Good day, everyone. Welcome to the Q4 2022 Delek US Earnings Conference Call. My name is Jamie. I will be your operator for today's call. Please also note today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I'd like to turn the conference call over to Rosy Zuklic, Vice President, Investor Relations. Rosy, you may begin. Good afternoon, welcome to the Delek US Q4 earnings conference call. Participants on today's call will include Avigal Soreq, President and CEO, Todd O'Malley, EVP and Chief Operating Officer, Reuven Spiegel, EVP and Chief Financial Officer, Mark Hobbs, EVP Corporate Development, as well as other management members. Today's presentation material can be found on the investor relations section of the Delek US website. Slide two contains our safe harbor statement. We'll be making forward-looking statements during today's call, actual results may differ materially from today's comments. Factors that could cause actual results to differ are included here as well as in our SEC filings. With that, I'll turn the call over to Avigal. Thank you, Rosie. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us today. 2022 was the best year ever for Delek US. Market condition were strong for refining and midstream. We were able to capture opportunities along the way. Fully adjusted EBITDA was $1.2 billion. During the Q4, total results were strong. Adjusted EBITDA was $221 million, despite unplanned downtime, mainly at the Big Spring refinery. Todd, we give more color around operation. The action we are taking to ensure safe and reliable operation. As I said in the past, shareholder returns is a key priority for us. During the year, we returned $236 million to shareholders. With $172 million in the H2 of 2022, close to 10% of DK market capital. We reinstate the regular dividend this year. We are pleased to announce an additional 5% increase in the quarterly dividend to $0.22 per share. Looking forward, we are very excited about our future. On the corporate structure, we are actively evaluating strategic alternatives for logistics and retail to achieve the sum of the parts objective. On the operations side, we launched the zero based budget to improve our competitive position on cost structure. We are proud of the Tyler Refinery team. The team finished the turnaround on time, on budget. We are on a process of starting the plant. This mark an important milestone for Delek's turnaround history. With that, we do not have any significant planned downtime schedule until late 2024. We are well-positioned to capture market opportunities during that time. Now, I will hand it over to Todd to speak about operation. Thanks, Avigal. Q4 crude throughput across the system was approximately 258,000 barrels per day. The reduced rate was primarily driven by unplanned downtime at the Big Spring Refinery during the Q4. Unplanned incidents make us regroup and reassess. We take steps to improve when and where we see opportunities and focus on the areas of the business that we can control. This is a priority for us, not only for the well-being of our employees, contractors, and communities in which we operate, but because we know that a safe and reliable operation leads to financial stability and protects the environment. A good example is our Krotz Springs Refinery, where our employees and contractors recently achieved a safety milestone of over 5 million man-hours worked without a lost time injury. As Avigal mentioned, we have just finished a significant turnaround at our Tyler Refinery. The refinery successfully completed the turnaround with zero process and safety incidents on time and on budget in difficult weather. This is a fantastic achievement for Delek, and I would like to thank our employees for their hard work and our contractors for their partnership. Our logistics segment ran extremely well this quarter. Our record earnings reflect this, and a big driver was the successful integration of the Three Bear Delaware assets. While DKL sees benefits from its base business, we see continued growth opportunities in the Permian and Delaware footprints. Delek Logistics is well-positioned to continue its strong track record of growth and to be a long-term, sustainable midstream player. With that, I will turn the call over to Reuven to go through the quarterly results. Thank you, Todd. For the Q4 of 2022, Delek US recognized adjusted net income of $61 million or $0.88 per share. Net loss for the period was $119 million or a $1.73 loss per share. During the quarter, we also returned $104 million to shareholders in the form of share repurchases and dividends. On slide four, we highlight that we had adjustments this quarter of $243 million. The largest impact was relating to FIFO inventory impacts, which we began adjusting for this quarter. We believe presenting this adjustment better align our EBITDA results with our peers. Adjusted EBITDA was $221 million after factoring in these adjustments. On slide five, we provide a waterfall of our adjusted EBITDA by segment from the Q4 2021 to the Q4 of 2022. The significant improvement period over period was primarily by higher results in refining. Compared to the Q4 of 2021, the Gulf Coast market cracks were 76% higher in 2022, which primarily drove the large increase. On slide six, we present the cash flow waterfall. We drew $313 million in cash during the quarter, largely driven by two events that occurred late in the quarter. First, we had a $180 million unfavorable timing effect associated with the closing of the transition of an inventory intermediation agreement with Citibank. This full amount was resulted in a favorable cash flow in the Q1 of 2020. The second item was an unfavorable working capital cash flow impact associated with unplanned downtime at the Big Spring Refinery. $60 million of this amount was a cash timing event and resulted in a favorable cash flow in the Q1 of 2020. On Slide seven, capital expenditure for 2022 were $343 million on a consolidated basis. For 2023, we have capital program of $350 million. The Tyler Refinery turnaround is the single largest capital expense and makes up a large portion of the 80% of CapEx dedicated toward maintaining and sustaining the integrity of our assets. The remaining 20% is dedicated for growth projects, primarily in logistics. The last slide covers outlook items for the Q1 of 2023. Before we move to Q&A, I wanted to give an update on our cost reduction and process improvement effort. We're executing changes in the organization and expect about $30 million-$40 million of P&L improvements in 2023 and an additional $50 million-$60 million in 2024. Annually, we expect the run rate to be approximately $90 million-$100 million. These improvements may be lower cost or improved margins. I will now open the line for questions. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we'll begin the question-and-answer session. If you would like to join the question queue, please press star and then one using a touch-tone telephone. To withdraw your question, you may press star and two. If you are using a speakerphone, we do ask that you please pick up the handset prior to pressing the numbers to ensure the best sound quality. Once again, that is star and then two to join the question queue. We'll pause momentarily to assemble the roster. Our first question today comes from John Royall from JP Morgan. Please go ahead with your question. Hi, guys. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. Maybe we can just start with an update on just a little more detail on how you're thinking about the sum-of-the-parts unlock. How do you kind of thread the needle between needing, you know, steady streams of cash flows to pair with the refining business, but potentially, you know, needing to separate out some portion of logistics into our retail in order to realize that valuation uplift? John, it's Avigal. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining our call. Our number one consideration, obviously, is to be a friendly investor company and share. We demonstrate that during the second half of the year with returning just over $170 million of cash to investor, which is 10% of the market cap, and that's some of the parties a subset of debt. As we said on the press release, we're evaluating both opportunities in the retail and in the logistic side. Each one of those opportunity look a bit different, or should I say, completely different. We cannot go too much into details, but we're obviously looking how to be able to manage the assets we need and to maintain the EBITDA we need and to maintain the cash flow we need. With that, it's a good opportunity for me to introduce a new colleague, important colleague here on the table, EVP of Corporate Development, Mr. Mark Hobbs. Maybe you can say a few words. Sure, Avigal. Thanks. John, look, that's a good question. We've obviously been very vocal about focusing on sum-of-the-parts. You know, look, since I joined in October, the company, my focus has been solely on, you know, evaluating and looking at options and opportunities, you know, across all of our business segments to u nlock the value kind of inherent in our businesses. I know, you know, Avigal mentioned, you know, midstream and retail, but, look, what I would say is we're, as we're thinking about this, you know, one of the things that we wanna make sure that we, that we solve for is doing something that's, goes without question, that's additive across our businesses and positions our businesses across all the segments for future growth, to drive additional value for our shareholders. That's really the sole focus here. You make a good point about, you know, cash flow and those types of things, but, you know, we really wanna position all of our segments for, you know, for additional growth. Anything that we do will be, you know, be focused on accretive growth to the business. I'll leave it there. At this point, we don't have anything to announce, but obviously, when we do, we'll be very transparent with everyone. Thank you. Maybe just switching to capital allocation. Good to see there's a bump to the dividend. I don't think we saw a quarter ahead guide on the buyback. Should we read into that you won't be guiding going forward? Should we think that maybe there may not be one in Q1? How should we read into that? We'll elaborate on that just a little bit. Our intent, if market conditions stay where it is to be balanced between debt reduction and buyback. Our goal for the remainder of 2023 is to be on the buyback between $75 billion-$100 billion. We demonstrate in the H2 of the year that we could be prudent around that. We did do the buyback that we guide for, with a total return of, again, over $170 million. Our intent is to keep doing to be a friendly investor share. That's the benchmark that we put in front of ourselves. Thank you. Our next question comes from Neil Mehta from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah. Thanks, guys. Appreciate the time. I'd just love some perspective on where you feel you are from a refining operational perspective, and maybe you can go through each of the assets, Tyler, El Dorado, Krotz, and Big Spring. Where do you think there are opportunities to continue to improve capture and drive profitability higher as the last quarter was a tougher one than I think people would have expected a couple months ago? Yeah. Hey, Neil, it's Todd. Thanks for the question. Look, you know, we're on a journey here, in terms of getting to the place that we ultimately wanna be. We know, as I said in my prepared remarks, that the key to success is being safe, reliable and environmentally responsible in operating our assets. I think we've done some good things during 2022, and I think you and the rest of the folks on the call were able to see that reflected in the capture rate improvement throughout the year. As we've talked about, we've had a number of different initiatives across the fleet to make improvements. We've seen creep at a number of the facilities. We've done some catalyst reformulation on some of the others. That's definitely bumped up yields, even in Q4, in Krotz in particular. making that, you know, continuing to make that asset a sustainable and long-term viable asset, in our mix. unfortunately, in VSR, you know, we had a planned, semi-planned, outage, and, you know, honestly, we didn't do a great job coming out of that. We've taken the lessons learned. We've incorporated that into our operating structure, and, we won't make that mistake again. you know, I'm not gonna go into specifically around each asset because a lot of that stuff obviously is proprietary. you know, it's something we're very, very highly focused on. We're looking at product mix every day. We're looking at crude slate every day, and we're looking at, you know, the Tyler facility, setting the standard for turnarounds. Again, we're just coming out of a major turnaround there and the first turnaround at that facility in over eight years. We've done it safely. No, no safety events, no process safety events, challenging weather conditions, and the team has done a phenomenal job, and I think that lays a, you know, a very solid blueprint for what we're gonna do on a go-forward basis. I think the other thing I'd mention is, you know, we don't have any real major planned work now until Q4 of 2024. That gives us a really long, nice runway to be able to capture the strong macro environment that we see out there. Thank you. That's a great perspective. How much of the challenge around captures has been more operations-driven, as you talked about, versus market conditions? Cause, you know, we think about the period where Delek refining profitability was outsized from 2011- 2018. A lot of it was about the Midland differential, which is now inverted. I think the investment community is trying to figure out what the mid-cycle refining environment looks like in an environment where the crude markets are less favorable. Would love your perspective on the go-forward crude markets and how that environment sets up for your kit. Thank you. Yeah, no. Thanks again, Neil. I'll take kind of the H1 of the question, then I'll let Avigal weigh in on market views. Look, you know, I think we've demonstrated over the last year where Midland traded at a premium relative to WTI, the earnings power of the company, right? I think that's pretty well established at this point. Again, we've obviously done things throughout the system to improve yields via catalyst reformulation. We've done some things throughout the system looking at product mix changes that give us better netbacks, we'll obviously continue to do that. Again, I think given the synergies between our logistics system, the strength in the Permian Basin, just from a demand perspective, and, you know, how well, albeit outside of Q4 we ran during the year, you know, we're in a good place as we come out of the Tyler turnaround. I'll let Avigal, you know, comment on what our views are on the Midland differential on a go-forward basis. Yeah. Hey, Neil, how are you? Good. Avigal, thank you. The Midland Basin is obviously the one prolific basin in the world, not just in the US. We have invested and demonstrate a lot of commitment to that. I think for the long term that that investment was able to prove itself and will prove itself in the future. Today, Midland is around started the year with around 5.7 million barrels a day of production, right? We see a nice increase in our footprint of production, and we forecasted that's gonna go all the way to 400- 600 this year. It's gonna put us at close to 90% capacity of the pipe that we have out of the Permian. Over time, the Permian Basin is gonna perform and gonna demonstrate the right differential and gonna fit to our configuration. We are obviously in two of actually between two to two and a half of our refinery, we have more optionality. This is something we are always looking on that, how we can improve and flex our crude slate. Over time, I think that probably the second half of 2023 and the beginning of 2024 will be a pivotal year for Permian Basin. Okay. Thank you, Avigal. Our next question comes from Doug Leggate from Bank of America. Please go ahead with your question. Hey, good morning, guys. This is Kaleem for Doug Leggate. Thanks for taking the question. My first question is a follow-up to John's question. I wanna understand how you guys view the cash flow and the free cash capacity for DK Refining when it's fully burdened for all the corporate costs. If you're able to walk us through those assumptions, I think it would help the Street to understand whether the core business can stand by itself or not, whether separation of retail and/or logistics makes sense. Thank you for the question. It really depends what's the outcome gonna be, but we are not gonna do any transaction that will put us in a risk for the total cash flow of the company. Let's make it clear. We are not gonna make any transaction that will jeopardize the mothership. We're gonna do any transaction that we're gonna perform, gonna be a transaction that is well thought out, and we'll think about the different scenario, and we'll take into consideration downturn to the refinery business, which we know is a volatile business. We are not gonna make just transaction to check the box. I've said it in the past, we're gonna do the right one. luckily enough, or we're grateful to have, the, probably the one, if not the best in the industry to perform those, deals. We are confident we can get one that you can all be proud. Would you guys potentially look at this as a multi-step process? In the case where DKL acquires something to get bigger through M&A, would you consider selling some of the refining assets back to DK Corporate? Yeah. This is Mark Hobbs. Thanks for the question. Yeah, look, we would look at things as a, as a multi-step process. You know, anything we do, as Avigdor said, there's a lot of different options on the table for us right now. Anything we do, as I mentioned in my earlier remarks, will be done in such a way that it sets up all the different businesses to continue to succeed, continue to have the ability to operate effectively through the cycles. You know, if that, if that involves moving assets, you know, strategic assets between, you know, a midstream company back to the refining company, you know, we're gonna evaluate all the different options. Got it. I appreciate it. We'll keep our eyes open for that. For my second question, I think we'd appreciate some details on your cost-cutting plans. For example, how much from each bucket, the buckets being gross margin, OpEx, and corporate? Should we understand the cost cuts as being an EBITDA expansion, or are there any offsets to revenues? Guys? Hello? Yes. Yes. Yes. Good. I think let's talk about the zero-based budgeting we perform. Avigal, you wanna take it? No, absolutely. I just missed the last part of the question. the the zero- The. based budget,... Sorry? The second part of the question was, should we understand the cost cuts to be an EBITDA expansion? For example, if you're talking about $100 million in cost cuts, does that translate into $100 million of higher EBITDA? Are there any offsets from lower revenues because you're getting rid of certain cost centers that might be revenue generating? No. Actually, as we see the plan right now, even though there could be a one-time restructuring cost, we're gonna see the $100 million are supposed to be sustainable. Just wanna make it clear that it's on a run rate basis. We're gonna recognize $30 million-$40 million this year, most likely $50 million-$60 million next year, on a run rate basis, around $100 million, which will be a direct contribution to EBITDA. Perfect. I'm sorry, Kaleem, just to make sure, it's not just purely cost in the sense that it's gonna come out of the G&A line. It could be in the form of- I mentioned. Right. Right. Right. ... preferred remarks that it's both margin improvement and, cost reduction. No, that's right. I just don't know that, I just wanna make sure Kaleeem picked up on it because, you know, just he specifically asked cost. Just to be clear, it is not gonna just be purely coming out of the G&A line. It could be coming out of the form of improved margin as well. Got it. I appreciate that. If I could sneak one very last one in. Can you offer some color on the one-time items that hit cash flow this quarter and which one of those items will reverse, if they will or not? On the G&A, we had $17 million of one time, of which $13 million are already part of the restructuring costs that I've mentioned to your previous question. That will allow us to be on track, and our goal for the Q4 is for the G&A, company G&A to be in the mid-$70s. I was thinking more about the items that affected cash flow here in the Q4. It seems like there was about $400 some odd million dollars. Yeah. what looked like one-time impact. Well, 240 of them were a timing issue, and we received the 240 during the, I mean, actually, in January. The other $200 million are really the FIFO impact or the inventory impact. If you know, compare all that together, it would have put us in a positive number. Got it. I appreciate it. Thanks, guys. Thanks, Bhutta. Our next question comes from Paul Cheng from Scotiabank. Please go ahead with your question. Hey, guys. Good afternoon. Hey, Paul. Hey, Paul. Can I just maybe go back into the earlier question? I think, will it be possible that you can separate out the $100 million by different major bucket, like how much is on the headcount reduction saving, how much is from the margin improvement and where the margin improvement you expect that kind of separation? Yeah. Hey, Paul. Avigal, how are you? I would just ballpark number 30%-40% on the G&A, 60%-70% in the OpEx. Ballpark. G&A is about 30%-40% and 60%-70% is in the OpEx or margin improvement. How of all this that are you reducing your headcount? If you do, by how many? Well, we are not gonna get specific around it. You probably understand there is sensitive discussions. We want to have the most smart, efficient, and obviously a safe and reliable company. We are not gonna jeopardize safety or reliable on that. We're gonna do it the right way. We get advice from best in class. Want to have a great company going forward. Okay. I have to apologize. There's one, I want to go back into the refinery reliability. Todd, if you look at where you are, do you think the reliability issues we've seen not necessarily just to Big Spring, but overall, is it asset-based issue, means that you need to spend CapEx or there's a process issue or cultural issue or that you're just not having sufficient of the talent or the skill set where that you may need to get some help from outside? Paul. Look, I think if you look at everybody in the industry, right, we all struggled during COVID. There were obviously cost cuts, rationalization on staffing, across the industry. I think we, like everybody else, are coming out of the back end of that now. I think obviously we've just conducted a major turnaround at Tyler. We've done that successfully on time, on budget, in challenging conditions. I think, you know, we really have the people in place. It's just really kind of playing catch up to some of the, you know, some of the issues that were caused by COVID in terms of, you know, the poor margin environment. You know, you look at what we did throughout the majority of the year, other than the Big Spring event that we had, and, you know, we ran the system very, very well, all-time record high utilization above nameplate capacity. You know, I think you should treat this more as a one-off on a go-forward basis, as opposed to something that's systemic in the in the company. Basically that you believe, if there's reliability issue, it's really just because during the pandemic, you guys may be postponing and delaying some of the maintenance activity as such that, now you're playing catch up on that? I think everybody in the industry experienced that, Paul. That's not, that's not unique to us. I think, you know, I'll leave it at that. Okay. I think a final short one, this is probably for Reuven. Can you share that what is the RVO on the balance sheet at the end of the year? Also if there's any meaningful impact on the Q4 result due to the mark-to-market on that liability? Yeah, Paul, this is Robert Wright, Chief Accounting Officer. As you know, we don't disclose that level of information within our, within our financial statements. Can you tell us that whether there's any meaningful impact on the Q4 P&L due to mark-to-market on that liability? Yeah. There was no impact beyond market rent price volatility. Okay. Will do. Thank you. Thank you, Paul. Thanks, Paul. Have a good day. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star and one. To withdraw from the question queue, you may press star and two. Our next question comes from Jason Gabelman from Cowen. Please go ahead with your question. Hey, everyone. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. I wanted to ask First one on the sum-of-the-parts unlock that you're going through. And the main question is, I wanna understand if the contours of the kind of or the goals, I should say, are the same, which is really to deconsolidate DK, DKL from DK. I know on the last earnings call, management had suggested that was a driving force of why you wanna do this sum-of-the-parts valuation unlock. Is that still the case? And additionally, on the prior call, there wasn't any mention of the retail footprint being part of the potential options that you're exploring. So did something change between that time and now where now retail is in play? Thanks. Thank you, Jason. Our end goal is to be a good share and a good company for investor. As I said in the past, there is more than one way to go about it. Obviously, we said in the previous call that we believe that with some actions around DKL, we can get there, and we still believe that that's the case. We did put in the press release a comment about retail. Our belief in retail is either you can go big all the way or you are almost not relevant. Obviously we are always thinking ourselves what is the best asset base we should hold and how to bring the best return to shareholders. You need to be very happy that everything is on the table. We are certain that you will be very proud and happy with the deal that we gonna end up showing you. Okay. My follow-up, there's two quick ones. I'll ask them together. On the cost cuts, the 60%-70% OpEx reduction, is any of that related to energy costs or is that all underlying? Separately, last quarter, you guided to, I think, a $100 million-$150 million in debt reduction. Doesn't appear like that materialized this quarter. Can you discuss why that was and where you see gross debt levels going over the course of the year? Thanks. Yeah, sure. Regarding the energy, if there is an energy component to that, it's the consumption, not the price. We are not gonna tell you that we're gonna reduce the cost by $100 billion and bet on the natural gas go down. That's not the drill. That's not. That's what the market give us, and that's what we can do ourselves. That's to answer the first. We are trying to be as steward as we possibly can with the information we provide straight. If there is an energy component around it's about the consumption and not about the natural gas price. Let's put that aside. Reuven has a lot of. Speaking of energy, Reuven has a lot of energy around the debt reduction and probably wants to give more color around it. Right. Actually until the end of November, we were on track to execute both the debt reduction of $100 million and the buybacks of $100 million. As a result of the unplanned events and the timing events that I've mentioned, it kind of disrupted our plan. We did end up doing the buybacks, but we had to push the debt reduction. We will go back, and Abigail mentioned it before, to focus on debt reduction and buyback as we go forward. Okay, thanks. Our next question comes from Roger Read from Wells Fargo. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah, good afternoon. I'm gonna beat the dead horse here of restructuring, I'm gonna ask the question with a little more put into it. I was curious, as you're looking at the overall process here and opening up value, how you see some other things such as, you know, the biofuels business and, you know, some of the equipment, let's call it assets like Wink to Webster that are still inside of DK that were originally planned to be dropped down to DKL. Is that a complicating factor or an enhancement when you think about, you know, improving the overall value of the two entities? Oh, Mark can start, and, I can finish. Yeah, sure. Sure, Roger. I appreciate the question. This is Mark Hobbs here, EVP Corporate Development. You know, as we said earlier in the call, I mean, we're looking at all the, all the options on the table. I am specifically across all of our business segments, and I'm looking at ways to, you know, to unlock the value that's inherent in those businesses, as well as to, you know, set all of our business lines up to be to be successful kinda going forward, right? When you, when you think about other areas for us to consider, whether that's on the biodiesel plants or whether that's decarbonization of our business. You know, what we're evaluating as well around our business, just in general from a corporate development standpoint, is looking for opportunities where we can, you know, leverage our existing, you know, kind of assets, appropriately, where we have a competitive advantage from a location, from a configuration, you know, sort of et cetera, to seek opportunities, you know, whether it's around decarbonization or A low-carbon fuels in the future. That, like, that's something that we're constantly evaluating and looking at organic opportunities around that. You know, as we think about the midstream in particular and think about, you know, kind of Wink to Webster and kinda how that fits in the overall scheme of things, I mean, that's obviously, you know, not a captive kind of Delek US refining related asset. It's more of a traditional midstream kind of third-party asset. When we think about where assets, you know, should be longer term and where the best value proposition is for those assets, you know, that's something that we're obviously thinking about as well. Yeah. So. Yeah. Just to add on that. Every deal that we are looking, obviously, Roger, we are looking to make it accretive to the cost of capital that we have. We are not trying to make a deal that the biodiesel market suggested a 12% return or something like that. That's something it's off the table. Every deal that we are if we're exploring, it should be accretive to our to our shareholders. That's the main criteria. Appreciate that. We've kind of thought of Wink to Webster as generating, roughly $50 million a year in EBITDA. Don't know if you're willing to comment on that, but is that a reasonable range at this point? Yeah. Hey, Roger, it's Todd. Thanks for the question. Look, as we've said in the past, you know, we don't speak for the consortium. Therefore, that type of information is not something we can be at liberty to disclose. I think suffice to say that Wink to Webster is running at planned rates. We're obviously a part of that. We get the benefit of distributions coming off of that. You know, I think we'll leave it there. Okay. Understood. Thank you. Thanks, Roger. Our next question comes from Matthew Blair from Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. Please go ahead with your question. Hey, good afternoon. Hopefully you can hear me okay. First question is, do you have an update on the potential RG project in terms of timing and if there's been any sort of update on the EBITDA contribution and whether Delek would be likely to invest in that project? Yeah. Hey, Matthew, it's Todd. Look, again, you know, kind of much like my answer to Roger, we're not yet invested in the project. As you're aware, we've got a, you know, an option, little over $13 million option for a 33% interest in the actual physical plant. As we said in previous earnings calls, the company's filed some SEC documentation that would lead us to believe that it's probably not online until the H2 of this year. I think it's, you know, it's safe to say that as Avigal laid out a minute ago, we will evaluate the benefit of us exercising our option vis-à-vis our capital structure when the time is appropriate. We'll obviously make sure that you guys are well informed when we make that decision. Sounds good. The corporate segment at -$60 million EBITDA this quarter, was that pushed up by like year-end comp? If so, what's a good run rate for corporate going forward? A large percentage of that is, or a large amount of that is the one-time cost that Reuven had mentioned earlier in his G&A response. We had about $13 million of restructuring charges that hit through that segment, and then there was other one-time costs as well. Okay. The one-time costs are still in the adjusted EBITDA figure? No. That's been cleared out. The $60 million is an adjusted EBITDA number, but what we're really talking about is that at year-end, we have the annual incentive plan. That's really the cost that you're seeing. That's why it's a little bit elevated in the quarter. Okay. maybe something like... Oh, sorry. Go ahead. It's just the accrual that happens in the Q4. That's why the Q4 is a little bit higher. That kind of accounts for variance that you're seeing versus the Q3 and versus the Q4 of last year. We did the AIP in the Q2 and the Q4. Yes. We did not do it every quarter. Right. Exactly. We're changing that going forward, but that's the way we did it in the past. Okay. Continue. Maybe like -$40 million to -$50 million a quarter would be reasonable going forward? Yes. I would say yes. Probably closer to the. Yeah, 40- 50 is probably right. Yeah. Because the way I did it in my head is that once you kinda the variance between the third quarter and the Q4 is largely attributable to that accrual. Obviously the AIP is a bit higher than what we anticipate going forward, yeah, I would guess like $30 million-$40 million. That's also a number that will come back. Got it. Thank you very much. Mm-hmm. Ladies and gentlemen, in showing no additional questions, I'd like to turn the floor back over to the management team for any closing remarks. I want to thank the management team around the table, to the investor, to the sell side, buy side community. Thank you for believing in us and being with us with our strategy. Thank you for the board of director and commitment to the company and first and foremost to our employees that are running and operating the assets day and night, rainy and sunny. Thank you, everyone, and we'll meet again in the next quarter. Anyone has any questions, please feel free to reach out. Thank you. Bye-bye. Ladies and gentlemen, with that, we'll conclude today's conference call and presentation. We thank you for joining. You may now disconnect your line.