Good afternoon, everybody. Once again, I'm Jerry Revich. Welcome, everybody. Thank you very much for being here. We're thrilled to have with us from EquipmentShare, Mark Wopata, Chief Data Officer and Executive Vice President of Finance. We have Rhett Butler, Vice President Investor Relations, in the back. Thank you everybody for joining today's session. Just like the others, we're going to run this in a fireside chat format. Mark, you and the team have built a $9 billion rental franchise in a really short period of time. You're in high growth mode now, so there are startup sites with low initial profitability. Can you just talk about what site economics look like for your older rental sites as we think about what EquipmentShare returns could look like longer term?
Definitely. Thanks for having me too. This has been a really great conference so far. Like you mentioned, we are in high growth mode. It's also important to note, too, why we're growing, which I'm sure we'll talk about some more in today's session. We are seeing a lot of demand from our customers, and we grow in response to customer demand. Our T3 technology platform creates a differentiated offering. We're a 400+ site provider, and as a national provider, that's really causing a lot of pull-through. When we start sites organically, like you said, there's an initial upfront investment where we burn about $2.5 million per market in the first 12 months. They're not profitable, like we said, in the first 12 months. That's coming from overhead, over-fleeting, and overstaffing.
Second year is about in the 40s% of the rental segment EBITDA margins. By month 24, those sites in 2025 produce 55% EBITDA margins and 16.5% ROIC. To your point on where can this go and where are we seeing the most mature sites, our most mature sites are producing north of that 16.5% ROIC, with also we're turning on a lot of other ancillary revenue streams. We started in rental. Rental is probably the most capital-intensive part of the business. We are seeking to serve the contractor holistically. Our founders, Jabbok and Willy, were contractors for 30+ years, and turning on parts and service, SaaS, fuel, and all the other specialty items, which we're doing, continues to expand the ROIC. We've seen even north of that 16% ROIC for our most mature sites.
Mark, the range of returns for the most mature sites, how much does that vary? $40 million OEC per site is not going to be feasible with every footprint. How much does that vary in terms of EBITDA per site and OEC per site once they're fully mature?
Definitely. We, in our long-term target, we have by 2030, 700 locations, $20 billion of fleet under management. There's some maturing still in there. Let's call it $30 million of OEC per site is kind of what their long-term target implies. There's nothing magic about $30 or $40 million per site. It is higher than the rest of the industry, which is mostly a product of our organic growth. We get to pick all the locations ourselves. We don't have overlap from legacy acquisitions. That's really why the OEC per site is higher. The return profile still cascades down from there. Once you have the amount of fleet invested in a site, you're getting that mid-50s EBITDA margins, the high teens ROIC.
The range on a site return, there's really nothing magic about how much OEC you drop on a particular site. What's important is the return profile on those locations. Whether it's $30 or $40 million, we have sites that operate at $20 million of OEC and $70 million of OEC, they're producing the same kind of high 50s margins and high teens ROIC.
When you're at $70 million OEC on a site, the returns aren't 30% on that type of site?
The margins and the ROIC are the same, the yield off that OEC is essentially kind of the revenue yield off that OEC is the same sort of revenue yield on an OEC basis that you would get from a $20 million site. It's just a function of the OEC that you're putting in the ground there.
Is what's happening in those areas, you're just paying more for transportation when you have $70 million OEC? Is that part of the driver?
Really, we don't see, even in those sites, transportation as a huge blocker. We're getting good enough locations, and we're having the discipline on our delivery networks to be able to still produce the margins that I was just talking about. We do see, as we especially expand, there's a lot of green space for us in the Northeast and the West Coast and denser metro areas. That smaller site and hub-and-spoke model can be more efficient, and that's usually where you'll see us trend towards in denser metro areas. Putting $70 million of OEC in a site that has the right location in a metro area, and the right access to highways, and the right customer base still does produce the sort of returns that we were talking about.
The high teens returns, that's essentially for all of your mature sites. It sounds like you have some sites that are earning higher returns. The sites that are earning higher returns, how do they get there? Jabbok talks about opportunity in some of these 30% returns.
As we're talking about the ROIC, that's the fully loaded NOPAT, including the OWN Program payouts and all the invested capital. How do they get higher than the 16.5%? They start to turn on other streams like tooling, parts, service, fuel, and other managed job site services for the customer. What we're seeing from a trend perspective is that customers expect more than ever for their equipment providers to be a full-stack provider, where they provide all the core specialty site solutions and then other really interesting areas like SaaS and the platform revenue that we're seeing. Those higher than 16.5% ROIC sites are the ones that are turning on those ancillary revenue streams for us.
Got it. In terms of the site development process, having been at this for 11 years now. What are we doing differently today? What have we learned about the site development process?
Yeah. A lot of hard-won lessons, as you can imagine. For us, opening the right location requires three things. It requires the right people, the right fleet, and the right property. You have to unlock all three of those to be able to open up location. Underpinning all of that, you have to have customer demand. That is what's pulling us through. That 90% national or regional customer base is what's pulling us through to open up in all these different locations. We've made a lot of improvements in the way that we hire people and the way that we select properties. We're one of the best selectors of IOS properties in the space. Then the other thing that, if you think about, we're around 400 rental locations today. The long-term target by 2030 is 700.
You ask yourself, "Okay, how do you get from 300, 400 locations to 700?" The answer is, we actually search for all those properties simultaneously. You would think, okay, we have a schedule that's this quarter we're going to open up these locations, and you follow that linearly, which we have the plan, but what's nice about having our customers that are renting in every MSA in the U.S., and 75% of our revenue and new openings comes from existing customers. If we see a location that we have the right property, people, and fleet that was slated for 2029 and we're ready today, we'll pull it up as well. We're able to actually search simultaneously, and having that algorithm that looks for all the MSAs simultaneously because we have the demand has been a real unlock for us from a new site opening perspective.
Mark, as you folks add 70 sites a year, can you talk about how you folks maintain a consistent culture, consistent control, quality, service quality? How do you folks do that?
Yeah. Creating that culture of excellence is really, really important. Culture of safety. We have $9 billion of fleet under management, but our most important asset, of course, is our people. A few things. One, we have this really great advantage that we have a great brand in the market. People want to work for EquipmentShare. We have over 300,000 applicants a year, and we're hiring a fraction of that number. The way that you create is, one, you choose the right people. We do a lot of work to make sure we choose the right people. We actually have this really nice advantage where people who want to build something new, they want to use tech to change the industry, are the ones that want to come work for EquipmentShare. That's really accretive to the culture. It's the technology and it's the incentive.
On the technology side, we use T3, our homespun platform, to run our business, and it's the same platform that we sell to our customers and we give for free as part of the rental. What that means is that every site when we open it is standardized on the same platform. It's got the same metrics, it's got the same operating controls. That's really been important to be able to replicate. Also incentives. We're a meritocracy. We want to choose a winning team, and our branches are paid when they make money. We're very focused on if you're not cash flowing and if you're not making earnings, you're not getting paid. If the people who are, or the branches that are performing, they're paid well.
Creating that incentive and aligning everybody to row in the same direction has been a really important factor for us to maintain, like you said, the controls, the accountability, but also the culture of winning across all of our branches.
In terms of the employee turnover, what's that been like across the company?
Yeah. Industry standard, what we would expect and what we actually see is our retention rates are very strong, and they've really even improved as we scaled, and we know how to pick the right people. We keep really great people. We hire really great people. The turnover and industry metrics are where we would expect, and we're pretty happy with how that's trended, even as we're adding thousands of members a year to the team.
Then, what we've heard from your competitors, and obviously, take it with a grain of salt because they're competitors. We've heard different quality of performance of EquipmentShare as a competitor depending on the site. Some areas strong. Other areas they'll say, "Oh, EquipmentShare is not getting the uptime for their equipment." They have some different brands within the fleet. What's your take, knowing what you know about individual branch performance? Are there pockets where it's like, "No, yeah, we've got work to do, we've got to turn people over" or what lens would you use to view those comments?
Yeah. First of all, if you think of that 55% margin number and the ROIC, it's pretty well clustered. It's pretty tight on that 50% number with a little bit of a right tail on overperformance. At the same time, we have 400 branches, we are very focused on setting expectations, holding people accountable, and building a winning culture. It's our duty to the teams that are operating in any environment to put the right people in place. That means sometimes you don't hire the right people, but you make changes quickly, and you put a winning team out onto the field. On the equipment side, the metrics, the uptime, the predictive service and maintenance from T3 is a big differentiator from us because we are selling uptime to our customers.
Our customers want the machines to work, they want them to be there on time. Holding teams accountable on that front is a very big part of the management strategy for us.
Mark, you folks beat fourth quarter results with the flash results. You beat first quarter as well. Can you talk about what's gone ahead of plan over the past. I'll throw in your third quarter results were good as well. Call it over the past nine to 12 months, w hat's played out better than expected?
Yeah. It's a good question. On top of all of the distinct advantages that we have in the market and the share that we're winning, especially on new projects, we saw a few things. One, strong macro backdrop, especially for the customers that we serve. Our customers are focusing and winning on mega projects, these large, not just data centers, but it's like power, infrastructure, manufacturing. Our customers are seeing a strong macro backdrop. Two, we're seeing a lot of stickiness and wallet share growth with our customers as well. I think we have a slide in our deck that we talk about when our customers use the T3 platform on rental, they're managing access control, they're managing utilization, they're buying trackers from us and putting them on their own fleet. They're spending six times more with us in rental, we're seeing that.
Also our branches are maturing quickly, too. All of those really are good tailwinds for us in the space and are contributing to our sharp performance the last few quarters.
In terms of on the backdrop side, you mentioned data center really strong. What we heard is rental rate really picked up in March and then took a point and a half increase in April and another point in May. Is that representative of what's happening in the market? Are we seeing significant price increases?
Yeah. Our strategy already, given our differentiated offering, is to price at or above the market on rental. What we are seeing is a lot of ingredients right now from a supply side, from the demand side, that is supportive of upper pricing pressure in the space. If that continues, it would be a nice tailwind for us in the back half of the year into 2027.
In terms of for data centers specifically, we're hearing essentially, you need late model year equipment, otherwise they don't want it on the site. Is that right? Is there a discrepancy growing between newer gear and older gear on the used market?
When you're building a large project in a data center, for example, you need a full range of gear. First of all, there's like the core gear, there's also the specialty gear where we're providing, and they're expecting providers to be full stack solutions providers. Typically, there's a few classes that are in the space that are kind of more indexed on data center needs. For the most part, what we're seeing is that just like in traditional rental, what matters is uptime. When people talk about new fleet, what they really mean is, "I want uptime, and I don't want my fleet breaking down." That's really what customers care about.
That's really what we're seeing on the data center, is there are data centers and also mega projects in general, is that customers want fleet that will run and will run reliably. That's typically if you maintain your fleet properly and you have the right predictive and preventative service, you can drive that regardless of the model year. My speculation based on the question is people want uptime and that's which is pretty important, obviously.
Got it. To shift gears, in terms of just the cohort disclosures that you folks laid out in the S1, just given the maturation of the footprint, just mathematically it would suggest relative to your EBITDA guidance about $150 million of upside this year, just because the newer sites as a proportion of total are coming down. Anything that we should keep in mind relative to, and I appreciate that we've got the law of averages and the sites are not exactly two years old or three years old. Anything we should keep in mind relative to the cohort math that suggests there's a good upside to your EBITDA look?
Yeah, we raised our guidance at the midpoint to 29% year-over-year growth for rental. So there's obviously a lot of tailwinds in the space. The other thing that we're really focused on is customer demand. Customer demand is there. We're going to grow, and we're going to expand to meet that customer demand. Then on the upside, as our sites mature, they should produce significantly, if the past is any precedent of what we expect, they should produce significantly more EBITDA as those margins move into the mature site cohort. The other thing that just to note on like kind of how the model works is we drop OEC onto a site. Depending on the site, obviously, the OEC produces revenue, then we're at the mid-50s EBITDA margins and high teens ROIC.
That's kind of the way to think about the growth algorithm and the upside. Certainly there is, if you kind of just look at our rental segment EBITDA margin for our mature sites at 55, and you compare that to the whole cohort, there is a lot of opportunity for those to move into the mature range, and we think that's a great tailwind for us.
Mark, your financing approach is unique. You folks have been able to build a $9 billion business using it. For those in the room that are newer to the business, can you just talk about how you've set up the OWN Program? How do the economics compare when you're selling to direct family offices versus the ABS structure that you folks set up and the cost of financing each? Is there a difference? Does it matter for EquipmentShare?
Yeah, definitely. The OWN Program first exists because we have customer demand. We've created a connected asset class that we can actually give asset ownership in a new and unique way. The way the OWN Program works, just to kind of back it up high level, we buy equipment from manufacturers. We're one of the biggest buyers in the world. We absorb that equipment into our rental fleet, and then we'll take packages of that equipment, and we'll sell it to third parties. Think high net worth, family office, and institutional buyers. Then we enter into asset management and revenue share agreements with those participants. When the equipment rents, we share a portion of the revenue with the participant. We don't provide minimum utilization or minimum payment guarantees.
We treat that equipment the same as any other program or anything on our balance sheet. T3 allows us to manage the fleet agnostically and blind. Then at the end of the program, six or seven years is typically the term, we have an option, but not the obligation, to purchase the equipment at the appraised value, or we can remarket it and just let it go. It gives us a lot of optionality to control the fleet. But also there's a significant de-risking mechanism there. Talking about cost of capital. This has allowed EquipmentShare to meet our customer demand because our differentiated offering in T3 in a balance sheet protective way and gives us a lot of capital flexibility.
If you just kind of think about, okay, how do I compare the cost of capital for a balance sheet machine versus what's in the OWN Program? If you think about the OWN Program in a normal utilization scenario and the payments that are made in revenue sharing to the participant, and then at the end, there's essentially a purchase option, but not an obligation at the appraised value. What you can back into there is those OWN Program payouts are essentially like lease payments or interest and depreciation, and using the residual value, what you can come up with is essentially it's like a 6%-9% implicit rate lease in a normal utilization scenario. We compare that to the balance sheet, and that's how we manage the cost of capital to keep it competitive between the channels.
We're very much oversubscribed in all the channels that we just talked about. It's a really strong product and people really like the product. Between the channels, to answer your question on the high net worth versus the institutional channels, really competitive and similar cost of capital. We like to keep those open and feed all the sources because it helps us meet our demand, while also protecting the balance sheet.
Got it. On the institutional side, what's the general cadence of when you come to market? I think there might have been an expectation around something near term coming. Is that happening? Can you just talk about the cadence?
Yeah. Historically, we run competitive processes to do this. There's over 1,300 participants in the program, we like to cluster the sales in Q2 and Q4. We've seen that from us for the last couple of years. That's a combination of the high net worth and the family office channel. Obviously they like the Q4 environment because it aligns with their capital planning. We've done deals in the second and fourth quarter over the years. Like we said, we're way oversubscribed to the program. We've shared before that we kind of expect to follow that cadence, that's when we typically do those transactions. We have a lot of flexibility there because we can keep them on our ABL until we're ready to do a deal. Our processes usually run at that cadence.
For the ABS issuances, are you folks providing any financial guarantees related to those assets when we see the ABS?
Yeah. Definitely not. There's no guarantees on our end. The way that this works is we sell it to an entity that we have no stake in. It's not our machines, those entities are then we're helping them do, from a marketing perspective, capital markets takeouts, but we are providing no residual value guarantees. That's really important for those equipments because it's really important for them to have the T3 platform to see how we're managing their equipment because they take the risk on the gear. For them to see that we're maintaining the equipment, that we're servicing it properly, that we're actually utilizing the gear and treating them like we say in the contract is really, really important. There's no minimum utilization, no minimum payments, and it is truly their asset.
In the scenario where used values depreciate, who's providing the senior collateralization in the ABS?
When the owners are still the actual owners of the institutional, like the institutional buyers are the ones that are at the bottom of the stack there, it's their risk, it's their collateral, it's their asset. That's the same across the board for the OWN Program.
Got it. When you folks do family office originations, you do it through EZ Equipment Zone. Can you talk about how that works? What origination fees look like? Why you folks do it through an intermediary? What does it do for you?
On the OWN Program in general and to the high net worth, the family office, there's over 1,300 participants in the program. We, like I said, we run a competitive process clustering our sales around Q2 and Q4, we will go direct. There's buying groups in the program. There's actually not really any single overexposure in that platform. Like we said, there's over 1,300 participants, we'll run those processes. For us, whether it's a buying group, a high net worth, family office, or institutional, we'll make the sale to those participants, any fees that they have would be kind of away from us and not facing us, but more facing the participants that they're working with.
They're aggregating the participants essentially?
Yes.
Is that their function?
Yeah. There are different-- you mentioned one, but there are multiple. There are buying groups that then actually face participants. The participants are the ones that are the true owners of the equipment, but we do face different buying groups as part of the transactions.
Good. Okay. Then in terms of from an end market standpoint, we've seen really positive outlook for semis, and we're now seeing starts inflecting positively. Are you putting gear on semi-fab sites? Is that starting to draw equipment yet?
Our theme more broadly is kind of industrials and manufacturing across the board. There is positive, obviously, momentum in that end market, but we're seeing it really across the board, which has been a really positive tailwind in the space. We've seen kind of the movement that you're describing, but it's really part of a broader theme of manufacturing, industrials, power, data centers, infrastructure, all those markets that we serve and those big projects, we're seeing a lot of good starts there.
We're hearing about things moving forward in life sciences as well. Is that something that could move the needle, or is that a niche that won't use a ton of equipment?
No, I would put that probably inside of the broader trend, and so there's definitely opportunity there, and it's really kind of part of the broader trend that we've seen.
Got it. In terms of the overall competitive landscape, how do you see the competition intensity today versus five, 10 years ago? Any changes from an EquipmentShare standpoint, especially with Caterpillar getting more aggressive?
What we've seen is for our 90% of national and regional contractors that are serving that $5 trillion to $7 trillion of mega projects that are in the pipeline, that really only the top national players are able to service their job site needs. From a competition perspective, that's who we see playing on the large job sites. There's a lot to go around. It's a very constructive backdrop right now, we've seen good discipline and good growth in the industry. Just on what's interesting on the regional side, providers that are servicing regional contractors, not quite the growth though that we've seen in the large nationals. The top four rental players make up 38% of the market or whatever it is. That's really where we've seen service of the national contractors that we're focused on growing with.
Right. Can you talk about power? Utilities have really big CapEx plans. The actual spending in structures has been really slow to get going. What are you seeing? Are you folks putting more gear on T&D areas? There's LNG projects that have broken ground. Are you seeing an acceleration in gear going towards power sites?
Definitely part of the broader trend I talked about, a lot of demand from customers there on the power side, which is what we would expect. As you mentioned, permitting, this is why T3 exists, because all construction is fits and starts and delayed and this is the whole reason Jabbok Schlacks started the company. We are seeing good demand in power. Also on the rental side, though, temporary power and modular power has been a really good tailwind for us. Our specialty offering in power enabled by T3 is one of the best in the space, and that's been a really good grower for us as well.
In terms of your ability to get equipment, what do lead times look like across the major CAT classes for you?
We are, like I said, one of the biggest buyers in the world, that allows us, with our OEM partners, to get us the right slots and allocation and pricing that we need. While on the industry more broadly, we do see lead times elongating a bit, it really doesn't have any impact on our ability to deliver our 2026 and 2027 CapEx goals. Broadly, yes, I think there is lead time. That is kind of not so surprising from the supply dynamics here. For us, in particular, given our relationship with the OEMs, we're right on schedule.
In terms of the product lines where it's tightest, we're hearing aerial slots might be getting close to sold out this year. Is that right? Is that really happening?
I don't think we can comment specifically on product lines, but I can say that on these mega projects, the core gear, high demand, the specialty gear is in high demand. You think about aerials, material handling, compaction equipment, and then also pumps, power, HVAC. They're all driving the demand side of the environment, you would expect that to drive through on the supply side as well.
In terms of when we think about a dollar spent on a data center versus dollar spent on the warehouse, is it more equipment intensive? Let's say you have a billion-dollar data center structures investment and collection of billion-dollar warehouses. Do you care? Are you agnostic, or does the billion-dollar data center use more gear?
On a probably total percentage of spend, we're still saying that rental is 3%-5% of total contract value on projects that we're serving. From an end market perspective, we can be indifferent. I will say for the data center projects that you mentioned are typically larger and more complex. From our competitive advantage in those enable our ability to win those projects that still price at or above the industry, T3 drives more value when there's more gear on site. Obviously, a data center project is going to be much larger than a warehouse project, that's where we're seeing a lot of value is when you're running 2,000 machines at once on a job site. Our customers are getting even more value out of the tech platform, that part is more valuable to us.
The fact that you need higher performance thresholds means
Just more equipment in general. Maybe not more as a percentage of the total spend, but there's definitely more equipment going onto those sites, it's a nonlinear complexity curve as you add 200, 300, 3,000 machines. The need for managing that more holistically gets greater and greater and greater.
Got it. Mark, can we double-click on specialty? Different companies have different definitions. With 15% of your fleet does specialty, can we just talk about what proportion is power, HVAC, pump? Just help us understand that.
16% of our fleet is at Q1, is what we call our specialty category. Inside of that category, power, pump, HVAC, site solutions, so think about matting, modular office, toilets, trenching, and then also our tooling and tools division all kind of sit inside of the specialty mix there.
The rough breakout between tools versus power, can you just give us the biggest pieces?
We haven't shared that specifically, what I can say is that we are looking like our customers. The other interesting thing I'll say on specialty is it's stayed around 15% of our fleet for the last couple of years, that's on top of 45%, 25%, 37% growth. We have, I think, the fastest specialty growing business in the industry, our goal is to look like our customers, and our customers are demanding even more and more specialty in their job sites. As a good index, we kind of think about our specialty business will look like what a job site needs to look like over time.
In terms of the returns profile of the specialty business, tools is different dollar yield and margin profile compared to power and HVAC. On a blended basis, what's dollar yield for a specialty versus overall useful life margins? Can you just frame that for us versus general rental?
Just directionally, what we typically see is that the specialty equipment is higher yield and higher margins than the general rental equipment. We don't specifically break a lot of those out, I think I already mentioned this, but I'll say it again. What we do see, though, is that the ability for the T3 platform to even elongate useful life on a generator, for example, that we can predict wet stacking, that we can predict the regen, that we can make sure that we're actually maintaining the equipment properly and keep it up is really, really useful. T3 is super useful on an excavator or a boom lift, and it's even more powerful on that specialty gear. There's a lot of upside there for us as well.
Geographically, looking across your footprint, any interesting demand trends that you're seeing? Obviously, 30% growth or nearly 30% growth, really a lot. Are there parts of your footprint that are even better than the average?
Well, first of all, there's a real opportunity and a gap where the footprint is. I think I share this, the Northeast and the West Coast, we have a real opportunity to greenfield there as well. There's a lot of demand dynamics and trends in those areas that we're not able to take advantage of because you have to have the service center, the distribution to service your customers. That's a real opportunity. More broadly, we've seen really good demand trends across the board, so nothing particular to call out there.
Okay. You folks spoke about pockets of lumber sites that might make sense. Can you just double-click on that? It feels like only a subset of rental customers would need lumber. Help us understand how that works.
Yeah, it's a good question. T3, the T3 platform stands for people, assets, and materials. We started in rental to connect assets, the software platform connects people, there's a real opportunity in the materials business. For us, we're at the national regional contractor scale, there's that middle market opportunity where a customer wants to be able to use the same salesperson, same distribution channel, and same tech platform as well to manage the materials on-site. Those LBMs, which we have about 22 LBMs right now, those are an opportunity for us to address that need. It's an opportunity for us in the long term. It's a small part of the business right now, and we'll grow in a really disciplined way there. Yeah, that's kind of the thesis around the business.
It's part of that broader kind of unlocking the total contractor spend that you see in our decks. That's one of the things that accretes to our total ROIC over time.
Got it. At the time of the IPO, I think there are aspirations for that to be a meaningful revenue business. What I'm hearing is if the returns are there, it'll be there, but-
In a disciplined way, yeah
you're going to be deliberate.
That's right.
Got it. Okay. In terms of the telematics offering, you've been focusing on scaling that. What's the runway to continue to grow telematics beyond the fleet?
It's a really big opportunity. We built our platform ourselves. We run it on ourselves. We give it for free to the rental customers. Right now, it's a $30 million ARR SaaS business. We would be disappointed if it's not a billion-dollar plus ARR business by 2030. The opportunity to sell a full stack ERP, connect the 40% of equipment that's owned and not rented in the U.S., and be a full digital partner with our customers is really where the long-term vision sits there.
$30 million ARR this year.
Yeah.
Next year, you expect double, triple, if we're talking billion in 2030?
Yeah, we haven't shared those numbers specifically, but you can see even more than double this year alone, year-over-year. There's a real opportunity to scale there. We'd be disappointed if we didn't reach the number that I just shared. We'll get more disclosed as that number gets bigger as well.
Super. Well, that's all the time that we have. Please join me in thanking Mark for joining us for our conference call.
Thanks for having me. Appreciate it.
Mark, thank you.