Okay, I think we're good to get started. My name is Alec Brondolo. I cover small and mid-cap internet at Wells Fargo. I am very delighted to be joined by David Day, Nick Kormeluk, and Erik Hovanec, the Chief Financial Officer, Head of Investor Relations, and Chief Strategy Officer at Magnite, respectively. Guys, thank you so much for joining us. Thanks, Alec. Thanks. I want to start on DV+. You know, this year you've announced several monetization partnerships with meaningful publishers, meaningfully large publishers. PINS and X are definitely two standouts. When you look at these 2025 partnerships kind of as a cohort or a group, what inning of the ramp from a revenue contribution perspective would you say that we're in today? Yeah, I'll start there. I think that both PINS talked about launching, and we're always sensitive to what our partners say about things. They like to be in control of the narrative. PINS, you know, has been on record saying that they're in market and launched X. You can fairly easily tell that it's Magnite representing some of their inventory. You know, that's how it was first discovered, as somebody on the media side found that, you know, we were running code on X. I think that was visible there. I have put those in early contributors and early ramp mode. I do think we've had a lot of traction across what we call our commerce media cohort and segment. We're looking forward to a very nice ramp across numerous partners there. Folks that we would include with that list are folks like a Best Buy, folks like a Redfin, folks like United Airlines, in addition to those that you'd mentioned. I would say that we're very, very happy about that list. The important nuance around that is these are new walled gardens that used to do this on their own. When we get chosen, this is very premium demand, or sorry, premium supply. It's never been the programmatic marketplace themselves. They also hire us, with the exception of X, they hire us on a unique exclusive basis. This is something that's not subject to, you know, other SSPs playing in that inventory or DSPs going directly. It's really premium new inventory. They're very guarded with their IDs around this. They want us to preserve that, allow it to be bought against, but they're really looking for one trusted partner as opposed to opening this up. As we think about the 11% 2026 contribution XTAC growth guidance, does that guide contemplate a meaningful contribution from this kind of 25-partner cohort, whether it's the commerce media guys or, or PINS or X? Yeah, we build that in. But, you know, it's very difficult with a lot of these. You know, we think many of these will be very large partners of ours over time. As you might expect, it's difficult to try to predict the timing at which those ramps happen. The last thing you want to do is leave the street, you know, with a sour, you know, taste if something doesn't, you know, hit or ramp at the time that you would look for. We're also relatively early to talking about 2026. We wanted to put a minimum bar in there for, you know, that 11% growth and the contribution into DV+ from this specific group. But I think, you know, a number of those players could hit inflection points that would be upside to where we stand today. I think, you know, what we've baked in is a reasonable assumption. I'm not sure, David, if you want to add any color to that. I think you got it. A lot has been said about kind of the degradation of web traffic to the open web as a function of kind of LLM search, AI. I think there's a lot of questions on how that might impact advertising spend in the open web category going forward. Could you maybe remind us of DV+ actual kind of exposure to the open web as opposed to other surfaces? We could start there and then we'll go. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it's, it's, it is kind of the question of the day. And it's a good question. You know, for our business, you know, less than a third of our total business is subject to the open web. But I think one of the most important points is that not all open web is created equal. So a couple of interesting trends that we're seeing on the open web front, the volume of ad requests that we see on a daily basis continues to grow actually fairly dramatically. We see over 2 trillion ad requests a day in the DV+ business. And we discard a trillion and a half of those requests. We don't even move them further for monetization. There is a lot of excess inventory in the marketplace. Also, you know, if you're obviously a, you know, a recipe site or, you know, a how-to site, there's certain verticals that are significantly, I think, impacted with AI. A lot of our publisher customer base tends to be more premium, more of a destination site, and so we really haven't seen significant impacts from that. Yep. DV+ grew 7% in the third quarter of 2025. I think that's 10% X political. However, the fourth quarter guide, I think, is only for 3% growth. In that deceleration, you called out three factors. Macro was one, Open Path was another, and then you called out a shift from DV+ into CTV. I think, could you maybe stack rank the magnitude of those factors in the guide, like which is the most important driver to the decel, which is less important? I think that would help investors maybe frame some of these issues a little bit better. Yeah, that's a good, that's a good point. To get apples to apples, X political, DV+, as you said, grew 10% in Q3 and at the midpoint of our guide, 8% in Q4. The decel was there, it wasn't huge, but it certainly was there. Of the factors you mentioned, we really saw them as all fairly equal, you know, between kind of macro, OpenP ath, and then some shift of online video spend to CTV, a little bit of cannibalization there. That really kind of equally accounted for maybe a bit of the lower than expectation outcome. I think with regard to Open Path, you gave a pretty clear indication on earnings that you thought that kind of the bulk of the impact had already been felt in the business, let's say in the fourth quarter or the fourth quarter guide at least. What gives you the conviction that that's going to be the case? It seems like a lot of this is in their control. It is. Yeah. Yeah, I think that, you know, a new data point that emerged shortly after is, you know, first, let's maybe level set. You know, Open Path has been around for four to five years. Open Path is nothing new. Kokai has been around for well over a year now. It's not as if all migrations happened and started at the end of the third quarter. The new data point that we were guessing at ourselves, but we were made aware of on The Trade Desk call, is that they had completed 85% of the migrations to Kokai. It's really what we saw at the end of September and into October is those clients that were migrating over from Solimar to Kokai, those clients had their default settings pointed at Open Path inventory. Immediately we started getting inquiries from customers asking what happened. Because we power many of these agency marketplaces, they have spent a tremendous amount of time curating what publishers they buy against, layering in their data against it, reselling some of their data that influences match rates, as well as economic deals, these SPO programs, deals, rebates, incentives, they were then, you know, hurt by or upset by this migration. Very quickly, you know, they started contacting us and vice versa in order to go back to the prior settings. I think that's where the key question is. If this occurred, we took a very, very interesting stress test, and it was at the buyer's preferences that they wanted to move their settings back. The risk would be if they moved over, were happy with it, or didn't care and just continued on their merry way, where we were essentially priced out of, you know, recovering this business with them, which we did not. Out of the large group of agencies and brands, we did not hear from anyone that said, "Hey, we'd like to keep our settings exactly as it was on migration." That, I think, gives us confidence that we're through the majority of that. We're now sitting here, you know, in conferences and meetings two weeks after earnings. Again, nothing substantially changed from the time that, you know, we gave this two weeks ago. We have a few more data points out there. I think it's another thing, you know, this industry goes through periods of time where a press headline is perceived as an existential threat. We've lived this through Disney. We've lived through this with, you know, Netflix talking about their ad stack. We've lived through this here. Each time we've emerged from these stress tests, and in this case, you're not even talking about revenue that dipped negative with something that was a fairly big move by a partner of ours, that again was, you know, not reflective of how strong our relationship is and how much we do with The Trade Desk, which is visible in kind of the dollar impact or the percentage impact that this had. How do you think about your own strategy in the context of what The Trade Desk is trying to do? Are there investments that perhaps you could pull forward to fortify the business model? Are there kind of relationships that you could develop with other DSPs, maybe Amazon, to offset some of this? How do you think about kind of like what's in your control and what you can do about it? Yeah. So, we've all, you know, we've always had great relationships with other DSPs. And so certainly Amazon is a fast grower right now, and we have a very, very close relationship with them. You mentioned, you know, kind of investment, and we might get into a little more of that later, but we actually are pulling forward some investment in some of our key, you know, technologies, which we can get into now if you want or, or later. Or why do not we just dive into that? We made some moves on our tech stack front to bring forward, make extra investment in shifting AWS costs to on-prem. And we are utilizing some of the margin that we gained from that to actually expand our engineering focus. And so we are hiring extra people. Our objective there is to accelerate the velocity of some of our key growing areas. One of those would be Clearline, which is a direct access point into our ecosystem. Also, our audience curation initiative, which is, you know, the data management, that is a real value driver and kind of a shift from kind of the buy side to the sell side, and a few other areas of investment that are important. Yep. Super helpful. Mobile app and mobile game inventory seems to be having a moment in the market. Obviously, we could observe that some of the public players in that space are growing pretty rapidly. Could you talk about your exposure to that end market? I think you actually just relaunched your mobile app SDK a week ago or two weeks ago. What's the goal there and how does it make it better? Yeah. We've always had a sizable mobile web business. Yep. In about half of what we do in mobile plus or minus. We've had some mobile, in-app business as well. We recently relaunched the SDK platform. What we're so excited about, the reason is that we're finally seeing the point at which for in-app advertising, there's more and more brand activity, right? In-app advertising has historically been full of, you know, app install and sort of gaming type advertising. That's where the economics kind of were. Brands participated, but not as much. Now we're finding that brands are able to use this channel. They're able to compete cost effectively for acquisition of the media with the app install platforms. To us, that's sort of what we do. This becomes one more TAM expansion, if you will, where we say, "Look, this is a new TAM. We are the ones who are well positioned to enable brand buyers to come in and execute that. The SDK is really, I'm assuming everybody knows here that, you know, the SDK is really just the vehicle by which you access the inventory, software development kit. It is the way you actually get access to where you're going to drop the ad. We are very excited by it. We think it opens up some big opportunities for us over time. We will, you know, continue to push in that front. I would love to ask you, I think a lot of investors are asking, like, why? Clearly, brand advertisers are prioritizing mobile app inventory for the first time. I think that's exciting. I think the question investors have is like, "Why now? What are the enabling factors of that? What has kind of driven interest in that surface where it hasn't existed from a brand perspective historically?" Any insight there I think would be really helpful too. Yeah, that's a tough one. You know, because the reasons are so varied, but certainly the attribution component of this is a big one. The brands have to be able to have trust and confidence that their placements are being seen, they're viewable, and they get measurable attribution. Once you have all of those ingredients, then mobile just becomes one more place you advertise, similar to you advertise on display, you advertise on CTV, you advertise on seven other different surface areas. You want to be able to evaluate all of those collectively. I think there's been a lot of progress on the measurement and attribution fronts that have made it, if you will, relatively easy and safe and transparent for brand advertisers to do this. We're thrilled about it because that's really what we do. We don't want to compete in the app install space. There's a lot of specialty knowledge and capability. That's not us, but the brand piece is. That's why we're excited about it. I think to add to that is, you know, it's a part of the ecosystem that has much better data to what point Erik made. As AI search infringes on, you know, traditional web search, it's also a place where you have higher value, you know, users that are, you know, again, protected from search trends impacting kind of the open internet. I think that's the other reason is people don't feel like investments made in that area are going to be threatened anytime soon. Maybe transitioning the conversation to CTV. You grew CTV contribution XTAC, excluding political, 15% in one Q, and then I think 25% in the third quarter, ex-political. I'm sure, you know, Netflix contributed to some of that acceleration, but perhaps you could elucidate on the other drivers to the extent they exist. Yeah, we put some Easter eggs in our earnings script and list who the largest performing, you know, largest contributing, you know, partners are. Yeah. We put that not in, you know, rank order, but in, you know, alpha order so that, you know, it keeps you guys guessing a little bit and lets the sell side add value to the buy side. That's good. Nonetheless, I think that list includes guys like LG, guys like Roku, NBCU snuck in there. There's somebody that we've been working with, even though they do have, you know, the Freewheel relationship, obviously as a known entity. There's value that we bring and other pools of demand that we can bring access to, in addition to Netflix. We also did talk about, you know, Disney shortly after the quarter leaning on us for an inventory in sports that, you know, Michael has historically said we'd never touch, which is NFL, as well as NCAA football. I think those are the drivers for the second half acceleration that we kind of signaled in the first half. I think there was a lot of concern around DV+. Not many people paid attention to the fact that acceleration happened and even kind of came in better than expected for Q3. The guide was lifted for Q4. I think all those factors are at play. Also, agency marketplaces continue to be a very strong, powerful differentiator and driver for our business. Yep. I think a lot of conversation around Netflix this year, less conversation around the Prime Video Fire TV deal that you announced in May. I think the premise of the deal is everything except the Prime exclusive inventory you are now going to help monetize. Could that be a meaningful driver of CTV growth in 2026? Definitely. Yeah, it's exciting that, you know, even Amazon, you know, is looking for additional demand sources and we're able to bring demand even into their ecosystem. Do you think that maybe in the future you could help monetize the Prime exclusive inventory? I mean, is that, is that. We're sure going to do our best to try. Yeah. I think that'd be a big unlock. I think a lot of the kind of prepared remarks in the third quarter and really this year have talked about SMB and the importance, the growing importance of SMB in the CTV ecosystem. Historically, that hasn't been a meaningful customer segment for Magnite. How are you working to enable their spend on CTV? I want to talk about. Yeah. Yeah. One of the big unlocks we think is the ability for SMBs to create low-cost, high-quality advertisements. We acquired a company called Streamer AI, which for a relatively small amount of money can make really high-quality commercials for small and medium-sized businesses. Now, we're probably not going to see your local plumber on CTV quite yet, but there will be those intermediate-sized businesses who can come in and for a few hundred bucks create 10, 12, 15 different iterations of a creative. We can run A/B tests on that. We have eliminated high-quality creative as a barrier. The way we go to market with Streamer is, it's sort of bundled with our Clearline platform where we can enable third parties, companies that are out there. There's some well-known ones, lots of small and medium-sized regional agencies as well, where we can go and say, "Look, here's your tool for creating the advertisements, and here's your platform, Clearline, for running the money and executing the campaigns, activating and executing on our platform." We're finding good success with that. We recently announced something with ITV. In Europe, there's a company called Volt, which is a subsidiary of DoorDash, I believe, which, it's a pretty big opportunity for us. We see a pipeline behind that that we're excited about. We think we're getting close to kind of the big unlock for SMBs there. Got it. It's interesting, you know, I think one of my questions was, you know, how you distribute Streamer because, you know, Magnite historically hasn't been an advertiser-facing company. It's bundled with Clearline. It's not like Streamer exists over here and Clearline exists over here. Like one is enabling the other. Yeah. To be clear, that's the intention. Are there edge cases where it's one-off? There are a couple of deals that, you know, we inherited when we acquired the company that they're one-off. For the most part, that's exactly how we intend to go to market with it. We see value in that it's going to bring more and more of these medium-sized, smaller businesses, which lend richness into this. To come back to a question you asked before, if you don't mind. Yeah. You said, "Hey, with regard to Trade Desk as one distribution partner, where can you move your investments around?" And Streamer and our efforts with SMBs is a good example of that, what I like to call a yes-and distribution strategy where, of course, we work with Trade Desk. That's a very important partnership with us. Of course, we work with Amazon, but we also work in the SMB space. We also work by enabling small and medium-sized businesses. The more fragmented that distribution or that buyer-side landscape is, the more opportunity for us to drive significant volume to our customers. We think we're well positioned to do that. Does that make sense? No, it makes sense. I think, you know, it's interesting with regard to SMBs. I think the thing that Amazon DSP has brought to the market is distribution, right? They have the longer tail of Amazon Marketplace sellers. And they, you know, that's a huge corpus of advertisers. And they were spending on amazon.com and the retail media inventory. And they said, "Hey, like you're doing that, also you should spend on CTV. And we've got this great Prime Video inventory and this great DSP platform for you." Do you feel like you've found the right way to distribute Clearline into the SMB ecosystem? Because like historically for companies that are, you know, focused on large enterprises, that's been a, that's the distribution has been a difficult problem to solve. Yeah. It is not our goal to work directly with SMBs. Yeah. That's why we want to facilitate. We want to work with the mountains and TV Scientific. Okay. And help them be more successful. Because exactly to your point, you know, there's a whole world of working with SMBs that is not something that we think is the highest priority for us. What's exciting is that, and you mentioned Amazon bringing long tail. Amazon also helped as a catalyst to, amongst other factors, bring down CTV CPMs. With the lowering of those CPMs, it becomes easier and easier for SMBs to target more, on a performing basis, and get the return on the ad spend that they need to be engaged in that medium. You know, I would love to talk about the point that you just made on Amazon and the lowering of CPMs. I think clearly, I think nobody could have possibly guessed the impact that the introduction of ads to Prime Video would have on CPMs in the CTV space over the, you know, the preceding 18 months. I guess as we look back, do you think that's been positive, neutral, or negative for the growth of your CTV business? Yeah. And let me also clarify. I do not think they were the only driver of that. Okay. I mean, they were definitely a catalyst and got a lot of airtime. But CPMs were already, you know, when Netflix first came out, even Disney Plus when they first came out, they had sort of pre, there was a demand-supply challenge where there was more demand. And so they had these really high CPMs. You also have a flip in that dynamic where you now have more supply than demand. The Amazon supply was a part of that, but also a lot more supply from all the other premium streamers. I think that's been part of that dynamic. I think it's been great for the ecosystem because net positive for sure over the last 18 months, because that has allowed SMBs to get into this game. It's really greased the wheels to grow this ecosystem. Yeah. I think those are highly interlocked and one feeds the other, right? Coming down, it now is a competitive media type that can compete against other media types and be evaluated on its own ROAS, right? I think that was massively important. That's why I think you're seeing this push to SMBs, right? Warner Bros. is doing it with Neo. Roku's doing it with Air Marketplace. Disney's doing it with Drax. Everybody's courting SMBs. A lot of this is because you do have critical mass at a lot of these streamers and publishers because they represent so much inventory. They want to welcome these folks indirectly. The skill set that's required for these is much different than what, you know, a DSP or a marketplace would offer to buy their inventory historically through enterprise sales, right? It is a, you need to give them the creative. You need to make it easy to select their audience. You almost have to look at this as almost a Robinhood solution where previously SMBs would look at market solutions and look at this as if it is a Bloomberg terminal and it is very difficult. It is very complicated. It is very hard to understand. They really need all of those features either coming to them from a direct inventory source or from, you know, a DSP that is focused on their effort. That is really what is kind of catering and bringing this new group of SMBs into market that Amazon has proven. Yep. Maybe if we could pivot to costs. I think we talked about it a little bit at the beginning of the conversation, but I kind of want to dive deeper into this off-prem to on-prem migration. Yeah. I guess maybe could we start out at a high level? What enables you to gain efficiency when you move infrastructure on-prem? Yeah. Good question. To level set, our DV+ business runs almost exclusively on-prem. We have data centers and our own machines, and we run those high volumes. CTV runs on the cloud, has run predominantly on the cloud. Cloud costs compared to on-prem can be up to four times more expensive. One of the challenges that we're dealing with is, and it's a good problem to have, the volume of CTV activity has grown significantly. Marginally, that growth has all occurred on the cloud and created some higher cost pressure there. We've been very focused on moving more of that cloud activity onto on-prem, and it will reduce the growth in our costs quite significantly. We did make a decision the latter half of this year to increase our investment. We expanded data centers on the East Coast and the West Coast. We also are putting in some more machines. Normally that would lead to a greater margin expansion. We decided to invest in increase our, the velocity of output of our feature and functionality in some of the areas that we talked about. Curation, Clearline, and also significantly, AI. Some of that, so we are, it is basically product and software engineers that we are hiring and then some international sales, demand-side sales. We really, you know, see the opportunity there. We want to accelerate, get more velocity on that output. From an AI perspective, we want to accelerate the development, embedding AI into our product, being ready to work with agents and be that sort of connective tissue, system of record, from an AI product perspective, but also to implement and accelerate our internal efficiencies from an AI perspective. We'll have this sort of influx of employees. I think you'll see the fruits of that in the latter half of this next year and certainly in 2027. Great. I would love to maybe touch on the Google case. We're going to get the decision. I don't want to say we're going to get the decision. We will probably maybe get the decision in December or January. I found that these legal timelines can often be not exactly what you expect. As you've kind of observed the questions asked in the case, the filings, do you think a behavioral or structural remedy is more likely at this point? Yeah. I'll put that. Yeah. It's a, you know, if you kind of rewind to early in this year before April, we believe that, you know, both behavioral and structurals were on the table. Each would be appealed and none of this would see the light of day for three to four years. Yeah. It was only until the judge made it very clear that she was not going to wait for behavioral remedies until after appeals are heard that this became a 2026 thing. Yep. Just kind of rewinding back to where we are. Even if there is something structurally that happens and we're not dismissing that there will be or there's not diminished odds of that, we feel just as strongly now because there's a guilty verdict for monopolistic practices. As much noise versus signal that there is right now, those two things won't be reversed. I think structural still is on the table. They're subject to appeal. That still is a three- to four-year window for that to carry any merit. It would be a very, very nice headline that I think for any generalist in our space to say, "Hey, I guess Magnite's going to benefit if Google's broken up." That's an easy, you know, easy button, so to speak. We have always from day one said the behavioral remedies and those flowing through and what they are and in what pace they would be implemented, that's truly where the benefit stands for us. We've gone on record of saying what a 1% share of market movement would mean to us. I think it's, you know, I think we still hold true there. There was an interesting wrinkle thrown in, I think just in time for your conference, that there was a delay in the concluding, you know, the concluding arguments, taking place. Originally was supposed to start yesterday and it got pushed to Friday. Everybody's trying to read what that means, if anything. You can all run your ChatGPT searches and see what both parties agreeing to an extension means. but that, you know, that being said, you know, your timeline of, you know, December at the earliest, you know, into next year more likely is probably, you know, what we're, you know, what we're looking at here with both options still being on the table. You know, I think with regard to your point, I think with regard to structural remedies, it's clear and obvious how divesting AdX and separating AdX from GAM would benefit the business and the industry, to a significant degree. I think with the behavioral remedies, perhaps you could remind people of like the one, two, three things that you would really like to see implemented because I think that there it's a little bit opaque and not everybody has kind of the industry expertise. Sure. Just as a reminder, let's remember that what Google has been found guilty of is tying, right? Meaning if you're using my ad server, you got to use my ad exchange and vice versa. You can only. The behavioral remedies will almost certainly be aimed at tying. If I think about a Maslow's hierarchy of needs, what do we want to have happen, right? Some of the first and foremost things are to stop some of the tying behavior, meaning you can use whoever you want. You can set your floor prices however you want if you're an advertiser. All right. A publisher, because many publishers will set one floor price for SSP1, a different floor price for SSP2, a different floor price for Google. They do that for good reason because they're trying to maximize yield. It's a yield management strategy that was taken away because of the illegal tying. You'll minimize that. Number two, you'll minimize some of the data usage and the ability for the data to be an unfair advantage for Google. I would say number three in terms of the Maslow's hierarchy would be routing a bunch of that money through Prebid, which is in a sense, you could think of it as a proxy to go around AdX. Prebid is an industry solution, open source solution. We were one of the co-founders of it. I'm sure people are familiar with it. You can really think about it as that's fair access for everybody. That ensures that the media opportunity is a true, fair jump ball. If you're routing Google spend that way, we think we stand a very good chance of picking up, you know, our fair share, if you will, in a fair auction. The cherry on top that we would love to see would be something about Google's AdWords demand, which is another $14 billion-$15 billion worth of spend. Google somehow, you know, not being able to just radically reroute that over to YouTube or do something with it, but having to continue to spend it in the industry. That's the cherry on top. Those are the hierarchy of needs. I think all of those can be solved with behavioral remedies depending upon how externally the judge chooses to implement those. Structural would be, yeah, kind of, you know, gravy on top of that. Yep. In addition to that case, you're also, you've now entered into civil litigation with Google. I think you're going to seek damages for the, you know, antitrust behavior that they've now found, didn't have been found guilty of. How should we think about the timing of that? I mean, I know it's very early in, in the litigation process, but perhaps you could help people understand how long this is going to take. First, a shout out to you. You put out a nice piece, a month or two ago on. Thanks. Trying to quantify that. I thought that was very, very thoughtful. Yeah. Timing-wise is always challenging. You know, this could extend out a few years. There are some alternate scenarios where Google at a certain point would just want to get this behind them. You could see some kind of a grand deal to just move on. I do not think it is going to be something that is going to be resolved in the near term, but, you know, we will see how that. There's a lot of plaintiffs now, publishers, ad tech companies. It feels like all of this litigation is probably going to have to be rolled up to make it more manageable at some point. Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. I'd love to, you know, we have two minutes left. I'd love to close on kind of capital allocation. You know, you guys have done all different types of M&A deals in the past, right? There's been some small tuck-in acquisitions like Streamer that gives you an additional capability. There was obviously the merger, I don't know if it was actually a merger between Rubicon Project and Telaria, which created Magnite, and then you bought SpotX several years ago. Where are you at today? Are you seeking tuck-ins? Are you looking for bigger deals? Are you more focused on buybacks and returns to shareholders? Where are the capital allocation priorities today? Yeah. Erik, why don't you hit the M&A side and then I'll hit the other. We certainly do not have anything planned that is big M&A. Tuck-in M&A, we are always looking. We have a very high bar for it. We need to be convinced that there is an unlock to one of our main focus areas, which was the case for Streamer. If we find other things like that, we would probably be aggressive there. That is sort of where we stand with M&A. Yeah. On the broader front, certainly we think we're significantly undervalued right now. We have a share repurchase program that's authorized for $88 million. That's certainly on the table. As we look forward, we do have some capital needs. In March, we'll have a $200 million convert that we'll pay down, but we have ample liquidity for that. We'll be focused on some repurchase. We'll keep some powder dry for Erik, so he doesn't feel like he's working in vain there. You know, excited about the cash flow generation ability that we have in the company. Next year, we could generate in excess of $150 million-$175 million in free cash flow. Perfect. I think I'm going to leave the conversation there. We're up on time. Erik, Nick, David, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you, Alec. I appreciate it.