Good morning, everybody, and thanks for joining us for our next session. Vishal is the Chief Strategy Officer and EVP of Wholesale at Frontier, which puts him at the center of two of the biggest controversies for would-be investors in Frontier, in my view. I think that the single biggest factor that keeps people on the sidelines is lack of confidence in whether the business and wholesale revenue will hold up. We started unpacking this issue with Scott at our conference in December, and we ran out of time. And so Vishal is here to finish off that conversation. And then the second biggest, the single biggest potential catalyst for the equity, in my view, is the strategic review that the company is in the middle of. I don't think Vishal is ready to share all of the results of the review today. Maybe he will. We've got a bunch of questions about how management weighs certain values and outcomes that I think will provide valuable context as investors think about what might be coming. Vishal, thank you so much for joining us today. We really appreciate it. Always a pleasure, Jonathan. Thank you for the brilliant setup. Good morning to everybody. Looking forward to these sessions. Jonathan, you always have excellent viewpoints on the industry, great questions. So I always look forward to these conversations. Awesome. Thank you. So before we sort of dive into the strategy of what's coming, I want to sort of focus a little bit quickly on the plan of record, which is getting to 10 million locations with fiber, generating 45% EBITDA margins, $4 billion in EBITDA, $3 billion in EBITDA less capex. My view has been if you just deliver on that, the stock would be worth a lot more than people realize today. And so investors aren't buying sort of the first stage of the plan or the stage of the plan that's already underway. When you set the 45% target for fixed wireless for the business, it was before fixed wireless access had appeared on the scene. Do you think that 45% target is still valid today? So it's absolutely spot on in terms of your observation that we are coming a few years out of the first stage of the strategy, the evolution of Frontier. And it's worth taking a step back and just reminding ourselves, three years ago, the company emerged from Chapter 11, new team, new management team, new board, new strategy focused on building fiber, selling fiber, improving the customer experience, and improving operational efficiency as well. And before I get to your question, I think it is worth just reflecting on, three years later, what has been achieved from a standing start of effectively having no fiber build engine. We have now passed over 6.5 million fiber residential passings. We have the second largest fiber build engine in the United States, second to AT&T. That's quite frankly, I'm not sure most people would have thought we'd have achieved that. And we have, and we continue to go from strength to strength, something that we're very proud of and believe is a relatively unique capability that we developed. Secondly, selling fiber. We have 2 million fiber customers in residential space. That's more than 50% more than what we had three years ago. And we continue to have really strong quarter after quarter in terms of growth, both in terms of ARPU, and we can talk about that later, as well as just subscriber adds. So the whole revitalization of the Frontier brand, the consumer proposition, the consumer experience, and the portfolio structure in terms of products is working well, in my opinion, has a long, long positive runway ahead of it. The story continues on experience. Our NPS was nothing to talk about three years ago. Some of the most recent surveys that we and others have done outside in indicate that we have the best fiber NPS of almost any player in the United States. That's a fairly material change in a short period of time. NPS takes ages to change in normal industries and circumstances. Then efficiency, I think we had our initial target of taking around $250 million of gross cost out. We've taken over $500 million in the last three years. Therefore, really, that kind of focus on being streamlined and readying ourselves for scale, being efficient, being able to scale efficiently and having a cost structure across the full company is something we've done a really good job of and continue to focus on. So I'd just take a step back and say, look, 3 years in, if you just look at the fundamentals of where the company is versus where it was, it's a very unique story, something we're very proud of and continue to focus on. And then looking ahead, 2023, we grew Adjusted EBITDA, I think, for the first time in 10 years. It was a very important milestone for us. The underlying fundamentals of the strategy enable us to keep that growing. So taking all of that into context and then coming to your question with respect to fixed wireless, to achieve this level of commercial and build success, clearly, we have to get very deep and granular on understanding our markets, what's happening with customers, what's happening with various other developments in the industry. We look at fixed wireless access as a technology, as a capability. I come from a wireless background, Vodafone. I've bought 5G spectrum. I've launched fixed wireless access products and capabilities. What we have seen here and understood is that fixed wireless is a very useful complementary product. We've seen very limited impact of fixed wireless on places where we have fiber to date. In fact, we're very, very reassured by our own fiber cohort penetration. We've always said that 45% would be kind of at 45% or more. In In our base markets, we're already at 44.5%. In some markets and clusters within that, we're well above that. Our confidence that fiber is the right future-proofed product for high-speed broadband is stronger than before. We're very confident with 45% as our kind of general target. We see fixed wireless as maybe an interesting complement in areas where there may never be fiber, where it's having some impact on margins on our DSL base. But most importantly, we see it as a real competitive tension between cable and fixed wireless where fiber doesn't yet exist. That's kind of the way we see it. But we're focused on it on everything at a kind of cluster-by-cluster level. Yep. It makes a lot of sense. I mean, I guess the strongest proof point is that you're still increasing penetration in your base markets that are already close to 45%. So that seems like a fair enough mark. When we model out the first 10 million homes to 45% penetration, if we assume flattish business and wholesale revenue, we can't quite get to $4 billion of EBITDA unless we assume cost cuts. Is there another $500 million of cost to take out of this business? I think the best way to answer that is without providing any specific points on guidance, because that's not the sort of topic for today. But if I look at our overall thesis and view of cost structure, let's put it that way, right? There are two types of cost. There's growth-focused cost, so cost that's success-based or it's variable based on adding new customers. And there is an element of adding variable cost as you grow the customer base. That's healthy. We focus on making sure that's as efficient as possible. We're increasing the amount of self-installation capability within our platform that makes those sort of additional incremental costs for a customer more productive and efficient as we go forward. But the second group is structural cost, right? I think we've made a pretty good improvement from where we started three years ago in terms of taking a whole bunch of excessive legacy cost out. We're pretty confident that there's a lot more we're going to do, for example, in terms of process automation, in terms of contact center simplification, a huge amount of work that we're doing with respect to digital, both in terms of digital self-care on the website through our recently launched and highly successful app, through our chatbot, which we launched last year, and the enrichment that you have in chatbots with respect to AI intents, etc. There's a lot coming through. I think we've reduced our contact center amount of calls by about 60% while having 50% new fiber customers. That already tells you that there's been a significant, let's say, structural shift in how we deal with some of those things. We have a long runway ahead of us as well, right? Automation and productivity improvement continue to be found and done. We think that's going to be a steady-state part of what we'll do. As a result, we're pretty confident in achieving our steady-state financial metrics, as you mentioned before. Got it. But am I right in thinking that taking structural costs out of the business is a sort of an important part of getting to those steady-state financial metrics? I think if you look at the areas of our business where we're still working on improving, video still remains an important part of the mix today, but we know it's declining. We've forecast that it's declining. As that does, that naturally takes important associated costs out of the structure. Automation and IT, we've only hinted at some of the early improvements we've made. We've stabilized a lot of our core capabilities, but there's a lot more to come. Of course, maintaining fiber networks is cheaper than maintaining copper networks. As the mix shifts, we'll see a lot more of that come through. You could say these are foundational or fundamental aspects of the overall strategy that we're heading down. Okay. Vishal, Scott gave us the recipe for establishing business and wholesale revenues back in December. It's sort of roughly SME grows like consumer, enterprise declines, and wholesale's sort of flattish in the middle. Can you delve into the wholesale bit in a little bit more detail? It's really a bit of a black box for those of us on the outside looking in. No, absolutely. And look, I think business the first thing is, what is it? A lot of people ask me, what is wholesale? What do you guys actually do in that mysterious part of the industry? And the first thing is, look, the vast majority of it for Frontier is the wholesale area is effectively servicing or selling circuits, connections, data connectivity into the large nationwide enterprise businesses, or then on-selling it onto end customers, large medium-sized enterprises. So customers of the like of AT&T Business, Verizon Business, Lumen, but also the mid-market, the cable companies with increasing nationwide enterprise ambitions, the pure aggregators and resellers in the space, they're all part of the wholesale customer base. And therefore, a way of thinking about wholesale and business, so to speak, our commercial segment is that our business division, SMB, and enterprise is very much focused majority on direct retail relationships on our footprint, highly localized, highly regionalized, more mid-market, and is very effective, is increasingly effective as a result of a lot of things that we've done to improve product portfolio and sales operations. And the wholesale space, we sell into the nationwide, so it's complementary as a business to the other piece. And within that, it's similar dynamics, which is we are exposed to the same general trends in terms of legacy copper declines, so mid to high single-digit declines. But at the same time, we also have a significant growth in what we call fiber-related services. So that is around fiber-based connectivity to enterprises, Ethernet, broadband. But increasingly, a focus point for us has also been connecting towers. So actually going out and rebooting the relationships with wireless carriers and, of course, data center companies and ensuring that we're also servicing them as direct end customers. So increasing that sort of fiber-to-the-tower component of our activity. So what you have within wholesale is this sort of balancing act of expanding our fiber-based connectivity, which we had not quite focused on as much in the past and which, as a result of increasing residential fiber build, we have better and better reach every year. So that's the focal point. And in the meantime, we use the standard approaches to better manage and just manage the decline on the more legacy side. So that total keeps wholesale relatively flat. We have a finite number of large customers, and therefore, strategic account relationships help us balance those relationships. That's what gives us sort of long-term stability while enabling both the residential and the SMB spaces to kind of do their magic over the next few years. Got it. And sort of closing out the thought process on the 10 million, I think going at the pace that you're going, you get there sometime in the middle of 2026, which, considering this is a 40- or 50-year asset, is effectively tomorrow. If you stopped the build in the middle of 2026, you'd be free cash flow positive sometime in the second half of 2026, right? That's how the free cash flow comes through the business. Let me answer that by talking more about, on a cluster or a cohort level, what are the dynamics of build and cash flow. At an overall company level, what will happen with respect to cash flow generation? That's not for me to say today, but it is important to try and understand the dynamics, which is, in a particular cluster or cohort, the day you stop building isn't the day you become necessarily cash flow positive because you still need customers. So the way to think about it is, in a cluster or cohort, we complete the build. We then need 12-18 months to hit that first wave of customers, hit our sort of initial 12-18-month penetration rate with healthy fiber output. And I think from then onwards, we see at a cluster-by-cluster level, things turn cash flow positive. So there's a build phase. There's a first wave penetration phase. And then I think you're in healthy, growing cash generation phase. That's how we think about it and how those cohorts and all play up at the overall company level. I mean, I'm sure we'll talk more about that over time. Yep. And just so I understand it, Vishal, it sounds like somewhere in that 18% range is where you hit free cash flow breakeven in terms of penetration within a cohort. Is that right? I would say 12-18 months. I think within that, different cohorts will have different economics, but it's in that sort of range. The 12-18 months, at 12 months, I think your average penetration is 18%. And so it's sort of somewhere in that, call it 20%-25% range, is free cash flow breakeven at a cohort level. Something like that, I would say. I'd have to each cohort is very special and different depending on the cost to pass, the market structure, all of this, right? And as you know, market structure is one of the most important things we focus on as we invest, right? 86% of our markets are two high-speed player markets once we finish fiberization. But I think taking that sort of attractive cohorts, mixture of cohorts, that period of the first wave of penetration, I think then sets us up. Not only is it kind of in and of itself cash generating, but we know if we hit that when we hit that penetration, that the trajectory is positive for the next year as well. Yep. And I know you don't want to sort of comment on overall cash flow positive for the company, but just so I understand the pieces correctly, by the time we get to the middle of 2026, you'll have 1 million-ish homes that are less than 12-18 months, 1.5 million homes less than 12-18 months, and like 8.5 million homes, there are somewhere between 45% penetration and that breakeven point. When you put it together, I would think that the overall business should be free cash flow positive just based on the mix of not cash flow positive yet and fiercely cash flow positive. I would say, I mean, I think what I would state that is, be very careful not to provide any guidance at this point in time. The general dynamic is, from the point you, at a cluster level, aren't building, you need a period of time to fill the cluster to a sufficient level before you're there. And what that means for Frontier overall over the next few years, I'm sure it'll be a topic of very interesting conversation, but not today. Got it. Got it. We'll save that for the analyst day in the second quarter. Jonathan, I would say the steady state, when that arrives, is highly attractive. Yeah. And in terms of the first 10 million, is $2 billion of additional funding enough to get you there? I won't get into the specifics of financing. I think Scott's going to pick that up separately. There's a lot that we've been working on. But what I would draw attention to is that asset-backed securitization, securitization as a source of financing, as a vehicle, which we did in our North Texas, Dallas markets last year, and others in the industry are following down the same road, is a sustainable and attractive source of, let's say, sustainable financing. It's something where we consider as strategic. You take that into account. You take that into account the fact that we have many, many, many mature markets. We don't feel we have any; we have a clear line of sight to funding and financing our committed build. Yep. Yep. Got it. Yeah. We've had two ABS deals done in the last week, which has been really interesting. And the sort of rough algorithm we figured out in the course of the last two days is basically every time a fiber company adds 125-150,000 customers, they can go and raise $1 billion of debt against it. The deals are all coming in around $7,000 per customer in terms of available financing, which I think really speaks to that runway of future financing, given how rapidly you're growing customers, fiber customers. I think the fact that there are now multiple securitization events in the fiber to the home space, I think, helps mature the category. And that's, I think, healthy for the industry as a whole. Of course, I think, Jonathan, as you pick out, not every deal is the same. I think if you're looking at market structure, if you're securitizing a portfolio of assets that's predominantly in two-player markets versus three or more player markets, there is something you need to think through there. So I guess maybe they're not all equal, but it is a very sustainable and, I think, increasingly mature source of financing. I'm not going to comment on what the inferred value is. Who knows what happens in the next few deals and how that changes? But it is attractive. So moving on from the first 10 million, Vishal, I want to sort of think about the next 5 million. Nick's been saying recently that between what you can upgrade organically, what will be funded by BEAD, and then what becomes organically upgradable once you've made the BEAD investment, you could get to pretty much all of the 5 million additional locations with fiber over time. At least I think that's what he's saying. Is that the right way to think about it? I think the first thing is, as disciplined investors of capital, which is fundamentally what we, as a management team, is the lens we've taken at for everything we've done. As disciplined investors of capital, we look at the returns at a cluster, almost census block level, wire center level, and we look at the entire footprint. We have some footprints around this in evaluating the total potential. Three years ago, when the company emerged from Chapter 11, a $10 million was the very first cut analysis that was throwing up an appropriate value. But we've learned a lot since then. We've made our build engine much more mature, scalable, probably one of the more efficient build engines that is around at the moment as a result of a lot of learning. And we've learned a lot more about how different cohorts behave, right? We've added 1 million customers. We've got to 6.5 million passings. So put that all together. And the real kind of potential for where there's strong returns, from an IRR perspective, is about 1-2 million more than the 10 million that we initially indicated. That's what the potential in our markets is. This leaves about 3-4 million where some form of BEAD subsidy is required. And with the BEAD program effectively coming into swing this year, we're pretty excited by it. We're well set up to apply. Now, we don't know how much we'll win. We don't know how much will be made available because not every county is likely to win a BEAD grant. It's not necessarily full coverage that the program enables. But we're excited. We see it as a once-in-a-generation opportunity. We'll be financially disciplined so that we don't end up still having a significantly. We want to ensure we have good returns net of subsidy, if that makes sense, and hopefully that results in a number of those 3-4 million passings that we can fiberize. That's how we're looking at it. More broadly, because of the knowledge we've gained and the detailed understanding of how fiber building and selling works, we're quite excited by the potential to go beyond the 10 million committed build. We're kind of exploring multiple different opportunities and avenues to do that, BEAD being one among them. Yep. And as I think about that opportunity, your investors want two things from you simultaneously that are in conflict. On the one hand, they want you to go and chase NPV-positive projects to the extent that they're for as long as they're NPV-positive projects, you should go and invest in them. On the other hand, they want to see free cash flow as soon as possible. What do you do with that? How do you balance those two objectives? I think taking a view on it, which is, it really is, it comes back to what I said a moment earlier. We view ourselves as disciplined investors of capital, which means we need to balance things, which is invest where there is appropriate return, strong returning potential, long-term value creation. As you mentioned earlier in the call, we're creating a 50-year-plus asset. And there's a build phase upfront, but there's multiple, multiple decades of cash generation on the other side of it, balancing that with also an understanding that you need to manage near-term financial metrics, leverage, etc., etc. So that's just how we've run the company the last three years. That's how we'll continue to run it. We are quite sort of quite confident that if we find the right return pockets and we structure the way to attack those return pockets appropriately, giving our investors what they require in terms of value creation, there's a formula that works. Rome was not built in a day, but you built it in a way that was sustainable and you could keep building. Right. So AT&T, I think, has come up with a template for how you can achieve both of those objectives in the same time in terms of putting assets into an off-balance sheet vehicle with a financial partner so that you can demonstrate free cash flow on one set of assets without holding back investment in another set of assets. It seems like a very good vehicle for the investment opportunity beyond the initial 10 is. How do you guys think about that, Vishal? So as we think about expanding beyond the committed sort of number of 10 million that we had that we have mentioned, there are a number of ways. Firstly, I mentioned that there's more opportunity just within our footprint as we look more deeply at it. There's BEAD. I also very purposely mentioned attractive opportunities around our footprint. There's some very interesting edge-out opportunities that we have evaluated as well. We've been evaluating various types of joint ventures. A joint venture is nothing other than a form of a structured partnership, and it can vary. It can be highly variable in terms of what it is, what it looks like, etc. And there's many variations in vanilla. There's not one vanilla option. Jonathan's what I'm trying to say, to think about the range of those, as well as targeted M&A events that may be an opportunity for us or a, let's say, it's an option to look at as part of an overall strategic review. So we look at all of this. Other than saying we're looking at all of it, I won't say any more today. But what I will say is how we think about certain things and fundamentals. First, we look at the capabilities that Frontier brings to the table, so to speak. And I think as a result of the work in the last three years, we believe we have one of a very unique build capability in terms of fiber today. That unique build capability gives us the ability to have some strategic optionality. We are a reasonably strong partner, good vendor ecosystem, good engineering and build track record, strong fiber sales engine with proven track record of hitting penetration curves again and again, quarter after quarter, three years in a row. We believe we're an attractive partner for many, many potential partners. And as a result, I think it allows us a little bit to be judicious and disciplined in terms of the choices we make, right, because we have something unique to bring to the table. A critical decision factor for us is going to be market structure. I think market structure, no matter where you invest and go, is a long-term determinant of returns. So two-player markets are very strong for us. BEAD markets are very strong for us. The other determining factor is how quickly and scalably can we bring the Frontier brand, the residential brand, across, right, because penetration growth is sort of the other side of the coin to build. So we're looking at these factors. And yeah, and I think we feel confident that there's a line of sight to go beyond our committed build. Awesome. I didn't get to discussions around pricing and promotion strategy. We've run out of time, Vishal, but this has been great. Really appreciate your insights today. Thank you very much for joining us. Thank you.