Good morning, everybody. Tim Horan, the communications analyst here at Oppenheimer. My pleasure to be hosting a fireside chat with Anterix. As all of you know, Anterix owns critical spectrum, low-band spectrum, which we have effectively run out of. As all of you know, if you want to do any form of mobile or satellite communications, you need spectrum. Without spectrum, no communications. It is really, really good to be the company owning really, really scarce assets, and we are going to talk about this in a lot of detail. We are lucky to have both the Chief Regulatory and Communications Officer, Chris Guttman-McCabe, and Elena Marquez, the CFO. I have a whole series of questions, but Elena, I do not know if you want to start with some kind of just regulatory message or other message. Yeah, no, absolutely. Tim, thank you very much for having us both. We are very happy to be here, and thank you for setting up the conversation in such a great way. We completely agree with you that being a spectrum holder in the current environment is just absolutely terrific. I want to start with things that we did control over the last few years, which is an incredible regulatory effort that Chris led that came to culmination in February, where we were able to expand our band capacity from previously 6 MHz to now 10 MHz. Folks like you can completely appreciate what 10 MHz of low-band spectrum means. It is certainly more of a standard band, but also we own spectrum in 900 MHz band, and it is a very scarce asset currently. Our spectrum is licensed, which makes it quite unique also in this environment, and there is not a lot of it left. With all of the current, just over the last few months, activity on the spectrum acquisition front. Companies like SpaceX acquired spectrum from EchoStar. The most recent transaction was Rocket Lab and Iridium, and many others. There is just so much validation to the demand for spectrum, but the supply is fixed. It is an incredible position to be in for Anterix. As you know, we historically have monetized our spectrum geography by geography to utilities. Interestingly, we have been very actively messaging the scarcity and the increase in value of spectrum and its appreciation through public forums and certainly to our prospective utility customers. We see that they are really very actively coming to the table with us. A lot of the discussions with about a dozen different opportunities currently are all about pricing, and a lot of them are renegotiating pricing. I also wanted to highlight really, I think, all of the above themes, I am sure we will unpack them further throughout this conversation. One of the things that even with our current very significant run-up in stock price over the last few months, we still believe that there is a significant disconnect between how the market values us and the value of the underlying asset, again, given all of the public comparables available out there, including the most current and recent auction that just closed, Auction 113. We will unpack the evaluation. Well, I guess while you mentioned it, Yeah. Just so 10 MHz of spectrum, what do you estimate you are trading at right now as a megahertz-pop? Yeah. How does that compare? Yeah. We have about 85% of our nationwide megahertz-POPs still remaining after the 11 utilities that we transacted with, which equal about 3 billion megahertz-POPs. If we take our market cap at, call it, $1.8 billion today and divide it by the 3 billion megahertz-POPs, that is only $0.60 versus the Auction 113 that just concluded at about $2.50 average nationwide. That would have put us at about $7.5 billion gross asset value. We remain very excited about the upside opportunity that exists for us. Can you compare and contrast your spectrum versus that auction spectrum, the, just the qualities, features, functionality? Yeah, no, appreciate that prompt, Tim. Our spectrum is low-band, and there's almost none left out there versus AWS-3, of course, is more of mid-band spectrum that doesn't have the same incredible propagation and penetration qualities as low-band spectrum does. Again, there's just not a lot of it on the shelf, and we're excited to be one of the holders. Maybe just stepping back a minute, you just reported earnings a few days ago. What was the most important message that you were trying to convey on that earnings result? Yeah, just really a lot of the same. Interestingly, and I know that would be a topic that we go into probably next, is SpaceX's filing to the FCC with some optionality for fulfilling our potential build-out requirements, not only with terrestrial that we already have in our rules, but also potentially with satellite coverage. That was very exciting. That, I think, helps validate the message around great and growing demand for low-band spectrum and its scarcity, and being mentioned as one of the three bands in that filing was certainly very exciting and very validating for us and our message. And maybe just a step back for people that didn't read the letter. Can you say what SpaceX said in that letter? And yeah, we can get into it in more detail, yeah. Yeah. Chris, do you want to take over? Sure. Sure. And hey, Tim. Hi. Thank you for having us. Very excited to be here. What we love about SpaceX is they put into the public discourse, at the FCC and in the broader investment community, what we had clearly been hinting at and contemplating, right? We had been hinting at broader, a breadth of interest in our spectrum and in low-band spectrum, right? And we had also been contemplating, actually, we filed an experimental license with a different direct-to-device company, Lynk, several months ago. So we had been sort of investigating what it would mean to utilize our spectrum for satellite coverage for satellite-direct-to-device. And what we see in that SpaceX ex parte is what they're trying to do is suggest to the FCC that as you, FCC, look at the satisfaction of build-out requirements, that you consider allowing satellite coverage to be a justification for satisfying the build-out requirements. They asked for, sort of at the macro level, a new rulemaking, but then at the micro level, and Elena referenced this, they asked for that concept to be applied to three different bands of spectrum. Two of those bands, one of them is one that NextNav is pursuing a reconfiguration of. The other one is 1.6 GHz band. Those are both still subject to rulemakings. They also obviously referenced ours, which we found exciting. In order to apply that satellite coverage justification for build-out to ours, it would have to be as part of a waiver, sort of after the fact, after an entity acquired our spectrum. We love that. You heard Elena reference it, and I would say the theme for our earnings call was optionality. The fact of the matter is we have optionality along a wide range of themes, of issues, right? For this one, if the Commission accepts it, we probably won't see anything formal until potentially after the fact in the form of a waiver, if we have a buyer that wants to pursue that. But there's now potentially optionality in how to satisfy build-out, right? We have optionality in how to monetize our spectrum. We have optionality in how to clear our spectrum. Elena manages a really wonderful balance sheet, pristine balance sheet with no debt. We have plenty of cash on hand. We look at the position we're in as being spectacular. We are very thrilled. SpaceX, I think we said we read with interest, but then we did a press release that said we were excited. I think we excitedly read with interest what SpaceX filed. Well, I'm curious. We supported it. Yeah. Getting into that a little bit more. Do you think their goal or are they trying to push that the spectrum should just be flexible, to your point? Should you be able to use it for private networks, for mobile terrestrial networks, for satellite? I think that's one of the things they're implying. Sure. That's how we interpreted it. When we received our five-by-five authorization, we also got sort of hidden in there in one of the footnotes, a flexible use designation, which then suggests, obviously, that you can use the spectrum for a range of capabilities, of technologies. Obviously, after receiving that, we pursued the experimental with Lynk. Certainly, I believe SpaceX is suggesting that bands going forward, particularly these bands, you should be able to utilize them for terrestrial or satellite connectivity and satisfy build-out with satellite coverage. But it would take further approvals from the FCC to use for satellite-directed device. Yeah. I mean, and we just saw AT&T and Verizon go through it with their block of spectrum. It's not akin to the formal rulemaking we went through to get three by three and five by five. Yes, there would be a process, and to some extent, some of that could be done through the waiver process that is part of the transaction. There'd be no reason why they wouldn't approve it, right? Agreed. Yeah. We all know, well, many of us that have been in the industry a long time know that terrestrial spectrum sub 1 GHz, you get great coverage from cell sites. You get great in-building penetration. So it enables really high-quality terrestrial mobile usage. Would that also apply for direct-to-device from satellites? Would it have better in-building penetration and mid-band spectrum? Yeah, I guess that's a key question. Yeah. The fact that you, yes, have low-band spectrum and however it is utilized, there is that absolute benefit of penetration through walls, through foliage, into parking garages, into urban canyons, and things like that. The neat thing about what we're seeing with LEO, the increase of LEO opportunities, low Earth orbit opportunities, to devices is we're in such the early formative stages. The companies we're talking about are launching satellites as we speak. SpaceX has a continued refreshing of theirs. AST is putting them up. We're going to see Amazon LEO, and they made a commitment to get more up more quickly. We have Rocket Lab out there that has a launch capability along with a desire to have a constellation. We have Lynk out there that just had an influx of capital and an integration with SES and Omnispace. There's just so much excitement and activity, and it truly is being fueled by the chairman, by Chairman Carr, and the team at the FCC, right? They've made this a real focus of their platform, and we love it. I just think it provides, back to that word, optionality for us as holders of an incredible spectrum asset. With Lynk, have you started a technical trial yet? We have. We have had a very successful first range of tests. We were excited. What we did was, they happened to have our spectrum in their operational constellation, small constellation. But it was operational, and they had our spectrum in it. We worked with them. We picked a bunch of locations and a number of devices, and we ran tests across those devices. There was, not surprising, there was connectivity. We certainly look at that test as very successful, and we will work with them to decide what the next steps are. We are not locked into them, they are not locked into us. Sure. This is a wonderful symbiotic relationship. They have a great team over there. They have a great technology. We are excited where it is. Well, Chris, just selfishly because I follow, like, five other satellite companies. Yeah. Were you testing more just like texting? Were you testing web browsing or voice services? What were you actually testing here? Yeah. We began with data connectivity, right? Yes, there's a little bit of the sending of a text and also web browsing, things like that. We wanted to get a sense of what connectivity would look like during a passover to a router and a phone and a TOUGHBOOK computer, things like that. Again, think early stages and we are comfortable that this could go a range of different ways. Ultimately, Anterix could have a satellite product. Ultimately, our customers could want satellite connectivity for a portion or all of their license area. Or, we may end up monetizing our spectrum in one fell swoop to a satellite provider who wants to use it for direct-to-device or for terrestrial. Absolutely. Chris, we probably should've started out with this at the beginning, but maybe just stepping back, sub-1 gigahertz spectrum. How much is out there now, roughly, being used for mobile networks? You have the 10 MHz. What other choices that are out there? We know NextNav, if they get approval, can get a 10 by 5. But more importantly, are there any other bands of sub-1 GHz that we can see that can be freed up in the next few years by the FCC or by others? Or where long term can we get more sub-1 gigahertz spectrum? Yeah. I'm going to start with your last point, and I want to reiterate what Elena said because she was spot on, right? This is beachfront property, right? A lot of people use the analogy of real estate for spectrum, and it makes sense. Spectrum is more expensive in NFL cities, right? It is more expensive in areas that are more populous. And then it's particularly more expensive if it's low band. It's more valuable for the reasons, Tim, that you referenced, and Elena referenced. As we look at low-band opportunities now, there are two, right? And there are well more than two entities interested, which is what we love. This is the core of supply and demand. It is the absolute illustration of supply and demand. So there's a block at 800 MHz, and there's our block at 900 MHz. There are others that are potentially in play. Tim, I know you cover and you referenced NextNav. Below 1 GHz, there are tiny little bits and pieces of 600 MHz, but T-Mobile is sort of buying that up. AT&T just purchased some of it. I do not think we are even going to see those little pockets for much longer. It is basically two opportunities, and as we look at our opportunity, we see a host of potential users of that spectrum. But Chris, is not there some spectrum, like in the 600 MHz range, being used for television right now that maybe that could be auctioned off at some point? Yeah, there would be, and I know, Tim, you have been covering TMT for a while like I have. There is a lot of air between here and there, a lot of time between here and there. It would require, and in fact, the last one was part of actually legislation, so there was legislation to repurpose the broadcast spectrum a while back at 600 MHz. Might some station owners want to participate in that type of a proceeding again, that type of auction. Maybe. You would have to get to some form of scale, then you would have to aggregate them together, and then you would have to have an auction. So there is a possibility that that could happen. I do not think it is a probability near term, but there certainly is a possibility. That is the only one I am aware of that is even remotely possible. But even if we look at the C-band, to your point, it is still a four or five-year process, right? And we've been talking about it for two or three years. I don't even hear much conversation about that broadcast TV spectrum, the 600 MHz, yet. Right. But clearly there's a. But is there any other pockets of sub 1 GHz that you're aware of? Yeah, no. As we look at it, that's what makes our position so magical, right? Is we have known from the beginning the value of our asset when it was three by three. We certainly know the value of our asset as it is five by five. We know the opportunities in front of us. We know the scarcity. We're going to be really good stewards of that asset for our shareholders. And we're excited to see what comes about over the next six months. The SpaceX letter was viewed with excitement. It's just an illustration of what's out there. Elena, why do you think SpaceX put this letter out, and why now? It's almost like front-running themselves. I guess it's the chicken or the egg. They can't buy the spectrum without having the rights to use the spectrum. Yeah. Yeah. I think we call it testing waters. It's interesting, just kind of using the public data available. SpaceX, it seems at their first earnings call, specifically said that they were not looking to invest a lot in low-band spectrum. Interestingly, they follow up with this filing. Again, it's nothing but great things for us as spectrum holders. Also really coming back to touching on what's available versus how much is needed. If you think about it, again, as far as what's licensed and available, from the regulatory perspective, right, it's 10 MHz of Anterix and then 14 MHz of the 800 MHz from Grain Management. Those are not significant, right? If you put in perspective how much low-band spectrum carriers have to run their terrestrial networks, which is, what is it, 40 MHz, 50 MHz, 60 MHz of low-band spectrum. Again, just reiterating the scarcity and the fact that I believe that there's going to be a great monetization opportunity for all the low-band spectrum that's available out there because I think the need for it is going to be really great. Elena, you guys right now have 10 MHz. Obviously, it's five by five down, five up. Could that ever be repurposed to be 10 GHz down if you ever wanted to? It's separated by a tranche of spectrum utilized. In fact, NextNav, there are opportunities in between our uplink and our downlink. Our capability is FDD, frequency separation. One is uplink, one is downlink. Well, just to play devil's advocate, let's say the spectrum was combined with NextNav by somebody, ultimately. Could they reconfigure some of that upstream, downstream bands also? Yeah. Everything with the right capital and the right technology approach, right? It would be a one-off. You would have to go get it standardized. You would have to drive an ecosystem. Those are things that make it unique. But depending upon who the buyer is and the scale they have, certainly. Everything technologically. No, well, not everything. Anytime you think something is not technologically possible, wait two years and. Someone figures it out. Yeah, in the wireless space, someone figures it out. Or let Elon Musk attack the problem, and it will happen. Exactly. That is just someone I would refer to. If a guy can land a rocket on a boat in the middle of an ocean, then I am pretty confident they could tackle it. But yeah, everything is possible with that caveat, that effort, ecosystem, standards, things like that. Elena, is this impacting how you are thinking about the highest and best use of the spectrum? And I guess even specifically, obviously for the electric utilities, they get massive amounts of utility out of the spectrum, if they use it right. And for a whole bunch of reasons, that industry really needs to upgrade. But will this cause you maybe to say, "Look, electric utility, Mr. Electric, you got to pay a lot more for this spectrum because we got like four other people that want it. That is. Not to put words in your mouth, but how are those conversations going? That is exactly right, Tim. You are absolutely picking up on the themes here. We are talking to about a dozen of utilities very actively, and majority of those conversations are around renegotiating pricing given the current environment. The demand for spectrum, but also the most recent comps that support the value of it and the continued appreciation of the spectrum. So that is exactly right. We really love the position we are in with having still our utility market that we can absolutely go after, and having potential larger players out there that could potentially take the spectrum as one deal. What we also absolutely appreciate currently is that we have a very healthy balance sheet, no debt. We have $116 million in cash as of the end of the quarter, and that allows us to really be patient and make all the right decisions for the company and the shareholders as far as what is the best monetization opportunity for the spectrum. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Elena, you are in a bit of a dilemma. You can probably enter in some leases now, but is it the smartest thing to do in front of potentially other ways to use the spectrum? Yeah, no. Uh. These are all of the absolutely great dilemmas and a rich problem to have, as we call it currently. Right. Yeah. This comes up for us daily. Our Chief Revenue Officer, Kim Kerr, that we just brought on board in May, she's only been here for a couple of months, but oh boy, has she been really busy with addressing, bringing the proposals to the customers, revising them. We have just very lively internal discussions on pricing multiple times a week for these deals. Oftentimes the discussions are continuing to negotiate up and not taking a deal that's just not good enough to continue punching holes. When I say punching holes, punching holes in the map. As you know, we have about 85% of the nationwide megahertz-POPs still to monetize, but that 85% keeps going up in value with each passing transaction that we see in the market. These are all the very great problems for us to have, and we can't be happier with the position we're in. Yeah. It's super exciting dilemma if we are faced with that dilemma. Yeah. Well, you are faced with it. Yes. Amazon also had a filing that said they do not have enough spectrum for D2D. They would like to get more. Yeah. Obviously, they bought Globalstar, I think, almost entirely for their spectrum at this point. Yeah. Even Globalstar, they were in partnership with Apple, so there is a lot of complexity out there to say the least. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Look, our story is becoming the scarcity story, and I think the market keeps continuing to help validate the value and the scarcity story. So again, can't be happier. So hypothetically, it seems like that was a good example. I think Amazon with Globalstar, with Apple. Th ey're going to figure out, I think, how to share that spectrum and capacity in some form. They must be pretty optimistic about it. Let's say someone were to buy all your spectrum. Is there a way to work with your existing leaseholders of the spectrum, covering 15% of the country, do you think, where. Yeah. The parts can work together and everyone gets what they need out of the spectrum? Yeah. Part of it depends upon, Tim, what the spectrum is used for and what those current licensees and customers want. If it is a satellite direct-to-device, my sense is we have customers that would love that capability to be overtop their existing deployment and build out. But if it is a terrestrial network that one of the satellite companies or someone else wants to build, that is perfect. They just sit right next. It is LTE to LTE, ultimately 5G to 5G. The reality is everyone who owns and/or licenses or utilizes spectrum has a spectrum neighbor, and the rules establish the relationship between those two. Even our customer base, we have a whole bunch of spectrum neighbors within our customers, and they work it out. The same way back to the old, Tim, folks your age and my age, remember the roaming days. Where you had your home carrier, but boy, if you traveled, you were visiting someone else very quickly, and so they made it work. Well, it can still happen internationally if you are not careful. Yeah. Yeah. But yeah, that is all 100% doable with our existing customers. Well, you brought up a really good point. If you are an electric utility, a lot of these areas are monitoring things that are in extremely remote areas. Yeah. Maybe satellite is the best way to connect a lot of these really and frankly, a lot of locations, period. You can get complete coverage immediately without having to build out any terrestrial infrastructure if you are going to use the direct-to-device. Have you thought about that, and then have you heard any. Yeah, that was an absolute underpinning of the investigation with Lynk, right? Okay. Was both, and as we referenced, the Lynk relationship was designed to wake up the satellite community to the existence of our spectrum, sort of check that box. But also very much to work with Lynk to investigate what a product might look like, right? Could it be primary for certain enterprise customers? The answer is, I think, obviously yes. Could it be secondary with a fabric overlay over top of a customer's footprint or the country as a whole? I think the answer is yes to that as well. There are a lot of paths forward for us with regard to satellite capability, that feed and enhance and support whatever path we choose for the spectrum asset itself. How do the enterprise customers feel about what you just said, yeah? Have you had conversations with them yet? Yeah. Absolutely, and some of them are excited for us to productize that, if that's the path we go down, to give them an additional opportunity for coverage or resiliency. Yeah, so definitely there's excitement there. I think our future customer base, I think they're probably waking up to the fact that they have competition for our spectrum now. From a shareholder perspective, that's a wonderful thing, right? I know we didn't talk about it too much, and I apologize, we don't have too much time left, but can you just remind us, the electric utilities, the ones that have deployed some of the spectrum, what benefits are they seeing out of it? What new use cases are they using it for? Are they finding value with it? Yeah. So, most of them are well on their way to deployment of the network. Several of them are fully deployed. They are loading the network. We are seeing a whole range of use cases. There's a big trade show for the utility sector called DistribuTECH. At the most recent one, we had a nice healthy booth, and in it we had about four dozen use cases. We had about four dozen companies in our booth displaying what they're doing with our spectrum. Think devices that give you a good sense of how the network is performing, help you with predictive maintenance. One of the neatest ones that we find exciting, because we went through a long test process with Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, is called falling conductor protection. It actually de-powers or de-energizes a broken line before it hits the ground. You think of the value of that to wildfire mitigation. Oh, that is worth tens of billions. Exactly. You cannot do that if you do not have high capacity, low latency network coverage that you can prioritize to do with the utility. Will that actually prevent fires? Is it that quick? It's that quick. You have 1.2- 1.4 seconds from when a line breaks to when it hits the ground. It has worked in the lab and in the field. Wow. It is deployed and it has worked in the lab and in the field. I just love hearing use cases like that. Any other cool use cases? There are a whole bunch of ones that are designed to segment off a power outage and stop it from spiraling out of control. There are sort of intelligent, some of them are called actually IntelliRupter, right? There are a whole bunch of products designed to enhance performance, to predict maintenance, to prevent outages. Then you just have the traditional bucket truck connectivity to voice devices, to TOUGHBOOKs, to grab schematics, to get a sense of what they're about to face when they climb a pole. So there's a lot of safety, security. The use cases, it's kind of if you build it, they will come. There is wireless connectivity throughout a utility's operations. What they're doing now is just moving it over to their own private network. They get to do the belt and suspenders from an access perspective, from a cybersecurity perspective. So, this to me, it's been a long time coming. The utilities, a lot of them are looking at the comms component as their third grid: transmission, distribution, and now communications. As you think of the reality that they are facing, it screams for data, right? They have more intense, more frequent, more damaging weather patterns, more intense, more state-sponsored cyber incursions. The greater and greater demand for electricity and electricity generation, more distributed renewable power. You can go on and on, and all of it says that they have to modernize, and this is a core component of that modernization. Is the federal government Well, just stepping back a second. We have a lot of contacts with the federal government on data center builds, frankly in AI, and they're all in supporting the industry as much as they possibly can. The most critical inputs are, frankly, spectrum and power. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Is the federal government supportive of electric utilities just trying to modernize and upgrade? Yes, at the federal level, and the reality is it really does come down for most utilities to their local regulator, to their commission, right? Their public utility commission will say yes or no to investments to whether or not something can find its way onto your bill. We do a lot of work, with NARUC and with individual commissions, educating them on the value to the consumer of modernizing their communications capability. We do see, obviously we've all read about the cost increase for our electricity, right? For our utility bills. Every utility is cognizant of that, but they still need to invest. They know it, their regulators know it. Well, this could potentially lower their expenses quite a bit and improve utilization and improve the quality, right? On and on. Yeah. You think of the value of not having an outage, right? Or not having a fire, or not having a cyber attack, and you could just go down the list. Let alone, right, that spectrum is typically a capital investment for them, and they are able to get a return on it. Typically, utilities appreciate that over OpEx spend on the carriers. That is another important factor that made us successful specifically in the utility industry and why it has been a great market for us. Last question for both of you. You first, Elena. Do you think SpaceX wants to build out a hybrid satellite terrestrial network in the United States? What is your best guess? I think the answer is yes, because they specifically said it. I think they explicitly said it. I think this most recent filing validates their interest in low-band spectrum, certainly. I think aside from SpaceX, there are many other players, as you mentioned, still Amazon with Globalstar and many others. Rocket Lab just acquired Iridium. This is just an incredible market for. Well, we have AFTS, we have Lynk, there are others. Exactly. There are so many. Chris, if someone is going to build out a fourth wireless network in the United States, can you do it without sub-1 GHz spectrum? I don't think so. I don't think so. To your earlier question, I'm going to say what I often say. I completely and totally agree with Elena, and she's spot on. Yeah, you can't build out. You can try. I would argue that the financials don't align, and the performance doesn't align. If you truly want to be a fourth provider and/or displace numbers one, two, and three, you've got an argument. Chris, everyone's been fixated historically that you need 10 MHz download. With technology, does it matter as much if it's 5 MHz down versus 10 MHz? What's your answer to that? I think Elena referenced this, and this goes back to someone, Tim, I know you'll remember, but Neville Ray at T-Mobile. I think anyone who's building a network needs the layer cake, right? They need a fair amount of low-band spectrum. It's not just one tiny block, right? It's not. Yeah. It's not just our five by five, and it's not just the others that are out there, right? You can't build it with the. You may need it all. You can't build it with the cellular A and B prime tiny blocks. There's. Love, love Neville, miss him. Yep. He was great. Funny, I just ran into his IR person when he was there at the airport last night, Nils. Yeah, I remember Nils. Yep, absolutely. We were talking about Neville last night. Yep, there you go. It's a really small world. Well, I apologize to Natasha for me that I only got to about half her questions, but we're out of time. It's okay. But we'll have a longer-term conversation. All the right ones. Yes. Thank you. And if we left our audience with something today, I think it would be that we see great optionality for how we can monetize the spectrum. We see great public comparables that validate the continued appreciation of spectrum. And we are just in a really great position, both with our current market that we are addressing, which is utilities, and these potential opportunities to monetize the spectrum all at once. Cannot be more. Yeah, that was well said. Well, I think you started with that and ended with that, so that is nice. There we go. Yeah. Exactly. All right. Thanks, guys. Thanks for having us, Tim. All right, Tim. Have a great rest of the summer and weekend. Bye-bye. Appreciate it. Thank you. Bye-bye.