Okay. Well, good afternoon, everybody. We'll get started with our next session. It's my pleasure to introduce Marc Lipschultz, Co-CEO of Blue Owl. With $235 billion in asset management, Blue Owl is one of the fastest-growing alternative asset managers under our coverage, with a deep set of expertise across private credit, leading GP Stakes franchise, and differentiated offerings in real estate. Lots going on in the space. Lots going on for you guys. It's been quite a busy year. So we'll talk a lot about the deals that you've done, the opportunities that you see for Blue Owl in the year ahead, and of course, the environment. So thank you for being here. Always a pleasure to host you. It's great to be here. Always love being with Goldman and being with you. All right. I worked at Goldman. I started my career there. So I heard. Good to be back. Should we talk about that? Should we sit down? I imagine you will not have an interest in that topic. Okay. Well, onto more important topics, I guess. Let's start with your priorities for 2025. As I mentioned, you guys continue to put up some of the best growth in the space. Earnings are tracking north of 20% for 2024. And at the same time, you've done quite a lot of deals, four acquisitions announced across different verticals, right? So you've got alt credit, insurance, most recently also digital infra. So as you pack it all in, what are your top priorities for 2025? So it's such a great time to be here. And I mean it quite sincerely. I always love being at a Goldman event with you. But it's also a particularly good time because we're sort of closing one chapter and opening another. We went public a few years ago. And it has been a tremendously successful time for us. We have grown every key metric at over a 30% compound rate. And that has been also something that we were able to kind of forecast with a lot of precision and speaks to business model. But now we're also kind of entering, okay, what's next? What's the next phase, as per your question? And I would put it in sort of three, not say buckets, but three adjacent attributes. There's diversification, there's scaling, and there's innovation. Those are the three things that are, I think, the clarion calls of 2025 and beyond. That speaks to what we've done organically and inorganically. When I look at the priorities, just to put a little more meat on those bones, scaling is continuing to drive the organic growth of the core businesses that we're in today. We have a market-leading position in our triple net lease, our particular flavor of real estate. We have a market-leading position in direct lending. We have a market-leading position in GP Stakes. In two of those, indisputably the number one position in direct lending, we're fortunate to be one of the leaders. Those are all really great markets, some growing faster than others. Our real estate opportunity set is growing even faster than our direct lending or GP Stakes opportunity set. And so we will continue to scale where we are already an incumbent and an established leader. And I don't say that with any complacency, but I mean just understanding our market position and how you leverage that scale and capability. Now, looking beyond that, those are sort of built off of decisions that we made five and ten years ago, right? So you get to that position today. The other priority as I look into 2025 then, beyond that scaling, is the combination of diversification and innovation, which is, again, either done in-house or done by acquisition, which is to position ourselves today for the places that we think you want to be ten years from now. And that's where things like alternative credit at Atalaya come into the mix. That's where digital infrastructure, our IPI business, hyperscale data centers, that's where that comes into the mix. Those are, by our look, where direct lending was ten years ago. And I think that analogy actually really holds if you even stress test it and unpack it. And I think we can do now with the addition of those capabilities, much like we've already done over the last several years in public form, the last decade since the creation of the business. Got it, so more layers to that cake is what we're saying. More layers to the cake, and just to call that out for the audience, the way we have built our business model, very importantly, because at the end of the day, our job is to deliver shareholder results, shareholder returns. We're not confused by the end state, and part of delivering shareholder results, of course, is being positioned with great products to deliver exceptional results for the LPs, because that leads to this ability to scale into a market leader and continue to grow. But the other thing is nature of the business model. As you know, from inception, the other thing we've done, and maybe it's more different than a lot of people, I imagine, are going to say, "Gee, 2025 feels like a very, very good market environment." It does, but there's a great market environment, and then there's how you capitalize on it. Our layer cake, Alex, as you noted, is about really building layers of permanent capital and building a business that's predicated on earning fees on that permanent capital. Our business, our revenues are all FRE, and 91% generated from permanent capital. That means that every dollar we raise, we actually generate more than three times the FRE one of our peers generates by raising a dollar. Combination of fee rate, duration of capital. So it's a very powerful engine, and I guess I would say it's a very differentiated engine. So yes, we're adding more layers to that layer cake. And when we add one, the business model is for it to stay, and you go up from there. And that gives us a durability that I think is really unique and a predictability. Yeah. Let's talk about that diversification point you mentioned related to the deals. And look, we've all been in this business for a while. Asset management deals are tough to do. They're tough to integrate. It's tough to get the culture right. And you guys have done four of them. So talk a little bit about your integration plans for the next 12 to 18 months. And then most importantly, what are the key kind of objectives? What are the milestones, whether it's revenues or expenses we could see from the outside in, to sort of evaluate whether or not these deals are tracking in line with your expectations? I say this with the due caution of not wanting to play word games, but I would recalibrate this. It's not four acquisitions, but it is true. I mean, of course, it is legally speaking, we've acquired these businesses. But as a matter of practice, I think there's a big distinction. What we have in four cases is had groups of entrepreneurs who have built exceptional investment capabilities and partly scaled their businesses say, "Hey, you know what? I want to join Blue Owl because if I can join up with the Blue Owl team and integrate into this business and this platform, I can do better for my LPs and I can build a bigger, better business." It takes scale today to succeed. I think what we've seen in each of these instances, and we should delineate, some are quite small by number of people. Take Prima, which is our real estate credit business. Again, here's a word, real estate credit. Lots of people would say, "Wow, that's been challenging." Not if you have Prima. Not if you're doing and you're the market leader in the single-asset single-borrower risk retention space, where in its 30-year history, they've had two losses. So there are ways to slice each of these opportunity sets, but it was a very small group of people. They're fully integrated, done and dusted, so to speak. And again, don't say that dismissively. It's just a fact that that team is fully integrated with our real estate team. It is also the case on the credit side. We've already fully integrated at Atalaya alternative credit because it was the whole team saying, "Hey, we want to join and be a part of it." And Ivan Zinn and his partners who founded that business, they're running that business at Blue Owl. We didn't take it and say, "Oh, okay, well, we've got all kinds of new ideas for you." We bought that business as opposed to trying to say, "As many are, do it organically." Why would an investor want to give me money to do it organically if I can have people that have done it for 20 years successfully and have them bought into this integrated Blue Owl culture? So I think when you unpack it, I would look at it as this joining the team as opposed to acquiring. Not that we're opposed to acquiring, but it's pretty different when someone says, "Great, it's all yours." That's, I think, where you see a lot of the damage occur. I gotcha. So when you take that a little bit further out and when you look at your sort of list of priorities, where are acquisitions on your priority list for the next 12-18 months from here? Look, we've got a lot of what we want and need to drive well-outsized growth. I think we have over the last many years meaningfully exceeded the market's growth, and I think we will do that again over the next several years. We have all the pieces we need for that. We don't need to do any more acquisitions. I say that both in terms of to put us in position to win, but also we don't need any more acquisitions to sort of be strategically positioned in the right place. That doesn't mean there aren't things we would do. We have now built a position in digital infrastructure, one of the more interesting areas. Everybody in this conference is going to come and say the word data centers for good reason. It's a hot topic. It's an interesting topic. But I will tell you that if you have the right solution, an IPI, which we acquired, is a truly distinct solution. It's not, "Oh, if I look through all my assets, turns out I own a bunch of data centers." This is a company that ten years ago said hyperscale data centers are a unique animal where there's an opportunity to be the market leader. And they are the market leader. And that's measured by the results they've delivered and the capability. They actually can build, site, build, manage a hyperscale data center in a way that is truly distinct. We have an 800-person operating group that's a part of that complex. And the mismatch, and this is what we saw in private debt direct lending ten years ago, and for sure see in IPI today. We're always looking for places where the supply of capital and the demand of capital are imbalanced in our favor because we know that's how you drive results and it's how you drive growth. And everyone in this room knows hundreds of billions of dollars of capital that the companies, the hyperscalers are going to spend. And we're now in a very distinctive position to meet their needs and as a result, generate really exceptional risk results for our investors. Got it. Okay. Let's turn the page to fundraising. I want to spend a couple of minutes on that. So Owl raised, I think, over $24 billion of capital over the last 12 months. So very good organic growth and pretty well balanced too. I think 13-ish billion wealth and about 11-ish institutional. So looking out into 2025, what are your expectations for fundraising? And I guess more importantly, what are the key building blocks that you would kind of put together to get these results? I don't know if you want to comment on institutional pipeline as well. As part of that, something we have not as much visibility into. So any color there would be helpful. Yeah. Look, fundraising was very successful, and in some regards, I look at fundraising as almost like the output of us doing our job right. If we deliver great results, then we raise a lot of capital, so eye on the prize. The good news is we've delivered great results. When I look at our direct lending businesses, we have now for years and years and years delivered double-digit net results to investors through thick and thin, through times of higher rates and lower rates. Same thing with our real estate business has thrived, our GP Stakes business. So we have the results. That's really important to driving growth. So what's happened though by the diversification, so let's go to that word, and I don't mean just by strategy, but it means we have more times we're in the market to match the needs of our investors. Look, I don't want to sell an investor something they don't want to or shouldn't invest in. But what I do want to do is work with our investors in this ever broader base of wealth investors and institutional investors to match their needs with what we can do distinctively. And the good news is in this world of more downside protected, income-oriented, predictable sort of result products, we have a pretty unique portfolio to offer. So we're matching. I think where a lot of people are looking to go. People have invested for decades now in private equity. They're looking for like, "Okay, but what am I supposed to do now that that market has kind of matured?" And I think that's where our portfolio comes so powerful. So what that means is we now have a series of products, some of which are continuously offered, right? To your point about the wealth channel, we've raised $13 billion in wealth because we have products like our Core Income product or our Tech Income product, both of which are generating double-digit returns for our investors that are always available and are growing tremendously. Then we have our periodic products, and we have a lot more of those now than we had before. Our GP Stakes fund in the market now. We have said we expect to raise $13 billion like we did in the prior fund, and we're well on our way. We have our Real Estate Fund VI, as you know, which we just completed. That was double the size of Real Estate V. It's heavily committed. We'll be back in with Real Estate VII next year. We now have IPI. IPI itself is just closing its third fund. That'll be very successful. We'll close our acquisition in the first quarter. We expect that'll be a $6-$7 billion fund, IPI III. And frankly, again, line of sight, most of that capital with some pretty big users is largely spoken for. So it won't be long before we're back. So again, I don't like to over- it's important for all of us. I don't like to overemphasize fundraising because I don't want to just go raise money, but I do want to raise money where that's going to give us the firepower to deliver a great result for those LPs. And now between continuously offered products and flagship products and taking flagship products and creating the continuously offered versions, we will create a continuously offered version of alternative credit. We will create a continuously offered version of digital infrastructure. Wrap that all together. We have a lot more lines in the water, oars in the water, whatever metaphor you prefer. We'll get to some of the new products in a bit, but I did want to ask you about some of the complementary strategies that you talked about in the past, because if I kind of hark back to your first answer, diversification and scaling. So some of the diversification aspect is being achieved via acquisitions. But then you also talked in the past about secondary business, different credit verticals, geographic expansion. How big of a focus is that for Owl today? Where are you in some of these initiatives? And do you expect any of them to be a meaningful contributor to 2025 fundraising? Yeah, it's a critical focus is the scaling of these, maybe you'll call them the step-out product or the adjacent product organically. So let's take triple net lease, which I was just mentioning in real estate. We observed by virtue of, again, let's follow the customer, our global customers that are saying, "Hey, I don't need to own these real estate assets on my books. I want to be a tenant, but I'll do it for a very long time and give you therefore a very predictable investment experience." They said, "Hey, we're doing it in Europe too." And there's nobody here to work with us. So we've done things episodically in Europe with our incumbent global companies. And we said, "Well, okay, but there are structural differences for sure in Europe. “So let's create Triple Net Lease Europe.” That product, which we just stood up, will achieve its target of $1 billion, I think, early in the new year. That is a heck of a new step forward. Then we'll scale from there. We have our Blue Owl Strategic Equity, GP-led secondaries. Again, trying to look where the world's going. There's way too much money, as you know, trapped in private equity funds. It is a great point of pain for the LP community and a great way to unlock that and do it in a way that GPs are supportive of and can lead to reduced risk in investing in private equity is GP-led secondaries. Again, there we've taken a product, stood it up from scratch in a very nascent market and well on our way to doing a meaningful close on that product. So that'll start to contribute. What's really important about these things is, again, to think about the products that are at scale where when you take a Real Estate seven or a GP Stakes VI, those are the ones that are going to be big increments in finite windows. And then you have to have the billion-dollar products and $2 billion products today that will be the five and $10 billion products five and ten years from now. So we're trying to always make sure that we're putting in place the next step, the next step so that we can continue this pretty unique trajectory off our layer cake. Remember, we're not on the hamster wheel. We don't have to run in place to replace dollars. We keep most of our dollars and then we add the next layer. And those are really nice incremental places to start adding layers. They might be thin layers to begin with, but they're going to be thick layers five years from now. Great. All right. I want to spend a couple of minutes on private credit. Not surprisingly, it's your still biggest vertical. I think it accounts for a little north of 50% of management fees. You guys have had a tremendous amount of success there, you and the industry as a whole, but there are definitely questions around the competitive landscape and really the direction of returns in direct lending, particularly larger size direct lending, just given the amount of spread compression that we are seeing and probably lower base rates at some point of time, rates starting to come down a little bit. You'll layer in acquisitions. Obviously, BlackRock, HPS potentially could infuse a very different competitive force into the market. How are you thinking about your competitive position within all of that? What do you think that means for fees in this product and also really the runway for additional growth? Look, I think the future for private credit is really good. Direct lending, sure, there's competition. I would expect in any marketplace there should be competition. The question is value proposition. There are plenty of people who have tried to be in direct lending and failed. Now, why? It's not because they weren't in the right market, but they didn't have the right value proposition, and undoubtedly today, scale intensity and credibility of established relationships is not only critical, I would say irreplaceable. There are only a few. There are a few. That's why, to be clear, we wake up every day sort of paranoid-driven to sort of move to the next level, but that's why we have 130 people just doing investing in direct lending. That's why we've done well over $100 billion in loans. That's why our loss rate has been running at seven basis points. And sure, spreads go up, spreads come down, but they undulate in a practical range. Here's the beauty of this marketplace. It's just different enough that for the user of the capital, that is to say the private equity firm that's saying, "Hey, I need to borrow money," they care. They care who they get it from. Because remember, part of the proposition they're paying for is that partnership. It is, "I know who my lender is that I get to work with." And that's part of the premium of proposition. So it doesn't matter. You can show up with all the money you want and just about any spread you want. It isn't going to answer that question. But you can't show up with all the money you want and any spread you want. Because when I say it's just different enough, let's also remember it is still substitutable. So what is the proposition for someone new to say, "Okay, I get it. There's a few really scaled players. I'd like to be one of those too." What's the pitch to the LP? I'm going to do better than seven basis point loss rates. I'm going to beat them by undercutting them on rates. I mean, neither of those are particularly convincing propositions. And I think reflect what you see today. Structure hasn't actually changed that much. There's a lot of people in the lower end of the market. At the large end of the market, it's a lot of very familiar names. The big have gotten bigger, ourselves included. But there's a structural reason for that, and it's actually pretty defensible. So look, at the end of the day, if you have a group of pretty capable and disciplined investors with not wildly dissimilar costs of capital, it tends to create kind of a practical band, right? At the end of the day, we have no desire to lend below a spread that allows us to meet that expectation of our investor. And I doubt other good players do either. Everyone will do what they want to do, but they have investors that are probably looking for a somewhat common experience. And so I think at the end of the day, the structure is actually quite healthy. And what more and more people are realizing is the private answer works. And sure, I preferred the spreads two years ago, but I prefer the volume today. I mean, through the first nine months of this year, we literally have, I think it's four times the origination of the year before that. But it's true that spreads are lower today. But if we can keep operating, would I prefer to deliver a 12% return to an 11% return? Of course. But as long as we're delivering a very attractive premium to that liquid market, and we are, then I think our future is quite bright, not just ours, but the industry. One last comment. You talked about spread compression or the large end of the market, and I'm going to say with a lot of conviction, the large end of the market in private credit is a way better place to be. Period, full stop. As a matter of being an LP investor. Now, we could debate where people might convince investors to put their capital. That might be a different GP question. But it's all about credit performance. And I can tell you, because we see the lower end of the market, it's always available to us. The spreads are not meaningfully better or at all better, and the credits are decidedly inferior. It doesn't make it a bad business. I'm just saying if I had to take $1 and put it somewhere, you're going to put it in the large cap market. I gotcha. Okay. Staying with credit, I want to talk about insurance for a few minutes here. So that was one of the acquisitions you made, Kuvare. It was an interesting transaction. Came with $20 billion of IMA and opportunity to roll about, I think, $3 billion of assets to Owl and to Owl's products over time. I guess, can you frame how Kuvare is likely to grow in the marketplace, how you could grow with them? What is kind of their edge? What is the competitive advantage there? And how are you thinking about using this really as a platform to target third-party insurance companies? Your numbers are spot on, as always. It's about a $20 billion asset base that came. Let me start by saying this. Blue Owl Insurance Solutions is very much, I'd say, a Blue Owl approach and flavor to this topic of insurance. I mean, we're certainly not the first ones to talk about insurance by a country mile. But adding, as we have an institutional pathway for capital to come in and for us to meet their needs. Wealth, we started that 10 years ago. Everyone's interested in it today, but people looked at us like we were half crazy when we started doing it 10 years ago. In insurance, we've made a very specific kind of approach, as you said. What we bought from Kuvare is the asset management business that is dedicated and purpose-built to serve insurance companies. We are not competing with insurance companies. We're not talking about integration, and you talk about risks. You integrate a traditional insurance company with an alt manager. I mean, that is far from a riskless or obvious cultural compatibility. And by the way, there's an element of arrogance on Wall Street, I'm sure we're all aware. I mean, I'm not sure why someone who's great at private equity would also be terrific at underwriting insurance policies. I mean, I think we got to be mindful of what we're really great at and can do really well. We manage assets really well, and we'd prefer not to spend our time actually trying to be in the insurance business. Partner with Kuvare, just like we do in other areas. We don't compete with private equity firms. We serve them as a capital provider. So I think we keep an eye on the idea of how do we help our customers be better at their business, not how do we compete with our customer, which I think leads to some obvious problems and tensions. So in insurance, I see a lot of growth two ways. One, Kuvare will continue to grow. Kuvare has been literally over the last five years one of the fastest growing companies in annuity issuance. We don't own them, but they're a standalone business and they have big ambitions. And as they grow, that capital flow comes to us. In addition, though, we are now talking to other insurance companies and we've gotten a very warm reception on this idea of, look, what you all want and what you all need is access to originated deal flow. Investment-grade, well, we have that because of our asset management or asset-backed business. And you want non-investment-grade, probably put in things like rated-note form, insurance-efficient form. Okay, we've got that. In Blue Owl, before the insurance business, we had 70 different insurance investors. So we have all these pieces. When you put them together, we now have something I would dare call unique, which is we're a scaled alternative provider with a scaled and dedicated, here's how we can offer a solution that incorporates originated private capital to you, an insurance company, and we're not out there to eat your lunch. We're out there to help you do your business better. So we're going to do it that way. And then inorganic, so to speak, which is we're certainly happy to provide capital. We're a balance sheet-like business. So I say that with obviously the appropriate boundaries on that statement. But like we do Kuvare, we gave them a bit of equity capital. We'll give other people a bit of equity capital where we think that will allow them, again, to support an outstanding business they have, which in turn feeds our business as their asset management partner. On that point, when you think about third-party insurance company opportunities, do those come and I'm not sure how much you have in the pipeline that you can talk about, but do they come with IMA or what you're largely talking about, just kind of more of a separate account relationship where they will give you a piece of their portfolio to manage, whether it's direct lending, asset-backed finance, or something like that? Understanding that every situation is bespoke, I think the template model is IMA-oriented, which is we'll help support your growth. But part of the way we support your growth is the capital. But the partners we need are the people that say, "But that's not just what I need. What I also want is a superior ability to deliver ROE as an insurance company. So what I need is originated capital opportunities." Again, in this world, particularly of lower risk, yield-oriented, insurance-friendly solutions, that's exactly what Blue Owl does. I mean, we have nearly $250 billion, and nearly all of it lives in this world of products that are much more about downside management and whether by current form or with the right structures put on them are quite good for insurance companies. So our scale capabilities match their needs. So we're going to give them, where appropriate, we'll give them some capital. The main thing we're going to do is give them a better ROE. I gotcha. So more of like a Kuvare type of playbook with other scale. Yeah. Okay. All right. Let's talk about wealth. We could spend probably half an hour on that alone. But obviously, you guys have expanded your product suite nicely. OCIC and OTIC, ORENT continue to gain traction. What else is coming up in terms of product creation? I know you hit on Atalaya a little bit. So what should we expect in the next 12-18 months to hit the shelf? I have a separate question on distribution, but why don't we get to this one first? Sure. So look, the key again for wealth is twofold. One is an intense investment in the infrastructure and establishing. This word partnership will come up a lot, but I think it matters, particularly in the wealth channel. We get it. We all understand. Everybody would like to be in the wealth channel now. But the thing about the wealth channel is it takes a tremendous amount of infrastructure. We have probably 150 people just to support that business. And importantly, it takes shelf space. This is not a case where, great, I have a group of folks whose job is to look at 100 funds and then pick through them all as an institution might do. The job for, I think, in partnership with Goldman Sachs, we've been lucky enough to work with, or other banks, is for them to find a partner that is going to deliver a great result and a great experience and understands, has the DNA to do it. We didn't add individual investors or wealth as like, "Oh, well, that'd be nice to do too on top of our institutional business." We created this 10 years ago as a true peer relationship, and it shows. And I think it's allowed us today, as you know, depending on how you want to measure it, gross net, we're number one or number two in the entire wealth business in the world in doing this. And we intend that has a lot of incumbent advantage. Now, the thing about the wealth business, though, in products is there's going to be a tremendous proliferation, but not every product belongs in continuously offered form. Not every product belongs in this wealth channel. But products that are more durable, more stable, and more income-oriented, they do belong in this channel because people get the return as they go. It's not, "Hey, I owe you, but only if you ask for your money back." And so I think this market is going to have some evolution. There's some subtleties people are going to start to pick up on. But in any case, to be very specific, product like alternative credit, asset-backed credit is a perfect marriage because, of course, it's the direct corollary to direct lending. But direct lending, those spaces are now occupied. Thankfully, we occupy one of them. Those are occupied. No platform really needs another direct lending answer. But they almost all need a good alternative asset answer married with someone who's a proven partner to them. Same thing with digital infrastructure, data centers. IPI is by far the most advanced in actually delivering a third-party investor solution to particularly invest in the hyperscale data centers. And that could sound narrow, but that's a many hundred billion dollar market with, by the way, people whose credit is as good as sovereign credits. So you talk about risk management, data centers alone don't tell you anything. A data center that has a short-term tenant that's an SMB business, I mean, it might be fine, but I don't think we should confuse that with Microsoft, whose credit rating is quite literally better than the U.S. government. A 15-year deal with Microsoft, which is the kind of thing we do, I mean, that is a really interesting place to be. We will bring that to the wealth channel as well. Is that likely a 2025 event, or do you think it takes longer? No, I think that we're hard at work on that. I think there's a lot of demand for it. And look, everything takes time. I don't want to suggest 2025 is still a year about how do we already know 2025, as you know, the way our business is built. We're in a great place to deliver very attractive growth in 2025. A lot of what I'm talking about, it's important for us to get it done so that we sustain that kind of growth in 2027, 2028. None of what I'm talking about matters for 2025. Matters strategically, but not financially. On the distribution side, so you guys made a lot of traction with the wires with your existing product. It's hard to get to them. And to your point, it requires a lot of resources, a lot of scale. So it's a big competitive advantage. How are you thinking about expanding distribution more broadly? It feels like the appetite from some of the independent broker dealers is widening. We hear folks, anybody from LPL to Schwab, talk about creating a platform for alt products to be offered on their distribution network. How big of an opportunity is that for you guys? How are you structuring for that? And when is that likely to come online? Yeah, you're absolutely right. The definition of available market continues to grow. And in fact, a channel that we have a long history with, the RIA channel, in fact, family offices writ large, but those are, of course, multifamily, so to speak, have been a part of our origin story. The RIA businesses are consolidating and becoming enormous platforms. And again, we have the benefit of having worked there for quite a long time. And it's a very good marriage to a lot of these kinds of products because they have investors. They're very sophisticated, both their advisors and their clients, saying, "Okay, but how do I get the benefits of these alternatives, but do it in a way that's diversifying?" And that's where the marriage comes in. So you're absolutely right, of course. The IBDs, in fact, our earliest wealth products, we're going into those original IBDs and saying, "Okay, look, yes, you've had a pretty unpleasant experience with," which they had, "with these advisor, sub-advisor models." But the problem is the way they're being run. It's not the construct. It's not having a BDC, which was an exotic word 10 years ago and now common parlance. And that was really how we started the business, was to go to the Ameriprise of the world and say, "If you do this right, you and your clients end up better off." And that's exactly what's happened. So yeah, that is absolutely part of the continued expansion. So for us, the expansion, to be precise, is really more about introducing products that are on a finite number of platforms to more, like ORENT. ORENT, a winning product, but it's young. We only brought it into being, but a good example after we acquired Oak Street, like we will do with alt credit, like we will do with digital infrastructure. And by the way, that's a huge product now. We have over $4 billion of equity in that product. It's a lot. I mean, remember, that's not far from the size of the flagship fund. So we can do these things where we bring the right product into the market, and that allows us to get the growth by adding more distribution. And then international is a big one for us. We have been growing our footprint of our team internationally. And of course, it's a lot of the same institutions, but you have to tailor products. We've now tailored, for example, an access point to our Core Income product that allows people to invest in Canadian dollars and eliminate all the currency management risk. It's a really innovative deal structure. We're going to be doing things like that for other markets. So there's ways for us to broaden the offerings internationally. So I think it's global expansion, and it's moving the current products into more places. Core Income is probably available in most of those platforms, not all the RIAs, but the big wirehouses. But something like ORENT is relatively new, and asset-managed alternative assets and digital infrastructure truly will be brand new. Yeah. Okay. So more to come on that. Okay. We're unfortunately out of time. I would love to keep chatting, but we're going to end it here. Thank you. Marc, thank you very much. Thank you. Happy holidays to everyone.