Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Sheila Kahyaoglu. I am with the Jefferies Aerospace, Defense and Airlines Equity Research team, for those on the webcast. We have the LHX team here, Ken Sharp, who has graciously stepped in, who is the CFO since March of 2026. Ken, thank you for being here. Lots of action going around what has happened, and I know you have taken care of all the investor engagements since Sam Mehta's appointment to CEO. I really appreciated Chris because he was a great professional mentor to me, and he came to this conference when no other companies would come. He has been a supporter of mine and a great professional mentor. I really appreciated what Chris brought to the table, to LHX, and all the growth that is ahead. How do you think about just the continuation of the strategy here and what Sam's background brings to the table as well? Sure. Look, I love Chris, and I have known him for a long time as well, Sheila. I think we both worked at the same firm eons ago, and I enjoyed my time with him. It was great joining L3Harris, and so look forward to building on what he did, candidly. I think we have a great portfolio. Sam would recognize that. I think we have gone through a lot of M&A, putting L3 together with Harris, then putting on two other acquisitions, including Aerojet Rocketdyne, and about 10 or 12 divestitures in the process. It is probably 13, I should count the latest one. I think all that has been dizzying for investors a little bit, and we have also reorganized the business. I think where we are at right now today is let us build on the great stuff Chris has done and the great portfolio we have, because I think we do have a spectacular portfolio, very well-positioned. Sam would say, "Hey, look, I like the business. I like what we did when we reorganized it." We lined ourselves up with multi-domain sensing, spectrum dominance, and then the missiles business. I think it is good. By the way, last earnings call, we talked a lot about the missiles portfolio because I think people viewed that as maybe we paid too much for a transaction. I think if people could pay was $4.7 billion for the business today, they would think that was a steal today. I think there is a lot of goodness in the business, and I think Sam is going to drive it and build off of it. He would say, "Hey, look, when we're focused on driving the business, we get great results. Shareholders like it. When we get distracted and start chasing some things around, people don't like it as much." Our job is to get normal and boring and drive the business. Since you called it out, I'll maybe ask that as well. You paid $4.7 billion for Aerojet. Is there a different change of how Sam and yourself view the value of the business to the core LHX portfolio today? Sure. I don't know if it's a lot different than Chris, and maybe if Ken Bedingfield was here, he'd probably have similar comments. It is a highly valuable asset, whether it's inside L3Harris or outside L3Harris. I think there's benefits of being inside L3Harris, and just given the fact that you have the ability to make the investments, you don't duplicate a lot of pieces, and you can focus on driving the business, meaning build the missile capacitization, while L3Harris is picking up some of the more administrative pieces. I think that makes sense. It's why when we talked about the IPO, we said we'd revisit it in mid-2027. We also have, I think everybody realizes this, some contractual requirements around the timing with that. We're not required to do an IPO, but certainly take business efforts to do one, part of our Department of War investment. Not required to do an IPO, but certainly something we need to work through the process, which is what we're doing. By the way, this is something we put criteria together with Chris and Ken and Sam, and briefed it to the board. The board thought it was really thoughtful. We said we weren't going to go chase multiples. Everybody asked why we positioned this for mid-next year. I just think it makes sense. At the end of the day, we'll have six good quarters of performance. We'll get through some of this government, CRs and Blue Wave and 833 language, which was highly unhelpful. I think our stock was down 7% that day, and we don't seem like we need any more bad news, so we get enough news, and we need to go fight through those things. So get through the government piece, get stuff under contract. We're talking about $20 billion of new contracts, and it's mind-numbing. So how do we get them under? We had the first UCA yesterday. It went out $4.7 billion. And by the way, every time we have a press release, there's always more questions. I call Tony and ask. Yeah. I'll get better at press releases, I think, because I thought it was clear, but we're never clear, I guess. By the way, it wasn't aimed at your questions. I got more this morning. So I just think we have a great business and a great position. So let's go run it and drive value for the LHX shareholders. I'll go back to missiles, but Sure Just sticking on high level for a minute, how do you think about just the We mentioned some of the enduring elements of the strategy. Where do you think Sam will focus in on the most to start, as you think about just everything going on, whether it's the defense backdrop, the positive Golden Dome, missile defense spending, Europe, NATO? How do you think about how you'll conquer the growth ahead of you? Wow, you're giving me lots of options. Yeah. It's funny because I think supply chain right now is something that's going bump in the night for a lot of companies. We have our CSD business. We've talked about a ramp up pretty significantly in the 2H, and then you wake up and the people that are buying all the stuff for AI are now impacting your radio capability as far as manufacturing it. You're scratching your head. I think Sam's, right now, his big focus is on making sure we're executing at the business level. I would say also making sure he spends the time with the customers. It's no surprise, right? Chris had access to pretty much everybody in the Pentagon. I think Sam's working to go make sure we have that same access. I don't think it's a problem. I think he's doing a really good job at it. He was in with Feinberg last week, and he was out at Camden making sure we deliver on the missile side. I think just taking a step back, just maybe more operational. I'm a big radios fan just because the capability with the software side. Chris maybe was a little less excitable about radios. You can debate why. I kid around, I say, "I put the Wraith Shield in his script three times last time. He took it out twice." I said, "Well, if you take it out again, I'm just going to put it in the CFO script," which really isn't a good place for it. He relented, right? I think it's so important to talk about, because we say software-defined radios, I don't think people really know what that means, and it really means about putting technology on a radio to help the war fighter. I think you'll see Sam spend a lot of time with the comms business. I'd like to see us talk more about the strategy on comms, what we can do to win the battlefield for our war fighters and protect them. I think that's really important. I think Wraith Shield's great. If you guys haven't watched the video, I think it is very important as far as the capability. Okay, we'll go back to comms more because I think it was maybe animosity towards Rochester or something like that and his preference for Florida. I'm not sure, but We can hit on that, sure. How do you think about, just on the missiles business, the Department of War's billion-dollar investment, how much of that is flowing through? What are you setting up in terms of just buildings, infrastructure, automation, and pursuing supplier agreements as well? I would say we're setting up too much. That's the challenge for everybody. I think Ken Bedingfield's doing an amazing job. He's out working routinely. Sam was in Camden last week, and he calls me up and he said, "It's like the Manhattan Project." There's more bulldozers and things getting moved to build. It's 100 different buildings, ultimately, not just in Camden, but everywhere. We're also working, as you think about the supply chain, up and down the supply chain to make sure that we can meet our commitments. We've been, and maybe wrong or right, and I'm waiting for, hopefully, not to get a bad report on this, but we've been out driving commitments to our supply chain way ahead of contract with the Department of War. Ken said this, I think it's right. We've been focused on winning the race, which means get the capacity in place, get the vendors lined up, so when other competitors come in, they're behind us. We'll be delivering all the capacity to the Department of War that they need, that the country deserves. With Protect the Homeland, we're very proud of this, and we're going to go drive the business. Now we've done that ahead of contract. I don't think there's a lot of contractors doing that. That's great. Can you give us any insights on that capacity expansion roadmap as we think about solid rocket motors? Sure. It feels like it changes routinely a little bit as far as the demand signal just keeps getting bigger. The different missiles that we provide components to, and we're on pretty much all the major programs. We're generally sole sourced on, I would say, most if not all of them. That's probably what creates some of the general energy around new entrants and all of that, which I think is important, and we love competition. We just hope they open up the whole missile architecture and leave things like seekers to folks like us who have great products that actually we built in the old L3 business. I think we have a seeker that can go on PAC-3 today, and we want to prove it out because we think it's a pretty important part. Things like that we think are really important. What are the biggest constraints that you're seeing today in terms of doubling the capacity over the next few years? I would say, and I probably say this too much, we don't have contracts. I would like contracts first, second, and third because I'm the guy that keeps signing off on stuff for Ken to say, "Go build and spend more." Like I said, we got on the last earnings call, and we said we had $2.2 billion out in either supply chain or building commitments. At some point, I need a customer and product to build to bill them. If I don't have a contract, in theory, I can't, right? We know it'll get resolved, but I would sleep a lot better if I had multiple contracts. I think everybody saw the PAC-3 award, right? $4.6 billion. We didn't put any of the escalators or anything in that. That's 80% of the PAC-3 demand. You guys can bounce that off of the 833 language, but that's 100% of all the DACS as well. I think we're in a good position. We just want to go get busy and build them. Look, Ken's working up and down the supply chain, moving dirt. You'd be amazed. One day we're out working in Orange, and then the construction workers are like, "Hey, we have to go work someplace else because it's a data center, and they actually have preference over you." Then we go back to the Department of War, and they come back the next day and say, "Nope, you have preference over them." Ken's got a full-time job at the end of the day working through this, but I think it's really important. I think he's doing a great job. How do you think about the competitive positioning of solid rocket motors and propulsion? We hear a lot about it from the new entrants, but also your market share. Is there opportunity for you to become second source on some programs where you might not be a provider? For one, there's just so much demand out there. We're happy to see people come in and compete. If it puts a better product in for the war fighter, we're all for it. We think it actually is causing us to drive harder for the business. I want to be open around competition. If it's there, great. We think we're going to outrun everybody. That's been Ken's mantra. That's been Chris's mantra. Sam will carry that mantra on. I certainly have it. I think it's important. The solid fuel rocket motor place, we feel pretty good. We've been working on some other pieces around affordable mass, cruise missiles, those kind of things, I think are definitely opportunities. The electronic side, this goes back to the thesis of putting L3Harris together with Aerojet. 30% of what's the missiles business today is stuff that we put in. It's probably 35%-40% with the divestiture we just made. I think it's pretty important that we go and do different things on missiles. We do a lot of stuff with electronics and fuses and so forth, so seekers, whatever else, I think is a good place for us to play. I think the team just needs to drive, and the opportunities are there. Maybe moving on to the space and mission systems business. How do we think about what needs to happen for space and mission systems to consistently outperform defense budgets? Just give us an update on what's going on with some programs, whether it's SDA or missile warning and tracking. Sure. We just received the latest Golden Dome award, I think that was last quarter. We're really the only awardee on the missile tracking, missile warning layer that has been the prime on all five awards. I would say five tranches, but then we get confused on the nomenclature of what each award's called. AMDT-3, the 3 stands for third tranche, but it's the fifth award on a set of satellites, so you guys can figure that out later. I can't. I would say, I think we're well positioned. I think the clear Golden Dome gets, I think we're well positioned for it. If we won all five, clearly we have some secret sauce around that. We believe our payloads are very important into that. I think it's why we win. We've been trying to work through the mechanics of, we weren't a space prime, right? We weren't building satellites as a prime. We're now doing that. There's a lot of lessons learned we've been taking in in the last four or five years. I would say some of this we did through our own P&L that probably maybe surprised a few people here or there. Certainly the charge we took last quarter, the $55 million, was on a program we signed a relatively long time ago, but that's what happens when you're breaking in pioneering space, and we look to get that behind us and drive better returns in that business. That's great to hear. I guess when we think about the business today, $11.5 billion of revenues in 2026, what gets it to the $13 billion plus? Where does the billion dollars of revenue come from? It'll be interesting. We have a fair amount, and this business has been exceeding our expectations, right? The organic growth in the first half's 15%, so it's been a very strong grower. We've had some episodic things with aircraft and so forth, and this business is split a 1/3, 1/3, 1/3, but I would say a 1/3 on the space side, 1/3 on the ISR. In fact, you went to the Greenville location with Tony. Pretty cool stuff, right? Best facility visit I've ever been to. I can't stop talking about it. Yeah. See, that got Tony a promotion to go back to do real engineering instead of financial stuff. As you know, he's a classically trained engineer, so I think it's great that he's running a P&L now. A third is that ISR aircraft capability, and then a mixture on the other third around cyber and some other pieces. We've had a great period of time, right? We'll do better probably this year than we expected in that business, so let's see where it goes. I think we feel pretty good about it. Certainly, the backlog we've built up there will help, whether there's a CR or not, whether there's other awards, how quick Golden Dome comes out. We need to just focus on driving down and delivering the satellites. I think there's 72 left that we got to get up in space, so getting those completed and ready to go. Maybe can we talk about the $955 million AMDT-3 contract for 18 satellites? It now means that you have 70 satellites on order. How do you transition from prototype demonstration to mass production, and what it means for your margins as they sit around 10% at the end of the quarter? If you had to dissect the segment, and look at the sector, the space business is lower than the average margin in the segment, so certainly getting that to perform better is important. As you can imagine, like Tranche 5, AMDT-3 is Tranche 5, so as you get into that next level, certainly we've learned a lot as far as what buses we're using, what other components are on a spacecraft, and just getting better on the supply chain side. The engineering, I think, has been where the team's been after. I think they've been doing a nice job. How we bid the programs has shifted, and we've been trying to be more thoughtful around, or disciplined around the economics, so I think that part's good. Truth is, we've been being somewhat conservative on our booking rates on the margins to make sure we deliver, and then as we de-risk the programs, you'll see better and better margins. In the past, we probably didn't run with a level of management reserve on the programs that we've built into the programs now. Maybe I just want to close the loop on the segment margins as we think about space only representing a 1/3. How do we think about the ISR business that's gone through transformation here, and it's on a positive trajectory where margins sit there and the remaining third of the business. Yeah, t he ISR piece is closer to the average margin in the business. I think it is to your point, and Tony was there. They did a great job of getting that business where it needed to be. We've got a couple very large newer wins as far as new aircraft types. Just getting those laid flat, and these are real hard to, till you go on one, you don't realize what the team's doing. They're cutting new holes, they're filling them full of. Cutting new holes in the fuselage, sorry, and redesigning the airplanes and the loads they can carry, how to carry them, how to also do the ISR work that the payload's doing inside. I think the team's done a nice job. They'll get to a level that it's repeatable, right? They've done that on the domestic side and these new international variants, that's what they're working through now. You asked about growth, I think both on the space side specifically and the ISR side for the aircraft. I think there's a lot of opportunity. That's great to hear. Maybe just on CSD, let's go to communications. We could finally touch on it. You talked about resilient communication orders of over $1 billion from European allies like Germany, Poland, and Netherlands. First maybe let's size the total communications business and how you think about demands both U.S. and internationally. Sure. It moves around a lot because, and maybe for folks, if they don't fully get our radios business, it's generally the military radios, they're highly effective. If we have them deployed in Ukraine today, the Russians are very good at jamming communications, so our radios are the best. We're very good about uploading new capabilities into the radios to get them on different spectrum and so forth, or waveforms, so people can communicate, they don't get jammed. At the end of the day, it's a great business where we get into the have the revenue ebbs and flows. We go through upgrades like your iPhone or whatever device you use. Right now we're on Falcon IV domestically. Falcon IV will go to Falcon V in the next, probably year and a half. That drives a little bit of demand signal as well, because you get better capabilities and maybe different than iPhone. If you guys ever look at a war fighter, but they have a screen in front of them, a radio, and a battery over here. It's still pretty big, right? It has to have a lot of capability, survive in combat. The form factor is important to work down, the compute power, the communication power of the radios are all still unlike your phone, and I'm not a kid, so I have to ask my kids. But they do different things when you get the newer phone, but they all seem to be the same to me. I think our radios aren't all the same. So, and maybe Chris' frustration with Rochester was they're too hot and we weren't working the form factor fast enough, and I think we've worked the form factor well, and the Falcon V will be that. In the international space, we tend to be on Falcon III, move to Falcon IV. When we talk about software products going out on these radios, you need the newer variants for the software products. And if you think about Wraith Shield being this fence that goes around with every radio that you can detect drones coming in and literally it'll detect it, sense it, and then jam it and drop these drones down if there are drones, it's pretty important. For me, it is like a personal thing because I used to be a war fighter, and I got a young kid that comes to my house who is an Army Ranger, and at the end of the day, I said, "Hey, watch this video. Tell me what you think." He is in the Ranger battalion, so these are the guys that get deployed all the time. He is like, "Hey," he has a lot of choice words. There are too many people here, and it is probably recorded. I will not use his words, but he would say it is very important, and how do we get it? We are working with SOCOM on something like that, and he is very big too, by the way, so I try to be really nice to him. He dates my daughter. I should probably giving you guys too much. I get a little worried about that, too. Anyway, that is the importance of the radios. That is why I think getting these software products out, getting capability in the war fighter. If you think about it, if a swarm of drones comes in, you cannot take it out with munitions and firing and kinetics. It has to be jamming and whatever else. It is just a really cool capability. That is what our radios do without any additional weight. It is just software. I think it is a great business. Tony is now in the business that does the turrets with WESCAM and also the counter-UAS. I think that is also a really good business. We have talked about $1 billion in pipeline that showed up out of nowhere because everybody now feels like they need counter-UAS systems. Our first round of that is really firing $30,000 missiles at drones. The kill rate on it is about 80%. It is probably better now, but we have been working through all the algorithms and so forth. It has been fielded in Ukraine, so it has had live fire activity. I think Tony is probably the best salesman for it. Is that right, Tony? Yeah. I will check some out at AUSA next month, so I might get to see Tony one more time. Fabulous. You will see him a bunch because that is going to be his hotspot, right? But with all things like this, we have a huge ramp in front of us trying to get all the electronics. Literally, I think two weeks ago, we are working through how do you get the Department of War certifications behind you internationally because the AI demand is huge. I think we have talked about a huge ramp 2H, and I have said, "Hey, revenue ramp 2H." We still firmly believe it will ramp 2H, but it is probably more fourth quarter weighted. Second, third quarter is probably flatter at the end of the day. But that is a little frustrating because it is such a great business. We want to see the product out. I will tell you, Sam is working that with the team night and day because we got to drive to get the supply chain laid flat. It is really two vendors, and it is like fourth tier materials and that kind of stuff. It just shows you the world we live in today, right? I have two follow-up questions for that. As we think about the U.S. market, Falcon IV to Falcon V over the next 1.5 years, what does that mean? Is it a software upgrade? What does that mean in terms of investment ahead, and how do we think about the U.S. modernization cycle in terms of what is completed and what is ahead? Sure. It is a whole new radio, so it is all hardware. So think of something that is big going to something maybe half the size and hopefully has better battery life, heat, more capacity for communication, so more ability to put software on it. That new radio will probably effectively roll out the end of next year. We do not want to get ahead of ourself because we also want to keep selling Falcon IVs because they are very important, and we have to keep everything moving. So, I think this will just be the next iteration, like your iPhone. Like I said, it is like going from an iPhone 5 to a 14, which then I am not really sure which one they are at today, but maybe a 17 because my kids told me we need a new one. Anyway, I think it's pretty big evolution, so we're very excited about it. What's the percentage in terms of the modernization? How do you think about the modernization cadence as we progress every year? I think somewhere around, we've been at 40-plus percent in the U.S., then internationally, it's a lot harder, right? Because every country, they don't all use our radios, but if you're trying to communicate, and you want this commonality between systems so you can communicate, then if you're putting your kids on the battlefield, you want to give them the best odds of survivability. That's L3Harris radios. So that's why we've been doing a really bang-up job internationally, and that's where you're seeing a lot of demand come in. One more follow-up question. You mentioned it's a very Q4-weighted business. How do we think about some of the, I guess, supply chain areas that you're keenly focused on to ensure you ship? I would say it's predominantly pieces that go into electronic boards. We make these radios all ourselves, so it's always putting resistors and stuff like that on boards. So I would say there's some materials in the boards that have gotten to be a little bit harder. We've had to go dual source different vendors. Also work with countries that some of these suppliers are not in the U.S., so trying to go explain to them, "Hey, it's important for the Department of War." Engage the Department of War with them, which Sam has done, and vendors, it's a little bit of a positive surprise, candidly, the vendors have said, "Okay, we're prioritizing you." Our demands aren't as high as somebody building a bunch of boxes for a data center, so maybe that's why it's been a little bit easier, but we hit a little bit of a bump, and I think we'll work our way through it, b ut we'll certainly talk about it on the next call for sure. That's helpful. Maybe if you could talk about last year, the team had mentioned Link 16. You've highlighted success of getting Link 16 into space. Can you talk about what that means and how you think about Next Generation Jammer, low-band pods, and how does the integration of Palantir's AI platform help with your sensor business? I would say you've got a big universe there, so let me try. Link 16 into space, I think it's important from a comms perspective, and we're a big comms company, so owning kind of the framework, how things work, I think is really important. And that was also part of why we bought the business. So I think that's a positive all the way around. Let's see, you then mentioned Next Generation Jammer. The team would say they're absolutely on schedule, on price. We're in the phase I of the contract. There'll hopefully be another booking somewhere in the distant future. Not too distant future, excuse me, on Next Generation Jammer. I think Sam would say it's working really well. I checked him out on the Next Generation Jammer recently. But we're in a development phase on the program, so it's cost-type lower margins. We just need to work through the program. It's a great program to have, right? And we like the position we have with it. And you asked about pods, electronic warfare in general. We got a lot in that because you've segmented into two segments now. So we need you to break out again and give more color, so I'm not jamming all these questions into one. Oh, it's all good. Yeah, a nd then just electronic warfare in general. I think like everybody, right? I think it's a very important part of the business. I was spending some time the other day just even getting EW platforms on relatively small drones, just so you can fly in contested environments and be able to make deliveries, even, believe it or not, on ships, for example. That's been one of the mission sets of late. So, I think there's a whole lot going on. I think it's important space. Moving on to some financials, the CFO stuff now. Sure We get to talk about, LHX NeXt, that seems long ago now. How do you think about the next steps of implementation? You have exceeded your targets of $1.2 billion of savings. How do we think about next steps in terms of margins from here? One, I think it is very important. I just always look at margins, and I have had enough time at L3Harris now where people talk about noise in our financials and stuff like that and how to have cleaner quarters. I will be honest, I am a cleaner quarter guy. We pulled all the one-timers out of our numbers or non-recurring items and look at it and say, "Okay, we are not at our 16% margin, so what do we need to do to make sure we get to our 16% in a clean way," right? When I say clean, it is not asset sale gains or non-operational things. I think a big part of the focus is how do we go drive the business to get there and be able to, any of these one-timers that come up are on top of the numbers at the end of the day. The LHX NeXt program was important. I think this going in and looking at the business differently and spending a little bit more time operationally, I think was good. Candidly, I think Sam will take it to the next level, and he is already asking for tons of data on spend and consultant spend and different pieces that I think are really important. I guess, how do we think about the next level deep? What do you think is required, whether it is focus on supply chain? Is it just delivering on operating leverage? Is it mix transitioning from development to production? That is a broad scope for such a large company, but how do we think about some of the three, maybe few buckets as you think about margin expansion from here? I think, one, getting out of the EAC charges we've had specifically. I know we had some ISR ones. We had some space ones. I think Ken Bedingfield did a nice job of, and we've talked about this, making sure we put more management reserve on programs, starting off with lower margins, and then as we have the right to book larger margins, we book them up. We're bidding them at higher margins, but we are recording and recognizing it's all appropriate from accounting. We're recognizing lower margins in the earlier stages because we have more risk. I think maybe under, or maybe previously, things got ahead of the company, and we're trying to make sure that we take a pretty conservative stance to new business and programs that are earlier stage. I think that's first piece. If I had to think about margins, I'll use missiles as a great example. We're going to 3x, 4x, 5x, 10x volumes on different programs, and some of it, you just scratch your head a little bit. If you can't drive higher margin than that, you're doing something wrong, right? I think some people probably here have even been to Ken's new building or facility in Huntsville. We took the Remington facility, I don't remember how many square feet. It's huge. Part of that is how do we dual source stuff that's either creating issues in the supply chain or stuff where we think that the vendors aren't treating us fairly and make sure that we're getting the benefit of the cost reductions for L3Harris shareholders. W e've got the capacity, so we'll be working through that. I would like to believe you'll see missiles have kind of supplier margins than where they are. We're not trying to do it on the back of the customer. We're trying to do it by running a better manufacturing, a better operation, and I think Ken will do a nice job with that because that's what he set out to do, and he was already doing that. I think that's a piece. Just, hey, look, we got to stay focused and vigilant on the business and look at cost, and I think LHX NeXt was nice because I'm not sure we had taken a fresh look at cost. I think we need to keep doing that. That's helpful. Maybe now that you guys have had some time to sit, not really a lot of time, but how do you think about the business, whether it's from a segment structure, I know you've realigned a few times, or from a portfolio standpoint, how do you think about just are there better fits elsewhere, or do you think maybe breaking down the segments a little bit more, what you'd like to see from here? Yeah, sure. I would like to see no changes. I think our investors would like to see no changes. When we look at all the investor perception studies and everything, in fact, when Sam was getting announced, I sat down with him, went through Q&A, and as every good CFO, you want to make sure you are attached to the CEO and you are not saying something different, and if you do not like what the CEO is going to tell you need to change it. So I literally, question one was, "Org structure, are you going to change it?" I was all ready for, "Hey, pump the brakes. We are not doing that." I let him give his answer was, "That was the last thing we need to do, Ken." I went, "Check. Okay, good." Sam was a big part of the portfolio and structuring it the way he did, and I think it actually makes sense. Now, we could argue, could you split space in ISR? Okay, we run it that way today as a construct of the businesses are together that way, but we run them in different sectors underneath. I do not think there is a wholesale, "We are going to go shuffle the deck chairs." If we did that, I would probably lose my mind, and I do not think we want to do that. By the way, I think Sam would too. Sam's exact quote was, "The last thing, Ken, we need to do is do that." I went, "Yes, that makes perfect sense." This is what I was thinking. He said, "Our stock was working really well when we were not confusing investors and we were driving the business." He had actually said, "Driving the business." I added, "Confusing investors." I think it is important because we did all this really fast. That is an L3Harris way. The problem is when you do things really fast, it is really hard to give investors all the data broken down by quarter, by different segments, and the underlying data, not the segments themselves, because we do not have it, right? So how can we give it to you? If you wanted bookings by segment 3 years ago, it would be hard for me to create that when you do it fast. When you do it in a slower fashion, we have more of that data. I would say we are very happy with the structure we have, and we want to continue providing transparency to the investors so they can understand what we know is the great company we have and why you should be investing in it. Well, thank you for a lot of that clarity. Sure. Appreciate you being here, Ken. Thank you very much, everyone, for listening in. Thank you.