Thank you for standing by. My name is Janice, and I will be the operator for today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to Fluence Energy, Inc. Q3 2025 earnings conference call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask questions during this time, simply press star followed by number one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, press star one again. Thank you. I would now like to turn the conference over to Lexington May, Vice President of Investor Relations. You may begin. Thank you. Good morning and welcome to Fluence Energy's third quarter 2025 earnings conference call. A copy of our earnings presentation, press release, and supplementary metric sheet covering financial results, along with supporting statements and schedules, including reconciliations and disclosures regarding non-GAAP financial measures, are posted on the Investor Relations sections of our website at fluenceenergy.com. Joining me on this morning's call are Julian Nebreda, our President and Chief Executive Officer, and Ahmed Pasha, our Chief Financial Officer. During the course of this call, Fluence Management may make certain forward-looking statements regarding various matters relating to our business and company that are not historical facts. Such statements are based upon current expectations and certain assumptions and are, therefore, subject to certain risks and uncertainties. Many factors could cause actual results to differ materially. Please refer to our SEC filings for our forward-looking statements and for more information regarding certain risks and uncertainties that could impact our future results. You are cautioned to not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of today. Also, please note that the company undertakes no duty to update or revise forward-looking statements for new information. This call will also reference non-GAAP measures that we view as important in assessing the performance of our business. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measure is available in our earnings materials on the company's Investor Relations website. Following our prepared comments, we will conduct a question and answer session with our team. During this time, to give more participants an opportunity to speak on this call, please limit yourself to one initial question and one follow-up. Thank you very much. I'll now turn the call over to Julian. Thank you, Lex. I would like to send a warm welcome to our investors, analysts, and employees who are participating in today's call. This morning, I will briefly review our Q3 results and then address the impact of recent legislation, which we believe provides a strong foundation for the future of our business. I will also provide an update on the current market environment and the progress we made in executing on our strategy. Ahmed will then cover our quarterly financial results and 2025 outlook in more detail. Starting on slide four, I am pleased to report that since our Q2 call, as we expected, we signed two contracts in Australia worth approximately $700 million of combined revenue. One of these contracts is the largest contract in our history. Additionally, we delivered on our first domestic content product, which we believe is the first domestic content-compliant battery storage system delivered in the U.S. We're ramping up our U.S. production and working through some typical production ramp-up issues as we scale. Finally, all of our contracts that were halted in the U.S. market due to tariff and regulatory uncertainty are now reactivated and moving forward. Turning to slide five and our Q3 performance. First, we ended the quarter with approximately $4.9 billion in backlog. Since June 30, we had added to our backlog approximately $1.1 billion of contracts, including the two Australia contracts that I mentioned. Second, we recorded approximately $603 million in revenue, which was below our expectations, mostly due to delays in ramping up volume at our U.S. manufacturing facility. We expect to recover this revenue in fiscal 2026 as production rates at these facilities continue to improve and reach their targeted capacity levels. Third, despite this revenue shortfall, we generated a 15.4% adjusted gross profit margin, well above our target for the quarter, and our annual recurring revenue increased to $124 million. Finally, we closed the quarter with more than $900 million in liquidity, including approximately $460 million in total cash, which we believe allowed us to continue operating from a position of financial strength and provides significant flexibility in the current market. Please turn to slide six. Since our last call, several developments have reshaped the energy policy landscape in the United States. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or the OBB3, came out with strong support for battery storage. It differentiates BEST from other sources of generation by recognizing our technology as a dependable and dispatchable source of electricity, much like nuclear or gas plants. This morning, I would like to highlight four provisions of the OBB3 that provide support to Fluence's U.S. strategy centered on domestically produced energy storage systems. First, the OBB3 extends the investment tax credits for standalone storage through 2034. Second, it establishes new restrictions on the base ITC, limiting eligibility for Chinese equipment. Third, it imposes tighter and increasing over time FELC requirements on the 10% domestic content ITC bonus. Fourth, it adds FELC restrictions on Section 45(x) manufacturing credits. We believe that these provisions enhance our competitive position. As one of the few companies currently capable of delivering domestic content energy storage systems at scale, we're seeing increased customer interest and growing opportunities that reflect the scarcity of compliant solutions in the U.S. storage market. Turning to slide seven, as I noted, the OBB3 adds FELC restrictions to the Section 45(x) tax credit, limiting ownership, control, and material sourcing from certain countries. We expect that the forthcoming Treasury rules implementing these restrictions will be workable. We are actively engaged with our suppliers to ensure compliance by the deadline next year. Here, I want to highlight two important topics. First, we are looking at multiple options, none of which requires any significant capital beyond liquidity needs we have previously earmarked, thus not requiring us to raise additional equity. Second, the increasing domestic content thresholds on the OBB3 favors our established U.S. supply chain, which positions us well to deliver compliant, cost-competitive systems in this evolving regulatory landscape. Turning to slide eight, the significantly higher tariffs on China proposed by the Trump administration and the uncertain tariff environment overall were the primary reasons for the halt in contracting activity last quarter. More recently, though, the tariffs on certain Chinese battery components have been reduced from 155.9% to 40.9%. This has restored a level of predictability that has prompted customers to resume contracting discussions. We are now seeing early signs of renewed U.S. order activity, supported by our flexible contracting model, global sourcing, and strong customer relationships. As I mentioned earlier, all our contracts that were halted in the U.S. market due to tariffs and regulatory uncertainty are now reactivated and moving forward. Separately, the Department of Commerce issued a preliminary 114% duty on certain Chinese origin graphite material, with an estimated $5 per kilowatt-hour cost impact that is manageable and reflected in our guidance. We are pursuing alternative sourcing and believe these rulings, along with recent legislation and tariff changes, reinforce the value of our U.S. content leadership and diversify supply chains. Turning to slide nine, I would like to touch on the competitiveness of energy storage. The data is increasingly clear. Battery storage is now one of the most competitive solutions for meeting capacity needs and is superior to gas turbines. It's not just about cost. It's also about speed and scalability. Generally, battery projects can be permitted, sited, and deployed far more quickly than new fossil generation, making batteries a flexible tool for utilities and grid operators navigating rapidly growing demand. We are already seeing this shift in real-world operations. In June, batteries supplied 26% of Tyson's evening peak demand, surpassing gas for the first time. That's a landmark moment for our industry and a clear signal that grid-scale storage is no longer a futuristic concept. It's here, it's working, and it's scaling. Turning to slide ten. In addition to competitive costs, we are also seeing an expanding addressable market for energy storage systems. One of the most transformative trends we've seen in the energy landscape is the rapid growth of data center demand, driven by AI and machine learning workloads. These workloads are not only energy intensive; they are also highly variable. Training large AI models or processing inference tasks can lead to sudden spikes in power consumption, placing immense strains on the grid and creating localized reliability challenges. This is where battery energy storage can play a critical and unique role that cannot be filled by conventional sources of generation or renewables. Energy storage systems can act as a buffer, absorbing rapid surges in power and releasing it during high demand intervals, effectively leveling out the fluctuations that come with AI-driven compute cycles. What's more, batteries can be collocated at the data center itself or deployed at the transmission or distribution level, offering both behind-the-meter and grid-level flexibility. That's a key advantage in markets with interconnection bottlenecks or constrained infrastructure. Fluence is engaging with leading data center operators to develop storage systems that meet these fast-changing power demands, providing real-time flexibility for some of the grid's most dynamic loads. Initial estimates place the demand for these solutions at $8.5 billion through 2030. Turning to slide 11. Coming back to our Q3 performance, we deliver strong double-digit growth margins driven by disciplined execution, cost controls, and supply chain optimization. Our product mix, pricing strategy, and scale are sustaining higher margins in a dynamic market, reflecting a structurally improved margin profile and supporting long-term attractive returns. These results reflect the success of our commitment to profitable growth that we laid out a few years back. Turning to slide 12. As of June 30, our backlog was approximately $4.9 billion, providing strong visibility into future growth. Since quarter end, we have signed approximately $1.1 billion in additional contracts, including the approximately $700 million from the delayed Australia projects. The backlog is well-diversified across North America, EMEA, and Asia-Pacific. Momentum remains strong in Asia-Pacific and EMEA, and we are seeing early signs of recovery in the U.S. as tariff-related uncertainty eases and the enactment of OBB3 address concerns about risk to the regulatory environment. Our domestic content-compliant product, flexible contracting, and resilient supply chain position us to capitalize on this rebound. Our pipeline has grown to $23.5 billion from $22 billion last quarter, undercurrent broad global demand. This concludes my prepared remarks. I will now turn the call over to Ahmed. Thank you, Julian, and good morning, everyone. Today, I will review our third quarter financial results and then discuss our liquidity and updated outlook for the remainder of fiscal 2025. Turning to slide 14. Starting with our third quarter performance, we generated $603 million of revenue. This brings our year-to-date revenue to $1.2 billion, or 46% of expected full-year revenue, which is consistent with our prior year results. Q3 revenue was approximately $100 million, or 15% below plan due to a slow ramp-up at our new U.S. manufacturing facilities, particularly at our recently commissioned enclosure facility in Arizona. Enclosures are the final stage in the production process and therefore the gating item from a revenue standpoint. We have already seen recovery milestones met across our cell, module, and enclosure facilities and expect to reach targeted production levels by the calendar year end. I would note that our delivery commitments have sufficient time contingency to cover this delayed ramp-up. Thus, we expect to continue delivering products to our customers on time and on budget. Our Q3 adjusted gross margin was 15.4%, which reflects solid execution across our portfolio, particularly in Europe and Asia-Pacific, where we generated more than half of Q3 revenue. Our adjusted EBITDA was approximately $27 million, which reflects the higher margins carried by the international projects during the quarter. Turning to slide 15, we remain focused on maintaining strong liquidity to support our operations. We ended the third quarter with more than $900 million in liquidity. This includes approximately $416 million of cash, with the rest coming from availability under our credit facilities. I'm also pleased to report that last week we executed a new $150 million supply chain facility. This is Fluence Energy's first-ever unsecured facility, which carries an all-in interest cost of approximately 6% and is available to us to meet working capital needs. We appreciate the continued confidence of our relationship banks who share our vision and believe in Fluence Energy's long-term growth potential. On a pro forma basis, this brings our total liquidity as of June 30th to more than $1 billion, giving us additional flexibility to execute on our future growth plans. As I mentioned on our second quarter call, we expected to require a couple of hundred million dollars of working capital during the second half of fiscal 2025. During the third quarter, we have already funded approximately $150 million of that, mostly to purchase inventory, which now totals $650 million. The majority of this inventory will be used to meet our near-term customer commitments. Accordingly, we don't foresee any material additional funding needs in the near term, and we expect to maintain our strong liquidity, which is critical to supporting our growth plans. Turning to slide 16, next I will review our financial guidance for fiscal 2025. We now expect revenue to come in at the low end of our prior guidance range of approximately $2.6 billion. As I noted earlier, the delays in ramping up our U.S. manufacturing facilities have had the impact of shifting approximately $100 million of fiscal 2025 revenue into fiscal 2026. With respect to other guidance metrics, we are reaffirming our ARR of $145 million by the end of fiscal 2025. In addition, we are reaffirming our adjusted EBITDA guidance range of $0- $20 million. We also continue to expect our full-year 2025 adjusted gross margin to be between 10% and 12%. Despite the macro headwinds that have occurred this year, such as tariffs and legislative uncertainty, we have continued to take necessary steps to manage the business for profitability and cash flow, and this is reflected in our results. For 2026, we will provide formal guidance on our year-end call in November, consistent with our prior practice. We intend to base guidance on backlog coverage of 80%- 90%, which will represent higher confidence in our revenue and EBITDA forecast compared to the historical practice of 65%. Today, we have FY 2026 backlog of $2.5 billion. In summary, we remain confident in the long-term prospects of energy storage in general, and particularly in Fluence's ability to deliver maximum value to our shareholders and customers. With that, I would like to turn the call back to Julian for his closing remarks. Thank you, Ahmed. Turning to slide 17. In closing, I will highlight the key takeaways from this quarter's performance and our outlook moving forward. First, the market for energy storage remains robust globally. More importantly, we have started to see the U.S. market activity pick back up after the pause we saw earlier this year, driven by a very supportive backdrop from recent federal legislation and some easing of tariff uncertainty. Second, we're actively working with our supply partners to structure our supply arrangements to achieve compliance with the new requirements under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBB3), including the FELC provisions, and will continue to do so as new regulations and guidance are issued. We're working towards these being completed ahead of the deadlines under the OBB3. Third, there is a strong business case for battery storage, as battery technology is now cheaper than gas and is uniquely positioned to adapt the growing AI data center power demand to grid conditions. Together, these factors reinforce our confidence in Fluence Energy's ability to excel in today's environment and deliver value to our stakeholders. With that, I would like to open up the call for questions. At this time, I would like to remind everyone, in order to ask questions, press star then the number one on your telephone keypad. We will pause for just a moment to compile the Q&A roster. Your first question is coming from the line of Brian K. Lee from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Good morning, Brian. Thanks for taking the question. I guess first, when I look at the guidance for the rest of the year, fiscal Q4, it implies gross margin. I know you guys don't like to focus on it too much, but you had a really good gross margin in Q3 here. Q4, it's indicating something south of 10%, so below the low end of the guidance range for the year, even though it's a big revenue quarter. Can you kind of talk about the puts and takes on margin into the year-end quarter? Also, you got a decent amount of backlog heading into 2026, some really good Australia activity here that presumably is going to show up in your 2026 execution. What are you seeing in terms of margin outlook for the backlog? Are we tracking ahead of the 10-1 2 that you did this year, just trying to understand what to read into Q4, but also what you see in the backlog at the end of 2026? Great. Thanks, Brian. On the margins for the fourth quarter, the fourth quarter has a lot of U.S. revenue. A lot of the revenue in the fourth quarter comes from the U.S., and it has been affected by the new tariff. Roughly, we disclosed in the last call roughly $30 million, which generally represents 1%. That's what's driving, I would say, the softer margin numbers for the year. From an execution point of view, putting the tariff aside, the other parts of the execution are going very well, and we're working hard to take this as high up as we can. We're delivering, things are working well. That's the driver, essentially. As you know, we had to take some of those tariff costs into our results. That's driving it. In terms of 2026 guidance, on gross margins for 2026, I don't want to provide guidance today on that number, but what we're seeing is roughly in line with the 10%- 12% that we're giving you, that we set for this year. Still some work to do that we're working on, and hopefully, things will work out better, but that's where we are at this stage. Okay. Fair enough. Julian, I know you talked a lot about the, I know you had a couple of slides here around the policy actions of late and how they impact your business. Can you, I know there's been a lot of investor focus and concern around FEOC restrictions and how Fluence fits into the new landscape with your relationship and the ownership structure of AESC. Can you give us a bit more elaboration around how you're navigating that and how you're positioned with respect to FEOC and AESC, and if there are actions you need to take in what timeframe and what potential investments you might need to make to make that happen? Thank you. Yeah. I'll tell you at first, I know that you all have expressed some concern around on the macro view. Our view has always been that the U.S. battery storage market was going to be a domestic content market. You know, that has been our view even before the IRA and all of that. You know, think politically about the role that this technology was going to play, how this technology is built. It was going to be difficult to see it being dominated, that the U.S. would allow this to become dominated by Chinese suppliers. That has been our view from day one, and that's what we've been working on. You know, we started this ahead of the IRA. We clearly, when the IRA came in, we got in, you know, financial support. I think now with the OBB3, it kind of confirms our view, you know, of that case. You know, we don't see it as a threat. It has always been the basis of our assumption planning. I just wanted to give you that general statement because that's very, very important how we see this context. In terms of AESC, which is what you're asking, there are three drivers of 45x credits for any supplier. Ownership, it cannot be owned by a company that is from certain countries. It cannot be controlled by a company from that group. Materials have a limitation of how much of the materials can come from one of the certain countries. We're working on the three of them, ensuring that we have the supply chain that meets the OBB3 requirements, and we have developed with AESC, we have worked together on developing that supply chain, which is from source out of that area. We need to do, we're working on it. We already have converted some of it. We have many, many suppliers that are going through the process, and we believe our view is that we will be ready by the deadline under the act. Control is more of how you're going to manage your O&M, and, you know, we've been talking to our lawyers, it can be managed effectively. Ownership is what you all are, you know, are a little bit concerned about. I know it's understandable. We have been working with AESC. AESC is looking at different options, and we are looking at different options. We believe those options, there are a good, there are a lot of opportunities, there are some opportunities, there are some of them that are very viable that we can execute them on time under the OBB3 line. When we look at us potentially entering into the ownership of the line, when we have looked at that option, it's one of them, not the only one. We believe that we can do it, and we can make it work within the cash flow, with the financial liquidity that we have today. We do not see any need for any capital raise, and we believe that transaction can be done on time with it, and it's not that complicated. When we looked at the act, and we looked at the effort to convert to the act, ownership has been one of them. I think we can, there's not only us, there are other opportunities here that they're working on. We can do, and we can transact on time to meet the act requirements. Generally, that's the view. If I can repeat the way I started, if you don't mind, we don't see the FELC restrictions as necessarily a threat. We see that this, in a way, confirms our view of how this market was going to evolve. We have been investing on this. We have been moving supply chains to the U.S., which is challenging, and everybody thought that it could not be done, and we're doing it. We are optimistic that the regulatory environment is supporting our view of the market. If I could just squeeze one last one in. I know, again, you're not going to give 2026 guidance, but you know, we're here at the end of, almost end of fiscal 2025. You had a lot of good contracts come in in July and August, so, you know, good momentum, but you're almost done for the year. You talked about at least high-level guidance should be 80 to 90% covered. Just as you think about maybe being more conservative and having more visibility into the upcoming guidance range that you're going to give on the next call, is that the way to think about it? You're sort of 80 to 90% covered, and you got this sort of $2.5 million of backlog thus far through end of July, early August, and whatever you book between now and the rest of the quarter is sort of the starting point of reference for what guidance should look like for next year? We will base guidance on the backlog we have for 2026 at the time of the fiscal. A couple of months to move forward. We have a good pipeline going forward, so we expect the 2.5 to be a higher number at the time. I'm resolute of guiding to 80- 90. I think I don't want to go over what happened this year. We're very, you know, the market in the U.S. picked up. Things are moving forward. We see good prospects in Australia, not only in Australia, where we have done a good job, but also in EMEA. Stay tuned. We'll provide you the actual guidance, but it will be based on the 80- 90% of the backlog we have for 2026, starting on at the end of the call. I think Ahmed will like that. Yeah, I think, Brian, I don't think you need to read anything in between the lines here. I think it's just more to tell you how we are thinking about the guidance when we give our guidance from November. I think it's more, hopefully, you know, we will continue to do what we have done in the first month. In July, we have signed a $1.1 billion contract. I think, hopefully, we will maintain this momentum, but that is where we will end up. The goal is to give you guidance where we have more confidence, unlike in the past, where we had 65% coverage and we had to sign contracts and then we missed the numbers. That's for the end. I don't think there's anything beyond that. That's right. Okay, thanks, guys. I'll pass it on. Thanks, Brian. Thank you. Your next question is coming from the line of Dylan Thomas Nassano with Wolfe Research. Please go ahead. Morning, Dylan. How are you? Can we start with some comments on data centers? Correct me if I'm wrong. It sounds like maybe you're engaging a little more directly with the data centers. Can you walk us through that? Have you actually signed any kind of new contracts there? No. This is a new and emerging need that, as you know, we've been serving data centers indirectly through our IPPs and other players who actually provide services to them. Now we have this emerging need that data center, AI data centers that are managing AI, complex AI processes have very volatile energy consumption. There's no other way of resolving that issue and not affecting the grid by adding battery storage. This is an emerging need. It requires a lot of technical work, especially the response time of the batteries needs to be very, very quick. I don't want to give you a number, not to provide, give my competitors a view. It requires very, very quick response time to ensure that the electrons in no way affect the algorithms that are learning in the process. That's picking up. We have a pipeline, but we have not signed an agreement. As I said in the call, we're working on the solution. The solution is, we think we have it, but we need to test it and be sure that we have it available for our customers. It is our view. The reason why we included it in the script is not only because clearly it's a data center opportunity, it also shows the expanding scope of products that battery storage can offer. I think that's where, or solutions, if you want to put it differently. I think that's where has been our view from day one that the value of this technology should not be only looked at, hey, integrating renewables into the grid. It's much broader and will continue to play a very broad job, more broad, more jobs, both behind and in front of the meter as we move forward. Dylan, you're getting cut out. I'm sorry. Your next question is coming from David Keith Arcaro with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hello, David. Good morning. Morning. Morning. I was wondering if you could maybe give a little bit more color on just how the U.S. demand picture is trending following the passage of the OBB3. I was curious if you're seeing the executive order uncertainty impacting the pace of bookings, given that it might impact the solar outlook and any battery attachments to solar. Speaking up, we remember we had to halt the execution of a few contracts we had signed. All those contracts are now moving forward and are moving forward to execution. There will be generally 2026 revenue rather than 2025. Very active. We have signed a few contracts as of late, and we are seeing more and more opportunities come up. We haven't seen people concerned today, at least with the projects they have in, concern about the executive order. I think that the projects we've been working on are projects that people feel are very much solidly within, you know, start of construction. They're already, you know, buying the stuff and putting it in place. I think at least the projects that we're signing, which are projects that are very, very mature, will not be affected or are not affected. Great. Got it. That makes sense. I was wondering if you could just elaborate on the ramp-up issues that you had. I think you mentioned it was at your Arizona facilities, but are those now fully resolved? Any lingering impacts or issues that you're managing through the end of the year? Yeah. We had some typical ramp-up issues that come out of putting in place these production lines. In the case of the Arizona facility, it was said we essentially did a technology transfer from what we were doing in Vietnam to the U.S., and some of the work processes and some of it needed to change to affect the U.S., and that kind of delayed the startup and the ramp-up. We believe we have it all under control, and we are in the process of starting to ramp up. We believe that we will be, by the end of the year, we should be able to resolve the problem. Unfortunately, we would not believe today that we'll be able to recuperate the $100 million of revenue that we have to move to next year. We will meet a ramp-up objective for the end of the year, but it will not be enough that we will do more than, from now to year end, that will recuperate the $100 million in revenue. That's the reason why we had to be a little bit more. They are typical ramp-up issues. The things that are small but get delayed, processes that need to be affected, processes that needed to adapt to OSHA rules, things of that sort that you only find out or you find out usually when you are trying to ramp up production out of a facility. The quality of the work is very good. I was on that factory last week, meeting the employees, looking at the people. We have like 40 of our engineers working with them, trying to resolve these issues very quickly or actually helping them resolve these issues very quickly. I'm really excited. If I can give a little bit of an ad, nobody believed we could buy the enclosure, we can build the enclosures with U.S. steel. These are U.S. steel enclosures. The view was that you could not do it, that it was too expensive, that the steel industry in the U.S. was not going to be able to do it. We now, we are, these enclosures that are coming out of that line are made with 100% U.S. steel. We're very, very happy with the process and we think this is the way to go forward. We are believers in the U.S. industry and issues like we have, but we'll make it happen. Okay. Excellent. Thank you so much. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question is coming from the line of Julien Patrick Dumoulin-Smith with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, team. Thank you guys very much. I appreciate the time. Hey, Julian, how are you? Just a follow-up. Hey, the pleasure of my namesake. You're doing great. Just on this '26 number here, you know, on the two and a half, how would you think about that team up here in the next year? I mean, I know you talked about this 80 to 90%. I just want to understand how you think about the line of sight and sort of the timing and cadence of when you see some of that backlog coming in. I mean, do you really see that number accelerating into the end of the year based on OBB3? Also, can you speak a little bit more? I mean, it's notable the non-U.S. acceleration that you're seeing here too. Yeah. I don't want to provide guidance for next year, Julian, unfortunately. We highlighted that number and we highlighted a conservative approach. Remember, last year we guided with $2.6 billion in our backlog, not this year, and we guided to $4 billion. I didn't want to say $2.5 billion and you tell me these guys are going to guide to $3.8 billion. That's kind of what we wanted to give you a sense. It's going very well. Things are picking up globally. We are in a very good position, but we're going to be a lot more conservative. That was a message. I think that's the message I can say. We are seeing very good momentum and, you know, stay tuned. Unfortunately, I don't want to give up, you know, we cannot provide a view today. We're not trying to own our shop. I think our goal is to continue to grow and provide service to our customers and grow the business, you know. That's the goal. Let's stay tuned, we will come and report. Our sales team is actively working and we are adding more resources in sales. That's right. Right. Maybe can you speak to a little bit of what you're expecting on FELC here and how that's going to be implemented and how you see yourself vis-à-vis like the cadence of bookings? I know someone kind of tried to ask the same question earlier, but how do you think about that driving acceleration or just at least the clarity? Like when does that drive order activity? If folks are safe harbored here, perhaps they're a little less. No, Julian, you got disconnected a little bit. I didn't get the... Can you repeat again, please, sorry? Oath. The sound in my part got cut out. Oh, okay. I gotcha. Look, keep it short. On the FELC part, you have contracts where perhaps folks have safe harbored, perhaps FELC exempt equipment. When do you think you'll start to see FELC compliant equipment orders really start to come in given what you're seeing with the OBB3? What the timeline there is, you think about it, right? In theory, that might be somewhat lagged. Is that near term or do you think that there could be some changes here with the safe harbor that would force folks to procure more FELC compliant type products? How do you think about that fitting into your business model? Good point. Yeah. As you know, safe harbor gives you a little bit of flexibility on meeting some of the FELC restrictions. What we said for ourselves and with our suppliers is to meet the actual act deadlines, which all happen, as you know, in the first half of the year next year, unless we see any changes going forward. That's generally our view. We want to meet the deadlines that are in the act as they are, even though we'll have some flexibility meeting some contracts with things that are slightly different. That's our approach. That's the way we take it. We have taken a, I wouldn't call it a conservative approach, but we do not want to lose any of our first-moving advantage on this. I think that part of it is ensuring that we have that supply chain, that ownership, and that control, restructured in accordance with the law as soon as we can. Got it. Thank you, guys. Thank you. Your next question is coming from the line of Justin Lars Clare with ROTH Capital Partners. Please go ahead. Hey, Justin. Good morning. Good morning. I wanted to just follow up on gross margins here. It sounds like the tariffs in the U.S. might affect your gross margin into the fiscal Q4. I'm just wondering if you're anticipating being able to offset the tariff-related costs in the U.S., whether through pricing, sourcing through your domestic supply chain here, or other levers. If this is a temporary issue, should we anticipate margins for the U.S. being similar to your international margins over time and what that looks like? Yeah, it's a very good question. I think these reflect two contracts we already signed that were already in our backlog and where we had some rules or some provisions in our contract, how we divided the tariff effect. The tariff effect on the contracts is a bigger number, but this is the amount. The $30 million is the net amount that we need to reflect in our numbers. This applies to the contracts we already signed. I think new contracts come in, they will reflect the new cost structure, and we should see them going back to the normal margin levels of 10%- 15% that we have set for ourselves. It should not, this is a temporary situation. There might be some in the first quarter of 2026 that still have these issues. There will be some lingering ones, but I think the majority will be done by between this quarter and the first quarter of 2026. Got it. Okay. That's helpful. Just on the domestic supply chain here, wondering if you could provide an update on the ramp-up of AESC's second production line. I think that was expected to come online toward the end of fiscal 2026. Has that timeline shifted at all, given the recent policy developments? Are you considering any alternatives for domestic cell sourcing at this point? Yeah, good question. As you said, we do not need the second line until early 2027. That is still the case. When you look at it, we can live with what we have with the one line going forward. We kind of put that line on pause during the OBB3, when things were moving up. People now forget, but they don't remember the House came with very strict rules and they liberalized now. We kind of put it on pause. Now we will bring it back on as part of our renegotiation on the FELC. It should come, I will say, probably be a little bit later than the first quarter of 2026, but it should work with our current volume needs. However, as you know, there are some challenges. We're also looking at other options just to ensure we don't play, you know, we don't dance to only one tune. We are looking at other options just in case this work gets delayed or we get a lot more volume than what we are thinking of, or somehow the negotiations with AESC do not work as we expect for the second line. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question is coming from the line of Ameet Ishwar Thakkar with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. Yeah. Good Good morning, Julian. Thanks for taking my question. Just real quick on kind of OpEx, you guys had historically tried to kind of, I think, grow that at half the rate of revenues. Looks like it's up kind of year-to-date versus the same period last year. I know you guys have embarked on some kind of cost savings initiatives. Can you just kind of give us an update on where that stands and maybe the timing of when we might start to see some progress on that front? Okay. In terms of OpEx, I think generally long-term, our view is what we have said, keeping our OpEx at half of our growth. However, for next year, most likely we'll keep OpEx flat compared to 2025. Why? We were expecting a significant growth in 2025 in revenue that we were not able to deliver, and our cost structure, in a way, reflects part of it. That's why I think that for next year, it will be essentially flat. After 2027, it should go back to growing after, you know, after 2026 and 2027 onwards, it should grow at half the rate of our top line growth. That's the way you should think about it. Just to give you a sense of what we're doing, we are looking at our OpEx, especially taking a deep look at all our costs that are not sales or product development or R&D. We invested on SAP, so we're looking at our financial costs, our control costs, human resources, all of that G&A that is not connected to either sales or R&D, and really taking a good look and taking advantage of our investments in SAP and other systems that I think are helping. That's what you should see. Flat for 2026, and then growing back again at half the rate of the top line growth at 2027 onward. Thanks, Vlad. Just one quick follow-up. It looks like AESPs were kind of in the low to mid-$300 a KWH during the quarter. If I look at your backlog, it implies something in the lower $200s. I don't think that's necessarily a new phenomenon, but is there any additional revenue that you guys end up booking on the product side that allows you to realize a higher realized AESP versus what's implied by bookings? No, it's in line with what we're looking at. No, I think if you look at our order intake last year, I mean, we were in $300 million. I think it's a timing lag, if you wish, in the revenue that we're seeing in Q3. Those are the contracts we had signed last year. If you go back last year, we had in that range $300 million plus. The only other thing you have to consider is the EPC, the scope of the projects. For example, in Europe, this quarter we have large, more than 50% of my revenue this year from international business is where I have EPC as part of the scope. That by itself increases the price 20%, 30% years. Yeah, 20%. It It depends on the complexity. The base equipment price, which in the U.S., for example, we normally don't do EPC, just the product. Okay. I would like to, I mean, I'm in the promotion mode too, but yeah, true. We are being able to follow the ASP reductions in line with whatever, you know, with our competitors. We are signing good projects with good margins at significantly lower ASPs. Some of you had concerns over our ability to do it. We've been able to do it with our investments in R&D, I'm thinking about our projects. In a way, clearly, the ASP is a threat, but at the same time, it's an opportunity for us all. Got it. Thank you. As I said, thanks. Thanks, Ameet. Great. Your next question is coming from the line of Christopher J. Dendrinos with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thank you. Good morning. How are you? I'm doing well. I wanted to go back to just kind of some of the manufacturing commentary here. I'm curious, are you in a position going forward to support a ramp from, I guess, AESC? Separately, if you do look at a different supplier, can you support the cells coming off that line? Maybe if they're Prismic or Pouch, just trying to understand your flexibility to support a different cell structure if you switch suppliers. Yeah. We clearly are currently, our supply chain is designed to integrate the AESC batteries. If we were to bring another supplier with another technology, there will be a little bit of work in bringing it up. It's not a lot of work, but it will require some workflow. However, we do not have any need for new supply during the rest of 2025 or 2026. It will be an early 2027 need that we will have enough time to adapt to it. Got it. Okay. As a follow-up, maybe just going back to the last question on pricing dynamics. Maybe just broadly, are you, you know, it sounded like in response to a question from ROTH Capital Partners that maybe there's pricing increases going on a bit in the U.S. as a result of tariffs. I guess, is that true? I guess, globally, are you still kind of seeing some incremental pricing pressure, or is it kind of dying down? Thanks. Good question. I think the U.S. will, over time, see some pressure on costs. However, today, most of the projects that we are looking at are projects that are safeguarded under the old IRA provision. I don't expect that you will see significant price increases for the next, you know, maybe 6-1 2 months. They will be under the current, under the older system. Generally, I think that we should expect some additional increases going forward. That's the way you should think about it. Thank you. Thank you. Your final question is coming from the line of Dimple Gosai of Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. Good morning. Thank you. What are you seeing in the market as far as Chinese players front-running FELC and tariff escalations ahead of the end of 2025? Maybe anything you can add on what customers are saying on that front. I have a follow-up. We have been selling domestic content production mostly in the U.S. Those are the customers who we have been working with. The customers who like Chinese equipment, we have not necessarily. I don't know, to tell you the truth, where we are. Chinese equipment does not compete with our domestic content offering. People are probably front-running it. Maybe they are, but it's for other customers, not the ones we are working with. Perfect. For projects that are not within our, the economics of domestic content under the projects that are safeguarded under the IRA and the new projects is very, very strong and continues to be very strong. You know, we feel very, very confident that that market will continue to expand. Okay. In the current backlog, what is the tariff sensitivity that perhaps wasn't already baked into the contracts, if any? Are there any potential cancellation risks or mutual terminations that might still be on the cards? In the U.S., no, we don't see any terminations due to tariff. I think that we have, as I said, the contracts that we stopped because of the tariff risk and how the thing all reactivated. Now with the 40% tariff this year, it's going up to 58%. I think everybody kind of, you know, the provisions that we have in the contracts work. I'll take care of the current backlog. They are ready, they are in our guidance for this year, so you shouldn't expect any other additional changes. Got it. Thank you. Thank you, Dimple. Thank you. I will now turn the call back over to Lexington May, Vice President of Investor Relations, for closing remarks. Please go ahead. Thank you for participating on today's call. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me. We look forward to speaking with you again when we report our fourth quarter and full-year results. Have a good day. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.