Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the U-Haul Holding Company's fourth quarter fiscal year- end 2025 investor conference call. At this time, all lines are in listen-only mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. If at any time during this call you require immediate assistance, please press star zero for the operator. This call is being recorded on Thursday, May 29th, 2025. I would now like to turn the conference over to Sebastien Reyes. Please go ahead. Good morning, and thank you for joining us today. Welcome to the U-Haul Holding Company fourth quarter fiscal year- end 2025 investor call. Before we begin, I'd like to remind everyone that certain of the statements during this call, including without limitation, statements regarding revenue, expenses, income, and general growth of our business, may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified. Certain factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. For discussion of the risks and uncertainties that may affect the company's business and future operating results, please refer to the company's public SEC filings and Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2025, which is on file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. I'll now turn the call over to Joe Shoen, Chairman of U-Haul Holding Company. Hello, everybody. What you see, especially in our fourth quarter results, are decisions made in prior years working their way through the financial statements. On a more positive note, the original equipment manufacturers appear to have decided to make reliable, fuel-efficient ICE vehicles in volume at improved pricing. OEMs and U-Haul both need to get some emissions regulation relief from the administration to be able to better serve our customers with truck product. U-Haul, in the meantime, has defleeted three-quarters of our pickup fleet as we see no path to profitability with more than a small specialized pickup fleet. Resale prices on both vans and pickups are steady or improving. I expect we may struggle through October on resale pricing, but beyond then, it appears to be a clear path. Our customers are expressing optimism, at least our truck share customers are. Storage remains a bright spot wherever we execute with precision. Our programs work. It is a less bright spot where we execute with less precision. Both self-move and self-store are consumer needs, and I expect those needs to continue. It is my challenge to make U-Haul the customer's best choice. With that, I'll turn it to Jason to kind of get specific on the numbers. Thanks, Joe. Yesterday, we reported a fourth quarter loss of $82.3 million compared to a loss of $863,000 for the same quarter last year. Our full- year fiscal 2025 earnings were $367.1 million, down from $628.7 million in fiscal 2024. In terms of earnings per share, the fourth quarter of this year was a $0.41 per share loss for non-voting share loss as compared to less than a penny a share loss in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024. Earnings before interest, taxes, and depreciation, EBITDA, in our moving and storage segment increased by $5.6 million for the quarter to $217.3 million, largely from revenue growth. Our full- year fiscal 2025 EBITDA increased by just under $52 million to $1,619.7 million. Included in our earnings release and financial supplement is a reconciliation of EBITDA to GAAP earnings. I'm going to highlight three large differences between the two. First, fleet depreciation from the increased level of fleet acquisitions and the cost per truck over the last several years. Second, the reduced gains on the sales of retired pickups and cargo vans. Third, the declining interest income at the moving and storage segment as we reduced our short-term cash balances due to reinvestment. Of the $0.41 decline in earnings per share for the fourth quarter, about $0.16 was from fleet depreciation, $0.12 from the decrease in gains on sale of rental equipment, and $0.10 from the decline in interest income. For the fourth quarter, our equipment rental revenue results had a $29 million increase or just over 4%. Of note, during the prior year, we benefited from the extra day attributable to the leap year. I mention that because it added somewhere around $11 million to last year's results. For the fiscal year, we finished up just over $100 million for equipment rental revenue. That's about a 2.8% increase. During the fourth quarter, both our one-way and in-town transactions increased compared to last year at that time, as did our revenue per transaction. Our trailer and towing fleets also experienced improved revenue results. For the month of April and now into May, we've seen revenue continue to trend positively compared to the same period as last year. Capital expenditures for new rental equipment for fiscal 2025 were $1,863 million. That's a $244 million increase compared to fiscal 2024. W hile proceeds from the sales of retired rental equipment declined by $76 million to a total of $652 million. This is a combination of fewer pickups and cargo vans sold, along with slightly lower average sales proceeds on the units that we did sell. Our initial projection for net fleet CapEx in fiscal year 2026 is $1,295 million. That's compared to approximately $1,211 million in fiscal 2025. Switching to self-storage, revenues were up $18 million, or 8% for the quarter. Our 12-month results were also up 8%, or just under $67 million. Average revenue per occupied foot continued to improve across the entire portfolio, up approximately 1.6%. If you look at just the same store piece of that, we were up 3%. Our average move-in rates for the same store portfolio were up just over 4.5% compared to the fourth quarter of last year. Our occupied unit count at the end of March was up just over 39,000 units compared to the same time last year. This time last year, when we were talking, that same statistic was a 31,000-unit improvement. We picked up the pace a bit compared to where we were at last year. During fiscal year 2025, we added 82 new storage locations, 6.5 million new net rentable sq ft across 71,000 new rooms. Our average occupancy ratio across all of our own locations during the fourth quarter declined about 2.5% to just over 77%. If you look at just the same store portfolio, average occupancy experienced about a 50 basis point decrease to 91.9%. During fiscal 2025, we invested $1,507 million in real estate acquisitions along with self-storage and U-Box warehouse development. That is a $249 million increase over the previous year. During just the fourth quarter, we added 1.6 million new net rentable sq ft. About a million and a half of that was newly developed locations, along with expansion at existing facilities. We currently have just under 7 million new net rentable sq ft being actively developed, and another 8 million sq ft in the pipeline behind that. Our U-Box revenue results are included in other revenue in our 10-K filing. This line item within the moving and storage segment was up just under $14 million, of which U-Box was the primary contributor. We are seeing both U-Box moving transactions and the related storage transactions grow. Over the last 12 months, we've increased our covered storage capacity, our warehouse space for these containers, by nearly 25%. We're going to continue to see growth in that area. Operating expenses at moving and storage were up $53.6 million. Starting off on a positive note, we had another quarter of declining fleet repair and maintenance costs, this time down $6.7 million. Some of the larger expense increases that we had, personnel costs, were up $12.8 million, although that was largely in line with our revenue increase. Other costs, including utilities, property taxes, and shipping costs associated with our U-Box moves, were up a little over $11 million. The largest outlier for the quarter was our liability costs associated with the fleet were up $27.8 million. As of end of March, our moving and storage segment had cash and availability totaling $1,348 million. On our investor relations website, investors.uhall.com, we posted some supplemental materials in addition to the earnings release and 10-K filing that are right on the front page for you to click on. With that, I would like to hand the call back to our Operator, Konstantin, to begin the question- and- answer portion of the call. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question- and- answer session. Should you have a question, please press star followed by the number one on your touchtone phone. You will hear a prompt that your hand has been raised. Should you wish to decline from the polling process, please press star followed by the number two. If you are using a speakerphone, please make sure you lift your handset before pressing any keys. Your first question comes from the line of Steven Ralston from Zacks. Please go ahead. Good morning. Morning. Looking through the numbers, I noticed, and obviously, you're in a seasonal business, that the fourth quarter was basically the strongest in the last six years, exiting out 2021, which was an exceptionally strong year. I'm interpreting this as the business itself, the top-line business, is getting stronger. First of all, I'd like to see if you can interpret that as I do. Secondly, I know Joe, I asked him last year at the beginning of the fiscal year what his outlook was, given his decades of experience, was for the coming year. Basically, he said modest growth. I don't know if he gave the exact numbers, but I interpreted like 2%-3% top-line growth. With all his decades of experience, what's his current outlook for the top-line, exiting out the depreciation and the other things that are going on? Yeah. This is Joe, Steve. I think it's picking up. We're seeing signs that customers are positive. Of course, there's all these forces that you can read the paper and go crazy. At the base store level, I think we're seeing a little bit of consumer optimism and willingness to start on some sort of a moving adventure. Every time someone moves, it's an adventure, to put it politely. If they're kind of optimistic, they're doing a little more business. I see them doing a little more business with this. They're accepting a little bit of rate increase. When we execute with what I call precision, they're good with all this. It's not that people don't have the ability to spend money or something like that. They just want to see good value for the money or maybe even great value for the money, which we should be in the position of providing. We're kind of at the great value end of the spectrum. I am pushing that real hard with my troops. I think we're seeing a positive response from the customer. Thank you. Now, moving over to depreciation, and you spent a lot of time on that in this call and also in the press release. I consider depreciation just part of the nature of the business that you're in. I mean, you're in a constant investment stage of capital for replacing your vehicles and increasing capacity. Depreciation is just a byproduct of that. You use it well to use that to offset as an expense, a non-cash expense. At some point, you'll be able to benefit from that when there's an increased demand. That's just the nature of your business in the self-storage industry and also self-moving, obviously. You're rather downbeat on it. I mean, this is just part of your business. Could you just comment on that? Maybe some investors don't understand that. I'm with you. Depreciation on self-storage is money in the bank. If you wanted to scratch me deep, that'd be my response there. It's money in the bank. Relax. Equipment is different. Equipment really is a depreciating asset. Through this time, we had a number of things that happened. The cost of acquiring equipment exceeded our upper limit of projections. Okay? It was something that we'd not seen in 30 years. That was coupled with a shortage of equipment, which is what runs repair expense up and also causes us, in the present year, to be acquiring more trucks than we would on a normal adjusted basis. I think you're absolutely right. Equipment depreciation, if we can have a reasonable handle on how we bring the equipment in and how we take it out, should match up to revenues in a positive way over a three or five-year cycle, for sure. I expect it kind of is, but there is this anomaly. The automakers, and they are starting to fess up to this now if you read the press, they have been grossly subsidizing electric vehicle misadventures by jacking the people who buy internal combustion engines, whether it is consumers or fleets. That has created a net loss for everybody. The automakers lost money because they could not sell the damned electric vehicles and make any money. We have paid arguably too much for fleet. That now is starting to come back towards normalization. We are not quite there on a, if you look at it over a 10-year trend, but we are improving. The feedback I get from the automakers is they're pretty much done with the charade of net zero. It's going to allow them to right their boat. Most of these people are actually manufacturing behemoths. They're excellent at it if you let them go. They have, whatever you want to say, drunk the Kool-Aid and not done what is their forte. I think they're focused on getting back to their forte, and that will benefit us, although there'll be some little lumps and bumps getting there. I think it's going to benefit us. I saw an article this morning where Mary Barra commented positively on tariffs. Of course, the article speculated whether she was trying to curry favor with the Trump administration or she actually believes this. She may be correct. These are complicated equations, how this cost works through the economy. Costs that are just wasted, in other words, money spent to develop a vehicle that you can sell for $50 but costs you $100, that's just pure waste in the economy. We've been the victim of that. I think that's coming to a halt. As that comes to a halt, the statement that depreciation is a normal thing will be absolutely true. It should be a normal thing. I'm, I don't want to say chagrined, but disappointed that we didn't properly see the extent to which this could go. In other words, the range of our projections did not encompass what actually happened on either the decline in resale value or the amount that the automakers would attempt to make stick on acquisition prices. Those are now coming back to where they're more comprehensible. Normally, they work well for the whole economy. I expect this is going to straighten itself out, give it a little bit of time. I'm with you 100%. Again, on storage, depreciation is just a piggy bank. It's not a cost. On trucks, it's real, but it should match to revenues. Thank you very much for taking my questions. Sure. Your next question is from the line of Steven Ramsey from Thompson Research Group. Please ask your question. Hi. Good morning. Maybe to start with, the U-Box growth jumped up meaningfully in the quarter and growing three times faster than moving. What do you attribute that step up to? I saw the comment that moving and storage containers both increasing. Were they increasing at similar levels on a year-over-year basis? Jason, I'll start with that. The moving transactions, the U-Box moving transactions, are growing at a faster rate than the U-Box containers that we're keeping in storage. Now, both are in the plus 20% range. It's just that the moving transactions are at the higher end of that. The storage transactions are at the lower end of that. With as many containers that we've acquired and warehouse space that we've built out, our big opportunity is to keep more of those containers in storage. Okay. And then the 17% growth, I mean, obviously, you can't pinpoint it too specifically, but is that the right sort of range to think about going forward, or is it still something strong but maybe more moderate than that? This is Joe. I think my expectation is to stay in that range. The market's vast. We've done this largely without cannibalizing our existing customer base. So we've been able to get growth in both of those segments. I see that the U-Box has a higher growth rate than the truck share operation for many years to come. I just think that's the nature of it. Of course, it's smaller, but the market's less explored also. And it's not a simple cannibalization of our other customer. Yeah, I think you can project it being higher. I certainly am banking on that. That's great to hear. Wanted to shift to real estate investments next year. Your storage pipeline is down a million or so from the prior quarter, and the U-Box warehouse space grew meaningfully last year. Do you expect real estate CapEx to be at similar levels in FY26, or do you expect it to moderate a bit? Just maybe your logic behind where you see it going. I'll touch it and I'll let Jason. He's the voice of reason here, which I think is the position you'd like him to play. I'm the voice of, "Let's get there before somebody else does." With U-Box, we've done a lot of just trying to get positioned in markets where we weren't positioned. With the exception of a few major markets, and I'll pick Los Angeles as an example, we're woefully under U-Boxed in Los Angeles, but that may end up being the situation for the next 20 years. We have added U-Box capacity throughout North America. I don't think we're in the emergency construction basis, which I would. If you would have asked me a year or two years ago, I'd say it's an emergency. We need more and more and more. Now, we need to calmly exploit the asset that we've built because, of course, that's the whole point of this. As Jason said, as we get more people into storage and continue to grow the moving franchise of the U-Box product, we'll be leveraging those assets, and that should be positive leverage. Okay. That's great. Last one for me, again, to stay on the real estate side of things. You've brought a lot of storage capacity online recently, that is, self-storage. The maturity period, is it still moving at the historical clip on going from day one to year one, two, and three? Secondly, you have a larger percentage of units in that early phase of ramp-up right now, it seems. Can you talk about the impact that has on EBITDA and the timeline of transitioning from money- losing to EBITDA positive as storage units mature? Steven, this is Jason. Our rough estimate is usually approaching 70% occupancy. You're paying your bills. We're not having any issues on the lease-up of the portfolio through, say, the first three or four years. I would say that if there's any slowdown that we've seen, it's in the year going from year four to five, where you're going from the low 80s to getting into the low 90s. I would say that that's maybe a couple of percentage points slower than what we'd seen before. I'm excluding the COVID years, which were unusual. That would point to more of a management challenge versus a consumer challenge, trying to get the facility filled up to the 90% plus. Otherwise, in the first three, four years, as we're monitoring these new facilities that come on, I'm not seeing any real weakness in how they're leasing up. Okay. That's great. Thank you for taking my question. Your next question is from the line of Andy Liu from Wolfe Research. Please ask your question. Hey. Morning, everyone. I appreciate you taking the question. I'm really excited to be on the call for the first time. To kick it off, you guys talked about a lot of the positives early on the call, right? On the top line and in the deck, you mentioned higher transactions, higher revenue per transaction, which is all great news. The big topic today is the tariffs, right? That kind of happened early April. As you look at the business on a month-to-month basis on your customers' traffic, have you guys noticed any meaningful shifts there? Perhaps folks that were thinking about moving and are saying, "Hey, maybe I'll just stay put," given uncertainty or anything like that? I'll answer this. You're going to get an opinion because if someone has a fact on that, I'd appreciate hearing it. My opinion, my observation is that if we communicate strong value, the consumer is still positive. They're a little picky. Where I have stores that are poorly managed, my business is down. That'd be my answer to you. I will never get every store managed with precision, but I can get most of them there. That's my task. No, I've not seen this, and I've been very curious about this like you state, where tariffs are going to make consumers uncertain, and then they do nothing. If you ask my opinion, when people are uncertain, they don't move. Okay? We're seeing people move. My answer would be, I don't think they're as uncertain as we might think. Okay. Got it. it. No, no, no. That's totally fair. That's totally fair. I know you don't spin around for a very long time. You're super experienced here. Just wanted to kind of get your sense on you've seen things through the cycle before. As you kind of look at where you are in sort of the cycle now, sort of what is kind of your outlook here on how things might play out on the housing and the moving side? Yeah. I think, again, moving is a need for the consumer. That continues. The question is, it used to be for much of my career, it was, can we get them to do business with anybody? Are they going to move in the trunk of their car or the roof of their car, or some damn thing? You see? They've always been moving. Of course, you watch them invest in moving. They're moving in wagons, for God's sakes. The question is, what's the mode? They're going to move. The question is, can you get them into a commercial transaction that works good for both sides? Can they see it as a value, and can we squeeze a profit out? We work at that, not so much as can we stimulate moving demand? Can we get people to move more often? No, we have no plans, no intent. We don't care. Don't accumulate any data on the subject. Can we get more of them to enter into a commercial transaction? Of course, specifically with U-Haul. That's kind of our task. If people shut down, and I've seen it where they've shut down, it immediately reflects in distance of move in our statistics. They move a shorter distance on average. That's a gross statistic, but it's a pretty good indicator when the distance they move declines, that overall, there's a little bit of anxiousness in the consumer group. Okay. Got it. Got it. That's super helpful. Super helpful. Moving on to kind of the storage side, I really appreciate you guys putting out that slide here on sort of the revenue upside on the development pipeline. I think I remember a couple of quarters back, I kind of talked about these developments you could bring in, sort of like 10% yield, 10% returns on these storage developments. On the real estate side, we kind of hear maybe tariffs are making input costs go up, or immigration policy could potentially affect the labor side of the equation. Would that potentially impact some of the yields you guys kind of initially expected for the future pipeline, that 10%? Andy, this is Jason. I've spoken with our real estate folks on the development side. Two areas of concern for us would be what goes into the concrete mix and then the steel. In talking with our largest steel suppliers, we don't anticipate any significant increases in the cost of steel, at least due to tariffs right now. Likewise, we haven't seen anything manifest itself yet in the cost of concrete. What we've actually been seeing, excluding the threat of tariffs, is the costs of construction have been gradually coming down for us. That's a combination of us being a little bit smarter. Also, I think that people are just a little bit hungrier, and we can get people to sharpen their pencil. It doesn't mean that actual costs have declined, but what we're paying is improving. Okay. Got it. Yeah. That's fair. That's helpful. It's really great that you guys are able to control that cost there. Really, following on the storage side, a lot of times you kind of look at companies that have an operating side and a real estate side. Sometimes they could be disconnecting the valuation of the real estate, right? Looking at your storage business, you guys own a pretty sizable footprint. Then, kind of look at the other storage names that we cover here or in the private market, sort of the value of a self-storage facility, right? Kind of like $200-$300 a sq ft is kind of what the market norm is. Looking at where you guys are trading, do you guys think there's a disconnect, maybe in how folks are looking at the value on the storage portfolio? This is Jason. I guess to answer that is we've been trying to provide more details to help people value that. That's an indication of we think that there's a disconnect. We think that there's more, as people understand us more, that we think the company's worth more than where it's trading at. We've been working with Wolfe and our other analysts in order to try to communicate that story. As far as valuing the stock, everyone who's listening to this call is probably better at that. What we're trying to do is present more information that our investors are asking for in order so that everyone can better value the stock for themselves. Yeah. For sure. For sure. I really appreciate you taking my question today. Happy to be launching on the name. Looking forward to working with you guys more. Appreciate it. Thank you. You're welcome. Your next question is from the line of Jamie Wilen from Wilen Management. Please go ahead. Yes. As a follow-up to the previous question, it would seem like when one looks at the self-storage industry, whether public or private, and looks at the growth of your self-storage as well as floating in U-Box there, which most of the other self-storage people do not have a similar component, that the value of self-storage in U-Box exceeds the current stock price. It seems like the truck rental business is being valued for less than zero. One would hope, other than just putting out information to additional Wall Street analysts, that the company can garner a plan for how to reduce that valuation gap since our self-storage is so undervalued relative to its peers in the market. Yeah. I think that's a great comment, Jamie. Of course, as you know, I'm invested in this. Optimizing that is in my selfish self-interest. I welcome input on the subject and in trying to get there. Would you all consider repurchasing shares at this tremendous discount to intrinsic value to close that valuation gap? I'm torn on that. We did some repurchases, I don't know, what, 10 or 12, 15 years ago. Some members of my family liked it because it felt like they were getting more wealthy or something. It didn't give any more money to spend. I don't know if it really did a lot. At the same time, Jason's keeping a pretty, he's playing his position and trying to make sure we keep ourselves very liquid and very flexible because there is significant uncertainty in financial markets, I'll say, relative to five years ago, maybe. He's trying to keep me to keeping a fair amount of liquidity. It's not been proposed. There's no proposal in front of the board or any particular board member that I recall who's agitating for a share back. I'm not agitating for one. If someone made the case, certainly we'd talk about it. I just know I don't know. It may be smart. We did it before. I was not very much in favor of it. I try not to just run this as a hypocrisy. And so. I would submit that the valuation gap today is much, much greater than the valuation gap when you were repurchasing shares a dozen years ago. It's a different equation today. I appreciate you making that point. Financially, the property and casualty business operating profits declined in the quarter from $25 million to $10 million. Is there any particular reason that would happen? Jamie, this is Jason. This is due to one of my least favorite accounting rules on the face of the earth. That is valuing common stock that we hold in our investment portfolios to market and running that change through earnings. We have a portfolio of common stock at the property and casualty company. Last year, during the fourth quarter, it went up in value compared to the beginning of the quarter, and we had a large gain. This year, it happened to go down in value. Combined, I think that was something like a $10 million swing just from holding the common stock, not from anything actually happening. Understood. As a shareholder, it intrigues me with the thought of potentially selling off our insurance businesses and using that liquidity to repurchase shares and close the valuation gap, and be able to put forth more capital into the businesses that are growing and are our core businesses. Any thoughts in that direction? Yeah. I think that's a valid consideration. It's discussed. I don't want to tell you that something's going to happen, but the idea is clear. I guess I'd leave it at that. Okay. All right. Thanks, fellas. Appreciate it. The last question is from the line of Stephen Farrell from Oppenheimer. Please go ahead. Good morning. I have a few questions about the fleet. What is the current age, and how does that compare to pre-pandemic level? I don't have a calculation. We don't run that statistic. If you look at unused mileage, in other words, let's take 130,000 trucks and how many miles do we have left in that fleet on a per-truck basis than we did pre-COVID? Pre-COVID was our highest. We would have had the highest number of unused and therefore available miles in the fleet. We have steadily been increasing that. This year, we'll increase it again. I was just thrilled prior to COVID because I thought we got the company into a strong position there. COVID came, and we had, at first, our own fear, and then to acquire more capital trucks. The automakers' inability or unwillingness to manufacture the trucks. Between the two of those factors, we declined rapidly. You saw that in escalating repair expense. Our repair expense went up a couple hundred million dollars in a short period of time. It is because the trucks, as on average, were not necessarily older but had more miles or less unused miles available. All these trucks have different amounts of miles that they are good for. There is not a one index number. I think we are probably, by the end of this bill, which will go through the one we are in now, basically, is going to go through next March, I think we are probably above 90% of what we had pre-COVID. I do not have an absolute calculation. We look at that twice a year and try to, it is a whole bunch of suppositions and try to comprehend what it is. I do not have a number in the front of my mind. We are gaining ground, which is, to me, the point. Gain the ground. You gain a little ground, you'll get there. There is no you can get too much and have the fleet too new, and it just costs too much. You want to kind of you want to have the fleet. If I had my druthers, I'd have an equal percentage of every model in every year of production. It never comes in that way. Sometimes I have to buy 30% of a particular model's fleet in one year because that's just what's available and what can be done. It kind of puts a lump in the snake as we digest that. You can just see it, kind of just like seeing a rat go through a snake. It's just kind of a little lump that kind of works itself out. We're not as good as pre-COVID. Pre-COVID was the best. We're way ahead at different times I've run this company. I mean, I'm proud of the fleet. I don't expect that if you randomly go into a place, you're going to get a rough truck. I'd expect you're going to get a good truck. There have been times in my career where I'd say, "You've got a 50/50 chance. You may get a rough truck." You're not going to experience that today. That helps build our business because consumers somehow communicate about that. They know. I can even tell by model when they think our truck fleet is a little bit not up to their expectations. I think we're not seeing that's not being a problem for us right now. If that makes sense. It's not a problem. We're paying up for it. That's what you're seeing in this depreciation. We're paying up. Right. I just wanted to follow up with that. You can correct me if I'm wrong. When there were no supply constraints with the fleet rotation, I always kind of thought of maintenance expenses increasing as the depreciation is decreasing, and the two more or less balance out over the life of the vehicle. Is it now we have a significant increase in depreciation that's outpacing the decrease in maintenance expense? Is that just a new normal because there was a big lump of spend this year and last year, and not much before that? Do you think it will eventually balance out? I don't know. know. I'm sorry. I do not want. I would not characterize it as the new normal. Again, I expect that automakers will continue to improve quality and maybe even pricing going ahead. They have room there if they can get themselves focused on it and get their cost allocated so they're not constantly trying to subsidize another vehicle. They're very good at this. They're very knowledgeable people. In my conversations with them as of late, that is their focus. I couldn't have said that two years ago. If they get focused on this, I think they'll do a good job. That will trickle through to us. We have to do, of course, a good job of what trucks we buy. We buy the right ones and the right amounts. There's always the issue that Jamie brought up. Are you really making a profit or not? Because there's so many things. On a what we call a box truck, in other words, a truck that has a square U-Haul box on the back of it, you're not out of the woods for seven or eight years. That's just the truth. That's always been the truth. It's not a scary thought to us. We deal with that all the time. You make a projection. An eight-year projection is kind of a long projection. We try to be real sober about that because we intend to be here seven or eight years from now in our positions. We don't want it to be reflecting poorly on us. We're trying to do that to the very best of our ability. It will become easier as the automakers focus back on their core competency because they are more predictable. Things are predictable. When all this green business has just disrupted, go to a car dealer and talk to the dealer. His tale of woe will be frightening. He has a bunch of unsold inventory and a bunch of orders for vehicles he cannot source. That just means the supply chain has been disrupted. We need to rationalize the supply chain, which I think is speedily being addressed. They will get it right because that is what they do well at. That's good. Thank you very much. There are no further questions at this time. I'd like to turn the call back to the management team for closing comments. Sir, please go ahead. Thank you, everyone, for your support. We look forward to speaking with you in August after we report our first quarter results. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you very much for your participation. You may now disconnect.