Great, thank you, everybody. I'm Joe Moore, Morgan Stanley Semiconductors Research. Very happy to have with us today the executive team of Wolfspeed, Gregg Lowe, President and CEO, and Neill Reynolds, CFO. So I normally don't like to make this about me or my views, but Tyler actually asked me, you know, we put out kind of a cautionary report on silicon carbide supply demand, and that's informed by the view of our auto analyst, who's cautious on EVs, and the view of our China analyst who are bullish on silicon carbides. So and we're actually it wasn't intended to be negative on Wolfspeed. In fact, we're not negative on Wolfspeed as a stock. But, I think, you know, give you guys kind of an opportunity to just talk about the environment in that context. You know, do you, when you look at EV maybe slowing down a little bit, you look at China progress, just kind of put that into perspective, what it means for you guys? Sounds good. Thanks a lot, Joe. So, thanks for the report. Appreciate it. And, you know, what I'd like to do is kind of give you, maybe a framework to kind of think about, the adoption of EVs and silicon carbide and what we're doing, you know, and so forth. First off, the transition from the internal combustion engine to electric vehicles is the biggest change in the history of the automobile, and it is the most disruptive change in the history of the automobile. There are gonna be winners. There are gonna be losers. There are going to be there's gonna be fits of it's ramping like this, and then there's gonna be fits where it's ramping like that. But my viewpoint is the transition from the internal combustion engine car to electric vehicles is not stoppable, and it's irreversible. The reason for that there are multiple reasons, but the most important reason is the world's largest market for cars is China. China is using this disruption to erase 100 years of being behind in the internal combustion engine car to race ahead and become the world's biggest exporter of motor vehicles. I believe that that is absolutely top of mind. There, like I said, there's gonna be a lot of disruption. So, you know, seatback tray in the upright position and fasten the seatbelts. There's gonna be a lot of disruption. We fully expect that. Like I said, there's gonna be winners and losers. Now, there's definitely a slowing of the acceleration. There, it's still growing of EVs, particularly in the U.S. I would hit a couple of points on that. First off, most of the EVs that are on car lots today were designed 5, 7 years ago and have silicon in them, have lousy range, you know, and so forth. So you're seeing a little bit of a yawn from a customer appetite. The adoption of electric vehicles and using silicon carbide is just at the early phase. The second thing that I would say, though, relative to this change in the adoption rate is it has no impact on us. The demand for our product is substantially higher than our ability to supply, despite the fact that you're seeing some pullbacks here and some pullbacks there. In fact, this weekend, I was on a call or I wasn't on a call, but I was communicating with a customer who was very demanding about his 2025 supply and how it needed to be substantially higher than what we're currently forecasting. What we're planning to ship this same customer in 2024 over 2023 is nearly 5.5 times more product. This isn't going from 20 parts to 100 parts. This is millions of units. So despite the fact that we're gonna ship 5.5 times more product this year, he's focused on the year after that, it needs to be higher. I'll be in China in beginning of April, and I'll be meeting with OEMs and Tier 1s. And their message to me, I already know what it is. We need more product. We need more product. We need more product. So that's number one. The second thing that I would say is the adoption of silicon carbide, was first introduced in electric cars by the Tesla Model 3. And at that time, it was the only car company that was committed to using silicon carbide in the inverter. Today, I cannot name a single car company that is not using silicon carbide. Maybe not in every car, but it's the adoption is pretty enormous where, you know, pretty much everyone is using it. The third point that I think is important is, the speculation about what's happening with, with China substrates, substrate oversupply, you know, et cetera. As you know, Joe, we do all of our substrate business on well, not all, but substantially most of our, substrate business on long-term supply agreements. We began that process 7 years ago. What has happened in between now and then is the customers of those supply agreements are attempting to get into their own materials business and supply themselves and become vertically integrated. That is important and a smart thing to do, because as Infineon showed in one of their public presentations, the substrate and epi are greater than 60% of the build materials for a silicon carbide MOSFET. So having that internal capability is really important. They all have goals. All of them are off their initial goals. They have not met their initial goals in terms of silicon carbide substrate production. So, you know, I think they're finding it hard. So we're now seeing extension and expansion of agreements, most recently with Infineon and with ROHM. And, of course, we did the long-term agreement with Renesas as well. The second thing that we've heard from a China substrate perspective is the vast majority of the substrates for China are Schottky substrates. And you don't try to build a Schottky substrate. You try to build a MOSFET substrate because it has substantially more value. And what a Schottky substrate is, is a scrap wafer. And so, you know, the notion that, you know, China is, you know, kind of right next door on, on MOSFET high-quality wafers, seems to not be there. There was also a commentary in the report about deflation of silicon carbide substrates. And, what I would tell you is we've just signed an extended agreement. And what is happening is 180 degrees opposite of what is happening. So I think the, you know, the, this, this potential we we always worry about all of our competitors. China certainly is trying to become independent of the West in everything semiconductor related, silicon, silicon carbide, analog, digital, leading edge, lagging edge, you know, all this kind of stuff. So you don't wanna write them off. But right now, based on the facts that we see, they're still a long way off. And the final thing that I would mention and then I'm gonna pause and turn it over for some questions. I know I'm covering a lot of ground here is, the notion that, our device competitors have broader portfolios and have a, a track record of, of delivering to customers. And I think that is, exactly correct, but it's about 6 years old. What's happened over the last couple of years is that the supply chain for silicon chips in the automotive market blew up. And always being able to rely on silicon companies, well, that kind of fell off the bandwagon, so to speak. And, you know, car companies were shipping fewer cars. Car factories were down. You guys know the whole story on it. So I think there was a bit of a dent into that armor, if you will, of we just need to work with them. And what car companies realized is they needed to understand who was the source of some of these fundamental things. And in the silicon world, kind of a lot of roads led back to TSMC. And in silicon carbide, the roads are leading back to us. So there's a lot of, you know, sort of appetite for what we're doing. The second thing that happened in that same time period is that there were pretty significant price increases for silicon chips going to the automobile industry. Some customers kind of felt taken advantage of in that situation. It left a pretty ugly taste in their mouths. So what were we doing all that time? Well, we were working with customers getting design-ins. And over that 6-year period, we achieved $22 billion worth of design-ins across numerous, you know, OEMs. We talked about in our last earnings report. We've got 128 different car models going into production over the next couple of years, 30 different OEMs. And by the way, of this $22 billion worth of design-ins that we had just in the last 2 quarters, nearly $5 billion of that is transitioning into production. You know, I think this. I'll now turn it over for a few questions because I know I talked a lot. You know, this transition is really, really disruptive. There are gonna be winners and losers. China is doubling down. And this is the West moment. It's their iPhone moment that Research In Motion and Nokia and Ericsson didn't pay attention to. And that moment is happening right now. Silicon carbide is at the heart of that. And it's gonna be a fascinating transition. So maybe I'll just pause there. And then, Joe, if you have any questions or clarifications. Yeah. Well, and I don't like, again, I would like to take the focus off of me and our what we wrote because I really want you to be able to talk about your stories. Of course. There's questions out there too. But I think, you know, just to come back on a couple of those things, just to be clear, we actually don't think China is viable as an automotive supplier today. Mm-hmm. So what our Asia team is talking about is, you know, 2, 3 years down the road. And I would certainly also agree when we first met, you said, "Look, everybody that we sell to has a plan to multi-source on the substrate." And I'd say the proof points have swung your direction, right? Yeah. Because you have seen those renewals. So I certainly would see all that. But that's really, you know, China is very resourceful. As you said, this is a major focus, not just. Yeah. Absolutely. Semiconductors, not just EVs, but the combination of the two. Yeah. You've not allowed China to innovate in a lot of areas. And so we're hearing they're putting a lot of innovation into this. That's kind of the main thing. They definitely are. And it's smart that they do that. 75% of all the silicon carbide on Earth is produced in the United States. And so they want to become independent of that. I don't blame them. It's just harder to do than most people think. You know, we have several of our device competitors who are our materials customers, really good customers, have found it harder to do. And so original agreements are extended and extended and extended again. And we don't do spot business. What, you know, you can think of these extensions as at least a half a decade. Yeah. Some of them are longer. So, we're in negotiations with one right now, you know? So I think that, you know, the quote I use a lot at work is the famous Mike Tyson quote where everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. And silicon carbide does that to you. You know, we just caught the last bit of the previous presentation from Warner, I think it was. And they were talking about Harry Potter. You know, this is a bit of Hogwarts kind of stuff, if you know what I mean. I was wondering how you're gonna connect to that. It's a very, very difficult technology. Exactly. Okay. Great. And so maybe, you know, shifting to your value proposition where we have been pretty constructive. I mean, this vertical integration that you offer, the fact that you do have substrates, that you're also have devices that you're moving kind of to a neat position on 200-millimeter, you know, you talk to the backlog that that's creating. But, you know, you've also had some fits and starts along the way. Yeah. As you tried to ramp that. You know, has that. It doesn't seem like that's shaken your customers' confidence at all. But can you just talk generally to that? And then we'll get specific to that. Oh, they would they would all love for us to be, you know, a lot ramping a lot faster right now. But what they see is, you know, they see that back in 2020, we stuck a shovel in the ground on a brand new factory. And we are now at the early phase of ramping up, you know, what is going to be the largest production facility for silicon carbide, you know, in the world. And so it's not we need to now go do something, you know, in the future. They see it's right there. They see kind of the light at the end of the tunnel, so to speak. I'd love for us to have had 0 problems. But we had a bunch of, you know, startup things that you deal with. I, I just remind everybody that we're doing something that no one's ever done before. We are ramping a 200-millimeter silicon carbide wafer fab. The hardest thing to do, to ramp that wafer fab, is to get the wafers and the epi and have that production going. That is the most difficult thing by orders of magnitude. That challenge we have overcome. You know, our Building 10 facility, which was a racquetball court, basketball court, it was the head of materials' office, is now a factory pumping out 200-millimeter silicon carbide crystals. It is ramping, you know, as nicely as you can imagine. The quality of crystals are fantastic. Quality of the wafers are fantastic. You know, we're shipping them up to Mohawk Valley. Every single piece of equipment in that factory, everyone is seeing a 200-millimeter wafer for the first time. Silicon carbide, sorry. They're seeing silicon carbide 200 millimeter wafer for the first time. There are integration issues that you need to deal with. We're dealing with those. We mentioned, 2 calls ago, we did a couple million dollars worth of revenue out of the factory last quarter. We did $12 million. We talked about $20 million-$30 million this quarter. That is ramping up. But underlying that is a really important thing. Every single MOSFET we've attempted to qualify in that brand new factory with a brand new wafer diameter, with a brand new epi capability, and everything like that, every single one of the MOSFETs we've attempted to qualify has passed qualification on first pass. That is not normal in the semiconductor industry, let alone when you're doing all this new kind of stuff. Further giving confidence to the customers that this fab is gonna be good. They would absolutely love for us to be doing 5 times more than we're doing today. But they see the light at the end of the tunnel. And I think it's encouraging. Great. You know, you talked about kind of an update on the supply side, on the substrate supply. Can you talk about Mohawk Valley? You've talked about, you know, 20% utilization in June and 25% later in the year. Can you talk about the progress towards that, and any kind of proof points that you can give us around that? Really good shape there. We are on track to hit 20% utilization out of Mohawk Valley in the June period. 20% is important for multiple different reasons. The first 20% is the hardest 20% when you're ramping a fab. Going from 20- 40 is substantially easier. That's because you have more lines. You have more equipment. You have more experience, you know, and all of that kind of stuff. So we're ramping up nicely. We've had very good output for the past several weeks, kind of record output, you know, out of the factory. So we've got good line of sight to that 20%. Again, our view is our ability to feed it now is pretty solid, you know, with Building 10, you know, humming along very nicely. I was up in the fab multiple times last quarter. I'll be up there again. I don't know exactly when. I think later this quarter. But the team is doing really good work. And, you know, coming together and, and dealing with these integration challenges that we have. And we're cranking out more product, you know, as we speak. So we're gonna continue that ramp. I think everybody would like it to go from that to that. But, you know, we're doing something for the first time. We're very, very confident in the capability of the fab and, and the cost factors that we're gonna see in that fab as well. So you have a couple of things working for you as you ramp that. One is the 150 moving to 200 millimeter wafer. And the second would be moving from kind of a low automation factory in Durham into a, you know, modern factory in, in Mohawk Valley. Can you talk to each of those? And, you know, how do you think about the relative cost structure as you continue to ramp? Yeah. I'll kick it off. And Neill can talk a little bit about the cost structure. So we're very, very pleased with the fact that we went to 200 millimeter. The quality of our crystals are better at 200 millimeter than they are at 150, you know? So that underlying capability is really, really strong. And obviously, you get 1.7x more die per wafer. And you basically have the same amount of time processing in the wafer fab. So you're getting 70% more chips per unit of time, which is, you know, obviously great when you have a supply-demand, you know, mismatch in the industry. I think, you know, maybe you can hit some of the cost side. Yeah. No. As we always say, Joe, that all roads lead to Mohawk Valley, both from a supply perspective and from a cost perspective. And, you know, as Greg pointed out, as you move from, you know, 150 millimeter substrate to 200 millimeter substrate, and this is the same math as silicon, you get about a 40% cost advantage, you know, at the die level just for the reasons, you know, Greg pointed out there. So I think we're on track to see that, again, the substrate, the cost, the quality, the yields, is on track for what we would expect at this level of volume. So we should see a nice cost progression there, and as you look in as we start to ramp the fab, you know, we right now, we're taking some underutilization, those early days of ramping a fab. But even with that cost structure, with the underutilization fully burdened, we're seeing a very nice die cost start to come out of the fab already. We anticipate seeing that improve. So, you know, over time, even over these next few quarters, the more, you know, revenue we push through Mohawk Valley, well, it'll certainly help, you know, from a supply perspective, but from a cost perspective as well. We'll start to see the benefit of that 200-millimeter substrate. We'll push more volume to the fab. You know, we anticipate, you know, as we start to see that fab ramp up, to have a very, very good cost position just because we're gonna be running a highly automated, you know, 200 millimeter facility with great yields, great costs, you know, give us a really, really nice advantage from a device perspective as you think about, you know, how things play out into the future. Automation will do multiple different things. Whereas, first off, it'll speed up the cycle time of the factory once we're ramped because you're moving material substantially faster than a human walks. And we're storing the material very close to where it's actually gonna be used. And it's overhead storage. So it, you know, it's not taking up clean room space. And, automation also will allow us to detect problems faster, which means, scrap events will be smaller. You know, right now, you know, if there's a problem in the fab, someone has to go down and look at some documentation, figure out what's going on, and determine. But, you know, when you have an automated fab, it's just, you know, you get those signals back a lot faster. Great. And obviously, the pipeline and the number of OEM wins, which I'm gonna ask you about, you know, speaks to the customer acceptance and enthusiasm. But it just how have you. I mean, you come from a background in automotive semiconductors from TI and Freescale. You know, there is it is a very difficult market to serve. And you need all of the qualifications of ASIL D and all that stuff. And you need the, you know, the ability to do advanced packaging and modules for those kinds of cars. Where are you guys in terms of establishing that with your customers? We've passed all the automotive qual and their certifications, you know, as well. So, you know, there are a number of different things you have to go through in terms of customers coming in, companies coming in, and kind of auditing the factory and so forth. We've passed all of those certifications, which I think is really important. As I mentioned, our devices are passing our own internal qual. Mm-hmm. Those are now passing qualification or in the process or have already passed qualification at our customer side of things as well. The customers are pretty excited about our module capability as well. Most of the product we sell is our, our dies and chips, because some customers wanna do their own modules. We're ambivalent on that, you know? So we'll sell them a chip. We'll sell them a module. Mm-hmm. We'll sell them a packaged die, you know? And it's unclear to me how it's all gonna play out over time. Mm-hmm. They're pretty excited about the module technology we have as well. Okay. Great. So your December quarter was pretty good in the things that mattered. Obviously, you had issues in industrial, which pretty much everybody has seen. You know, can you talk about that industrial weakness? Does that give you any flexibility in terms of being able to reallocate that capacity to the things? Yes, it does. It's not dramatic change. We're definitely reallocating capacity out of our Durham factory to service more of the automotive. It won't be a huge uptick. You know, at this point, every chip counts from these guys. And we're obviously. The ability to shift Mohawk Valley is substantially easier because it's you know, a giant facility comparatively. And so we're doing that as well. And so the vast majority of the output from Mohawk Valley is focused right now on the automotive parts. It makes it more of a challenge because the parts tend to be bigger. And you get less output per wafer. Mm-hmm. But we're definitely doing that because our customers are counting on us. The bottom line here is you're quite confident hitting the milestones for Mohawk Valley for the rest of the year. Yeah. Yeah, I am. So maybe we could talk to the demand side a little bit. I think you talked about 28 OEM wins. Obviously, you know, you talked about the pipeline numbers. Those are really big numbers. And, you know, I guess, how do you think of those in terms of timing that they go to production, timing that you can make announcements around those kind of exclusive wins that you have? We sort of have a funnel, so to speak, taking, you know, the opportunity that we have, the design-ins that we have, the design wins that we have, and then what the revenue is gonna be. And at each of those stages, we take a pretty decent haircut, you know, just anticipating that the customer might not need make 1 million cars. Maybe it's gonna be 500,000. Mm-hmm. Or, you know, they're taking a brand from a run rate of 100,000 cars to 500,000 cars. And is that really viable? So we take haircuts on that, sort of stuff. We do the same thing with our China customers. We have great customers in China. We've got pretty decent exposure to the auto industry there. But it's sort of in the country's interest to try to foster internal. Mm-hmm. capability. So we make an assumption that more of that is gonna, you know, possibly go away. Despite taking all of those, you know, sort of judgments, we still have a demand scenario that is substantially higher than our supply for the foreseeable future. I think there's going to be lots of fits and starts. I think you're gonna see surprising winners. You're gonna see surprising losers. I think if you look at the top 10 automobile companies in the world today, two are Chinese, despite the fact that China is the world's largest market for cars. Mm-hmm. By the way, they occupy number 8 and 10. Mm-hmm. If you look at battery electric vehicles, there are five of the top 10, including 1, 3, and 5. So most likely, if you look at the top 10 car companies in 2030 and you compare it back to 2020, I think there's five new names. And maybe they're not all Chinese. But probably one of them will be. Mm-hmm. Probably one of them's gonna be Tesla. You know, there's gonna be. Yeah. There's gonna be a lot of change and churn in the auto industry. This is the biggest disruption in the history of the car. Antilock brakes and traction control and power steering and all of that was nothing compared to what's happening. Yeah. And there's definitely this sense that the momentum on EVs has shifted to China a little bit. And in the U.S. and in Europe, you have a lot of companies that are dedicated to EV, spending a lot on EV. You know, and this is where our auto team gets a little bit cautious of, like, you know, these if they focus on internal combustion, the stocks are materially cheaper, right, because they're not making these big investments. And he's questioning some of those investments. So I guess, how do you think, and again, that's one view. I'm not saying that's right. Yeah. But, how do you guys think about that? And, you know, does it matter if we see programs here and there that sort of shift back towards? It, first off, it's not gonna matter to us because the supply is not meeting the demand right now. Yeah. We'd just be able to shift it. There might be a quarter where we're running with this one part. We need to shift it to a different part. Mm-hmm. We have a lot of fungibility, though. So I probably aren't gonna see that. But I would say, you know, a couple of things. First off, you heard me say it earlier. This is the iPhone moment for the Western world. And they're either gonna shine or they're gonna go away. And I don't think this is a stoppable, reversible, pattern. Second, most Western car companies got rid of all the people developing anything internal combustion engine technology development-wise, you know? So new engine technology, new, you know, any of this kind of stuff, they stopped developing that four or five years ago. And, you know, you're not gonna have the do-over moment, I don't think, you know, for this. Mm-hmm. They may produce those same cars for a little bit longer. But they're not gonna meet, you know, any of the, EPA guidelines or any of that kind of stuff. So there's gonna be a lot of issues. And, like I said, they stopped development of that technology. And I just don't see a do-over possible at all. Yeah. It's gonna be highly disruptive. Winners, losers. You know, forecasts are gonna be changing. Yeah. Doesn't really matter to us, you know, for the foreseeable future. Mm-hmm. Okay. Great. And then I guess, you know, I guess this time last year, was it last year that Tesla started talking about this kind of 75% reduction in silicon carbide, you know, presumably at the low end? And the commentary around that has kind of faded. Right. It seems like that's a mainstream technology at this point. But, you know, how do you think about that, in terms of, you know, when you look at markets like China taking the lead, do you see a range of outcomes there? Or do you see you know, obviously, you've made the kind of comments that the range of these engines is sort of comparable to horsepower, in terms of the way we're gonna think about these cars. Do you think we'll still continue to focus on the longer range? I think that silicon carbide does three things for a car. It gives it a longer range. It allows it to charge faster. And it makes the car less expensive because tons of reports on, you know, the value you get when you put silicon carbide in makes up for the difference in silicon versus silicon carbide cost at the vehicle level. And the company that first announced figured that out was Tesla with the Model 3, which I think is their entry-level, you know, vehicle. So it, it's you know, this is a I believe it's a $30,000-$40,000 car, you know, what have you. It came out. It had a 350-mile range when it came out. And the next longest range for a non-Tesla vehicle at that time was 125 miles. So today, you're gonna see more and more cars come out with silicon carbide. My car is a 516-mile range. You know, I don't have range anxiety. I can travel to and from work for a month without plugging in. I drove it up to Cleveland, Ohio. No issues, you know? So, you know, more you're gonna see more cars come out with 400+-mile ranges. You're gonna see cars come out with 500-mile+ ranges. Tesla, I think, has a 600+-mile range car coming out. It's the Roadster, you know? So, you know, that is going to, you know, I think that's gonna keep the momentum for silicon carbide very, very strong. There was a commentary as well, I think, in the report about going back to 400 volts. We don't see that happening at all. Companies are moving to 800 volts because it makes the wiring harness substantially less weight. I think the wiring harness is one of the heaviest things, probably outside of batteries, in an electric car. It's, it's one, it's the second heaviest thing inside an internal combustion engine car. So, you know, higher voltage, less weight, more range, higher voltage, faster charging. You know, we don't see that transitioning either. Okay. Good. So, you know, I get a lot of feedback from people around me. So we. Yeah. We tend to incorporate it. No, I think it's good to. I appreciate your feedback. No, I think it's, it's good to just have an open dialogue on this, you know? Okay. I might mention one other thing that I've forgotten. It again kinda gets back to the China substrate issue. You know, we do all of our business in long-term agreements, as I said before. We've done $3 billion worth of long-term agreements with customers in these agreements. And that's all for 150-millimeter wafers. I don't think we're including the 200-millimeter in that. So that's for 150-millimeter. We have shipped, to date, less than 40% of that. So there's 60% still out there. Out of runway, yeah. If there's gonna be an oversupply of silicon carbide, we're not seeing it. Yeah. Okay. That was actually a couple of questions on financials. And then, Yep. Turn to the audience. Can you talk about the gross margin trajectory, you know, the targets of operating cash flow in 2020 fiscal 2025, free cash flow 2027? You updated on those targets. Yeah. So from a market perspective, I said it earlier, Joe, I think it's all gonna come down to, you know, us pushing more revenue through Mohawk Valley, leveraging that, you know, leveraging these facilities that we're investing in and driving more volume through them. We'll, you know, using the 200-millimeter substrate, we'll just drive more volume through the facility. And we'll start to see, you know, really nice costs that eventually start to come through, you know, through the P&L from that perspective. So as we get to the end of the year, I think we talked about kind of, you know, mid- to high-teens here, as you get into the, you know, Q4 quarter and exit our June quarter, which ends our fiscal year. And then as you get into next year, we should just start to see, you know, continued improvement. Now, from a you know, startup perspective, you know, we're building these large facilities. I think, over time, you'll see them as translate into these really nice, you know, cash flow-generating vehicles, you know, as we start to bring up the utilization. So we will see a little bit of a drag as you get into fiscal 2025 just related to the startup becoming, you know, production cost at some point. So I think that's kind of the how you'll see the trajectory. I think underlying gross margin will continue to improve. We'll start to see a bit of a drag just from startup as it's related to bringing on these new facilities. What that translates into then from a cash flow, you know, perspective, you know, we'll continue to, you know, invest in the business over the next, you know, years and time to come. As you get into kind of mid-calendar year 2025, we'll look to drive operating cash flow positive, you know, based on that ramp and leveraging those facilities. And then as you get into fiscal year 2026, we'll start to see some, you know, step down in CapEx, in 2025 and in 2026. You'll start to see that then transition over to free cash flow positive out in that time frame and really start to see the benefits of these facilities, the 200-millimeter substrates, you know, benefit us and, you know, not just drive volume through those facilities but really start to see the benefits of that, in terms of driving cash flow as well. Great. And then in terms of the CHIPS Act, obviously, I'm sure you can't say too much at this point. But, you know, what do you think is the timing? And it does seem like, to me, this is gonna be an area that is politically very popular to subsidize. You guys are investing aggressively in something where the U.S. is. Yeah. Establishing leadership in a green technology. It just seems like it checks out. Yeah. We can kick it off. Yeah. Go ahead, Gregg. Over to you. So a couple of different things. So we've had, you know, full engagement, you know, obviously, with the CHIPS Program Office. We had a number of folks come and join us for a visit to the site, you know, two weeks ago, I think it was. Had some great visits. But there's a couple of things that I think are important. First off, this is a technology where the U.S. has the lead today. And between us and Coherent, it's roughly 75% of all the silicon carbide is produced in the United States. So it's not lost on the CHIPS Program Office that investing in something that's currently a leader is way easier than investing in trying to bring it back. And so we've got that direct feedback. The second thing is that our technology, silicon carbide technology, it's considered a critical mineral now by the Department of Energy and a national security, you know, interest. And it enables electric cars and charging infrastructure. It also enables better use of solar energy. So this is right down the fairway of what the administration is really trying to support. We're also a company that has done, as you all know, a ton of private investment into this, into our company. And so this private-public, you know, partnership, I think, is something that we've already demonstrated, you know, and so forth, and so I think we are almost perfect for what they're looking at. Now, we still have to do our work. We're submitting the final application. We've submitted our pre-application, got some good feedback. Our final application will go in a couple of weeks. Maybe you can talk a little bit about the timing. Yeah. So from a timing perspective, let me, if I just take a step back from an overall financing view. If, you know, if you go back over the last, you know, 5 or 6 years, you know, we've done, I think, a very good job of raising non-dilutive capital, you know, and managing the capital structure. In fact, in the last five and a half years, I think we've done about $8 billion of capital raise. In the last, you know, year to year and a half, we've done about $5 billion raise, with very little dilution. So that's left us in a nice spot right now. So we've got a little over $2.5 billion of cash on the balance sheet. It does not include, and Gregg mentioned it earlier, the capacity reservation deposit, the second drawdown of $1 billion from Renesas. So we're sitting at a little north of $3.5 billion of cash and liquidity pro forma, which makes it the perfect time to really focus in on the government incentives. That's really where we're focused now. From a timing perspective, Gregg mentioned it. We're getting our applications in. We're working closely with the CHIPS program team. What we've heard so far has been positive. But it is important for us to focus on right now that right now because it'll inform what our next steps are in terms of what's gonna happen with the balance sheet and how do we fund things going forward. But right now, like I said, I think we're in very good position, you know, from cash liquidity perspective. We'll let this inform kind of what our decisions will be next depending on how this all works out. We were also, you know, quite pleased to see some of the announcements recently, both for grants and for loans, that have come out. And, you know, we expect to make, you know, continued progress on that. They're actually gonna be here on Thursday, talking about the investment strategy and stuff. Perfect. Let's open up the audience. I think we have time for one or two questions, maybe in the back. Hi. My question is related to competition in the 200-millimeter silicon carbide wafer plants. Can you talk about, you know, ROHM and the other firms who are ramping 200-millimeter wafer fabs? And after all of these get up and running, what will the who will have the cost advantages? Are there which what companies have any inherent advantages? And maybe if you can also comment on the Chinese firms trying to enter the space. Yeah. So from a wafer fab perspective, a lot of wafer fabs going into either construction or changing, you know, and so forth, the real key is supplying that wafer fab with a high-quality, automotive-grade silicon carbide substrate. The two companies that first introduced 200-millimeter substrates were us and Coherent. And we both did it around 2015. And from 2015 to today, we're the only one that's actually gone into production with a silicon carbide wafer fab at 200 millimeter. So we're ramping the Mohawk Valley fab today. As I mentioned, you know, in terms of the Chinese suppliers, there's a lot of discussion about China investing. We know they're doing that. We know it's in their interest to do that. We can't stop them from investing in the technology. The technology, though, it itself, you know, is a lot tougher than most people imagine. And as I mentioned earlier, at 150, we understand that the vast majority of their output is for Schottky diodes. And again, a Schottky is a scrap MOSFET wafer. It's one you cannot use for a MOSFET. So they're gonna need to get 150 up and running before they get 200. How far are they behind? Well, hard to tell. We're not invited to their program reviews. But, you know, it took us and Coherent, who are supplying 75% of all of the silicon carbide on Earth, from 2015 to today to get us into production. I think speculating that someone that isn't really into production on high-quality wafers today at 150 can somehow pivot to 200 in the next two years seems like a pretty long putt. All right. When you think of your Japanese competitor, who's trying to enter the space, ROHM? Yeah. So ROHM is the third largest fully integrated silicon carbide company. They produce their own wafers and crystals through a German company they bought a number of years ago called SiCrystal. They are a very reputable company. They're also a customer of ours. We've done supply agreements with them and extended those agreements. And most recently, I think a quarter ago, maybe two quarters ago. Last quarter. extended again a supply agreement with them to supply them with 150-millimeter substrates. So I guess what that's translating to is the third largest fully integrated, the second largest fully integrated, silicon carbide company and the third largest producer of silicon carbide wafers is a customer of ours. And there's probably a reason for that. We're running out of time. We have one more question. Yeah. And we, a similar question from my side, with regards to the extension of the agreements. I mean, the biggest two silicon carbide device makers today, you haven't mentioned. And we haven't heard anything about them extending agreements with you guys. So did I miss anything, or what's the. Let's do my prediction. So the largest producer of silicon carbide chips in the world is ST. We did an original agreement with them back in 2017, maybe early 2018, something like that. These are all publicly announced. They are a great customer of ours. We have a very good relationship with them. The original supply agreement was for $250 million. Shortly after we announced that supply agreement, they bought Norstel, a crystal growth company. So this is, again, back in roughly 2018. About six months after owning Norstel, they came back to us and doubled their supply agreement with us to $500 million. And then recently, a year and a half ago, a year ago, or something like that, we further extended that agreement to $850 million. They are by far our largest customer. They're a great customer. But I think what they're finding is, what most people find, is that silicon carbide is not an easy substance to master. There's all kinds of challenges. And we've been, you know, a great partner with them. So they, they are the largest company by far in terms of those substrates. They have publicly stated that they will do about 40% of their substrates internally and about 60% externally. I talked to Jean-Marc, you know, about that. And, you know, we're understanding that. And I think that's strategically a good move from their end. But I think with these supply agreements extending and extending and extending again, and we don't do one-year extensions. We're not gonna be a stopgap. I think what it says is this is more difficult than most people anticipate. One word on onsemi, if you can. We've announced just an agreement with them a while ago. And so, we haven't made any further announcements. I believe their target is to be 100%. I think it's still 100% internally sourced. I actually don't remember. Yeah. They exited last year over 50% in their goals. Yeah. And GTAT, I think, is the company they bought. Yeah. Probably less than 100% 'cause they'll source from China as well. But, but they're it seems like they're mostly focused on GTAT. Yeah. All right. We'll have to wrap it up there. We're out of time. Thank you so much. Thank you, everyone. Thank you.