Good morning, everyone. I'm Samik Chatterjee. I have the pleasure of hosting Tom Fennimore, CFO of Luminar, for the next session here. Tom, thanks for coming to the Autos Conference at JP Morgan. Thanks for taking the time to do that. We really appreciate your time here. Maybe I'll just dive into the fireside chat questions here directly. If you have any prepared remarks, please feel free to sort of append that before the first question. Overall industrial production, you've highlighted that multiple times. You're on track for industrial production later this year. We're just curious what part of the process is remaining to be executed on from Luminar's standpoint, to deliver on these production units, in, for the vehicles that go into production. Sure. First, thank you for having us, and it's good to see you again. When you look at our industrialization progress, we reached SOP in low volume last year for our initial vehicle platform, which is actually in China with SAIC Motor. We've proven that we can make these things, put them on vehicles at the right quality, but in low volume, right? You know, that, that was never gonna be a high volume program. This was it was a good starter program for us to kind of prove out the concept of making these things at the quality that can go on consumer vehicles. I think we crossed an important threshold last year. What we're focused on is building these sensors in very high scale. The first thing we needed to do was to get our manufacturing plant up and running. Originally we were doing the low volume production at Celestica's existing facility in Monterey. That's where we made the units for SAIC Motor, and we were making the units for our other development customers. There wasn't enough space at that facility for the volume that Volvo wanted us to produce at, so we went 20 minutes down the street in Monterey, found a cold shell of a building. We spent the last year plus building that out, installing a clean room, installing the automation equipment. We turned on that switch at the facility at the end of Q1. Now what we're doing is we are producing parts at that plant, but those parts are going through the testing validation that we need to get ready for the high volume production with Volvo next year. So that goes through an increasingly higher production volume, you know, looking at the units, testing them as they're coming off the line, working out the kinks in the manufacturing process. That's not cheap, right? Because I gotta buy all the material for that. I gotta run them through the, the plant. You know, you don't do it perfectly the first time, so you got to work through the kinks. Unfortunately, once you have a sensor that kind of goes through the testing validation, you can't sell it and, you know, you have to scrap it. That results in, you know, a lot of high costs that we're currently going through. You know, I tried to highlight some of those during our recent earnings call. You know, the goal is, at the end of the year, to have all those kinks worked out and to be able to produce. Doesn't mean we are gonna be producing, but we, you know, we've kind of gone through the testing and proved that we can at that volume rate and at the quality that Volvo wants us to for their initial launch. That's what we're working through. I would say we, we crawled, we walked, now we're working on sprinting and, and going through that evolution. Okay, just to summarize then, in terms of your readiness for Volvo, you'll be ready by the end of the year? Yes, that is our target. Customer conversation. Right. You know, I would say, to borrow the baseball analogy, we're, we're probably getting close to the eighth inning, heading into the ninth inning. You know, there's still issues that we need to work through, but they're the type of issues like, how much torque do I apply on this screw? What's the right level of, of proxy? So I would say for all the known issues, we have a plan to address that we're confident. You know, the risk is you get to the ninth inning, and it's those unknown, unknown issues, and you have a bad ninth inning. You know, we're well on track to be where we need to be at the end of the year. Okay, got it. In relation to then the customer readiness- Mm-hmm. On behalf of Volvo, I think there have been multiple press reports speculating that Volvo is finding it difficult to integrate the lidar. Can you talk to some of the challenges that the OEM might be facing and how independent they are of what Luminar's deliverables are to the customer? Yeah. Look, I'll let Volvo speak on behalf of Volvo and the issues that they're facing. I know that there was some noise in the market a couple weeks ago. I think there was something around the lidar integration. Volvo did put out a clarifying statement that said, you know, the issues they're facing are not related to lidar integration. It's related to the software and getting that ready. You know, we're trying to control what we can at Luminar, which is to be ready to go at the end of the year. You know, I think Volvo said that their SOP is gonna start the middle of next year, so we have a little bit of cushion. We didn't change the timeline for our team when there was an SOP delay. We're doing this for the first time, and so we're sticking to that original end of December, and, you know, we wanna make sure that we're ready to go there and, you know, God forbid, there's any unforeseen issues, we have a little bit of buffer built in there. The delay is not related to lidar integration or our readiness. It's, it's related to, you know, getting the software ready on their side. Okay. That's what they said publicly. Okay. One of the investor questions I've got on this topic, and I think we were discussing this offline as well, like, the risk that investors want to sort of get a better handle of is: Is there a point at which Volvo says, "I have to delay the launch by a longer period because of the software issues?" Given some of the press reports around lidar being the integration, which you clarified is not the case, but one of the questions that's been coming up on account of that is: Do they get to a point where they say, "I don't want to put the lidar in, in this generation of the vehicle, I'll just postpone it to the next one"? Any thoughts around those risks? I think the latter risk is very low. Volvo has been front and center, both in the past, present, and future of marketing their EX90 vehicle with our lidar. You know, you guys can go out there, look at some of the videos. I've personally been to launch events in Sweden, China. You know, there's other stuff that we're planning to do. I think Volvo is very committed to lidar. We are standard, and so their roof and the production process that they set up for the roof and the system has our lidar being integrated into that. The software doesn't need to be perfect at the time of launch. Software you can update over time via over-the-air updates, and in fact, I think that that's what Volvo plans to do, and so it needs to be good enough. The issues that I think Volvo is facing on the software side, they're all imminently solvable. You know, I think the, the, the likely outcome there is they kinda get the software in a good enough shape, start production, and then continually update it over the time with software updates. This is Volvo's flagship vehicle. They're very committed to it. You know, I'm sure it's a big contributor to their revenue or, and, and profit, and so they're gonna do everything they can to launch this vehicle. Okay, fair. Update on the $1 billion order book. I, I know you've said you're not gonna give continuous sort of updates in terms of quantifying it, but maybe give us anything to flesh out more in terms of where you are relative to that $1 billion? Yeah. -order target. How lumpy also should we be thinking it is? Like, is it going to be many sort of small wins contributing this year, or are you expecting it to be lumpy and sort of one or two OEMs contributing to that one? Yeah. It, the answer to that is both. We've already made progress to, to filling that $1 billion. We calculate it at the end of the year. We don't wanna get into, you know, we don't wanna kinda disclose the order book increase upon each win because our customers don't like that, so there's a reason why we do it at the end of the year. We've had wins so far from both new, from existing customers as well as new customers, some of which, like Plus, have used a legacy lidar, and are upgrading their next gen system to our lidar. Look, it can be lumpy when you get a big win from a big customer, that adds a lot to the order book. That, the timing of when that happens, though, is difficult to predict. The OEMs move at their own speed. A lot of the business we win is one-off, right? It's conversations that we have, particularly with existing customers. New customers tend to run a broader RFQ process, and we've been in enough to, in those RFQ process to know that they typically don't happen at the original timeline, and each of the OEMs move at their own pace. So that's why we don't predict, like, the timing of RFQs, because they're largely out of our hands. I know other companies are talking about, oh, we have this many RFQ processes, we're this finalist. What I would say for the RFQs this year that we targeted as must wins, we are active in those RFQ processes and even finalists in some, and we haven't lost anything this year that we've wanted to win. Okay. Yeah, got it. On the earnings call, there was one comment, I think Austin talked, mentioned, that definitely stood out, which is, he mentioned there are certain features on a vehicle that only Luminar can enable and competitors cannot, and this was in response to, I think, one of the competitive landscape questions that was brought up. I mean, one of the things. Can you shed, maybe firstly, start by shedding some light on what those features are, what you see as that differentiation where competitors are not? Yeah. to enable features that you can? Let me give you two real-life examples. Look at what Mobileye does, and, and they have a wide array of products. Mobileye has a supervision system which gets you up to L2+ that works pretty good. You can meet today's NCAP standards, you can deploy a good L2+ system. Look, if you wanna build a ADAS system or an L2+ system that meets today's standards, you don't need our lidar. In fact, you probably don't need any lidar. If you want to take your ADAS system to the next level, and we're starting to see some, I would say, regulatory guidance to do that, and if you want to build an L3+ system at all relevant speeds, you need, and if you want to build an L3 system, you need a lidar. If you look at Mobileye Chauffeur system, they have a lidar on it. It's our lidar. Their mobility is a service system, it has our lidar. I know that there's one OEM in particular who thinks that they can do it all, all camera. My point of view, if there's any company that's motivated to do it all camera, it's Mobileye, and they've effectively admitted that they need a lidar. If you wanna go L3 and above, you need a lidar. If you want to take your ADAS system to the next level, we think you need a lidar, particularly our lidar as well. Look at what Nissan's doing with their next gen system. They wanted to significantly improve their safety of the cars, take it to the next level. They ran, you know, a process a couple of years ago. They selected our lidar. We're in the development stage to build that next generation safety system with our lidar, and Nissan has said publicly that they want to start deploying it on vehicles around the middle of this decade, and have it on every vehicle that or virtually every vehicle that they make by the end of this decade. They've started to release commercials showing the benefits of that, and we're making great progress with that. There's a lot of things you can do on the ADAS system with our lidar. Cameras are ultimately guesstimating. If you take a picture of an object, you don't know how far it is away. There's a lot of calculation and guesstimating that goes in by taking a bunch of pictures, looking how the size of the object changes. If I give you a laser pointer, and you know exactly how far away each object is, and that's effectively what our lidar does. That's an example of where you need a lidar. Develop that next generation ADAS system, L3 and above. Why our lidar, particularly 1550 nm, and although 1550 nm versus 905 nm, you put too much power through a 905 nm laser, you're gonna blind the human eye, and there's actually regulations that limit how much power you can go through that. There's no such limitation on a 1550 nm. We're able to put 15 times more photon out in the environment. Because we're putting more photons, we can see further and better. We also have the ability to pump up the power in the laser in tough environments, fogs, bad weather, you know, really want to get a sense of that. We can put, you know, and we don't do this all the time, but we have the ability to put 1 million times more power in the laser when it's needed. That allows us to see the environment in a much richer way as well as farther. Look at what Mercedes-Benz did. Mercedes-Benz' current generation system uses a 905 later, 905 lidar, and that's able to deploy L3 at speeds of up to about 35-40 miles an hour. The Germans like to drive faster than that on the Autobahn. For their next generation system, one of the biggest reasons why they selected us is because 15 times more photons, 1 million times more when you need it, you see farther. We're able to go, you know, at speeds that are, you know, 75 miles an hour plus. Because you need to see very far when you're traveling at those speeds, so you give the vehicle enough time to react. I'm not talking, seeing a bright white object in the middle of the day, it's seeing everything, right? That's what we're able to do. Mercedes-Benz upgraded for that reason. We're seeing other companies start to upgrade for that reason. When we get an RFQ from an OEM, we look at the vehicle functionality that they're looking to deploy. If it's just an L3 traffic jam assist at low speeds or, you know, an ADAS system with only modest improvements, we typically deprioritize that because, quite frankly, our technology is not differentiated. We know eventually that OEM will wanna upgrade that functionality, and we'll have another bite at the apple. You know, we tend to focus our initial customers because we can't win everybody at once in our early stage. We got to execute flawlessly. We focused on the vehicle programs where the OEMs wanted to work to unlock the full functionality of our lidar, and when you do that, it's, it's more or less only our technology that can deliver that. Yeah, interesting. No, very helpful. Maybe, changing gears here a bit. Can you outline a bit more about your partnership with NVIDIA? When you work with partners like those, how are you thinking about when, in bringing a full stack solution to the market, what portions can Luminar contribute? What are you looking for your partners. Yeah. bring to the table in that sort of full stack? We're working with NVIDIA on a daily basis on, at Mercedes-Benz. You know, NVIDIA is doing the full stack software with Mercedes-Benz. Our lidar is incorporated around that. What's going on now, we just started a B-sample delivery earlier this year of our Iris+ product, of which Mercedes-Benz is gonna be the lead customer. What you do once you have B-samples, that product is mature enough where you put it on development vehicles. Mercedes-Benz and NVIDIA have, you know, however many, development vehicles, driving around, you know, I wouldn't say the world, but, you know, driving in real-time environments. What they're doing is, is they're gathering data, and they're training their software algorithm. In NVIDIA's Hyperion software system, that drives the autonomy that Mercedes-Benz wants, NVIDIA is developing that software system around our lidar. We're the reference lidar in their system. Now, we won Mercedes-Benz by winning it ourselves. We went directly to Mercedes-Benz. Mercedes-Benz, you know, ultimately chose their lidar supplier, and I think most OEMs are gonna do the same thing, right? The OEMs are, you know, they, they tend to wanna select each of the different components. However, as NVIDIA sells that Hyperion system that they developed with Mercedes-Benz to other OEMs, the quickest path to market, the most cost-effective path to market, and the least risk path to market is to keep our lidar on it. If you switch out lidars, each point cloud is significantly different between the lidar companies. They need to then go back and redevelop most of their software system again, so that's more time, more risk, more money. So, you know, the OEMs are gonna want to ultimately select the lidar supplier, but we're gonna have an embedded advantage as a result. Not only do we have that relationship with NVIDIA, we have that relationship with Mobileye, it creates stickiness for us, not only with our OEM customers, but some of the leading system integrators as well. Let's talk about another feature that you've talked about, which is with the acquisition of Civil Maps, the mapping capabilities- Mm-hmm. that you've brought in-house. Any update in terms of roadmap to commercializing it, monetizing it with the OEMs? Where are you on that front? Sure. Just for a little bit more background, bigger picture, on the, you know, what I would say, the M&A front, it's a tough environment out there for, for a lot of tech companies, particularly companies in the mobility tech space. There were a lot of, you know, there's been a lot of companies who are running out of cash and, and struggling to, to raise their next funding round. Civil Maps was, was one of those companies. Last year, we, we, we kinda did an acqui-hire, paid a modest fee. I think it was like $6 million, to the, you know, to, to some of the shareholders to get the deal done, and they actually had a decent 3D mapping code. Most of the mapping systems today are camera-based, right? They're built with cameras and, you know, are two-dimensional maps. You kinda see these HD maps, which brings better clarity, more detail in it. Our lidar data, remember, you know, over the next few years, we're gonna have several hundred thousand vehicles on the road, driving around, collecting real-time data. So one of the ways that we can work with our OEM partners to kind of monetize the environment created or the ecosystem, you know, enabled by our lidar is: How do we kinda collect that data, and then, you know, convert it into a 3D mapping tool, and then kinda work with the legacy mapping companies to utilize that data, right? Because the way that a lot of the mapping companies build their maps today is, you know, a lot like the software teams. They build cars, drive them around, and, and, you know, build their mapping that way. The interest from the OEMs has been, I would say, a lot faster than I was expecting, because you kind of go to them and say: Look, we got this thing. You're putting our lidar on the vehicle anyway. Let's work together to do this. One of the things we announced on our earnings call, and, you know, we'll go into more detail on this, you know, probably later this year, is we did sign our first development contract with a major OEM to figure out how you can utilize this, you know, mapping software, mapping engine that we have. You know, I think at some point in the near future, we'll go into more detail with our OEM partner in terms of how we're doing it. I'd say how we're doing it is gonna be a little different than what we were expecting. When we did that acquisition, we thought this would be a good fit for us. You know, it was a $6 million acquisition, it wasn't like, you know, we were, you know, making a big bet, but it was a bet that if it worked out, would be, you know, you'd get a pretty good return on it. I would say, you know, we're starting to see early signs of the fruit bearing from that acquisition. Okay. maybe just following up on that, I mean, once you go through the development phase, is the end goal to get to something what Mobileye has with REM, in terms of being able to charge OEMs on a sort of per vehicle basis for utilizing that data? Is that sort of how investors should think about? Yeah, that, that's one path. There's also a path, I would say, to more collaboratively work with your OEMs in terms of gathering that data and how you monetize it. Okay. Yep. That does bring me to maybe an interesting question that we've got from investors, but which is related to the China market. Maybe before we get into the ability to sort of collect that data on the mapping front in China, that's where we get a lot of questions. Oh, yeah. China, let me just clarify here. This, you know, this would exclude China. China is very protective of its maps, even to the point where, you know, they kind of put constraints on what Tesla's, you know, the, the data that Tesla is able to capture. lidar data in China is, is classified as mapping data. Mapping data can only be held by Chinese citizens that either have a Class A or Class B license. Class A allows you to operate, you know, anywhere in the country. Class B allows you to operate, like, in, in certain regions. Think about it as having a license operating where in the United States or a B license would allow you to operate, like in the state of New York. Those licenses are very few and limited. In China, we, there are a lot of rules that we need to follow as a foreign company. For example, you know, we have 2 server rooms in our China office. There's a server room that is in a locked office that I don't have access to. There's 1 person in our, in our office who's a Chinese citizen that can get in. It's, it's owned by a, you know, a registered firm in China. They, all the data we collect goes to that server. That Chinese firm then filters it, and then, kind of, we then have the second server room, which we have access to. We're very, very limited as a foreign company in terms of what we can, and so we don't have any plans of, of kind of being successful in the mapping business in China, just because we don't see a feasible path to do that. Okay. Okay. Maybe just, last one- The rest of the world is still a huge opportunity we can do. Maybe just last one before we open it up to the audience. Outside of mapping, what are you seeing in the China market? I see a lot of other lidar companies not willing to participate yet in the China market in terms of going after wins. You've obviously been successful, but what are you seeing in terms of just appetite from the OEMs, particularly with some of the local competition also coming up? What are you seeing in terms of competitive intensity there? Well, I think the other I don't know if the other companies aren't willing to be in China. I just don't think that they've been successful. We have to be in China. If you look at a West, any major Western OEM, 20%, 30%, 40% of their business is in China, and you've got to be able to serve them in China. Yeah, you know, it's really not a strategic option for us not to be in China, because you need to be there to serve your Western OEMs. They're half the market. Part of the reason why we announced a partnership with TPK earlier this year to build out a manufacturing presence in China is because our Western OEM makers wanted it to be there. In fact, the Western OEMs are starting to realize that they're losing market share in China, particularly to these, you know, new EV companies that are really being aggressive on introducing new technology on their vehicles. They're seeing their market share decline. They realize they need to react faster, particularly with new technology. You know, one of those things, it's actually what's happening in the China market, is creating, I would say, a demand pull from our Western partners because they see themselves move, losing market share and need to move faster. You need to be in China if you want to be a global lidar company. Now, there are a lot of challenges of being successful in China. I talked about some of the limitations that we have on the data side. You know, I spent three years living in Beijing, you know, a few years ago, you know, I've had first-hand experience of, you know, of, of what it takes to be successful in China. We're doing a few things. One, I already talked about how we have that local China manufacturing presence. You know, I think that gives us a lot more credibility. Two, you know, I think this is a true statement, but I'm not 100% certain. I think we're the only Western OEM that has won a lidar business with a local China brand, with SAIC Motor. You know, I think that that gives us, for lack of a better word, some, you know, street cred in China that's been helpful. Three, we partner, you know, we need to partner with people. We did it with TPK on the manufacturing side. We have a strategic partnership with ECARX, which is the, you know, the technology arm of Geely. Then four, you need to be very smart about the local customers that you work with. There are Chinese brands that wanna put a cheap lidar on their vehicle. That's not business that we're gonna win. If it's a game of cost, we're gonna lose. If it's a game of picking the best technology that can deliver the best value, we're gonna win that in a level playing field. So we're very smart in terms of who we, you know, target as customers. You know, look, we're gotta be very, you know, nimble in our strategy in China because, you know, I think the geopolitical landscape is continuing to evolve. We need to be very smart about it, including how we protect our IP. We wanna be a major player in China. We realize that, you know, our market share there is probably not gonna be the same in the Western world, we're probably gonna need to partner with the right players to be successful there as well. Okay. Let me open it up to the audience, if anyone has a question. Any questions? A lot of the lidar versus radar, what would be your thoughts on the radar versus lidar? Let me repeat. Yeah, you might wanna repeat. The question is lidar versus radar and the comparative dynamics between the two. Yeah, so, pardon me. I think with radar, you're, you're probably talking more about 4D radar, which is kind of like the next generation. What that does is it, it actually gives you a, a better resolution than a kind of traditional radar. The way that it was described to me is it, it still is a very, very blurry image, and so it limits your object identification. So I think 4D radar can help supplement an L2+ system. It can probably help replace a 905 nm lidar, but it doesn't, it's not going to get anywhere close to that long range resolution that we have. We're not worried about 4D radar. What it can do is it can provide, I would say, modest improvements to an L2+ system, and I do think that there is a case, particularly for a 905 radar, where a 4D radar is, is kinda good enough. One of the things, you know, going back to the China market, I think that, you know, this is one of the things that a lot of Chinese OEMs are, are actively debating. What happened earlier this year is they're now in a price war. They're becoming a lot more cost-effective. One of the things that they're debating is, if you wanted to buy a cheap lidar today in China, you know, it's probably like a $500 lidar. You know, I think a 4D radar is like, you know, less than half that price. For an OEM that wants to continue to differentiate themselves from a technology perspective, you can put a 4D radar on the car. It sounds cool. You're probably gonna get just as much functionality or pretty close to it as you would at putting, like, a $500 lidar on it. That's the kind of progress that we're seeing with 4D radar. The people that put our lidar on the car are the ones that wanna you know, introduce that, you know, that, you know, significant improvement in ADAS systems or that high speed autonomy and 4D radar just can't provide that. Thanks. On a kinda similar note, just thinking about price downs over time as, you know, lidar potentially becomes a bit more ubiquitous. Can you give us a sense of what the price of, I guess, like, either Luminar's lidar or a high-quality lidar, however you wanted to define it, like, what that is today and what the pace of cost/price declines might be over the next few years? Yeah. So for our current generation product, Iris and Iris+, what we said publicly, it's around $1,000 per unit. Most of our large-scale customers, we have volume-based pricing. In low volumes, it's a little bit higher. In high volumes, it's, it's a little bit lower than that. The OEM culture is to go to their suppliers and ask for 2% annual price downs. We've been successful so far combating that by saying, like: Look, this is new technology, you know, we'll give you volume band pricing, and if your, you know, as your volumes, you know, roll out and you introduce more platforms, you're actually gonna get better pricing and more price downs from that higher volume than you would by, you know, the 2%-3% annual price downs. We've been successful doing that. Our next generation product is, is probably gonna cost us roughly half to produce what our current version is, so that gives us, you know, a little bit more it gives us flexibility to effectively lower the price without, I would say, sacrificing margin. The other thing that we're, that we're doing and working with our customer on, is, is, is building the tools to monetize the ecosystem, the value in the ecosystem that our lidar creates. I've talked about 3D mapping, working with our customers to do that. We, you know, let's talk about the upgrade package. Our lidar enables both the significant improvement in ADAS, which delivers safety improvements to the vehicles, but it also can deliver highway autonomy. Part of our pitch to OEMs and part of the reason why Volvo standardized our technology on their EX90, not only does it significantly improve the safety of the vehicle, but then you can upsell the consumer to highway autonomy. The consumer has demonstrated an ability and willingness to pay for that, particularly on the high-end vehicles. When you look at Tesla FSD, which is an L2+ product, you know, for the Model X and the Model S, their high-end product, $100,000+, that $15,000 trim package is getting a take rate based upon the data we see of about 40% in the Western world. For the three and the Y, which, you know, is their lower priced vehicle, the take rates are kind of in that 5%-10% range. If you just play with the math, and if you're able to charge a $10,000 trim package on a high-end vehicle for highway autonomy, and you get a 30% take rate, that's $3,000 of incremental profit per vehicle that accrues to the OEMs. If you standardize our lidar, you can, you know, we haven't figured a way yet to do kind of do an over-the-air update for installation of our lidar, but you can actually do over-the-air updates to, you know, either deploy or unlock the software on the vehicle. And then I would say so, you know, 3D mapping, you know, you kind of need our lidar to do it. The upgrade option of the consumer, you kind of need our lidar to do it. The other thing, it's like, you know, we kind of looking to get into the insurance business. We don't want to be an insurance company. The reason we're doing that is we want to build a tool to monetize the safety improvements in that our technology brings. We're in the best position with our OEM partners to underwrite that. It would be great if the legacy insurance companies gave a discount, but, you know, in our conversations with them, they wanted to see years of data for their actuarial tables. We're willing to bet on ourselves with our OEM partners. What we're trying to do is change this less into a cost game, which is, you know, eventually hardware is always gonna be commoditized. I think, you know, that's gonna be some point in the future, but what we want to do is build these tools and turn it into more of a value equation with our OEM partners. Here is the value that our lidar enables, and we can unlock it with, you know, mapping. We can unlock it with, you know, this, this highway autonomy, upselling the consumer. You know, one of the things that we're kind of having discussions with on, with our customers is what we call dynamic pricing, right? We'll, we'll take a, we'll take a lower cost on the lidar upfront, standardize it, but then we'll take a cut of the revenue on the back end when the consumer upgrades to autonomy, right? Bet on ourselves. You know, also on the insurance, like, partner with our OEMs to do that, to kind of capture those savings. Yes, whenever you have discussions with an automaker, is that upfront cost, just culturally, that's what they want to have, but we also want to have a more strategic discussion to say: look at the value and the ecosystem that's created with our technology. Let's build tools where we can capture this together, and when you look at that value, and if you're able to capture it, it's, you know, a very, very big return on capital and investment. Sorry, I'm new to the name. I'm just curious to know, have you provided a cash flow profile, like looking years out, this is what we expect to produce? Part of the same question, what are the milestones required to that achievement? In other words, we need to have this much in volume, and we need to be at our next gen system that brings our cost down to a certain level. We're gonna spend at this rate. What are some of the key things that you want us to watch as investors? Yeah. I would encourage you to, and, and I'm happy to set up a call afterwards. At Luminar Day, we, we kind of gave some near term, medium term, and longer term guidance around it. I'll focus on the near term because, you know, that's the most near term, and I, you know, based upon I think we have a lot of questions. I want to focus on long. Okay, well, I'll focus on the near term. I'll give you the longer term. Near term, first to, you know, the last three quarters, I've been burning in the mid-seventies. The reason for that is I'm industrializing my product. I'm putting in a lot of cost. I'm launching this new facility. I got to talk to you about a lot of those costs. As we're successful industrializing our product, just by taking those costs out of the system, our target is to cut that, you know, mid-seventies burn rate roughly in half by the end of the year. That will leave me with about $300 million of cash. You kind of do the back-of-the-envelope math on that. That gives me at least two years of runway. My cash flow should then improve again, right? The, the next step... First step function is a lot of those upfront investment costs, you know, start to rapidly decline as we're successful. Step function two is getting to that Volvo SOP. That will then, you know, take our cash burn levels down again. Our goal is to get to company level break even by the end of 2025. That's when we should have enough volume to get to that. When you get to 2030, you know, we'll, we'll kind of go to that level. Our, you know, what we kind of said publicly as our targets is to be producing about 5 million units. You know, call it, that will be roughly $5 billion of revenue, and, you know, we think particularly with our next generation product, we're, we're gonna have some pretty healthy margins. You look at high tech auto suppliers such as Mobileye or even like a Gentex, you know, mid-thirtyish range as well. So that, I would say is, is the roadmap that we have. Our next generation product, we have the design in place. We'll be talking about that more in the future. There's, you know, one component in particular that I would say is the most expensive. We, we, we kind of figured out what the, you know, the right technological solution is. So that is something that will, you know, cut the price of what it costs us to produce the sensor roughly in half. Thank you. Thanks for that. I'll wrap it up there, given we are out of time, but thank you everyone for coming. Thanks for the time. Thank you.