Greetings, and welcome to the Allscripts investor call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Jenny Gelinas, Vice President of Investor Relations. Thank you. You may begin. Thank you very much. Good morning, and welcome to the Allscripts investor conference call. Our speaker today is Rick Poulton, our President and Chief Financial Officer. We will be making a number of forward-looking statements during the presentation and the Q&A part of the call, including, without limitation, statements regarding management's expectations regarding the financial results of our businesses and the amount and uses of potential net proceeds from the sale of our Hospitals and Large Physician Practices business should the closing of the transaction occur. These statements are based on current expectations and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that can cause our actual results to vary materially. We undertake no obligation to revise these forward-looking statements in light of new information or future events. Please refer to our SEC filing for more information regarding the risk factors that may affect our results. Please reference the presentation that is available on our investor relations website. With that, I'm gonna hand the call over to Rick. Okay. Jenny, thanks so much. Good morning, everybody, and thanks for joining us. Again, for those of you who are just dialing in, the slides that we're gonna go through are available through an 8-K filing. They're also on our investor relations website. What I wanna do with our short time today is just real quick, I have a few slides that I wanna cover really three topics. First, I wanna talk about the what and the why of our announcement last night. Second, then give you a refresher on RemainCo, which is our Veradigm business, and make sure you understand the roots of what Veradigm's doing. Lastly, I'll finish by just updating our outlook for 2022. We'll take a couple of questions. With that, Jenny, could you please start us out on the slides? First, let me just get on the facts of what we did. Last night we, of course, announced a definitive agreement to sell the net assets of our Hospitals and Large Physician Practices business segment. We're selling that to Harris Health, which is a subsidiary of Constellation Software. This business unit, again, just to make sure everybody's rooted in what it is, it's our essentially our hospital and, as the name suggests, large physician practice. It's our Sunrise, our Paragon, our TouchWorks, dbMotion, and then a couple of our standalone financial solutions like STAR and HealthQuest. The transaction does not include anything from the Veradigm business segment. The purchase consideration is up to $700 million. It's a fixed price of $670 million paid at close, and then we have a couple of earnout targets that are based on revenue performance from the business, going forward. Now I wanna just talk a little bit about why. Why did we do this? Three main reasons. The first was, we are seeing a very widening gap or widening divergence in the momentum between our two core business segments. The hospital and large physician practices segment has shrunk for three years, well, is expected to shrink again this year, which will make the third year in a row. Frankly, that will continue, as far out as we can see. In fact, our thresholds that are tied to the earnout targets are sequentially lower, each year. In contrast, the Veradigm segment's growing 6%-7% organically, and we think has a very strong competitive positioning, particularly relative to our Hospitals and Large Physician Practices segment. With these two divergent forces, it's becoming harder and harder to manage this under one roof, particularly when we try to be efficient with shared services functions. Our only alternative, frankly, if we were to keep it under one roof, would be to replicate a lot of those shared service functions so that they could be very just tuned into the business they served and their different needs. Second big reason is focus. You know, I think it's pretty clear over the last two years that our execution has improved as we have narrowed our focus. As we look to think about the idea of separation, I think it allows for enhanced focus on priorities, enhanced accountability for results. Finally, this is part of our journey to unlock value of the company. We have persistently traded at a discount to anybody that we would look at as peers, and you should think of this as another step in our two-year journey towards first illuminating the different pieces of the company and then separating them all with a goal towards maximizing value of the whole. We think this transaction improves strategic optionality for Veradigm, and we have lots of opportunities ahead as we think about where to take that business. Next slide. Just again, to root you in the business we're selling, through last year through 12 months, we did $928 million of revenue and also reported adjusted EBITDA of $145 million. These figures come straight from our press release that we filed last week, so you can find all the details there. However, as we think ahead to 2022 or we look ahead, this is a business segment where we expect our revenue to be down 3%-4% year-over-year. We expect adjusted EBITDA to be down approximately 10%-15% year-over-year. This business segment provides, even though it's about 60% of our consolidated revenue, provides about 1/3 of our free cash flow. It's a more capital-intensive business and more delayed cash flow terms that we get from our clients there. I wanna make sure you have the right context when you think about what we're selling here. Finally, just as we think about use of proceeds, net of some transaction costs and net of taxes, we'd expect to yield approximately $600 million from this transaction. Those proceeds will be used to continue to support our share repurchase program, as well as we'll consider strategic and M&A for Veradigm as we see fit. We're not gonna race into that, but we'll certainly be looking at opportunities to continue to enhance the value of that business. Now let me pivot to just making sure we ground everybody into what is Veradigm doing. I want to start by just talking about how do we generate value. We have tight connectivity between our three core value drivers. Those are, as I go left to right in this diagram. First of all, it's our longitudinal data and the insights that we get from that data. We have decades worth of clinical information. We've been able to link it in many cases to claims information. When we combine that with some of the specialty patient registries that we have, as well as partner data that we also have, it's a very robust data set that we get to tap into. Second is our connectivity to the point of care and connectivity to patients. This is in many most instances bi-directional, and this allows us to provide patient engagement, patient recruiting, but also a lot of workflow type of interventions, whether it be gaps in care or anything of that like. Finally is our scale. We're partnering with over 300,000 medical professionals with a large e-prescribing network. Again, we build that. There's building blocks to that scale, which is the proprietary relationships we have, some of our partner relationships, and then again, our data registry relationships as well. Next slide. Combined on the slide, this gives you a little more factoids on the left of the slide about the scale, where we touch. It's a formidable touch points and data set in our view. Collectively, what's happening is, as value-based care is driving more and more market convergence, payers, providers, those lines are obviously blurring every day. But the need to coordinate amongst them, amongst the therapy providers and life science companies and with the patients, we get this real network effect coming off of that. It's very much a mutually reinforcing network that we believe is just getting stronger and stronger. We're excited about what it is and the scale it provides us and the proprietary nature of it as well. It's very difficult to replicate what we have. Next slide. When we think about the opportunity set ahead of us, we wanna bring this very large provider base to the large market opportunities that we see in the payer and life science end markets. We've listed several on this page. These are large markets, large market opportunities. We don't have to grab all of it to still set up for what we think is a very nice long-term growth profile for our opportunity or for our business. Next slide, please. This is a profile of some of our customers. Left side of the page is our biopharma clients, health plan and payer clients in the middle. Also we do quite a bit of business with other HCIT names that you're all quite familiar with. Very robust customer set, no specific revenue concentration in any of them. We look to continue to grow this as we go ahead, as we move forward. Finally, I wanna just ground everybody in the financial profile of Veradigm. You've seen our numbers, our revenue, as reported in aggregate for 2021 and prior periods. I wanna give you a little more insight, with this slide. Roughly, today, or 2021, I should say, we broke down where just a little over 80% of the revenue that Veradigm earned came from providers, and just under 20% came from payer and life science clients. As we look into 2022, the payer and life science slice of this revenue pie is expected to grow 20%-25% this year. Our provider side should grow in line with what you see other industry participants talking about 3%-4% as well. When we look at that in aggregate on a weighted basis, that's what gives us our expected growth rate of 6%-7% in 2022. I would add that, you know, the gross margins that we reported in 2021 of 51% and the adjusted EBITDA margin of 27% that we reported, both of them are expected to expand in 2022. The growth that we get will provide leverage down the P&L. With that backdrop then, I just wanna formally change our guidance for 2022. In light of the transaction, we're gonna withdraw the guidance that we provided last week, which was guidance on the consolidated company, and instead replace it with a Veradigm specific guidance. We expect Veradigm revenue to grow year-over-year in a range of 6%-7%. We expect Veradigm adjusted EBITDA to grow year-over-year in a range of 10%-15%. We expect free cash flow from continuing operations to be in a range of $110 million-$120 million this year. The transaction, of course, has some customary closing conditions, one of which is HSR review. We do expect that the transaction will close during the second quarter of this year. With that overview, I wanna open up for a few questions and then let everybody get back to their start of their day. Thank you. We'll now be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment please, while we poll for your questions. Our first questions come from the line of Sean Dodge with RBC Capital Markets. Please proceed with your questions. Hey, good morning. This is Tom Keller o n for Sean. Thanks for taking the questions. I guess starting off on the revenue growth outlook for Veradigm, I mean, you've updated the target this year of, you know, 6%-7% growth. It's a little below the double-digit target from previous. Where do you see that shaking out over the next few years and presumably with more growth investments and a sharper focus, does this get you back to 10%, or are you looking for something a little higher? Well, let's be clear, Tom. I mean, we grew in 2021. We grew a little under 5%, so we grew about 4.5% year-over-year. We talked about 10% in some of the quarters at the back half of the year to accentuate some of the momentum that we were getting, that we were building. When you look at it in totality, it was that i t was, you know, around 4.5%. Growth is accelerating. It's not declining when we look at it in aggregate. There is a seasonality profile to the business. But we, you know, we're comfortable with the range I'm disclosing now. Would we like to see that get higher? Yes, of course we would. Our goal, again, with the narrowed focus, will be to continue to, you know, pursue the opportunities in a very focused way. We're hoping that will continue to go up. I think that's a, y ou know, from my standpoint right now, that's a pretty healthy start to growth rate, given the scale of the company and the size of the company already. Okay, great. Thanks. That's all for me. Thanks. Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Jeff Garro with Piper Sandler. Please proceed with your questions. Yeah, good morning. Thanks for taking the question. You know, recently you had reallocated RCM services to the Veradigm segment. I wanna ask what the strategy is to grow that business going forward, you know, particularly without a captive TouchWorks client footprint. Well, we didn't really reallocate. I mean, RCM services, Jeff, is I would think the way you should think about that is that it is one of a multitude of things we provide to the provider base, right? We build this provider base and we get them, you know, we serve them, and then we bring that footprint that they represent as well as the data set we collect from them to the payer and life science end markets. In keeping that strong relationship with our providers, we have a whole suite of clinical, financial, patient engagement and other services, including RCMS. It's in the segment because it's a service we do provide to customers. It's part of our value proposition to those providers. You know, I think we would expect that to grow going forward because you know, where that trend that you hear across the industry of providers wanting to step out of that responsibility is very real in the segment of the market we provide or serve as well. We'll expect that to continue to grow. Got it. That's helpful. One more from me. You know, you've previously done a helpful job of allocating corporate resources down to the segment level in your reporting. Will we see any impact on profitability going forward as shared services are leveraged across a smaller business? Maybe more specifically, could you comment on resources needed to support the Practice Fusion and Professional EHR regulatory needs? Well, let me take those in reverse order. You know, in all the guidance I've provided, we have an assumption in there and embedded assumption about development spend. The development spend, you know, not only meets regulatory hurdles, it you know provides value adds above and beyond that as well. You know, you can look at our historical report information to see what we spent last year in the segment. That's gonna go up a little bit in 2022, but you know, all of that is embedded in the guidance I've provided. In terms of allocation of corporate resources, yeah, we do allocate virtually everything. We have a small unallocated slice of you know, what I would describe as just pure public company costs. Otherwise everything is allocated that supports the business itself. We'll continue to do that. That also is embedded in the guidance that I've provided. I think somewhere in your question you said, is there gonna be a need for any more or is there any inefficiency? You know, everything we think we're gonna have to use on a continuing basis is embedded in my guidance. We have obviously some transaction costs that are, you'll see, you know, netted against the overall transaction. We may have a little bit of bolus of, you know, just separating a couple of IT systems and things like that we'll also call out when that happens. You know, there's no inherent inefficiencies in this overall transaction. In fact, just the opposite from my perspective. Got it. Makes sense. One quick follow-up there, since you mentioned the unallocated segment. You referred to the cost, but I think there is something like $20 million+ in revenue there. You know, given the shifts in the company, maybe you could illuminate us on what contributes to that $20 million and how we should consider that going forward. I think you should just think of the unallocated segment as being immaterial to the overall story, okay, Jeff? Then we'll talk more about details around that if necessary. Got it. Thanks for taking the questions. Thanks. Thank you. Our next question has come from the line of Stephanie Davis with SVB Leerink. Please proceed with your questions. Hey, Rick, congrats on the sale, and thank you for taking my question. I'm gonna start with a really annoying question. We've had a bunch of re-segmentations since you first broke Veradigm out in 2019. Back then it had the Practice Fusion business, the life sciences Real-World Evidence platform, payer risk adjustment, and the clinical workflow platform. The segmentation wasn't your doing, but is there a way to map what's been added and what's been taken out of Veradigm, kind of in line with what you did on the Rev Cycle side, just kind of fully map this out? First, it's not an annoying question, but let me try to get at it. I mean. It's not a fun one, right? Well, yeah, I mean, it may, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Listen, I mean, here's what's happened, right? The company has evolved significantly over the last couple of years. I would think anybody who's followed us wouldn't dispute that. In the case of Veradigm, the branding of Veradigm occurred and before we had kind of fully put all the pieces together of what it represents. Today's, the Veradigm segment today, represents a collective business opportunity that we had in different pieces, and we were using the data from different pieces of the company, and we were using some of the workflow connectivity from different pieces of the company, but we didn't have it all in one place. We finally fixed that with the last kind of segmentation change that we made last year. You have the full opportunity. The full provider set that feeds this business, the full payer life science end market opportunities that kind of flow from it as well, is all in one place now. That's just the, you know, reality of what we've got to. If you're asking, part of your question is, can I look back and reconcile from here to there? I don't know. We could think about that. I mean, you know, basically, you had some other provider platforms and provider solutions that resided in other ways we were reporting the company at that time. You know, we brought them all together because they're really the full story that is fully managed by one management team right now. Okay. So. That's helpful. That's it. For a completely different follow-up that's a little bit spicier than the last question. If I look at the acquisitions in the health tech space over the past two years, just about every single press release talks about the buying of data assets and that being the most important part of the transaction. Now you have a standalone business that is a data asset and a data platform. I know you talk about using some of these proceeds for M&A, but is being a consolidatee instead of a consolidator also on the table? Absolutely. I mean, look, I mean, we've you know, the last several transactions we've done, going all the way back to Netsmart, shows that we're not just empire building here at Allscripts. We'll absolutely do what's right for shareholders. If it makes more sense to think about that, then we will. If it makes sense to build value off of strict organic activities, we'll do that. That's our starting point right now. And if it makes sense to build value off acquiring a couple of things, we'll consider that as well. I mean, we're not racing into it, but we'll consider it. We are, I think we've demonstrated from our past that we are open to whatever outcome makes the most sense for the shareholder base. Beautiful. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. Our next question has come from the line of George Hill with Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your questions. Yeah. Good morning, Rick, and I'll echo the congrats on the transaction. I kind of had a follow-up on Stephanie's line of questioning, which was, you know, given where you guys are right now, do you feel like the portfolio rationalization strategy is complete for the near term, or should we expect to see kind of are there other parts that you guys are either looking to add or continue to dive down, as kinda, as you think about how you guys wanna refocus the forward basis? Yeah. Yeah, thanks George. So my answer to that is, look, what's left hangs together. If there's one thing you take away from this call, I want you to feel like this. It's, you know, Veradigm is a three-legged stool of the provider footprint that we have and the connectivity that it represents to the point of care and to the patients is what is the value asset to the payer and life science entities. That is a very, very strong mutually dependent opportunity set. I do not envision hiving that up or carving that up in any way, shape, or form. Okay. That's a, I guess, a long-winded way of saying no, I think we're done on that. The only small, and it's very immaterial, you know, potential exception to that is, it really goes back to a question that Jeff was asking earlier. I have a couple of very kinda like orphan product lines left that are in our unallocated segment, did not fit nicely into this transaction. They're in the noise from my perspective, so we're not gonna talk a lot about them. If there's a buyer at a fair price, then, you know, we might consider that. That's helpful. If I could go with one quick follow-up, just as I think about the businesses that you sold, and I know this is all in the rearview mirror now, and you detailed the financial profile of what you sold. I guess to some degree, could you talk about how much of that did you think was kind of Allscripts- specific and share loss- related versus how much of it was industry- related and kind of coming to the end of the maturity of the EHR life cycle? Are you talking about all transactions, George? Or are you just talking about the one. No, no, I'm not talking about the business. I'm talking about the businesses that you guys sold. Like how much of that, how much of those businesses became less attractive because you know, the market started to consolidate around a couple of vendors and you guys had seen increasing market share losses or how much of it was just, providers had spent a boatload of money in this space over the last six or seven years, and the end market just became less attractive. Yeah. I mean, you know, I guess I'll try to answer your question by just thinking about, you know, the last five deals we sold, okay? That I can recall anyway. We sold, you know, a business called OneContent. That was something we acquired from McKesson, and we had it sold within six months. For me, that was all part of the transaction logic that we knew there was a market for that asset. T here’s not a lot of people, so that was kind of an industry consolidation play. The buyer was interested in. We knew we could pay for the entire transaction and then some on the McKesson acquisition. It was essentially, you know, we got paid to take the rest of the assets from McKesson. You know, that's to me a trade that I'm still quite happy that we did. But that was what the logic was there. Then comes Netsmart. You know, the Netsmart thing was a two-step transaction that was all about monetizing a home care asset that we had. That was an asset that got lost in the big shuffle. So it's not as if home care is a dying end market by any stretch of the imagination. It was frankly why we wound up with a pretty good exit on that when all was said and done. It was, I would call that an asset that was just, you know, undermanaged inside the larger company and needed a better owner with a more focused management team to realize its value. Fast-forward to the deals we did last year, EPSi. I would say it was similar. Good end market, not really growing very much, but it was a good end market. That was an industry consolidation play, so the value was there for the buyer. You know, we were in a position where we needed to focus and we needed to recapitalize the company, and so it made sense for us to do. Fourth was CarePort we did last year. CarePort is a great business, growing very nicely. Its owners, I think, are extremely happy with what they acquired. At the same time, I'm extremely happy, you know, that we got what we got for it. It allowed us to do our full transformation of the balance sheet and, you know, got us to where we are today. You know, it's a great business, though. You know, there was one really growing business that we sold that I would have liked to have kept. That probably would have been it, but it was still the right thing to do at that time. Then, you know, what we announced yesterday, I mean, obviously it's a business that's not growing. It's in a tough market. Market's not growing a lot. You know, I think it's, it makes sense for all the reasons we explained earlier in the call. Sorry for a very long answer to your short question, but hopefully that was responsive to what you were thinking. Nope. That's a great answer, Rick. I'll say with your transaction history, and especially the success of that McKesson deal, I'm sure there's a job for you in investment banking if you ever want it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question has come from the line of Charles Rhyee with Cowen. Please proceed with your question. Yeah, thanks for taking the question. You know, most of them have been asked, just maybe a couple things here, Rick. When we look at the guidance, any kind of like transition service agreements in place that will contribute to the new business going forward for this year that we should think about that may tail off or any kind of framing around that? Also around access to data. I know right now most of the data all coming from the provider-related business that you're sitting on today. Any kind of data access agreements in place to continue to get data out of the Sunrise set of EHRs? Yeah. Hi, Charles. Thanks for the questions. First part of your question, there are absolutely TSA agreements that are gonna accompany this deal. The TSA agreements, though, are just meant to create an orderly separation of some shared, a little bit of shared capabilities that all EHR platforms that Allscripts had shared. Not only the Sunrise and TouchWorks, but some of our Pro platform and to a much lesser degree, the Practice Fusion platform. There's a little bit of shared things there that need to be unwound. The TSA provides for an orderly exit to that at costs, you know, that are shared by the parties today. I don't expect the costs once we get to standalone status to diverge much, you know, in either direction, frankly, from what it is today. The second place that the TSA is in is you know similar, the connective tissue on some of our shared services. You know, we had a shared service function across all of the business units that we had. We have to unwind some of that, you know, ERP systems, you know, things like that. Again, orderly transition and you know we have structured the cost sharing in the TSA such that I don't think either entity should see much of a blip when it achieves full independence. That's kind of the TSA story. If I missed something you're thinking about, please come back on that. The second part of your question, we don't really get much, if any, data from the Sunrise space today. The hospitals in general are less willing to share that or have been less willing to share that. You know, you see quite a few of them doing their own syndicated kind of data kind of things or on their own. I don't have any real comment on how successful those are or are not. We are not getting much from that. We do get a little bit of data flowing from a couple of TouchWorks clients. It's a small piece relative to the bigger picture I painted here. There is continuity of receiving that data under the terms of the deal we did. That's great. Just maybe to follow up on the TSA question, just a length of term for these agreements. Is it a one-year transition or is it longer? Uh. Secondly, I'm sorry, go ahead. Sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off, Charles. Most of them are built to wind down progressively over three years. Three years. Okay. That's helpful. Lastly, you know, the growth profile of the remaining business looks pretty attractive here, particularly as it is it fair to think that, you know, if you have this 18% of revenue in 2021 growing at 20%-25% over time, this we should continue to have accelerating top line growth. Should we expect that as well on the EBITDA line as well, or is 10%-15%, a re there some fixed costs or, I'm sorry, is there some variable costs that will have to keep going into the business? Or, you know, we think further out, should both of them be tracking upwards? Yeah. I mean, as I said earlier, Charles, I mean, we expect operating leverage. I mean, I expect gross margins and adjusted EBITDA margins both to rise in 2022. You know, absolutely we'll get operating leverage off of top line growth. Okay, great. Appreciate it. Congrats. Thanks for the questions. Thank you. Our next question has come from the line of Eric Percher with Nephron Research. Please proceed with your questions. Thank you, Paul and Rick, and I'll say congrats on getting to the starting line on new Allscripts here. A question also on the growth outlook. Clearly expansion or re-acceleration 2021 to 2022. Relative to that 20%-25% on payer and life science, what is your view on how much of that or if any of that is rebound versus investment driven? You know, I think the question being how much you know is that a steady number that can continue into the future or even grow with more focus? Well, the macro driver, Eric, is, you know, what I said earlier is, you know, the continued growth of value-based care and, you know, pushing more and more, the risk equation, toward, you know, both payers and providers is, what's driving a lot of, you know, the need here. When you combine that with what has been a historical massive inefficiency that payers and life science companies have had with intersecting or interacting at the point of care when decisions are being made, you combine those two kind of macro forces, that's what's creating the opportunity to create value. We can eliminate inefficiencies, we can accelerate time for these large end market participants to intersect with the point of care. We can help them manage the risks a lot faster. You know, again, gaps in care, things like that. Those macro forces are what create the end market opportunity. We don't see an end in sight to that right now. We think we have a nice runway to continue growing into. It requires us to have fabulous execution, and it requires us to keep ideation about a new product or solution offerings we can bring to these guys that help them with some of the inefficiencies that we see. Sometimes they'll come to us, but we need to be able to come to them with ideas as well. You know, I think the opportunity is there if we can build a good growth engine, you know, in terms of ideation and solution development, combined with flawless execution. I think we have a long runway ahead of us. The flip side of that question, maybe as we look at provider and as, you know, you continue to grow in payer and life sciences, do you think that helps to boost beyond 3%-4% or is 3%-4% something that we should accept as the natural growth rate? Look, I think that's the right thing to think for now. I mean, there's no shortage of industry participants who throw around different growth rates in this space. I would tell you know, the fundamental market opportunity is, you know, it's a mostly mature market for clinical financial tools. So people are either trying to come in with better mousetraps and disrupt incumbents or in other cases, you know, look for new pieces of wallet share like RCMS or things like that. So those are the things that are gonna grow the pie. But. Mm-hmm. I think you know personally that's the right way to anchor your expectations right now. A lot of folks who talk about higher growth rates talk about them but don't deliver them. I think we'll start there. You'll be the first to know if we think it should go up from there in terms of an expectation. All right. A name change likely in the future for the corporate entity? TBD, but. Okay. You'll be the first to know. Thank you. Our next questions come from the line of Michael Cherny with Bank of America. Please proceed with your questions. Good morning. Rick and team, congratulations again on the transaction. I want to echo other folks' comments. I want to take a step back to make sure we're capturing everything appropriately on thinking through Veradigm. Clearly a lot of nodes that you have into the various different customer sets and partners. As you think about this going forward, especially as we all think about a standalone Veradigm within Allscripts, who do you view as the key competitors across your various businesses, and who should we think about as we look to the market, seeing traction that you're having versus others or others are having versus you to think about both market dynamics as well as your own competitive position? Yeah. You know, it's an interesting question, Mike, because you know, I wrestled with putting in a kind of competitor slide in as well to the deck. The reality is a lot of the folks I'd list as competitors are also either partners or customers too. It's you know, we have this semi-incestuous world here in healthcare IT, where on in some dimensions you compete and others you're cooperating. You know, given the you know, given that we're still in early stages of digitizing healthcare, you know, maybe that's not a surprise. You know, you would probably try to answer the question looking at the different you know, business segments that we're in. Certainly, on the provider side, some of the traditional ambulatory EHR players would be some of the competitors in terms of the scale, or excuse me, in terms of, you know, the how much of that is proprietary to us versus how much of it is not. You know, some of the competitors there, though, having said that, are partners of ours, in that they have asked us to use our platform that we've built to get to the payer and life science markets to help them, in effect, monetize their assets. And we do that under rev share arrangements. So they compete on one hand, partner on the other. In the payer side of it, similar stories, you know. And I'll put one logo that's on there. Inovalon, good partner for us. You know, in some aspects of the business, they would be a competitor as well. On the life science side, you know, it would be some of the CROs are partners and competitors. It would probably be a longer list of anybody who's really attempting to bring datasets, clinical datasets to the life science companies. Got it. I don't know if that's as specific as you wanted, Mike, but that's kind of directionally how I think about it. No. I'm sure we'll all learn more too as we go and this transaction closes. I guess one more technical question, if I may. You have an outstanding share purchase plan in place. Obviously, you've been very active on that front. Is there anything regarding the transaction that prevents you, at this point in time, if you want to, from deploying capital to buybacks today, tomorrow? Not as of 5:00 P.M. last night, no. Now that this is out there, nothing's holding us back. Awesome. Thanks so much, Rick. Thanks, Mike. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'd like to hand the call back over to management for any closing comments. Okay. Well, thanks again everybody for joining us this morning. I know you got work to do, and we're encroaching on the beginning of the market opening, but I appreciate your time. Great questions, and I look forward to building out the story in the weeks and months ahead. Thanks. Thanks so much. Have a good day. Thank you. This does conclude today's teleconference. We appreciate your participation. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Enjoy the rest of your day.