All right. Good morning. Thanks, everybody, for being here. Thanks, everybody, on the webcast. My name's Frank Louthan. I'm the senior telecom analyst here at Raymond James. We're very pleased to have Fastly, Rich Wong, and Vernon Essi here from the company. So maybe we just, you know, start out, Rich. You know, give us a couple of highlights from the quarter and a couple of things that you want folks to focus on, and then maybe give us some you're new in the seat. Give us some of your vision of how you're gonna approach the job as CFO.
Sure. Our most recent quarter was Q3, which is September 30th. We had a really good quarter. We had $158 million of revenue, which was 15% year-over-year growth. That was actually our third sequential consecutive quarter of re-accelerating growth, which was a great position to be in. We also, in the quarter, announced record profitability and record free cash flow and guided for free cash flow positive for the year. You know, I've been in the job for about four months, so I started in August of the year. You know, I think it's a great time to be at Fastly. I really was drawn to Fastly from the product that we have and the technology that we have and how good we are with our customers.
You know, I think for the CFO role, you know, given how good our product is, I just feel like the market share should be greater. And so I was really excited to join because when I see the product and how good it is, it's about execution. And I think that, you know, my role as CFO is really gonna come in and help, you know, take advantage of the products we have and really execute well across the company. So I'm really excited. Kip Compton, who's our CEO, you know, he joined about 18 months ago or 20 months ago, but he's, you know, new to the CEO role where he was promoted two months before I joined. So pretty excited about the management team we have in place.
All right. Great. So, like you said, good, good quarter. You know, talk to us about, you know, the guide. So what does it take to kinda hit the higher end of the range, you know, for the year? Talk to us about how you're seeing things so far.
Yeah. So we provided guidance in our last earnings call. You know, from a guidance perspective, you know, I think we are in Network Services is 75% of our business. And so to hit that guide, we have to feel really good about the traffic that we're getting on the site and the pricing environment that we're in. You know, I feel like Q4 we've, you know, we're very in a similar situation from Q3 where we're seeing a lot of strong, strong traffic growth. And I think the pricing environment stays very positive for us as well. We also, you know, in Q3 had a real strong cross-sell opportunity, and we had strong cross-sells overall. And so security grew 30% year-on-year last quarter. And that was the cross-sell momentum that was put in place over the past few quarters.
You know, for Q4 guidance to hit, like, you know, we have to continue and assume that those cross-sell opportunities are there and that we will continue to achieve those. So I feel really good about the motions we put in place as a company to take advantage of those cross-sell. Security, you know, grew 30%. That was the third quarter of re-acceleration in the quarter. And even without that one big customer win, the revenues in security continued to accelerate. So I feel good about the momentum that we have across cross-sell and, you know, how we are in the quarter.
So let's talk about the cross-sell opportunity there. So, you know, that you talked about that in the quarter. That's interesting. Tell us what kinda what went right with that and how you're gonna be able to replicate that going forward or what you're trying to do to drive that.
Sure. I think, to understand that, you know, we have to go back further in time, so Scott Lovett, who is our go-to-market president, he was hired probably about 18 months -20 months ago, and really, you know, he you know, prior to that, we had a very strong go-to-market motion around Network Services. Scott, you know, spent a lot of time at Akamai, but he actually was at Imperva as well, and so having that security selling background was really key, and so you take what Scott, you know, had done, and then Scott also brought in leaders across his management team that ended up having security selling backgrounds as well, so having security selling on the go-to-market side was really important, and then you couple that with some of the work that was done on the product side.
So, you know, 15 months ago, we had one security product with our web application firewall, our WAF. And then now we have five security products. And so if you couple, like, the go-to-market motion that was put in place plus the product innovation and velocity that was there over the past 18 months- 24 months, that led to really good cross-sell. So in Q3 specifically, we announced a top 10 customer who was buying Network Services from us and how we ended up having a big, you know, we had a contract signed, you know, in a cross-sell where they adopted our WAF, our web application firewall. And, you know, that provided a lot of real good tailwinds into the quarter, where you saw security revenues grow $5 million quarter- over- quarter sequentially, which was really nice.
And then even if you exclude that one big customer, you know, our security revenue growth would've re-accelerated. So it kinda shows me that the cross-sell momentum that was there, you know, wasn't just a one-time one-and-done. It was actually, you know, across multiple customer bases, which was definitely really nice. I think, you know, as I look at Q4, you know, the things that he put in place, on the go-to-market plus product still exist. And so I'm very excited about, you know, going into Q4 and even 2026 having that momentum behind us where, you know, we're just gonna continue to go after those opportunities because we, one, know we can win in top 10 customers. We also know that beyond that, it's also applicable, and we can win there too.
When you look at the combination of those things that kinda result in that success, how much of it is just having the right product set or more products in the market, and how much of it is how you've changed, how you've approached the business? What's sort of the operational change versus just having the products that's driving that? How should we think about that?
Yeah. You know, I think it's interesting because, you know, it's if you take both in combination, it totally makes sense that we're accelerating. If you take them in isolation, you know, it'd probably be a little bit harder just because, you know, having just the full product suite, you know, having that, it was almost game stakes to, like, table stakes to having a seat at the table with RFPs. So if you go to an RFP with an existing customer or even a new customer and they ask you about your suite of security products, if you don't have that full suite, like, you're not even gonna have an invitation to that RFP, or you get eliminated in the first round because you don't have that full suite. So having that was like table stakes.
You know, having that alone isn't helpful because if you don't have security, you know, salespeople who are trained, that becomes really hard as well. And so what's really nice is, you know, Scott and his leadership team that he brought in has that security background, and they have an understanding when you're selling security. You know, it depends on where in the chain you're selling to the customer base. But if you're selling at the very end, I mean, it's the CISO. And selling to a CISO is very different than when you're going into Network Services and selling into a DevOps person or an SRE within a company or, you know, a network engineer. So it's kind of two buying agents. They ultimately roll up to potentially a CTO or an SVP of engineering. So it depends on, like, where in the chain that you're selling the products.
But I would say that you need both. I would say having that product suite provides us the table stakes to be able to play in that game and have those opportunities.
Okay. So like you said, you added five new products. Is that enough? Where are we in the life cycle with the security products, and how should we think about continuing to develop those and get more of those in the market?
Yeah. Sure. So on the security side, as Rich had said, we started out with a web application firewall about five years ago. We bought from Signal Sciences. We added to that in 2024 with Kip's arrival. We augmented that with DDoS, which we productized out of our Network Services. It was a technology we had already provided to our customers. We then also rolled out a bot mitigation solution as well. As at the end of 2024, we had three products, and then in 2025 also introduced API Discovery on the API side as well as Client-Side Protection, which is more on the end-user side as well. Now we have five products.
Rich had said, you know, we grew from one to five, and we enter into this year basically now in a situation where we have to augment those with feature rollouts. I think from a security perspective, we won't be, I think, having big new initiatives, that are, you know, gonna be at that pace for new sort of product categories in 2025, but we will be adding more features around these products. One that we talk about a lot is in the web application firewall space.
We rolled out a deception capability, which basically tells attackers that they're being successful attacking your website when in reality they're stuck in sort of a labyrinth, if you will, of false prompts and what have you that occupies their time, costs them a lot of money, and basically makes it very painful for them to hack websites that have this sort of technology. It's very innovative, and we have a very good successful track record with our security product, especially in the WAF. We've got like a seven-year running award out of Gartner's like best-of-breed product there. We're really proud of it.
So, what's the next step there? Is it going back to existing customers and trying offering these additional products, your traditional WAF and DDoS customers, and, you know, selling them more? Is that the bigger opportunity, or is it just, you know, starting with a whole new marketing plan?
No, I mean, absolutely.
Or is it?
It's just continuing that motion, as Rich had said. Like, we go into these RFPs, and now, like, we actually have enough to get in the door and have more opportunities to cross-sell, and some of these products do play off each other in that dynamic. I mean, some customers don't need all of them. Some of them definitely do, and so it just depends on what customers are looking for, what need, but again, for those that aren't well-versed on security, we do not participate in sort of what you'd call like the endpoint or Zero Trust sort of markets. We are focused on the area that's basically where you're running your websites. We call it the Web Application and API protection, and that's sort of our wheelhouse.
It's a bit of a smaller space, but still a very large market. You know, for us, we're very under-penetrated, and there's a lot of growth opportunities there.
Yeah. Okay. Rich, you know, we sat down a few weeks ago in your office and talked about, you know, some a few things. One of the things you mentioned, some operational changes, you know, you guys have implemented. It's a little bit better control, some new systems, things like that. Walk us through what are some of those operational changes that you and Kip have put in as, you know, you started out, and how is that benefiting the company versus what we've seen in the last few years?
Yeah. I would say that, you know, it's been great to have Kip there as a partner. He's been truly, truly, like, thinking through how do we execute better and how do we do better given, you know, the products that we have on our hands. I think the areas that Kip has really focused on is making sure we have faster and better decision-making. And so just, like, execution and being able to, like, move faster, and having clarity on who the decision-makers are and how do we not get stalled on things. And so I think that's been really helpful, you know, just empowering his next leaders to really drive initiatives across the company and really drive things to completion. I think it's also, you know, one of the other things he's focused on is metrics and simplification of the metrics.
Really, you know, like, within the company, what are the five or six key metrics in the company that we're focused on? Like, you know, explaining to employees that every employee has a role to play in those metrics and having, you know, more accountability and driving forward. So, you know, as employees think about, like, initiatives they wanna drive, what impacts or what metrics do those impact? And having more transparency and clarity on that has been really good. And then I think the last one, in order to drive real transparency and clarity, is, you know, a session that he leads, which kind of we call it Behind The Numbers, where we really provide employees context around the numbers we report, you know, what roles employees have to do behind it, what does it mean, and how does it drive, like, behavior and actions.
And so he's trying to help educate and provide context around decisions we make and, you know, what metrics matter and, like, how does it drive those metrics forward. And so having that, like, transparency and clarity provides ownership within the company. And I just feel like that is a really, really good kind of initiative that he's been driving where employees feel more empowered. They feel more excited because their actions translate to behaviors and metrics. And so I think that's the really good part. On the kind of, like, CFO front, the ones that I'm focused on would be a lot of, like, operational and fiscal discipline, thinking through, you know, decisions and how we make, you know, as a company, and how that translates into financials.
You know, with that, going forward around, you know, like, Scott has been pushed on pushing on pricing discipline, trying to make sure that gross margins are high, you know, like, things like that, and just making sure that, you know, as people are requesting headcount, how do they think about that? How does it speed up the company with actions and behaviors, and how does that translate to metrics? And just being able to be a, you know, like, fiscally, operationally, you know, you know, driver to the company. We also, you know, talk a lot about incremental margin model within the company.
And so, you know, instituting, you know, fiscal controls and OpEx discipline, but you combine it with, you know, an incremental margin model, which is like, "Hey, as you have additional, you know, million dollars in revenues, like, how much additional OpEx can we have and how much additional investments can we have?" So having them feel some ownership around if they drive certain behaviors, you know, we can start spending more, but not necessarily, like, starting the year with a bunch of headcount, you know, that has been approved for the year, but really, you know, watching those metrics as we go and being more flexible with how we operate the business, so that we have incremental margins that we think that we're gonna hit.
Yeah. I mean, it's a really interesting aspect 'cause I'm not an operator. I've run a business, and a lot of investors have not either. So tell us a little, you know, a little bit on that, like, you're trying to empower the customer, the employee base and things they haven't heard or seen before. You know, you mentioned the headcount or whatever. How has some of these budgeting things? What has been the reaction from the employees? And how should we see, how can we see that turn into operating leverage now that they have maybe a deeper understanding versus in the past, maybe operate a little bit more as a startup kind of mentality?
Yeah. You know, I think, like, you know, I prior to being a CFO, I ran FP&A for about 12 years. And one of the big pain points in FP&A all the time is setting the annual planning process. And so, you know, what's the annual number that you wanna hit? You know, what's the incremental, like, headcount that gets opened up for the whole year? And so you're making, like, full year-long decisions, you know, almost like 14 months in advance, right? And you're approving headcount reqs throughout. It's really painful because, as you know, you need a flexible model that you can adjust, you know, as you see things go through the year. And so, you know, we're not stopping the annual planning process. People are still planning.
But one of the things that we wanna do is make sure that people know, you know, "Hey, you know, these are the P1 reqs that are priority one for the company. We wanna open those regardless, but these P2s, let's gate them and let's see how we perform for the year and start opening those reqs as we see that performance through the year." And it makes it a lot easier and more seamless. Like, you're not saying no to reqs. You're not, like, having this, like, headcount discussion where you, you know, you're making decisions yes or no, you know, 14 months in advance.
You're literally saying, "Hey, these are important reqs, but let's see how the performance goes through the year." And I think it makes it a lot more collaborative and iterative and then a lot more ownership because as you go through the year, you know, as people start seeing these numbers, they're like, "Okay, we're gonna start releasing these reqs." And so there's ownership where, like, there's real action, you know. On the FP&A side, if you open a plan and you open up all the headcount, if things don't hit for the year, you end up pulling back reqs, which feels like you're taking things away, which actually becomes very painful.
Yeah. Okay. Great. So maybe talk to us a little bit about the delivery part of the business. It's been a pretty good year for delivery, I think, kind of across the board. That tends to kind of go in some cycles, but how are you feeling about that, and it's particularly as we move into sort of the fall season, you know, with more video viewing and so forth, how do you think about that?
Sure. So on the delivery side, you know, I think about the—I mean, let's break it out into two, right? There's the traffic growth, and there's also the pricing environment. I would say on the traffic side, you know, I think we are continuing to see good traffic growth. You know, I think that as the internet becomes more complex, you know, like, more dynamic data, real big files, you know, like, lots of streaming, you know, we're continuing to see traffic growth. And traffic growth in the range of 25%- 30% year-over-year, which is very, very healthy. You know, like, we just hit another record with the Fortnite downloads where we just had record traffic on our website, you know, just for that one event.
And so it shows the resiliency of our network relative to those traffic loads that come on. So we're seeing very strong traffic patterns, you know, very healthy. On the pricing side, you know, I think the pricing environment, as we mentioned in Q3, is a very rational pricing environment. You know, we're, for the most part, well beyond the headwinds that we saw in 2024 when, you know, we talked about Edgio going out of business. They got a little bit irrational with pricing. They had excess capacity. And so, you know, I think the whole industry was hit, based on what we saw there. You know, that was, you know, we're like over a year past that now. And so we're seeing, you know, continued resiliency and rational behavior on the pricing side.
And so definitely, you know, we're in a very good spot for the Network Services side.
And I'll just add to that. I know Frank was gonna ask about seasonality, but we, you know, get this question a lot from investors. And the business, on the delivery side hasn't been as seasonal as it has in prior years. I think we're scaling and growing out of, like, what we used to have more seasonal aberrations from live events or sporting seasons or what have you. Without getting into details, but bottom line here is, as Rich was saying, there's a lot more downloads and other larger events taking place that are offsetting what was our typical seasonality. And we will still have a little bit of it, but I think as we grow in scale, it's become less relevant, certainly, from the calculus of an investment, you know, quarter-to-quarter growth and what have you.
So, talk to us a little bit about that because some of this is just human nature. You know, you get, you know, less daylight hours and fewer people out, you know, weather change, people indoors more. Traffic has historically seen some of that. So, is that you're not seeing that seasonality? Is that from new businesses that you're pursuing that have maybe, you know, download-type activity that's maybe less, you know, less affected by those types of things? Is it a purposeful thing for you guys, or is it something broader that you're seeing in just the overall traffic market that's driving that muting that seasonality?
I mean, I would say it's definitely a little bit of a deliberate by Fastly as well to try to, you know, find new businesses, but that's also just because we're trying to take share, so I think what's happened is we've taken share at the expense of some of our competitors, and we've had newer programs and customers that are just naturally offsetting what we used to have, so we were very concentrated, I think, in more sporting events type traffic, which had a very strong, you know, third quarter sort of seasonal effect. That seems to be a situation that we're outgrowing, as we've taken on a lot of different downloads. It doesn't have to be gaming, even, like, operating system downloads and things like that where we're taking on traffic, and it's helping offset that.
And we've been very smart about trying to find programs that fit or customer traffic patterns that fit into a healthy overlap in the diurnal traffic of the day. So obviously, when you're doing a lot of streaming, like, prime-time North American hours are gonna be very peaky. If you can find programs where or customers—I keep saying programs or customer—opportunities where the traffic comes in, say, at, you know, 4:00 A.M., Eastern or something like that, we're all over that kind of business. So we've been very proactive in trying to find that and create a healthier traffic flow within our revenue.
How much staying power do you think this has? We've seen this in the past where things get a little better in the pricing, and then, you know, the customers tighten the belt. I mean, how should we think about that versus, you know, the versus what we've seen in the past?
Yeah. I mean, I would say pricing power. Like, well, pricing is a function of, like, capacity, right? I think that right now it feels like a very rational, you know, set of players who are not building excess capacity for what we saw. Like, I think there were the two big, you know, excess capacity issues that we had. I think we had one in COVID where there was, like, this big buildup because everyone was working from home, everyone was Zooming, everyone was streaming, and so we had some excess capacity there. Then, you know, I think when you start seeing, like, Edgio bankruptcies and everyone, you know, people going out of bankruptcy, then you start seeing excess capacity with irrational behavior.
You know, barring a, like, you know, COVID-like environment where everyone's working from home and streaming like crazy or barring, like, another player going out of business, I think the pricing is pretty the environment should stay pretty stable, right? Like, the existing players who are there are quite smart about the capacity buildups we do. So for example, for us, to do a capacity buildup in an existing PoP, it could be one to two quarters, right? Like, why should we be investing, you know, three or six quarters in advance? And so, you know, I think given that, I think that, you know, the players that are in the space don't need to build, like, years and years in advance. Like, we're literally building one to two quarters in advance, and that actually helps maintain a rational, you know, capacity for a pricing environment.
All right. Well, that gets us to another topic about capital intensity and so forth. So you guys priced a deal last week. Talk to us about that. Where does that put you guys from a balance sheet perspective, and capital?
So, you know, from a Q3 perspective, we had $343 million of cash. We had about $338 million of debt on the balance sheet, which consisted of two convertibles. We had a convertible that was coming due in March of 2026. So it comes due in, like, four months. You know, as the CFO, I think about, like, you know, the capital structure and what we have. You know, it just felt really right, the capital structure we had, but with a pending maturity, it just made sense to refinance the existing convertible. So, about $188 million of that convertible was coming due in March. So what I did was we launched a convertible offering. You know, we are cash flow positive for the year. Given that, I didn't need to raise the full amount.
So we went out with a convertible offering of $125 million with a $25 million Greenshoe. You know, it was a very strong convertible market. We had lots of interest, way over. You know, we were oversubscribed on that. We priced at the tight end of the you know, the marketing range. And so we ended up pricing a 0% coupon convertible up 32.5%. And then we coupled it with a call spread, so a capped call purchase, which, you know, like, extends the dilution and, you know, for the future stock price. You know, we ended up upsizing given the strong demand. And so we went out with 125 plus 25 over-allotment, and we ended up pricing at $160 million with a $20 million over-allotment.
So it was basically a 28% kind of upsize on the convertible offering given, you know, where the pricing environment was at. You know, I think that puts us in a very good position because with this refinance, we end up buying back early the $100, you know, $150 of the $188 million outstanding. And we bought it below par. So that kind of, you know, should be reflected in our key financials, but we proactively bought that back. And so from a capitalization perspective, I feel really good with where we'll be at, you know, roughly the same cash position, but our maturities are now gonna be 2028 and 2030 as opposed to, you know, 2026 and 2028.
All right. Great. So you talked about, you know, the capital needs, you know, making some changing how you're making some of the decisions. What's the right capital intensity of the business now going forward? You've got some new products and so forth. You're being more mindful about capacity and needs in the network. What's the right capital intensity?
Yeah. I mean, it's, it's, you know, for us, we've been running roughly around 10%-11%, like, we at Q4, we announced that we would have capital spend about 10%-11% of revenues. That was actually a raise because we were historically at 10% of revenues on CapEx. You know, given how well we did in Q3, given our guide in Q4, we thought we should go ahead and build a little bit more. We raised our capital spend last quarter just to, you know, as we see the strength of the business. For us, I think longer term, it should always, it should still stay in the 10, you know, maybe 10%-11% depending on where you're running, because you're always building one to two quarters in advance.
I would say that, you know, that's inclusive of capital-based labor, IUS. And so if you strip that out, really, the capital intensity of the business is roughly around 7%-8% of revenues, is what we're targeting because the infrastructure CapEx, to me, is, like, the critical core portion. You know, the IUS and capitalized labor is kind of a function of, like, what are the projects our R&D folks are working on and what portions get capitalized through the year. So I would say that, you know, going into next year, as we think about guidance about CapEx, we'll probably start shifting to more infrastructure CapEx guidance and say what it should be as a percentage.
Okay. And so that infrastructure CapEx is. That's more the 7% kind of a range.
7%-8%, yes.
But total capital CapEx is probably in the low double digit.
Yeah. Yeah. It's 10%-11% for total, inclusive of IUS, exclusive of that. Just pure infrastructure, what we have for our, you know, PoPs or point of presence, you know, servers that go there, that's the 7%-8%.
With that, so what sort of a free cash flow outlook for the next 12 months with that?
Yeah. So we don't, you know, obviously, we'll guide 2026 free cash flow, you know, at the next earnings release. For 2025, we guided to $25-35 million free cash flow for the year. And so that's, you know, including the CapEx spend, so $25-35 million of free cash flow. You know, given the incremental margin model, you know, that we expect to flow through, you know, we do expect to continue to show leverage every single year going forward. I that goal is to continue to be profitable and free cash flow positive. And so, you know, think of, like, the incremental margin model as flowing through 25%-40% of incremental revenues into incremental operating profit.
Okay. So another question and maybe take a few questions from the audience if folks have some, but maybe talk to us a little bit about that operational leverage and how you're gonna get that flow through.
Yeah. I mean, it's you know, using the incremental margin model and even, like, educating our employee base around what it is, I just feel really good about it because I feel like that context and that education has really empowered employees to really think about investments that they make. And so, you know, if you know, operating profit this year, you know, we're gonna be operating profitable, it's you know, we're gonna continue to do 25%-40% flow through next year. And you know, if you keep CapEx you know at you know 10%-11% of revenues, like, that should just naturally flow through to the business.
And so the, you know, this year is a pivotal year where we hit those record, you know, we shifted to profitability and shifted to free cash flow positive, and we're just gonna keep on maintaining it.
These are operational changes that have hit those numbers. It's not something one time or in the event or anything. Okay.
Yeah.
All right. You've got a yeah. Go ahead.
[audio distortion]
Can you repeat the question?
Yeah. So the question is, you know, in a world of high demand for power and data centers and so forth, how are you guys thinking about that clearly being different than a large AI, large language model type data center demand? But how are you thinking about that?
Yeah. It's a good question. I think, just to be fair, we run on a lot of our PoPs off of a very small proportion of, basically other co-lo data centers. So in other words, we would partner with a household name like Equinix, to basically run our PoPs. So we feel like we have adequate capacity with those partners. We're not building massive data centers behind the scenes to do what we do. We have a pretty much more, I would say, flexible model around that that can adapt to those dynamics. And also, I just wanted to clarify that, like, you know, our PoPs are located in a lot of metro areas to be close to our users.
Yeah.
So we call those, like, the edge cloud where, you know, the goal is to have multiple PoPs spread throughout the world, and those are gonna be closer to our user and more likely metro areas. The big, like, LLM models or AI models, data centers, those are, like, massive central cloud data centers, and those are gonna probably be focused in low power, you know, low-cost areas. So think, like, you know, in Washington State because there's a river that kind of you can produce, you know, cheaper energy or Buffalo, New York, you know. So those are, like, the massive data centers we're talking about where there's scarcity of power and land and value, you know. I think ours are gonna just be in the partnership with the colo spaces in metro areas.
Can you characterize your incremental demand in terms of megawatts every year?
So we don't actually do that in megawatts. I mean, I think our focus has been, you know, with how many PoPs do we have?
So I say it's low, low single-digit megawatts that you need on an annual basis of incremental capacity, or?
Yeah. We don't characterize it in megawatts. I mean, because, you know, we have a hundred.
Come on. Just between us.
We have 112 PoPs throughout the world. Like, we're very focused on how many PoPs do we have and how much terabits per second capacity do we have on our network. And so those are the two functions that are really critical to us. I think, you know, if we think about, like, the future, right, the future with potentially compute at edge, that might be more data center intensive where you may need more servers and more PoPs, and we may start thinking about that. But for now, we're focused a lot on the, you know, not so much of that side.
I do wanna land one point here. It's not so much the hardware that we run. It's the software stack that makes our solution so unique. I mean, we run basically off-the-shelf hardware, CPU, and programmable switches. We're not doing exotic hardware, custom GPU-type tasks. Yeah. So I think. Yeah. Yeah. Real quick.
[audio distortion]
I'll take that. Yeah. So the question is, memory is scarce. What, you know, what presumably you would think we'd have a lot of memory usage. The truth is our memory is not as intensely a part of the solution as you're implying. So it isn't as, it is relevant, and we're obviously monitoring that, but we're not in a situation where we feel that memory pricing is going to impact our procurement or our ability to expand capacity.
All right. Great. Hey, guys. Thank you very much for being here. Really appreciate it, so good luck with the rest of the conference. Thanks, everybody.
Thank you. Thanks everyone.