Welcome, and thank you for joining the SBA first quarter 2025 results. This call is being recorded. All participant audio lines are in listen-only mode. There will be a Q&A session at the end of prepared remarks. At that time, you can dial pound two on your phone to enter the question queue. With that, I'll turn the call over to Mark DeRussy, Vice President of Finance. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good evening, and thank you for joining us for SBA's first quarter 2025 earnings conference call. Here with me today are Brendan Cavanagh, our President and Chief Executive Officer, and Marc Montagner, our Chief Financial Officer. Some of the information we will discuss on this call is forward-looking, including but not limited to any guidance for 2025 and beyond. In today's press release and in our SEC filings, we detail material risks that may cause our future results to differ from our expectations. Our statements are, as of today, April 28, that we have no obligation to update any forward-looking statement we may make. In addition, our comments will include non-GAAP financial measures and other key operating metrics. The reconciliation of and other information regarding these items can be found in our supplemental financial data package, which is located on the landing page of our investor relations website. With that, I'll now turn it over to Brendan. Great. Thank you, Mark, and good afternoon. 2025 got off to a good start in the first quarter. Results were broadly in line with our estimates, and activity levels continued to demonstrate a healthy level of growth. In the U.S., our mobile network operator customers continued growing their level of network investment around our macro tower sites. We had our best quarter going back several years in terms of new domestic leasing business signed up during the quarter. Most encouraging, though, is that our leasing backlog also grew from December 31, meaning we are adding new applications at a greater pace than we are signing up new business. This bodes well for the balance of the year. We also continue to see a higher percentage of our new U.S. leasing business coming from new lease colocations versus amendments to existing leases. Our U.S-based services business had a great quarter as well, with activity levels and results ahead of our expectations. We also saw our new business backlog grow for services during the quarter. As a result of the strong start to the year and our growing backlog, we have increased our full-year outlook for services. In our international markets, we also saw a positive start to the year with solid leasing activity. In addition, elevated CPI rates in some of our markets have presented the potential for better existing lease escalations during the year. Across our markets, our customers have many network goals, which will require continued investment. Macro sites remain the most effective and cost-efficient way to advance wireless coverage and deploy new spectrum and technologies. Our portfolio is well-positioned to capture growth from these initiatives over the next several years. In addition to our operational achievements during the quarter, we also made progress in the areas of portfolio management and capital allocation. During the quarter, we completed our exit from the Philippines, and on last quarter's earnings call, we announced our planned exit from Colombia. We were able to finalize the required steps to complete this exit and formally sold our Colombian operations prior to quarter end. These steps have allowed us to improve our focus and allocation of resources. We continue to evaluate all of our operations to identify ways to improve our market positioning or gain further synergies. In addition, during the first quarter, we closed on a small portion of the Central American sites previously put under a purchase agreement with Millicom International. While there are numerous regulatory and diligence steps remaining, we will continue to explore opportunities for additional early closings. Against the backdrop of the current uncertain macroeconomic environment and the resulting market volatility, the stability and consistency of our company and our business stand out. We have not experienced, nor do we foresee, any direct impacts from the current tariff policies. Our business continues to generate steady cash flow, and the underlying needs of our customers remain robust. As a result, we have significant confidence in our company and our future. Subsequent to quarter end, we have demonstrated that confidence by repurchasing 583,000 shares of our stock at an average price per share of $210.87. We have also announced today that our board has approved a new $1.5 billion share repurchase plan, supporting our ability to return significant value to our shareholders. The combination of this plan and our industry-leading dividend growth provides a direct line of shareholder returns, while our existing capital structure allows us the flexibility to still pursue meaningful asset investment opportunities. We are very well-positioned. For the balance of 2025, SBA will be focused on operational execution, driving efficiencies in our processes, particularly through the incorporation of new technologies and systems, enhancing our relevance to and relationships with our largest customers, and bringing a balance of entrepreneurial spirit and informed financial discipline to capital allocation and expansion. Some of these focus areas may seem straightforward or mundane, but our ability to excel in each of these areas will be what sets SBA apart from our peers. The wireless ecosystem will continually evolve, providing new opportunities for those willing to take them. I believe we have the people, experience, and DNA makeup to maximize these opportunities. Before turning it over to Marc, I'd like to thank our team members who represent that experience and DNA. Our team members represent SBA well every day and continually put the goals and objectives of our customers first. I look forward to sharing our progress with you throughout the balance of the year. With that, I'll turn it over to Marc, who will provide additional details on our results. Thank you, Brendan. Given the solid start to the year, we are increasing our full-year outlook for all key metrics, including site leasing revenue, tower cash flow, adjusted EBITDA, AFFO, and AFFO per share as compared to our initial 2025 guidance. The primary drivers of these increases include inline first quarter result, the closing of a small portion of the acquisition of towers from Millicom earlier than expected, an improved outlook for services, slightly higher straight- line revenue due to the extension of some leases, and a reduction in the share count from recently completed buybacks. First quarter domestic organic leasing revenue growth over the first quarter of last year was 5.2% on a gross basis, 1% on a net basis, including 4.2% of churn. $20 million of our first quarter churn was related to the Sprint consolidation, which we anticipate to be approximately $50-$52 million for the full year 2025. Our previously provided estimate of aggregate Sprint-related churn over the next seven years remains unchanged. Beyond 2025, we anticipate approximately $50 million in 2026 and $20 million thereafter. Non-Sprint related domestic annual churn continues to be between 1%-1.5% of our domestic site leasing revenue. During the first quarter, 80% of consolidated cash site leasing revenue was denominated in U.S. dollars. International organic leasing revenue growth for the first quarter, which is calculated on a constant currency basis, was 1.6% net, including 5.6% of churn or 7.2% on a gross basis. Total international churn remained elevated in the first quarter mostly due to carrier consolidation. We believe that post-carrier consolidation in some of our international markets, the remaining wireless operators will be stronger and in a better position to invest for the long term. This will support a steady growth rate for our operation in those countries. During the first quarter of 2025, we acquired 344 sites for total cash consideration of $58 million, mostly related to the acquisition of sites from Millicom in Nicaragua. The contribution to the 2025 outlook from closing earlier than previously assumed is $4 million of site leasing revenue and $3 million of tower cash flow. The remaining 6,700 sites related to the Millicom transaction remain under contract, and the guidance continues to assume a September 1 closing date. The closing date is dependent upon regulatory approval and other requirements and may differ from this date. We also built 67 new sites in the quarter, mostly outside of the U.S. Our balance sheet remains strong, and we have ample liquidity from both cash on the balance sheet and a fully undrawn $2 billion revolver. The recent share buybacks were funded fully with excess cash and did not require any borrowing. Our current leverage of 6.4 turns, net debt to adjusted EBITDA, remains near historical low. At the end of the first quarter, our weighted average interest rate was 3.7% across our total outstanding debt, and our weighted average maturity was approximately four years. Including the impact of our current interest rate hedge, the interest rate on 98% of our current outstanding debt is fixed. Finally, our next debt maturity is a $750 million ABS security due in January of 2026. Now, let me turn the call over to Mark. Thank you, Marc. We ended the quarter with $12.5 billion of total debt and $11.8 billion of net debt. As Marc mentioned, our net debt to annualized adjusted EBITDA leverage ratio was 6.4 times below the low end of our target range. Our first quarter net cash interest coverage ratio of adjusted EBITDA to net cash interest expense remained strong at 4.9 times. During the second quarter, we repurchased 583,000 shares of our common stock for $123 million at an average price per share of $210.87. On April 27, 2025, the company's board of directors authorized a new $1.5 billion share repurchase plan, replacing the prior plan that was authorized in October of 2021, which had a remaining authorization of $82 million. This new plan authorizes the company to purchase from time to time up to $1.5 billion of our outstanding Class A common stock. The new plan has no time deadline and will continue until otherwise modified or terminated by the board of directors. In addition, during the first quarter, we declared and paid a cash dividend of $122.3 million, or $1.11 per share. Today, we announced that our board of directors declared a quarterly dividend of $1.11 per share, payable on June 17, 2025, to shareholders of record as of the close of business on May 22, 2025. This dividend represents an increase of approximately 13% over the dividend paid in the second quarter of 2024 and approximately 35% of the midpoint of our full-year AFFO outlook. Operator, we are now ready for questions. As we move to Q&A, please dial pound two to enter the question queue. Your name and affiliation will be announced when it's your turn to speak, and your line will be unmuted. You may ask your question at that time. Our first question comes from Jim Schneider, Goldman Sachs. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. Maybe first, on the overall carrier environment, it sounds like fairly constructive commentary on the direction of travel here. Maybe you just - was wondering if you could comment on any updates in terms of carriers' plans in the U.S. and their willingness to devote any capacity to fixed wireless access as far as you can see at this point. Secondly, on the capital allocation front, the buyback of $1.5 billion was encouraging to see. How are you thinking about just the overall environment for capital allocation at this point? Rates are obviously probably a little bit higher than you might have thought 6, 9, 12 months ago. How are you thinking about the refinancing needs potentially for 2026 and the level of buybacks you'd want to do right now, assuming nothing changes in the rates environment today? Thank you. Sure, Jim. On the carrier environment overall, as you heard in our prepared comments and in our press release, things are generally pretty positive here in the U.S. There's a lot of work to be done. We're seeing a greater amount of leasing activity than we've seen over the last two years. Broadly, we feel very positive about that. The fact that the backlogs continue to grow is an indication that there's still a lot of work to be done. As I said in my comments, that's perhaps the most encouraging thing. In terms of the specifics of what they're focused on and fixed wireless access, our belief is that fixed wireless access is certainly a contributing factor when you look at our customers' recent reports. On their own results, you saw that that's where a significant portion of their subscriber growth is coming from. We know that that is a very heavy broadband-consuming product, and therefore it drives a lot of usage of the capacity of the network and therefore would be a driver of the need for incremental investment in their networks and infrastructure. I can't tell you specifically because it's using the same frequencies and spectrum, generally speaking, as their mobile network, but we do think it's a driver. There are many drivers, so we just feel good about the pickup and activity. On the second question around capital allocation, rates are certainly staying higher here for longer. It's hard to say for sure, obviously, in the current environment as to when we'll see rates moving lower, if we'll see rates moving lower. Our positioning is very good. As you heard, our leverage position today is well below where we've historically carried our leverage balance. As a result, that gives us a lot of flexibility. We did buy back shares because we saw the opportunity to do it here in April as there was some dislocation around some of the announcements that were affecting the market more broadly. We took advantage of that. I think if we see additional opportunities, we'll continue to take advantage of it. The new plan that was put in place by our board is evidence that we expect to be allocating capital towards share repurchases. As we said in the past, you should expect that our approach to capital allocation should be really a mix of buybacks, new asset investments where we see good opportunities, and debt repayments in addition, of course, to our dividends. It hasn't really changed, and we're pretty comfortable with our positioning to be able to be flexible and adjust as opportunities present themselves. Thank you. Sure. All right. Moving on to Jonathan Atkin from RBC Capital Markets. Thanks. I was curious about, just given what you said about the current activity level, the backlog, where do you think you might end the year on a run rate basis for U.S. leasing? Any kind of approximate metrics you could share with us? Yeah. I mean, it's a little hard to say absolutely at this point because I got to see how things continue to build, but I certainly would expect to end at a higher level than we're at in terms of what we produced here in the first quarter. That was approximately $9 million from new leases and amendments here in the U.S. I definitely expect to be higher than that when we get to the fourth quarter, but I'll refrain from giving an absolute number there until we see how the rest of the year progresses. Secondly, I was interested just where you stand in terms of the bilateral contracting relationships you have with major customers in terms of pay-by-the-drink for things like amendments, colocations, and just give us kind of a refresh on MLAs. Yeah. We have, I wish we not typically had the kind of holistic MLAs that you're referring to. We've always had master lease agreements in place with our customers, but they've usually been equipment-specific in terms of how they've paid us for the use of our sites. The exception to that was the deal we did with AT&T a couple of years ago, which was more of a holistic approach. We're open to a holistic approach with our customers, but it really is just dependent on the specific give and take within the negotiations around those agreements. We'll just have to see how it goes. At this point, the only true holistic agreement we have in the U.S. is the one that we signed with AT&T a couple of years ago. Thanks very much. Sure. Our next call comes from Batya Levi, UBS. Great. Thank you. A couple of quick questions. First, can you talk a little bit about what's driving higher network services business versus what you had expected earlier in the year? When we look at domestic churn, it looks like it's picked up a little bit, excluding Sprint. What were some of the drivers for that? Maybe on the M&A front, a couple of tower portfolios are available for sale in Canada. You have some exposure to the region there, slower growth market, but can you provide some color on how you would approach M&A in Canada? Thank you. Sure. First question was on services and why it's growing faster than we expected. Really, it's as simple as one of our customers in particular just operating at a much faster pace than we had even expected here in terms of their network investments. We're just seeing them, frankly, just move quicker. It's kind of that simple. I would expect, based on the backlogs growing, that they'll continue to keep a fast pace during the rest of the year, and that's why we raised our outlook for the full year. We'll continue to try to meet their needs and keep up with them. On the U.S. churn, you said it was growing. It's basically in line with what we put out at the beginning of the year, so I don't think it's beyond what our expectations were. I don't know if you're asking about year over year, but it's not that. No. I guess, yeah, it's within the range you've given. It's just picked up slightly versus the last two quarters. Maybe it used to be around 1%. I think that's really just a timing thing. If you look at our full-year outlook, we didn't change it. I think the implied percentage for the full year for the U.S. is around 1.2%. It was 1.4% in the first quarter, so you should take that to imply that it'll be a little bit lower at other points during the rest of the year. On the Canada side, really, we approached that the way we approach most major M&A opportunities and portfolios that come to market anywhere really around the globe, particularly, obviously, in the markets where we already have operations. We will look thoroughly at any of those opportunities. If we can see value there and see it at a price point that we think makes sense and is competitive and is better, then certainly we'll be interested in pursuing that. I think you've heard us talk about our approach to our international markets over the last year or so in terms of what we'd like our positioning to be. Obviously, in Canada, if you have the mobile network operators up there divesting of their towers, whoever ends up buying those will certainly be in a lead position in terms of their size and scale in the market. That would be something that we would consider in our analysis of any deal. At this stage, you should expect that we'll look at any opportunities that come to market. I can't say whether it'll work or not, but if it does, it's something we will certainly pursue. Got it. Thank you. Next caller, Walter Piecyk, LightShed. Mr. Piecyk, your line is unmuted. Please make sure your phone isn't muted. What about now? Hey, now I hear you. I can hear you now. Sorry about that. I guess I'll ask about our friends at DISH. I think there were some press reports about them wanting to lease or looking to lease their spectrum. I think it might have been some rural areas, so maybe there's no impact there. In general, can you just characterize kind of what they've told you about some of their longer-term plans, what role you may play? Alternatively, I suppose, has there been any inbounds from cable companies who might be considering Spectrum that's available in the market and want to redeploy on their own? I would guess that they want to do a little due diligence ahead of that to see what type of expenses that they want to take on. I mean, basically, the same question about DISH. Yeah. Yeah. You're probably not going to love my answer because there's not a lot of detail to offer there. I'll take the cable one first. There really hasn't been much in the way of direct conversation. We talk to them periodically, but there's nothing really along the lines of what you just described. I think until they have something firmer in hand, they frankly don't really need to spend a lot of time talking to the tower companies just yet. We'll see if that develops. Can I just interject on that one before you go back? Sure. Even on CBRS, because I think Comcast has made mention, at least in some investor meetings, that the initial attempt with CBRS might have been tied to a vendor that didn't really deliver. They moved to, I think it was Samsung or something. I know a lot of that's kind of in home, but I thought there was an opportunity, especially with the current FCC, to increase the power ability of CBRS for them to start hitting towers. No even early indications of them looking to try and offload the rising expense at Verizon? Very limited Walt. I mean, we have conversations with them. We've actually talked with them about CBRS over the years at various times. But when I look at it from a materiality standpoint to us, it's really completely immaterial. Got it. On the flip side, like the DISH, what do you have, have you seen this stuff about them leasing out their spectrum in rural? Does that touch any part of your contract? Otherwise, what are they saying in terms of their intermediate-term plans, let's call it? Yeah. At this stage, there hasn't really been any specific conversations in terms of the leasing. If they do lease their spectrum, their contract doesn't allow for that to change since somebody else's hand. There would have to be a conversation, and we've not had that conversation as of yet. In terms of just their broader commentary and feedback with us, we work pretty closely with them. They, on the operations side, are very clear about their desire to continue to pursue their standalone greenfield network. At this stage, obviously, things are much slower in terms of leasing activity with them. We're hopeful that that changes. At this stage, it's really just meeting some very basic needs. There's some basic upgrades going on. They are signing a few leases here and there, but it's pretty small at this stage. I don't have much feedback for you there either, but I'll be interested to hear what they have to say on their call. Got it. Thanks. Sorry for the technical difficulties. Nope. No worries. Thanks. Okay. Moving on to Michael Rollins from Citi. Thanks. Good afternoon. Two topics, if I could. First, on the international front, just curious if you could share an update on how the visibility is trending for organic growth as well as the churn dynamics, specifically in Latin America, both for this year and over the next few years. Second, I was just looking at the supplemental, and thanks for the refresh that I think you began on this last quarter. The supplemental, looking at the straight-line revenue. What caught my attention was the straight-line revenue is negative this year for the first time in like five years and goes more negative next year. As these contracts, on average, are getting further into their life, does that increase the potential for some renewals? Is that something that could significantly just impact the way GAAP results look over the next few years that might be different than what the schedule is currently inferring? Let me try to answer that second one first while I'm thinking about it. I don't think so. I mean, basically, if you think about what straight-line revenue is, it's essentially revenue that, from an accounting standpoint, we're booking, but we haven't actually received the cash. Eventually, it's going to all go negative and reverse out and end up at zero cumulatively. I think what you're seeing is that as we've had less new leases and moved further in terms of the dates and the timing of our portfolio as it gets more mature, you should expect that it would move back towards that sort of break-even point. Now, having said that, we are signing more new leases today, and perhaps that will have an impact. As we, in some cases, extend out the length of the terms, we'll see some adjustments up. Actually, that did happen in the first quarter. We extended some leases out, so that pushes the timing. I do not think that there is anything to be read into it other than just we are a more mature business, and we are in a more mature place in terms of our lifecycle with our biggest customers. It is going to move up and down over time. Eventually, if you went to the end of time, it would be zero cumulatively. The other question was on international, I think, Mike, right? Organic growth and churn, is that what your question was on? Dynamics? Exactly. Yeah. The visibility into this year as well as into the next few years as you're managing through some of the Latin American churn dynamics. Yeah. Each market is a little different. In some of the markets, we have experienced churn over the last few years due to consolidations, and we're pretty close to being on the other side of that. In a number of markets, we are on the other side of it. If you look across many of our Central American markets, you had that consolidation take place. You had most of the right-sizing of those leases happen as a result of that. I think we're going to be in a good spot there. Actually, you're going to have carriers that are more interested in their network development and investing further in their networks. Therefore, we're going to actually see some pickup in activity in that area. In other spots, like in Brazil, we're really just kind of in the throes of the consolidation impacts and everything that comes with that. We talked about it a bunch over the last year or so. Everybody knows that Oi was replaced by the other three carriers, taking a piece of them, each of them. That leaves a lot of overlap and a lot of rationalization that needs to take place. We are seeing that take place. We're also still seeing the impacts of the Nextel acquisition by Claro. That was done years ago. I would say for the next few years, we probably will see some elevated churn internationally as a result of those dynamics. I think the hidden cost of that is not just the churn, but it is the fact that that rationalization takes a lot of the focus of the existing carriers. The organic growth in terms of new lease-up is also impacted, I think, a little bit by that. I would say the next few years will probably be a slower growth period in Brazil in particular, which is the lion's share of our international business. As we move beyond that, based on what we've seen in other markets, including the U.S., by the way, I would expect there to be an acceleration of leasing activity as we start to get further down the maturity cycle of that process. Thanks. Sure. Before we move on to our next caller, just a reminder to our audience, if you'd like to ask a question and enter the question queue, please dial pound two on your telephone keypad. Next caller is Matt Niknam from Deutsche Bank. Hey, guys. Thanks so much for taking the questions. Just two, if I could. First, on the macro front, I'm wondering if sales cycles, conversations with carrier customers, particularly in the U.S., are lengthening at all, or are you seeing carriers even potentially reevaluating spending plans in light of what's developing into a choppier macro backdrop? Just secondly, on the U.S. as well, if you can give us any color on the mix of colo relative to amendment for new lease assigned in 1Q and how that compares to prior quarters. Thanks. Yeah. The answer to your first question, Matt, is we have not seen an impact on any of our sales or leasing discussions with our customers. I also think that it is pretty fresh, and it's not something that I can swear won't take place over the coming months. I do feel very good in the sense that we obviously have no direct impact from tariffs. Our carrier customers have limited, relative to most companies here, international companies, in particular. The impacts on our carrier customers are very limited. I think we're not going to see a lot because there's still such significant network needs, and there's a competitive dynamic that exists among our customers that I think is also favorable to continued investment. We'll have to see how the macro environment around this topic evolves and where it ends up going. Obviously, there's a possibility that it has an impact. As of today, we've not seen any of that. Your second question was colos versus amendments, right? That's right. Yeah. We have definitely seen a pickup in the colocation. That started last year and has continued into this period now where we are seeing the vast majority, actually, of new revenue added in the U.S. coming from new lease colocations versus amendments. I do not actually have the percentage handy to give you, but that is something our team could probably provide to you in a follow-up call afterwards. Most of it is coming from new leases. Based on the backlogs and the way they are building, I would expect that to continue for the balance of the year. Thank you. Our next caller is Nick Del Deo from MoffettNathanson. Please go ahead. Oh, thanks for taking my questions. First, Brendan, in your prepared remarks, you noted that driving efficiencies through new technologies and systems was a priority for the year. Can you expand on that at all and maybe frame some of the areas that you're looking at, the sorts of savings that you're expecting? Second, you decommissioned a lot of towers overseas this quarter. Is that all Oi-related, or are there other drivers, anything we should be aware of there? How should that trend in the coming periods? Sure. Yeah. On the efficiencies, we are, I mean, this is stuff that you should expect that we would be doing anyway, Nick, but I call it out because it's an internal-focused area that we are definitely spending some time on. We have a number of new systems that we are putting in place in various areas of our business, some on the operational and front-end side around leasing, others around back-office operations, including our ERP systems getting a total refresh. As we do that and we incorporate AI and other things into the solutions that we're providing, we will look for efficiencies in the way that we run these processes. I think through that, we will actually gain not only cost savings, but opportunities to drive additional revenue sources as well. It's too early at this point to probably quantify that for you. Over time, I would hope that I'll be able to give you some idea of places where we've actually realized real savings that make an impact on the financials. Only because you mentioned—sorry to jump in. You mentioned the ERP system. I know sometimes that's been problematic for some companies when they change that out. Do you feel comfortable for a risk profile? Because that's typically a big change for folks. I do. It is a big change, and it's actually a multi-year project. I feel very good about where we are today and the progress we're making on that. Yes. Okay. Okay. Good. No worries. Yep. Okay. The decommissioning question? Yeah, the decommissioning. Just to be sure that we're clear, because you probably are looking at the total number for international, that includes the divestitures of Colombia and the Philippines, which took place. Just to be clear, that's the vast majority of the year on sites. Oh, okay. Okay. Oh, okay. Okay. Right. Okay. Yeah. Okay. If you strip that out, though, we are decommissioning some sites, primarily in Brazil. That is, it is in association with the Oi consolidation, where we're seeing places where we have naked towers that we don't think have much promise. Sorry. In those cases, we'll take those towers down to save the cost. Most of that number is the sale, those two countries. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you, Brendan. Sure. Next question is from Eric Luebchow from Wells Fargo. Please go ahead. Thanks for taking the question. Brendan, I think you talked a little bit about the increasing colo mix in your backlog. Any sense for you have for how much might be related to regulatory requirements that certain carriers have that have a specific time those need to be deployed versus kind of any early signs of densification in your footprint from early mid-band deployments? Yeah. First, since you gave me the opportunity here, go back and answer Matt's question on the actual percentages. It was about 75% of the new leasing business signed up in the first quarter in the U.S. came from colos as opposed to amendments. To your question, it's a mix of things. Definitely, the regulatory requirements is a part of it. I only know that with confidence because when we look at at least one of our carrier customers and we look at the locations and sort of the more rural nature of some of those, that gives us a pretty good sense of what they're trying to accomplish there. It's really hard to say in every case because they have real network needs in all these different spots. Whether it's for a commercial reason or a regulatory reason, sometimes we don't have that clarity. I would expect that we'll continue to see a balance of both of those factors as a driver. Okay. Great. Appreciate that. On the services guide uplift, I believe you over-indexed to one carrier in particular there. Would you attribute that uplift to that customer, or is it a little bit more broad-based than that? I guess, do you think there's any correlation here between the services upside and some of the higher leasing activity that you've talked about in your backlog? Thanks. Yeah. I do think that there is a correlation to the leasing, at least a little bit, because most of the work that we're doing, virtually all the services work we're doing now, is on our own tower sites. It is definitely tied into leasing activity. Yeah, I mean, we do have a significant percentage of our services business with one particular carrier, but the increase, at least proportionally among them, is more broad-based. Obviously, that one customer takes up a bigger percentage. Therefore, as they get busier, that makes more of an impact to our outlook. Thanks, Brendan. Sure. Our next caller is Brandon Nispel from KeyBanc. Thanks for taking the question. Brendan, I wanted to go back to your comments around new bookings and backlog. From a historical standpoint, what period is most comparable to the new bookings you saw this quarter? I was hoping you could help us contextualize what the book-to-bill ratio looks like today. Thanks. Sure. Yeah. I don't know if I could say absolutely, but it's been a couple of years. It's been over two years, I'd say, since we saw this level of applications that drive our backlog. It's pretty good in terms of recent history. We were pretty busy back in the 2022, 2023 window. It's probably as good as it was anytime since then. I'm sorry, Brendan. Your second question? I was just curious on book-to-bill backlog and sort of what that looks like today. Yep. Yeah. Because of this shift in the mix to new leases, it's obviously more elongated than it's been historically. It's typically a six- to nine-month for a new colo. We've seen a little bit of improvement in that. It's probably been a little bit shorter than that on average, at least thus far into the year, which is not that much history, but they're turning them around a little bit quicker and getting them deployed quicker. Let's say three- to nine-months just to kind of hedge it. Every lease is a little bit different, but that's the typical range. Great. Thanks for taking the questions. Sure. Moving on to Mike Funk from Bank of America. Thank you all for the questions today. First one, just what do you attribute the increase in new leasing activity from the carriers based on your conversations with them? Any maybe split between the carriers would be helpful as well. Second one, kind of more bookkeeping. You mentioned during the remarks that CPI rates have a potential for better escalators throughout the year internationally. If you can quantify that, it'd be helpful. Yeah. The increase, I don't want to get too specific by customer in terms of what they're each doing. I think you can look at their own reports and get a sense of the things that they're focused on that would be the logical drivers of activity in terms of leasing on macro tower sites. It's broadly increased subscriber activity, certainly certain product offerings that are more network bandwidth intensive, such as fixed wireless access. There are some regulatory requirements, which we referred to a moment ago, for at least one of our customers. That's T-Mobile, who has some need to meet obligations in terms of downlink speeds and coverage that they committed to as part of the Sprint acquisition. That's ongoing as a driver as well. There's a variety of things. I think we'll continue to see a mix of those things. Overall, it's going to be strained on the network and competitive pressures between the carriers. On the CPI question, yeah, I mean, particularly in Brazil, we've seen an increase in CPI rates down there. We'll have to see whether that holds up. We obviously didn't raise our outlook around international escalator contributions for this year. If we continue to see elevated CPI rates down there, there's a potential that we would actually be able to raise our leasing outlook. We're really talking about on our total for the full year, you're talking about a million or $2 million of impact. It's not a massive number, but as a percentage, it's a reasonable contribution increase. Great. Thank you for the question. Sure. All right. Moving on to Ric Prentiss from Raymond James. Hey. Good afternoon, everybody. I think I messed up my pound two here. I appreciate the questions. Sure. First question. I want to follow along the lines. A lot of people have touched on the colocation amendment. Appreciate the 75%, 25% for 1Q number. Was that revenue-based, I assume, instead of application-based? Because I would expect new colocations to come in at a significantly higher amount of revenue than an amendment. Yes. Yes. That's revenue-based dollars. Okay. Okay. Which also then leads to activity. Also, associated with that, kind of looking at new colocations versus amendments, what's your outlook as far as when new spectrum, not just secondary, like Walt was asking about, but when new spectrum could be found, auctioned, and put into the system that would drive more spectrum deployments instead of having to split sites? Any update from Washington that you're seeing on the spectrum front and when we might see some blocks come out and when they might show up on your towers? Yeah. I don't obviously have any insight that is specific to when you're going to see it. The general commentary that we get back in the conversations that we have and that our industry association, WIA has, is that there's definitely much more of an interest in this administration and the FCC to get new spectrum out there and auctioned off. We're encouraged by that. I think even if they get that done in relatively short order, by the time it gets cleared and is available and then is actually deployed, I mean, you're talking four or five years from now, probably, before we would see an opportunity for increased leasing activity as a result of that, Ric. It's a ways off. The faster that we get it done and out there, get this process started, the quicker we can get to that point. We're definitely pushing for that from our industry. Right. Industry could definitely use some more spectrum, but it's going to take time, which means we should probably count on colocations more so than amendments being the trend, it feels like. Yeah. Which obviously isn't bad. I mean, we're fortunate in terms of where we're placed in the ecosystem in that if you don't have the spectrum, the only solutions you've got are to densify your network. And that typically means more locations for us and more equipment, which is a good thing. Okay. Last one for me. Obviously, good capital allocation, jumping on the dislocation in the stock price. When you think about M&A that might be out there, and Batya asked about the Canada towers, are you still seeing private multiples being well above or just above what the public multiples are going for? How is that still impacting the ability to compete and win for external towers? Yeah. We are still seeing that. If you're talking about the U.S., because there is a limited supply of potential assets and there are a lot of people very interested in acquiring U.S. towers, when those opportunities come about, the private valuations are much, much higher than the public valuations. That makes it a challenge for us. Internationally, in some of our emerging markets, we've seen that rationalize a little bit more. What you're actually seeing is very few assets trading hands at all. I think what's happening is sellers are not getting interest at the levels that they'd like to or that perhaps they were getting in the past. Buyers aren't willing to come up to those levels. You end up having deals just not trade. I'm feeling better about there being a little bit of rationalization in most of the international markets, although I'm not seeing that so much in the U.S. Hopefully, we will see that kind of balance out because I think it'll be good in terms of the health of the overall industry if we have more rationality brought to some of these analyses. You can't have cost of capital rising the way that it has and have no change in the approach that people take to valuing these assets. Hopefully, we'll start to see that. Makes sense. In the U.S., that much, much higher. Are we thinking mid-20s, high 20s, even into the 30s? Is that kind of what we're seeing out there? Yeah. I mean, it just depends on the portfolio to some degree because the maturity of it makes a difference. We're definitely seeing assets that are trading in the mid-30s, some cases even higher. Wow. Great. Appreciate it. Thanks, guys. Sure. All right. Moving on to Ben Swinburne from Morgan Stanley. Thanks. Good afternoon. Two questions. Brendan, we touched on it in a few of your answers. Just can you give us a sense of your visibility into sort of the full-year domestic site leasing growth? Should we look at the activity, the service revenue growth, and the mix shift to colocations as adding to that visibility? Just want to get a sense sitting here at late April, sort of the line of sight into the improving revenue trends in the domestic business as we look through the rest of the year. I just thought a little bit of housekeeping. Can you just update us on if there's any change to how we should think about the Millicom contribution to revenue and gross profit when the rest of the bulk of the acquisition closes, assuming it closes September 1? Thank you. Yeah. We do break out in our press release our outlook for the contribution to leasing that we expect during the full year. The range that we set for that for the U.S., we did not change after this quarter. It's only been two months since we gave that outlook originally. I think at this stage, while my commentary is accurate in terms of the accelerating pace and that we're feeling very good about it as the backlogs have been bigger and the lease-up was a little bit ahead of pace, I think that it's a little early to think that we're going to be outside of the range that we gave. We'll see where we are next quarter. We'll certainly have a much better sense by then as to whether there's an opportunity to beat the range. Perhaps we'll be more towards the higher end of the range if things continue on this track. Stay tuned on that. At least we're talking about it being towards the higher end and not towards the lower. That's a good sign. On the Millicom question, yeah, I mean, at this stage, the outlook that we put together originally hasn't really changed outside of the sites that we closed on early. Obviously, we adjusted for that. I don't know, Ben, if you're looking for something in particular, but basically what we laid out in terms of the total expectation when it's all said and done, that's still the same as what we put in our original press release when we announced that deal. No real changes there. We'll be excited to get it done as soon as we can. Okay. The only change, I guess, is just part of that acquisition is close to ready, right? Yeah. Yeah. Just a timing difference. And it's a fairly small piece of it. There were 320 sites that we were. If we can close other pieces early, we'll do that too. I think there's not as great an opportunity to break off other pieces. Each this particular market, there was an opportunity to buy the asset separately as opposed to an entity. That allowed us to close a few early. We'll see how it goes. If we can close them early, we'll do that. Great. Thank you so much. Thanks. Okay. Moving on to Richard Choe from JPMorgan. I have a follow-up on the services side. Was the increase more in near-term activity, or is it just feeling more confident about the level through the year? Also, how much more services revenue could you fulfill, or how much capacity do you have in that services business kind of from this $180 million-$200 million level? The increase in guidance for services is a mix of the contribution from the first quarter, where we did a little bit better than we had anticipated when we set the original outlook, as well as the increased backlogs, which gave us some confidence that we will do better during the balance of the year versus our original projections as well. It is really a mix of both of those. On your question on capacity, I'm not sure what you're getting at. I mean, obviously, we've given an outlook for this year of now updated of $180 million-$200 million. In the past, we have had even bigger years. A couple of years ago, we did almost $300 million in services revenue, high $200 million. We have the capacity in terms of our capabilities and scalability to handle increased volume if we can find the right work. If we see that opportunity, hopefully, we'll continue to see it grow. We're not restrained in terms of our capabilities or capacity. Great. Thank you. Sure. Moving on to Jonathan Chaplin from New Street. Thanks, guys. Just one clarifying question for me. I think in the past, Brendan, you said that the 2.5 gigahertz and 3.5 gigahertz spectrum that the carriers have deployed on their sites is sort of 55%-65% of sites. Is that of your sites or of their sites? The way I understood it initially was they're at sort of 55%-65% of their sites, and they've still got a lot of growth to go. I would have thought that would have translated into a lot more amendments still to come as opposed to what you're seeing, which is the bulk of growth coming from new leasing. Yeah. No. When we give those statistics, we're giving it on their presence on our sites, the leases that we have with them on our sites. Yeah. It's not to their overall position. That's up to them to comment on. The carriers are not balanced in terms of that. Obviously, T-Mobile is further ahead because they had 2.5 spectrum well ahead of the other incumbents having their mid-band, C-band spectrum. It's a mix between them. That perhaps is what's contributing to the shift of who's moving towards new leasing versus amendments faster. Either way, they're through on a consolidated combined basis, cumulatively, they're through about close to 60% of our leases with the three incumbents have been upgraded for mid-band spectrum. Got it. Wait. Brendan, that's 60% of their sites. They've done amendments on 60% of their sites for mid-band spectrum already. There's another 40% they could still do amendments on? Yes, as a group. We're talking about their leases on our sites? Yes. Yes. They are not doing incremental. That is not where the activity is coming from at the moment. It is mostly coming from them putting equipment on new sites? Yeah. I mean, we're still signing a bunch of amendments, though. The amendment activity is largely around that. It's largely 5G-related upgrades. Yep. Perfect. Thanks for that clarification. Sure. Next caller, David Guarino from Green Street. Thanks. Hey Brendan. Going back to your comment on the transaction front, you said the bid-ask spread might be too wide for some deals to cross the finish line. Was that comment in reference to the past few weeks and the volatility we've seen, or is that something you've observed over the course of the year? Yeah. No, it's something we've observed really for the last year or so internationally, where you're seeing just we've seen a number of potential transactions come to market, processes run. Some we've participated in. Others, we have not. There are a number of them that did not actually get completed. It's been a dynamic that's been happening for the last year or so. Really, if you look at the timing when cost of capital started to increase, sometime following on that time period, you started to see this dynamic. Makes sense. You had a comment in your press release talking about the business having very reliable cash flow, economic uncertainty. That's definitely been true in the past. Since the tenant landscape's evolved, since we've really had any sort of economic stress test, how should we think about SBA's portfolio performing if the U.S. economy were to hit a soft patch? I think, David, if you look at it from a big-picture standpoint, we produce a tremendous amount of cash flow. Our AFFO is about $1.4 billion a year. Even if there's softness in the U.S. or anywhere else, you're talking about a variation of leasing activity and incremental dollars being added that is relatively small in the big picture of the cash flow that we're able to produce, the amount that we're able to return back to our shareholders. There's no risk to our ability to continue to operate or, in quotes, I'm saying, sell our product. It's already been sold. It's already happening. We are talking about impact happening on incremental additions. Right now, it's a positive environment, and that's great. Even if things were to slow down, you're talking about fairly small amounts. My commentary is that compared to most businesses out there, the cash flow that we're able to produce can be relied upon. It is very steady and consistent. That's a good place to be in an unstable environment. Good point. Thank you. Yep. Okay. Moving on to our next and last Okay. Moving on to our next and last caller, Ari Klein from BMO Capital Markets. Thanks for squeezing me in here. The commentary on domestic leasing activity and signing continues to get better. Based on the conversations with carriers, is that something you expect to continue to accelerate and maybe build here for the next couple of years, or does it level off kind of in the range where you're at now? I think that's a hard question to answer to look out multiple years. We've seen this play out over decades of being in this. There are some periods where the carriers are busier than others, but it tends to move in cycles as different events happen. I think if you look out over the coming years, this year, we're obviously feeling very confident and excited about the level of activity as it's continued to increase based on the specific drivers that are in place today. There are a number of factors that could come along that cause that to slow, and there are factors that could come along that cause that to increase. As we look out longer term, we know that there will be new spectrum that's eventually made available, and that will be a driver of increased activity. There's eventually a 6G cycle that will take place down the road. Over time, I feel very good that there will continue to be cycles of investment in networks by our customers, and we will be a beneficiary of that. To say from one year to the next, whether this year is going to be a higher or lower year, it's hard to say with too much precision if we look out multiple years. I'll just leave it at we'll see how it goes, but you should feel comfortable that there's always another cycle if something needed. Got it. Maybe if I can just kind of moving that leasing activity from backlog to two leasing or to leasing revenues. I think one of the things is the guide this year is the midpoint is down a little bit from last year despite the improvement in activity. Is that something when we look at the 2026, we should expect a decent rent given how active you've been? Yeah. If we continue to see it move the way that it's moved thus far this year and it stays with the same trajectory as we move to the balance of the year, that should be favorable to next year. The reason this year is down compared to last year, even though the activity is better this year than last year, is because there's a drag. There's a lag time between when you sign up these agreements and when they start to hit your financials. We will see this benefit into the balance of this year, but particularly into next year as it carries over. Thanks for the call. No problem. Thank you all for joining the call today. We look forward to reporting our second quarter results at the end of July. That concludes the SBA first quarter of 2025 results conference call. You may now disconnect.