Good morning-- Good afternoon. My name is Sebastiano Petti, and I follow the communication space here at J.P. Morgan. I would like to welcome Frontier Communications Executive Chairman, John Stratton. John, thanks for joining us. My pleasure. It's good to be here, Sebastiano. It's been roughly three years since Frontier emerged from bankruptcy, and the fiber strategy, which we'll certainly touch on, appears to be working. What are the near-term priorities for the board, and how are you thinking about the three-to-five-year timeframe, perhaps? Yeah, that's a good place to start. You know, when the board meets at Frontier, you know, consistent from the very beginning, ultimately, the priority is always about maximizing our ability to create value with this asset, which is a pretty terrific asset. And so that has been our focus in the beginning. When we first got started in emergence from bankruptcy back in 2021, the focus was principally on bringing in the right leadership team, ensuring that we had a simple but powerful strategy around selling fiber, building fiber, improving the customer experience, and improving the operational execution, the efficiency with which we executed. And as I look back, you know, over the last three years, the job that the management team has done has been quite solid, you know, across all of those dimensions. If, you know, we look at the fiber networks now reaching 6.8 million passings, so that's about 68% of our stated goal of achieving 10 million as our committed build. We've grown the fiber broadband customer base by 60% in that time frame. And then as relates to improving our operating efficiencies, we had targeted $250 million of run rate cost savings to be taken out of the business, and we've actually more than doubled that. We're just over $500 million in costs eliminated during that time span. And then maybe for me, most importantly, and I think most notably, we talked about improving the customer experience, and I have to tell you that upon emergence from bankruptcy, that was a real problem. We had a broken business, and the brand was somewhat tarnished as a consequence of, you know, some poor service delivery that had preceded that period of time. I'm really gratified to see the work that the management team has done in this regard, where you can see that as reflected in the company's churn rate, which is now quite competitive and improving quarter on quarter. But maybe even more so on the net promoter score, the NPS, the business puts up. We were dead last in that category when we started, and we are now at the top of the charts in terms of NPS performance in our category. So, you know, look, we, we always know that there's more to do, but it's a good sense as a board, as we look at the accomplishments of the leadership team, that we're pointing in a positive direction. And, you know, this operational improvement has now started to translate into financial results. And, we now enter what we think of as our second stage, which is the growth phase, for our company. And, on a consolidated basis, for the first time in, I guess, nine years, since 2015, we grew the top line, in the first quarter. That was for us, that was kind of, a, an important achievement, and we'll look to sustain and grow that as we go forward. And then last year, for the first time in a decade, we grew the EBITDA, the bottom line of the business. And again, our expectation now is that should accelerate, as we go forward. So for the board, as we go forward, the focus is on continuing to execute, on the fundamentals of the business to improve our operating and financial results. And then also, as we look out a bit, you described kind of a 3-5-year timeframe. We announced, earlier this year, the initiation of a strategic review, you know, to consider different options that we might have as a business to enhance and augment the work that we're doing on the ground. I suspect you're gonna probably ask me more about that later, but that's kind of the tool and the means by which we'll suss that out. Okay, well, yeah, definitely want to come back to the EBITDA and top-line growth, which I think is a great inflection point for the business as well as the strategic review. But you hit it, you know, build fiber, sell fiber, improve the customer experience. You're at 70% of the way, essentially, through the 10 million passings build, on pace for the 1.1-1.3 million this year. Where do we go from here? I think is it just, as you said, that top-line EBITDA acceleration, as well as just continuing the steps you kinda just outlined, continue to just build, sell fiber? Yeah, you said it very well. We're at about 68%-70% now. And you know, we've announced that we're going to build 1.3 million passings this year, which would have us ending the year just over 80%. So we're getting close, right, to that 10 million objective. Interesting, though, it all starts with the build. When we first started as a business, Frontier had no experience in building fiber. We had acquired fiber. We had acquired fiber from Verizon and AT&T in the company's past, but we had no practical experience in building fiber. So all this was new, and there was a question about whether we'd have the ability to do it. We have a very strong leader in Veronica Bloodworth, who's managing the build with her team. And we look at that on three levels. You know, are we building at the right velocity, you know, the right pace, the right level of quality, and the right cost? And all of those are tracking in the manner that we had hoped. But as well as that's going, no value is created when we build the fiber. It all comes from putting customers on the network and selling fiber. So part two, right, selling it. And if you think about it, with 80% of our intended passings complete by the end of this year, the real opportunity is to bring it forward, you know, and to continue to drive penetration in the markets. We've talked about a one-year objective of 15%-20% penetration, two years, 25%-30%, and then ultimately 45% or better for terminal penetration. And those numbers remain sort of emblazoned on our minds as the critical targets and objectives for the company as we go forward. But what's interesting and important for investors to note is that, you know, from the minute we lay the fiber into the ground, we create the passing. It takes about 15%-20% penetration, call it 12-18 months time, from which point it now begins to generate positive and growing EBITDA and positive free cash flow. So this is where now, as the expansion network is aging in its place, you know, it's coming up in terms of its average age, you see us beginning to unlock the financial returns that, you know, we've promised. So we've said, you know, EBITDA will grow. We've said EBITDA in 2024 will grow at an accelerating rate, and, you know, it comes from this flywheel effect of, you know, sort of building, penetrating the market. So the heavy focus now, of course, is on that execution. And then we'll talk more about is there more to build, et cetera? You know, that's also grist for the mill. Great. So I think shifting gears a bit here, it's a competitive environment. So we've seen FWA growth slow a little bit industry-wide as AT&T Air, Internet Air enters the market. But what are you seeing in terms of FWA competition in your markets? And maybe broaden the lens a little bit to the fiber builder, overbuilders as well. Yeah, I remember I was literally, I think, in this chair, at this desk, and, your predecessor, Phil Cusick, asked me that same question, and the idea at that time was, of course, it must be affecting your growth and it has to be eating into your opportunity. And I gave Phil all the possible assurances I could at the time that, "No, no, we're not seeing it." And we believe that in a market where a customer has a choice between a fiber optic network that delivers symmetrical capabilities, a gig, 2 gig, 5 gig, that if you have a choice, you're gonna go that way 10 out of 10 times. And, you know, our thought process at the time was we may start to see some level of that, cutting into our copper business. Perhaps that'll start to happen in a meaningful way as we go down the road. Candidly, we remain in the same place. We haven't really seen it. You know, our copper performance, while that business is in secular decline, it's remained somewhat constant. You know, we see roughly the same negative net add levels quarter after quarter. And in terms of fiber, you know, we're growing like crazy. We've grown 18% at that pace in the last 12 months, and it continues to grow at a nice rate. So we don't really see it there. Now, listen, I think that the wireless operators have been very credible, I think very thoughtful about how they frame their market with fixed wireless access. You know, where they say, you know, maybe this is 6 or 8 million pops kind of capacity, is probably about right. I think it can be a bit of a strong positive niche for those players, particularly in the B2B segment. But when I look at the levels of consumption that a fiber customer is taking today, and I don't mean any fiber, I'm talking about Frontier, in our base of customers today, are consuming a terabyte or more per month. And that level of consumption, the wireless networks I know from close and hard experience, the wireless networks were not engineered for that level of consumption. And I think that's what leads to the conservatism with which, you know, T-Mobile, Verizon, and AT&T might describe fixed wireless. So no, we don't see that as a significant point of competition. We recognize that it has a place in the marketplace, but from a head-to-head perspective, we see, we see virtually no impact. From a fiber overbuilder perspective, I mean, we have heard some commentary from, you know, others in the industry that maybe some of the insurgent overbuilds have been slowing to some extent. Is that what you've also seen in the Frontier footprint? Yeah, you know, when we got started, we had the good fortune to be well-timed. You know, we emerged from bankruptcy in April 2021. Cost of capital was relatively low. We were off to a fast start. We knew the size of the build that we endeavored to create. We were able to then go out to the marketplace and secure material, secure labor, and supply the relationships necessary to help us create that build. And as a consequence of that, we were also able to then communicate to the broader market that we intended to build 10 million passings of fiber, and we were gonna very aggressively market those in the places where we trade. I think that had a bit of a freezing effect on overbuilders in terms of how they thought about entering Frontier's geographies, its territories. Really, from that time, we've seen very little, if any, evidence of overbuilders in our markets. It's not to say that they don't exist, they're not out there. They are. I think they've had a tendency to enter markets where perhaps the ILEC provider has been slower to move to fiber. You know, if you have a chance as a, as an overbuilder to go into a market where it's the cable guy and a DSL offering, yeah, you'd be pretty motivated to do that. I do think that the increased cost of capital and the higher input costs, labor costs and material costs, may be dampening the enthusiasm for some of the overbuilders, even in terms of going to those lesser-developed markets. But in terms of the Frontier markets, we've seen almost no evidence. Okay. Maybe backing up a minute, I think obviously something that's pretty topical at the moment is the ACP roll-off that we're in the midst of here. On the call, I think Frontier noted that at the end, the program will have a, quote, "unknown impact on the company." It represents just 4% of your customers today. Any update on what you're seeing and how your ACP offers perhaps might be resonating in the market or your newly, I think, the new competitive, lower price competitive offers resonating? Yeah, we have a pretty limited expectation of impact from ACP. As you said, Sebastiano, this is only about 4% of our base. So, it's not zero, but it's not, you know, to the level that some of our competitors might see. We are working on a pilot program with a 200 meg offering that would be intended to direct towards customers if they're rolling off of ACP. So we'll, you know, experiment with different opportunities to hold on and preserve those customers. You know, some folks have asked me: Do you see an opportunity here? You know, where a few of our competitors have really loaded up on ACP in the last couple of years, and what happens when they begin to shed those customers? I would tell you we'll certainly be opportunistic where it makes sense, and for us, it's important that we take a disciplined approach to the markets. We wanna grow the business, we wanna grow our penetration levels, but we wanna grow in a profitable way. We've also spoken about the importance of achieving, you know, sort of a sustained level of ARPU growth. So the mix that we take as we go forward will be a pretty big contributor to that. Okay. Sticking with competition for a moment, so we have a host of open access networks have been announced, most notably AT&T's Gigapower JV. As you've given your experience in the industry, do you think open access networks will continue to proliferate from here? And if so, how do you think they'll impact the competitive dynamics longer term? Excuse me. Yes, I'm not sure how much they're actually proliferating. You know, that is to say, when I look at open access, I'm kind of lukewarm, to be honest, at best. I think that we're best served by building our fiber optic networks, and then, you know, selling those networks to customers, getting up to levels of penetration 45% and onwards, capturing more than 50% of the market from a retail share perspective. All that makes sense to me. I also suspect that if I look across at the cable competitors, they're probably highly unlikely to ever think about, you know, opening their networks to open access type service, which leads to the question of overbuilders, which is really where your question was going. I think my answer to overbuilders is similar to... or to open access overbuilders would be similar to the notion of a you know pure-play overbuilder. You know, how open are the open access networks that AT&T launches with Gigapower? I think AT&T is the primary tenant, will be the tenant. You know, what will T-Mobile do with Lumos? We'll see, how that goes. But at this point in time, we don't see a whole lot of that sort of in the critical path for our business. Over the last few years, cable companies have leaned into convergence with more aggressive fixed broadband and mobile offers. You and other members on the team have a lot of experience in wireless, as we touched on. How is Frontier evaluating convergence, and what would need to change, or what would Frontier need to see in order to perhaps think about standing up a mobile product of its own? Yeah, we talk about this. We're asked this question a lot, you know, and I think folks are curious to see, and maybe at some level, the question about whether we need to deliver a wireless offering is a different way of asking, do we think the markets ultimately are gonna converge? Nick has been really explicit in the way he speaks to this, in the marketplace, and that is to say, we look at the data very, very closely, and specifically, we look to see in what way, if at all, are our gross add trends impacted by the lack of a wireless combination, a wireless fixed offering? Do we see anything in terms of significant levels of defections, churn, where you've got competitive switching activity because people are really desiring to have a converged offering? We don't see it. Now, I will tell you that, as you've said, Sebastiano, there is a pretty good level of experience on the team, people who have built wireless businesses before. So we feel pretty confident that we know what to do and how we would do it. But we also know that the most important thing that we can do to build our business is to maintain a maniacal focus on the one thing that we do, which is building, selling, and servicing the fiber networks. And so anything that takes us off of that, anything that sort of, deflects or distracts the management team's time, energy, and resources to doing something else, is something that, you know, I personally would have a bias against. However, if it became necessary, we would know what to do. In the moment, we don't see it. Yeah, and I think Nick's made comments about the industry or the market is converging, and perhaps that's where it's going. But on a near-term basis, there's plenty of other opportunities in front of Frontier that probably make more sense to focus on. Yeah. Sounds good. So, you touched on consumer ARPU, and, you know, while peers have reported ARPU growth, you know, maybe a little bit less, I mean, Frontier's consumer fiber ARPU growth is exceeding peers, right? It grew 6% in the most recent quarter. I mean, what are the near-term and long-term levers in the consumer fiber business as it pertains to ARPU? And, you know, what gets you comfortable about that 3%-4% longer term kind of goal? Yeah, we've set 3%-4% as our near and long-term objective for ARPU. This is one of the most critical value creators that we have, is the ability to grow the average revenue per user. And it's something we're really focused on. There are really three levers that we have to affect and impact ARPU. One is just pure pricing, right? Just where we set pricing. The second is the speed tiers. And, you know, just to talk about that for a moment, I remember when we first came together as a business, we had an objective to improve our gigabit mix. And at the time, the goal that we set for ourselves was we needed to get over 10%. We just had to do that, and we were gonna work every day to find our way past 10%, and there was literally a celebration inside the company when we got to 11%. Like, that was a big deal. But, you know, fast-forward a couple of years, that's now 60% and growing. And so what we see is a combination of things. One is the natural evolution of the marketplace. Consumers increasingly see the value of a fiber broadband connection and the utility of a Gig plus, you know, sort of in terms of what serves their household. And I get the question a lot, like, "What's the use case?" Somebody asked me earlier today: "Do you have anybody who actually, you know, subscribes to 5 Gig? I was like: "Well, yeah, you know, it's on the price list, and certainly people do buy it." I think what we see here is a recognition of I'm going to establish a connection to my home to serve broadband. In that house, I probably have 10, 12, 15, 20 different devices that are all feeding off of this. I mentioned earlier that, you know, the average consumption for a Frontier fiber customer is a terabyte per month, so the consumption is at an extremely high level. It. Look, if you're a gamer, then our very, very low latency, the, you know, single-digit millisecond latency is a phenomenal benefit, but I don't think that's what's driving this. I think it's the notion of, I have an opportunity. I can buy fiber networks for at or around the same cost as a cable network or other options. Why wouldn't I do that? And that's where we've netted out. So you talked about long-term usage trends. I mean, any update in terms of what are you seeing in terms of the one gigabit? And I think in the past, anecdotally, the team has brought up, as you roll out two gigs, one gig take rates are higher. As you roll out five- Totally Maybe 2 Gig take rates go higher. You know, as you launch some of these higher speed tiers, how do you think that positions you longer term, even though DOCSIS against cable, even though they're on that DOCSIS 4.1? Well, kind of. You know, we think gradually, almost as sort of against their will, they'll get to a gig, you know, and they'll maybe fight their way past that. You know, from an uplink perspective, it's still gonna be kind of limited, and then eventually they'll get to an uplink that looks like it. We know what we have is a very, very smooth and efficient evolutionary path forward. So what I mean by that is, you know, with almost no cost, we're able to go from a gig to 5 to 10 to 25. You've got customer premise equipment that needs to change as you go along that path, but from a standpoint of the build and the deployment at the network level, it is a very, very efficient timeline and path forward. What I would tell you in terms of use, it does seem that in all consumer markets, you have a halo effect that's created by the top end. You know, you put a 5 Gig, plan in front of the marketplace, you'll get some level of take at the very top end, but it does have a tendency to pull through a 1 Gig and 2. You know, when we launched 2, sales of 1 Gig went through the roof. When we launched 5, sales of 2 really, really accelerated, and I think we'll probably see a similar phenomenon as we go forward. Now, during the 1Q call, Scott Beasley, your CFO, mentioned, noted that Frontier was deeply involved in scaling up a team to go after BEAD in a disciplined but strong way. How are you thinking about BEAD and the size of potential opportunity for the company? And then any update, perhaps, how you're thinking about timing of BEAD? Yeah, Scott, Scott's very well reflected on the level of effort inside the company. We do think this matters. This is important. It is in terms of timing, it's maybe a little further out, as the federal government and then working with the states and then at the state and local level. There's a lot of detail associated with what are called the challenge periods, the prequalification periods. You know, a lot of that work is being done, and some states are ahead of others, but all the states that we talk about, a pretty significant proportion of the total BEAD program happens to fall in states in which we do business. So, you know, so of course, we are spooling up a team. We have a team on the ground now that is organizing and driving our effort in terms of BEAD. I would tell you this. I think this matters, you know, at a high level to the U.S. overall, as a citizen, when I think about the importance of BEAD and some of the other programs that are oriented around this. There's a real need to provide high-quality broadband access to users in all different corners of the U.S. You know, from an access and affordability perspective, this is a noble cause. And, you know, it's encouraging to me to see the level of private capital investment that's driving the formation of these networks, but there is an economically impractical point beyond which it's difficult to go, you know? We get to those extremely remote or rural areas, subsidization will be necessary. So we think this is important. I like the way this program is being designed differently than many of the predecessor programs. I've been at this for a while, and I can tell you that in the last decade or so, there have been a dozen different programs. In the early stages, some of the discussion was about, well, how do we define broadband? You know, and is it 5 megs? Is it 50 megs? Is it 100 meg? That is a self-defeating approach, and I think what's an improved methodology here is more with a bias to the technology. You see, in this case, in the case of BEAD, a bias towards fiber technology as being the preferred approach, which, you know, obviously plays well for Frontier, but I also think more importantly, plays well for the U.S. market, and for the taxpayers who are funding it. So you touched on it earlier, but strategic review is obviously an interesting talking point or interesting point that came up in the 1 Q call. At that point, you know, Nick did say, you know, he was excited to provide more detail about your long-term financial goals and your analyst day, but that it would be predictable, the exact timing would depend on the strategic review process. If you'd like to make any announcements today, John, please. But as it relates to that, what options do you think are, you know, perhaps most or least attractive as you think about Frontier, where it sits, you know, across the landscape that we've kind of outlined thus far during our Q&A? Yeah, by the nature of it, I'll be limited in terms of what I can share here, but maybe at least describe how we're thinking about it. We have a very rigorous process internal to the business around medium-term planning and then, you know, sort of the annual build of the financial and operating plan for the business. And of course, the management team works closely with the board to get those plans locked down and fully funded, and off we go. About a year, a little bit more than a year ago, as we were doing a review of that, inside the boardroom, and as Nick and the team were taking us through not only the 2023 operating and financial plan, but also like, okay, what does it look like now as we go out a couple of years? We got to a point where you were seeing the end of the initial build. And so the natural question that the board needs to ask is: Okay, where do we go next? What's next for the company? How should we think about this? And, the way we're working this now is we start with what we think of as the base case, the investment thesis that, you know, investors today are quite familiar with, which we articulated back in August of 2021 when we did our last Investor Day. And so that's a that remains a very strong hand. You know, the conversion of copper, we're converting about 3,500 homes per day to copper, as I referenced earlier. In 12-18 months' time, they, you know, become EBITDA cash flow positive, and there's this beautiful flywheel effect as you increase the number of homes that you've converted. So that's a great business. You know, as we think about that as the base case, the question is, you know, are there other options that we can either use to augment the business to, you know, further expand the returns that investors will see from their, from their investment in, in this company? And that's the work that's underway. We've basically broken it down to, you know, six categories. We're looking at operational and financing strategies. We're looking at strategic partnerships, joint ventures, divestitures, mergers, and, and other business combinations. So all of those are independently stood up as work streams, and the effort that's underway now is to see and determine what the contours of those different options might be. In the end, they'll be, you know, lined up against the base case, the core investment thesis, with the filter being, is this accretive to our current investors? Is something that will add increased value without a disproportionate level of risk? And if so, then it might be attractive to the business. If not, we'll go a different way. Much more to do on that topic, and once we've come to, you know, sort of the conclusions that that process yields, we'll be ready to go out and talk to investors more fully. Okay. And as we're thinking about the company's strategic review, how would you be able to perhaps describe it? Is it just taking its normal course, or is it taking longer than intended, or these are things just take time, and that's just, you know, unfortunately, the nature of the beast to some extent? Yeah, a little bit of that. I think it is a bit of the nature of the beast. You want to do the right work in the right way, and it's an awful lot. As I described these six work streams, there's a lot to that. I am very pleased with the level of energy and intensity that the team is bringing to it. It's good work that's going on. But it's one of those things where we don't feel compelled to be on the clock with this. We have a good base business. Every quarter that goes by that we are able to describe in our results, the growth of our business, the momentum that we've established as a company, that only strengthens our hand. But we'll do the work. We'll look to do it the right way, and then when we're ready, we'll be ready to communicate. We'll be watching. So, any update maybe on how you're thinking about or how the incremental 2-3 million homes that have kind of been talked about in the past that maybe meet the return hurdles or criteria now that perhaps didn't a couple of years ago? Any update on how you're thinking about that, and maybe how does that factor into perhaps some of the strategic review workstream? Yeah, that's definitely in there, in the strategic review process. And just to be clear, when we started, we had identified 10 million homes that we thought we could profitably build, you know, from an organic perspective, mid- to high-teens in terms of rates of return. And as we've become more proficient at building fiber, and as we've come to really deeply understand the markets in which we trade, what we've seen and identified is another 1 million, 2 million, maybe more additional homes that we could pass that would be, you know, solid candidates for development. And all of this, even in the time that cost of capital has risen from when we first started. So, that's pretty encouraging, and we're excited to see how we might best exploit that. But that's part of the review process. When I describe sort of, financing strategies, part of it is that. When you talk about some of those other options, you know, we look at different ways that we might go. We're focused on many different drivers in the business. We know that, our opportunity to convert copper to fiber in a profitable way matters. We also know that our investors care about things like, how much leverage do we put on the business? You know, what does the path to free cash flow generation look like? And so, in addition to the fundamentals around building and selling fiber, you know, the broader outlines in terms of financial objectives are things that we think about, talk about, and, you know, sort of carry into those discussions inside the business every day. Makes sense. And so, I guess tangentially related, you've been around telecom for quite a bit of time. While we do not assume that Frontier is outright sold anytime soon, do you think eventually we could see a roll-up of the disparate, you know, fiber overbuilders, you know, perhaps over the next 10+ years, similar to perhaps what we saw in wireless 20+ years ago? Yeah, I, you're right, I've been around for a while. I remember living through that process with the convergence of the wireless industry. It was, people may not remember in this room, some of you do. It was pretty fragmented. You know, there were, like, dozens of providers across the United States, and then ultimately, consolidation happened, and similarly in cable, you know? Yeah. Not quite to the level of fully national, but a good amount of consolidation happened there as well. I think it could happen. You know, I don't know that it's a lock, but it certainly could happen. Market forces may, you know, sort of create the conditions under which that would take place. And as we think about it, you know, one of those scenarios could well be a consolidation event or event where, you know, the markets come together in that fashion. Here's how we think about it. We know that, fiber, amongst those different points, wireless and wireline connectivity, fiber is the most valuable and the most scarce. We also know that we're the largest pure play fiber provider in the United States today. And so if, in fact, the market moves in a direction towards consolidation, we think our investors would be well-positioned strategically to benefit from such a move. But in the meantime, not something that, you know, we see as something we need to work, you know, sort of in an active way. The most important thing for us to do is to continue to build, to continue to effectively sell, and service the business. Great. So you did touch upon, you know, Frontier returning to, you know, revenue growth for the first time since 2015 in the first quarter. You expect the trends in consumer revenue growth to accelerate, roughly stable business and wholesale for the rest of the year. But what are the different drivers for both consumer and business wholesale over a multi-year period? And I guess as it pertains to EBITDA, talked about the operating leverage as you deploy those fiber homes, and so maybe thinking about not only just the revenue drivers from here, but, again, how does that translate to the bottom line? Is there additional cost-cutting opportunities as well? Yeah, great question. As we think about... I'll hit those segments separately. As we think about the consumer markets, it's all about driving the growth in subscriber gains, and, you know, continuing to go up the ladder in terms of penetration profitably. We know that this 3%-4% ARPU accretion is, in our minds, a very achievable objective. We talked about the three levers: speed, tiers, pricing, and value-added services to fuel that ARPU growth. First quarter, as an example, 18% growth in the consumer customer base for fiber broadband, 6% ARPU acceleration, you know, leads to really nice... You know, fiber is the growth engine of the business. Fantastic. We talk about enterprise and wholesale being relatively stable, and in our vernacular, stable, in this case, ±2%. We've managed to hold that level, and continue to do so. We still have guided to that for 2024. That's actually outperformance relative to our peers. But to be fair, we have significantly less exposure to very large enterprise, where I think more of the tumult, more of the downward pressure is being experienced. So, we do feel confident there. What we know is that in enterprise and wholesale, there will be secular decline in the copper-based TDM-type businesses. But as we deploy more and more fiber, we have an opportunity to displace some of those revenues with new revenues on fiber-based broadband services. Then to the point about ARPU, or excuse me, EBITDA expansion, while we've done a very nice job, taking $500+ million out of our run rate, there's still a terrific amount of opportunity to come. And what's been great to see is that while the company was able, for the first time in a decade, in 2023, to expand its bottom line, to grow EBITDA, virtually all of that was on the backs of cost savings, you know, cost improvements, cost efficiencies. Now, as the flywheel turns on fiber, as our top line begins to grow, you have multiple sources of opportunity to drive bottom-line expansion, and that's why we've guided, for 2024 an acceleration of EBITDA growth, and we think that should continue for years to come. I think that's a great place to end it. John, thanks for joining us. Great. My pleasure. Thanks, Sebastian.