All right, we'll get started. Very formal. All right, so happy to have back at the conference, Mark Shapiro, President and Chief Operating Officer of TKO Group. Mark, thanks for being here. David, always good to be with you. Great. All right, Mark, so when we look back over the prior year, fairly significant outperformance for TKO stock. What's gone right, and what do you think has generated that buy-in from investors on the story? Look, I think that this is a long laundry list of an answer. Go for it. I will tell you that I think it starts with the fact that we are humbly delivering on the promise. We still have a lot of work to do, obviously, but we are delivering on the promise. On the media rights side, I think the Netflix deal, and we can talk more about that, was a transformative deal for WWE, and nobody saw that coming. That hits. The way we've laid out SmackDown, what NXT is doing with CW, and then the actual performance of Raw, just overall media-wise, we have a lot of experience here. We have a lot of years of experience here, history, buyer and seller. We know what we're doing, and that's playing out. On the live event side, really across the board, internationally, nationally, we're setting records, gate records, attendance records. Our dynamic pricing, which is something we frankly introduced when we bought the WWE or merged with the WWE, is playing out. Yield is playing out. Site fees are playing out. On the global partnerships front, we put out a target of $375 million for the year. I feel confident that we're going to hit that. We have incredible momentum. You move over to the other side of the fence on really cost containment. I think that my CFO, Andrew Schleimer, and I said that when we brought it all together, TKO, that we would realize a net savings of $100 million. We blew through that. Now we've got IMG cooking and On Location and PBR, a recent acquisition, and we put out a target of $30 million in savings. As stated in our earnings call, we're above $40 million on that front. We also raised guidance on earnings. Since the formation of TKO, we've had significant, meaningful margin expansion, adjusted EBITDA margin expansion. We already generate significant free cash flow. We have a strong balance sheet. When you put all that together, I think it really underlies our conviction on the industrial logic of this merger. I would say we have significant upside ahead of us. One of the only hurdles, to your question, would be these new assets and how they fit in. Obviously, they'll take down our margin. Also just, you know, and I'm very sensitive to this, the kind of lumpy nature of On Location in particular, because it has a lot of events like the Olympics and the World Cup that are not every year. All I can tell you is that we're going to be very transparent and very visible with regard to how we articulate our model, our numbers, that business, the KPIs. We've done that thus far, and you should expect that as a public company. We're ultra sensitive to it. We're not going to do Endeavor 2.0. Folks are going to understand, investors, partners are going to understand what they can expect out of those businesses, which aren't as easy as just UFC and WWE. Okay, that was a great overview. Mark, when I talk sports media with investors, I always kind of say that in the long run for leagues and promotions, the quality of the product's everything. Yeah. I'm kind of curious how you would gauge WWE and UFC at the current moment on items like fan engagement, star power, cultural resonance. I think cultural resonance, that's a great topic. Look, we have strong brands, global brands. We have strong demos. Half of our audience is 18-49. We have a billion followers across our owned and operated social channels. When you look at just under 18, and I think that's a key metric, you know, as we're, and I know we'll discuss UFC renewals, what I have found, which has been pretty insightful and informative as we've been making our rounds, is how focused the platforms are on under 18, which makes sense, right? That's when you're buying and you're forming habits of where you buy and trends and who you're going to stick with. You sign up and there's a lot of lifetime value. I will tell you that, you know, one of our biggest audiences is our high schoolers, right? They tune in on Saturday night. They may or may not be betting, because of course you have to be legal age to do that. They are watching. Betting with each other. Right, exactly. It's a heavy prop sport. It really is the UFC. And when you have 10 to 13 fights a night and all these props, I mean, it really lends itself to that. Therefore, it's a long way of saying it's no surprise that when it comes to the under 18 audience, we are tied with the NBA for the biggest draw amongst men and women. And we're number one as it relates to just men. We have no off season. So that's obviously a big bellwether for us. I think there's two X factors when you look at UFC and WWE. Let's say three. For UFC, it's sports betting. It's that that's a big, just like the NFL, it's a big part of the ecosystem. It's not fueling the growth, but it's an important component. With regard to fan avidity, fandom, it will continue to energize that. On the WWE side, the X factor is Netflix. I mean, this is the greatest marketing platform you could ever ask for. Their pre-roll is one of the strongest tools they have. You go to Netflix, whether or not you're interested in the show, if you're clicking on that icon, you're getting a trailer. And UFC is front and center. That has been strong. The third X factor is just the creative powerhouse we have behind both of these brands, these leagues, if you will. I mean, Paul Levesque lives, breathes, his whole life has been spent in the WWE. He's amazing on the creative storylines. Just when you think you know where he's going, he turns left like the heel that John Cena became and then the champion. On the other side of the coin, it's obviously not fictional, it's not storylines, but Dana White's the best matchmaker and the best promoter in the business, in the game, maybe in the history of boxing or combat sports, because he's played in both. He knows what he's doing. He's never afraid to say what he thinks. He gives the fans the fights they want to see. You put all that together, it's a hell of a cultural conversation. It's just a reminder to all of us that sports truly is the last unifying conversation we all have. Let's follow up on Netflix with WWE. You're a few months in on that now. How are you kind of evaluating success here, not just in the U.S., but also abroad? I'm curious, as you've made this switch from linear to streaming, has anything kind of stood out in terms of how the fans are consuming the content differently? Just with WWE? Yeah, WWE and Netflix, yeah, for now. Yeah, so look, Netflix itself is a transformative deal, as I said, $5.2 billion over 10 years. They have over 300 million subscribers. This is the last time they will publicly announce their subscriber count, or at least for now. There have been plenty of articles and following with regard to their internal forecast, where they're trying to get over 400 million subscribers and maybe the first trillion dollar valuation. I like the sound of that, because we're going to be one of the vehicles they use to get there. We have proven in just a short time that the WWE in particular is an antidote to churn for Netflix and is a proven formula, proven formula for subscriber acquisition. As it relates to Raw all by itself, look, every week we're in the top 10 in 29 countries. We're not even fully penetrated yet. We're adding countries as the months go by. Particularly as it relates to what we did over USA last year, we're up 14%. One of the most popular questions I get asked all the time is, hey, you're with Netflix, when are you doing a Drive to Survive? When are you guys going to start doing ancillary programming? I'll tell you this, June we're coming out with our first reality series, WWE Unreal, which is a behind-the-scenes look really at how the sausage is made on the storylines at WWE. I always tell Nick Khan, the President of WWE, like, careful, let's not give away the Coca-Cola recipe here. Having said that, I think just a little sneak behind into the writer's room is evidenced by SNL, something all fans and viewers of the WWE want to see. Okay. Mark, it's always great to get your view on the sports rights market. We're at an interesting moment where linear firms are maybe kind of showing a little more caution post-NBA. Streamers are indicating a need for events. You've got flagship launching. How do you kind of view this moment in time for rights? You know, I was looking at some of the notes that my Yoda, Seth Zaslow, was preparing for me. I will tell you that it's not 20 years I've been in this business. I've been in this business 30 years. I'm getting out there. I started as an intern at NBC Sports in 1989. I can unequivocally say as a buyer and a seller, because after ESPN I was at Dick Clark Productions selling music rights, I have never seen the sports media rights environment this hot. There will be periods where it cools off a little, and it's just, as I've mentioned, warm versus hot. It's never going cold. That's just not happening, because it's a proven winner. Once again, antidote to churn, and at the same time a proven formula for subscriber acquisition. ESPN just announced this morning their flagship, if you will, I think they're calling it ESPN, which is a smart move by Jimmy and the team, but $29.99. Even though it will be a mirror of ESPN, it'll obviously have a lot of bells and whistles, different camera angles and multicast and fantasy and sports betting integrated. I mean, it'll be special. You need premium content to sell a D to C these days. You need premium content to keep subscribers on linear. You're feeding both beasts. I can tell you right now, as it relates to premium content, demand is outstripping supply. Particularly with regard to sports rights, there's no major property outside of the UFC and the WWE PLEs that is up for renewal until 2028, when you start to get baseball coming and NHL. When I say baseball, I know there's some baseball now given the ESPN deal, but I'm talking post-season, the stuff that really counts, and English Premier League. That'll all be $28. 29. We're sitting in a very unique spot. Beyond that, it's going to stay strong because it's a built-in rooting interest. It's live. It's shareable. The highlights are snackable. I mean, what's everybody talking about? Granted, I'm here in Boston, but all morning I've had 10 people come up to me to talk about the Celtics and the Knicks. Yep, I mean, it's good. On a Monday night when the game's on ESPN, it's just, it's hot. And there's a lot of fandom. Last time I checked, the Knicks haven't won a title, what, since 1973, something like that. So it's a, you know, it's high demand. That's why tickets are going for as much as Super Bowl tickets were for game three against the Celtics. That's how viewing is going to be consumed as it relates to these platforms, linear or streaming. Sports is going to stay where it is. Got it. All right, Mark, you've been asked at conferences and earnings calls every which way in the UFC negotiation. What can you say in the latest? Look, I'll take it a little differently. What are the priorities investors should be aware of outside of just maximizing AAV, right? How do you think about deal length, reach, shoulder programming, things like that? It all depends on the platform. You know, it's, I mean, I'm not going to say a lot because we're in a window and we're in multiple conversations. Demand is strong. We, to your point, we want to be thoughtful and strategic about, you know, who we sign up with. I mean, when we sign on the dotted line to go 10 years with Netflix, I mean, you're making a bet. They're making a bet on you, but you're making an equal bet on them. It goes every which way as it relates to these UFC rights. Who's going to be around? Who's going to stick around? Who's got a long-term strategy? Who's going to be good just in the short term? Can you divide it up into multiple packages and have your cake and eat it too? What's the future of pay-per-view? Do you need pay-per-view? I mean, this is all stuff that we're analyzing and having conversations on. I think that we're unique in the sense that the UFC, we're the commissioner and the league all in one. We make our decisions in a second, a nanosecond. We're a great partner, as Dana always says. You know, anybody we meet with, Dana underscores the fact that while ESPN's been a great partner to us, we've been a great partner to them. I mean, we put our premium, premium content on ESPN Plus and let them use that as the anchor to go from 3 million subs to 25 million subs. There is just a lot of opportunity where year-round, most aren't. We're global, most aren't. You know, we don't have an owners' committee, most do. You know, we incentivize our fighters to be a part of the team, frankly. We're finding new ways to allow them to cash in beyond just winning in the octagon. The platforms recognize that. We're young, we're diverse, just a lot of upside. We lend ourselves well to betting consumption and the popularity of sports betting. We're not afraid to pound our chest about it. The premium experiences, which has been so strong, I mean, On Location is really benefiting right out of the gate as it relates to the UFC and WWE. For UFC, I mean, Dana, he's all about experimenting and getting those fans as up close and personal as he possibly can to the field of play and to the fighters themselves. The fighters want that because they want the storylines, they want to build personalities, they want to cash in on their own stardom. It's just an exciting place to be. I'm thrilled that we have so much interest. We're not in a rush. Our deal with ESPN is up at the end of the year. We're out of our exclusive window with ESPN. We're not turning our backs on ESPN. We want to have multiple conversations and we want to make a smart, strategic decision that works best for our long term. That long term is not just the money. Of course, the money's important. Of course, the AAV is important. Of course, it's important to our shareholders, most importantly. At the same time, what's best for our brand? Who's going to be our best marketing partner? Who's going to continue to drive what is still a nascent sport when you compare to leagues like NFL and Major League Baseball who've been around for 100 years? Maybe just staying on the rights, but shifting to WWE, right? The PLEs expire March 26th, I think you said. That's something you'll look to do after UFC. Around the world, that content's mostly distributed with Netflix along with your weekly programming. Kind of curious, as that's rolled out, how it kind of informs your view of the optimal structure here in the U.S. How do you kind of weigh the benefit of having more content in one place versus you might have an incremental partner that really wants those events? We're not afraid of multiple partners. Look, it's funny, from a business perspective, I think that it makes a lot of sense to have multiple partners and maximize the financial opportunity and not put all your eggs in one basket as it relates to the marketing opportunity for your brand. Having said that, as a viewer, I can't stand it. I have to do too much homework to find out where my game is on a given night. Guess what? That's the world we're living in. If you're going to be in sports, you have to be prepared to play in that world. As it relates to the WWE, we're up at the end of March next year, as you said. WrestleMania for 2026 will be our first big event with our new partner or with our current incumbent, Peacock. We're having conversations with Peacock. They want to extend. They've been a fantastic partner. Love the progress that they are now making with Peacock as it relates to original programming and sports. I think the NBA is going to be a monster winner for them on the Peacock side. We're not in a rush on that one. It is, again, brand and dollars and what's best for our fan and what's best for our investors. Those do not always line up seamlessly, but they're close enough. We're anxious to get in that conversation, to further that conversation, I should say. We're kind of having parallel tracks here with the UFC and the WWE right now. Got it. Live events, real standout success for WWE since you acquired the promotion. Maybe you could speak a bit to what's worked so far. Oh, I'm sorry. I do want to say one more thing. Go ahead. What is unique, though, about WWE and the PLE specifically is that you're talking very high quality, but low volume, right? I mean, you're really talking for those platforms that are looking for little volume because they don't have the money for it or it's too much to put on or they don't have the bandwidth or the shelf space. They are just looking for a big tentpole pop once a month. You can't do any better than the WWE PLEs. Sorry, go ahead. No, good. Like I said, WWE, real standout success on the live events side. Curious if you could talk to what's been working, limiting house shows, right, for instance, and kind of what are the levers ahead? Yeah, so the house shows, just so everyone's aware, these are non-televised events. WWE used to do about 300 events a year. I'm not criticizing that strategy because they were building a brand, they were building a business, they were building an audience, they were building a following. When we put these two companies together, not just in an effort to improve our margin, we cut back on the number of non-televised shows. Like they're already established. They already have a massive following. Just try to go to Backlash this past weekend or go to WrestleMania in Vegas. I mean, the audience, the fandom, it's really like nothing I've ever seen. And that's saying a lot because I've been around sports for the better part of three decades. I mean, these fans are so loyal and they're so engaged, they don't leave their seats. These stadiums have to be careful what they wish for when they bring one of our events there because you're probably not going to do a lot of F& B. They are in their seats and they don't want to miss a second. It's something to see. I would just tell you that we cut those house shows down. Now we're doing 200 events a year. We've cut them 75%, the number of house shows that we do. We feel that's a good place to be, but we'll continue to prune as we go through. WWE has tremendous upside in global partnerships, tremendous upside that we're already realizing on ticket pricing, tremendous upside with site fees, dynamic pricing, yield management. You know, all areas we're really focusing and pushing in on as it relates to live events. As you see from our first quarter, you know, our margins significantly expanded as it relates to WWE live events. You know, an amazing place to be. Look, when it comes to free cash flow conversion, you know, we're sitting at north of 60%. Even with adding On Location, PBR, and IMG, which are obviously lower than the other properties we have, we're still going to be north of 60%. We're not going to be happy until we're knocking on the door of 70%. That's an internal goal that we have. The quicker we get there, the better it'll be for our shareholders. All of these different levers are going to help us both with margin, adjusted EBITDA margin accretion, and also with free cash flow conversion. All right. You recently had your first TKO takeover weekend in Kansas City. What were some of the highlights from that? Should we look at this sort of as a marketing and site fee driver? Are there kind of some cost synergies to consider? What are the learnings? It's both sides. I think that what I would tell you from my perspective, the biggest win we had was all the earned media that it delivered. Because yes, we were paid a site fee and yes, we were able to reap the rewards of some in-kind savings, but it was a marketing bonanza for us and hopefully a template for more to come. Having said that, if we aren't going to get meaningful upside on the site fee or the in-kind, we won't bring it just for marketing. We had a nice splash. Of course, T-Mobile was happy to have us. Who wouldn't want an entire weekend filled up with three or four events? We are uniquely positioned to do that versus other leagues. We will keep looking into that and pursuing that. Make no mistake about it, we are driven by the financial return. It was great earned media. It was a solid return on the site fees and the in-kind services. It worked with our schedule, terrific arena, great fan base for all the sports. One plus one did equal five. Site fees are what is the priority driver. When you just talk specifically about site fees, if you want to go there, like you've got, I mean, look at WrestleMania 41. We had a meaningful site fee and in-kind from Las Vegas. I would just tell you, we've just finished our economic impact study or we're just putting the finishing touches on it. That study is showing we drove $320 million to the city of Las Vegas for WrestleMania 41. That's a hell of a marketing chip when you're going out trying to drive site fees. We're looking under every stone, David. I mean, when you're doing Royal Rumble in Minneapolis for two days for a meaningful site fee, when you're going to New Jersey this summer for a SummerSlam and they're paying us $7 million. I mean, these are meaningful opportunities here. Perth, Australia, where we're committed to doing multiple events over the next two years with the Western Tourism Australia. And then, of course, in June, we're going for multi-million tobacco, Azerbaijan. So these aren't just like run-of-the-mill, you know, around the corner Kansas City. These are, you're looking hard and fast. And we've got an entire team dedicated, not just on the government relations side because you need to have these relationships, but boots on the ground in these different cities to uncover who wants to pay to play. Yep, plenty of opportunity. When we observe WWE shows, clear expansion of sponsorship inventory, right? We see the logos in the ring, presenting sponsors for matches. You know, is there any pushback from fans on these changes at all? Kind of what's next as you kind of look to build the success on the sponsor side that you already have with UFC? We're a proven partner, winning formula partner as it relates to global partnerships. That is why we've expanded the roster so deeply with the UFC. That is why we're following that same recipe and roadmap with WWE. Over the last 10 years, if you look at our adjusted EBITDA tied to partnerships, including digital, we've grown fivefold in 10 years, fivefold. Many of our deals are experiential, they're activation, but several of them allow our partners to use our IP in stores, convenience stores down the aisle. That is a heavy cost to entry. That is why we're able to garner the kind of prices we have and we'll continue. That is why it's so high- margin. We're a pioneer as it relates to activating in the ring or in the octagon, in the arena. Remember, most of this is not spots and dots. This is an experiential media-driven business. Our Meta deal was super innovative. I mean, we went out there, no one saw that coming. I've had so many NFL owners just call me on that deal. Explain to me again what this is. You know, AI and the glasses and they're going to help us with our rankings, multi-year, multi-millions. I mean, a really strong deal. Monster Energy, one of our really first super brands across the UFC. This is the biggest deal we've ever cut. You know, A/B and the deal we did across their brands and the life we breathed back into Bud Light. Just really extraordinary the job the team is doing there. We still see no ceiling. I mean, if you just look at WrestleMania 41, we had 28 partners. We had 14 title sponsors across the various matches and nights and products that we had in terms of the properties. Sky's the limit here. Sky's the limit. All right, maybe just shifting gears a bit. You recently closed on the acquisition of IMG, On Location, and PBR. We have some familiarity here through Endeavor's public period, but it'd be great to refresh. Maybe you could just cover with IMG what people should know about the core rights distribution production business. Maybe we'll just also throw in On Location. You touched upon it in the beginning, but kind of your confidence on executing around those quadrennial events. Yeah, these I would just tell you, we know them well. We have a lot of history with these businesses. If you're in the sports business, you know On Location because it's industry leading. You know IMG because it's been industry leading for 60 years. We are acquiring industry- leading assets. Let's start there. The deal is value accretive to us. It powers our flywheel. Everything we do, premium experiences, selling tickets, driving global partnerships, marketing, social, it's only going to accelerate our growth. Finally, even if you're not buying that, you're still questioning, they need bull riding. It makes up 10% of our EBITDA, these new assets. It is very small when compared to the overall relative picture. Got it. I Got it. I want to touch upon the company entering the world of boxing. You announced in March that you were partnering with Turki Al-Sheikh to form a new promotion. Mark, how big do you think this opportunity could be down the line? When could we be expected to hear maybe some details about the structure, first card? It's interesting. You know, on the earnings call, on the Q&A, somebody asked about how you get these media deals done. And you're supercharging on the ticket sales, you're supercharging on global partnerships. Now you got site fees. We're trying to model that. And you got the media deals locked in. Like where's the growth going to be? I mean, first of all, that's a mouthful right there. This isn't done overnight. This isn't easy. We have a lot of work to do. This is hard stuff. But fortunately, we have a team of smart, hard chargers to do it. What I would tell you is that we don't sit still. We're looking around every corner. We're plugged in on the entertainment side, the music side, the sports side, and the cultural side, looking for what's next, looking for what's hot, looking for what's popping with that 18- 49 audience, let alone 18 and under where we're having so much success. Boxing is a perfect example of that. Nobody really saw that coming. Here we are. We've taken a risk-free proposition because it's not even brand risk because it's not going to be called TKO Boxing. That's just a working title. To answer your question, we're going to announce the name of the franchise in short order. It's risk-free. We're being paid to operate. We're being paid to promote. We're being paid to help matchmake and then cut media deals for our partners in Saudi. We're excited about all that. We will generally have an average, I would say over the next five years, 12 fights a year. That's probably being conservative, but let's play that way. I'd rather overdeliver. In addition to that, we will launch, I call them super fights, but that's just a name for a big card, a big main card, like we're having in September with Canelo vs Crawford. I mean, this is going to be one of those fights of the century, quote unquote. Fight everybody wanted to see, fight nobody thought was going to happen, fight nobody thought the fighters would ever take because what they would need to put in their pocket would be too much. It got done. Dana's going to promote it. It's going to be in a stadium, not an arena. It's going to be in Allegiant Stadium. It's going to make a lot of noise. It's going to be appointment viewing. At the same time, there will be a card underneath it of four to five fights that will be fights attached to our new boxing vehicle. That's the formula. We'll do 12 fights a year on average of our own card, our own franchise. Then we'll do anywhere from one to four super fights a year that garner a lot of attention, a lot of media attention that allow us to populate our franchise of fights underneath it. I'll just remind you, we have two guys here who really know what they're doing. Dana White grew up in boxing. He knows the sweet science like no other. He has the relationships. He's the best promoter in the business. Nick Khan has been a manager in boxing. James "Lights Out" Toney and Manny Pacquiao. I mean, he's got a lot of history here. I mean, he happens to absolutely love boxing. Pairing the two of them together, you know, we just need to support them, frankly, with the right resources. That's what we're doing. All right, we got time for one more. As you noted, targeting free cash flow conversion in excess of 60%, excluding certain items. You put out a goal of 70% at some point. Maybe just update us on capital allocation priorities outside the cash dividend, how to think about the buyback, and you know, any potential changes in your approach to M&A opportunities within live and entertainment sports. Like you said, you look at a lot. No, I'm glad you asked about that because obviously it's an important part of our strategy. We talked about all the cash that we're generating and accumulating. We talked about our adjusted EBITDA margins. We talked about our free cash flow conversion. We talked about our strong balance sheet. This is the final piece in it. We, of course, started our dividend program. I believe our first dividend was in March, $75 million. We will continue that quarterly. We put out a plan to buy back roughly $2 billion over the course of the next three to four years that we will start in the third quarter. We take our responsibility as it relates to having all that cash and deploying it thoughtfully and strategically, very seriously. At the same time, we will be prudent because, you know, albeit the deal that the U.S. and China have reached, quote unquote, on tariffs and the CPI news today, I mean, things are still uncertain and volatile. I'll remind you though, whether it's the business model of the UFC, the business model of the WWE, or the business model that is the IMG Sports Rights portfolio, sports tends to stand up very well, is extremely resilient in a recessionary environment. While things are uncertain and volatile right now, all our trends are pointing north, but we're keeping our eye on it. We need to be prudent as it relates to deploying our capital. All right, great. It's a good note to end on. Mark, thanks so much for being here. Always good to see you. Good to see you. Thanks.