Let's get started. I'm Vivek Arya from BofA's Semiconductor/Semicap Equipment Research team. Really delighted to have our friend, John Pitzer, Corporate Vice President and Head of IR at Intel, join us this afternoon.
I'll go through a few of my questions, but if you have anything you'd like to bring up, please feel free to raise your hand, and I'll be sure to get you in. So warm welcome, John. Before we start the Q&A, I'll have to read a very exciting disclosure statement.
Appreciate it.
So before we begin, please note that today's discussion may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to various risks, risks and uncertainties and may reference non-GAAP financial measures.
Please refer to Intel's most recent earnings release and annual report on Form 10-K and other filings with the SEC for more information on the risk factors that could cause actual results to differ materially. Additional information on non-GAAP financial measures, including reconciliations, where appropriate, to the corresponding GAAP financial measures.
Perfect.
Do you remember this by now?
I haven't memorized it yet. I probably should.
Excellent. No, great. Thank you so much, John.
Yeah, thank you, Vivek, for hosting. I appreciate everyone joining us this afternoon.
Excellent. So before we, you know, get things started, I know post-close Intel made an announcement about Apollo's investment in your Ireland Fab. Maybe we could just give an update on that a nd importantly, what, what does that imply for this year's capital expenditure?
Yeah, it's... Appreciate the opportunity to talk about it. So, yeah, after the close today, we did announce what we're calling our SCIP 2. This is our second implementation of our SCIP program. Remember, SCIP stands for Semiconductor Co-Investment Program.
It's part of our Smart Capital strategy, of trying to be, you know, smart about sources of capital, tapping financial partners, to maintain the strength of our balance sheet, yet still be able to execute and accelerate on the strategy. As you pointed out, the SCIP 2, the partnership is with Apollo. It creates a joint venture between us and them and their affiliates, where we have about 51% stake, they have a 49% stake, and that JV has certain rights to Fab 34 in Ireland.
Intel Corporate will buy wafers from the JV at a cost plus margin, structure, as a way to, give finances into the JV. It's structurally somewhat similar to SCIP 1, but it is a little bit different.
Remember, SCIP 1 was a new capacity build-out in Arizona, and the way that worked is for every $1 of CapEx we spent in Arizona as we're building out that facility, we contributed $0.51, Brookfield contributed $0.49. This is a little bit different in the sense that Ireland's mostly built out already.
S o we'll get the $11 billion up front, which is what the and that allows us to kind of take capital out that we've already deployed in Ireland. To- date, we've spent about $18.4 billion in Ireland. It gives us capital to finish Ireland, but also to use that capital elsewhere in our global footprint. W hat we said about the structure is that over the next couple of years, there's not a significant impact to the P&L. There's no change to the capital spending plans.
Our capital spending plans already contemplated this, and then as the fab ramps into full capacity, you'll start to see more of an economic benefit flow to the JV. From an accounting standpoint, the way to think about this, given that we have 51% ownership, we will fully consolidate this through all the way to the net income line.
T hen, as you know, we've got that non-controlling interest line after net income, and that's how we reflect both the Brookfield agreement, now the Apollo agreement. Quite frankly, it also reflects when we sell down Mobileye, when we sell down IMS.
You know, everything that we deconsolidate at that NCI line before we calculate EPS. I think what's important to note is this is likely the last SCIP deal that we are contemplating a nd so we did a SCIP 1, we did a SCIP 2. It really helps us protect the balance sheet and prosecute the strategy during a period of time where we know we're playing catch-up and our P&L and cash flow is under earning.
You know, if you go out over the next several years, as we talked about in the April event, we think we're gonna see meaningful improvement to both the P&L and the cash flow statement over time. S o as you think about incremental sources of capital from here, I, I'd make the argument that one of the, the largest incremental will be cash flow from operations over time.
Got it. Makes sense. Second thing, John, on Computex, so Pat had the keynote yesterday. If you could maybe give us a summary of the main announcements. We heard about Lunar Lake, we heard about Gaudi, we even heard about Gaudi's pricing, which I thought was interesting. So maybe if you could just get us up to speed on.
Yeah. Pat was in Taipei. His keynote was 8:00 p.m. local time last night. You know, there were probably four product announcements that sort of came out. Clearly, given that it's a PC show, I'll hit first on Lunar Lake and some of the comments we made there. You know, we're very excited about the AI PC.
We think our silicon roadmap is extremely strong, even before you layer on top the ecosystems we've been able to build, both in consumer and in enterprise PCs, which we think is going to advantage us, as you see AI PC pick up momentum.
With Lunar Lake, you know, as we talked about at the Build Conference a couple weeks ago, it will be a Q3 launch. We talked about it at the NPU level being a 48 TOPS processor. Actually, at the SoC level, it's greater than 100 TOPS if you include the GPU and other things.
So one of the things that I think is important to note is we don't think we're going to have a performance superiority with our silicon roadmap. We also think we're not gonna have a significant sort of battery life deficiency relative to the Arm camp and peers, and I think that's important.
We tend to shy away about talking about battery life benchmarks in general, because there's so much more that goes into battery life of the system than just the CPU, that it can be a very misleading benchmark. But one of the things that Pat said about Lunar Lake, it is 40% more power efficient than Meteor Lake, and so we're pretty excited, and we think our roadmap only gets stronger after Lunar Lake. I think we were the first to talk about the AI PC.
I think we're doing a very good job helping to define that category, and we will be the biggest beneficiary as AI PC penetration increases. On top of the client side, we also had some announcements within data center. We talked about our Xeon 6 generation E-core, which is Sierra Forest. As we talked about on the earnings call, we released that in Q2.
The P-core version of that, Granite Rapids, will be released in Q3. We're excited about both, and I'm sure we'll get into some questions about the server market, so I'll probably leave my comments and expound later on in the conversation. T hen lastly, as you pointed out, we talked about Gaudi, some of the pricing dynamics, some of the TCO dynamics. Gaudi 3 is now in the market.
As we said on the last earnings call, we're set to have greater than $500 million of revenue from Gaudi this year. So we're excited that we've moved from pipeline to actually now talking about backlog and revenue. It's a good start, but we're not satisfied. It's obviously a much larger market than that, and we want to gain more traction. But we think Gaudi is starting to see some good momentum in the marketplace.
Got it. So let's talk about the PC market, first. So, you know, during COVID, we got to high of, like, 340+ million units. Now, I think we are, like, 260-270. What does AI PC mean? Does it mean a faster refresh cycle? Does it mean, you know, an ASP, upside? When do we start to see it, become more tangible?
Yeah, it's a really good question. You know, when we first started talking about the AI PC, and I think we were the first to actually brand the AI PC, you know, Pat likened it to the Centrino-like moment. I think, the exact words that he said, and we liked that comparison for really two reasons.
One, when you think about Centrino and Wi-Fi, it took the ecosystem 12-18 months to figure out the functionality around Wi-Fi and the incremental applications it could drive before it became a tangible driver. S o while we're very positive about the AI PC over a multi-year period, we do think it's gonna take some time for the ecosystem to figure out what this thing can actually do.
I think you were at CES earlier in the year. There was a lot of buzz around AI PCs going into CES, and I think everyone came away going: "Well, the ecosystem hasn't quite figured out what this thing can do yet." Every quarter that goes by, I think you'll see more tangible proof points.
I think the Build conference from Microsoft earlier this month or last month was really important. I think every quarter that goes by, we're working with more ISVs to bring, you know, AI-infused applications onto the PC. But just like Centrino, we think it will take a little bit of time a nd just like Centrino, when it did kick in, it was much more of an ASP uplift than it was necessarily a unit uplift.
W e see a similar dynamic with the AI PC. Now, as you pointed out, you know, consumption last year was about 270 million units for the market. We're pegged this year to, like, 276-278. We still think longer term, this PC market's roughly a 300 million ± unit market.
I think AI helps on that front, but it's really more of an ASP uplift a nd if you're thinking about a more concrete, tangible unit driver for this year, it's really, as we get into the back half of the year, whether or not enterprises start to think about refreshing their installed base. There's two reasons to do that. One, we're four years+, you know, past the COVID peak.
The other one that's really important is Microsoft will end of life their service level agreement for Windows 10 in the fall of next year an d historically, if you go back and look at how the enterprise reacts to that, about 12 months in advance of that, you start to see some sort of enterprise refresh.
Got it. Sitting here in June, would you already have visibility into that conceptual refresh, or is it too early ?
Vis-à-vis conversations with customers and OEM partners? Absolutely, a nd you've seen some of our OEM partners, you know, make some public comments on recent earnings reports that would suggest they're getting more optimistic about, you know, the enterprise refresh in the back half of the year. Whether we have tangible orders or not, you know, that will be a little bit closer to the actual event.
Does it imply better than seasonal? Is that what a refresh implies, or, or does it-
That is our expectation. Now, remember, you know, we only guide revenue one quarter out.
Right. Right.
But we have kinda given some breadcrumbs for the full year that would suggest, at the corporate level, that we would have a better than seasonal second half, and there's many sort of bottoms-up drivers for that. But one of them is off of the low end of seasonal first half for PCs. We do think we'll see a little bit better than the second half trends in PCs because of the enterprise refresh.
Got it. Makes sense. On the AI PC side, John, what we hear about is, you know, so many TOPS here, so many TOPS there. Is that the right metric? Is that what we should all be chasing? You know, this person have so many TOPS or, you know, that's why that silicon is better.
Yeah, there's a lot of different ways to try to define what an AI PC actually is. Clearly, the large software partner, Microsoft, has sort of fixated on TOPS. We've kind of moved away a little bit from that.
I mean, quite frankly, if you look at Meteor Lake, which is a 30-35 TOPS sort of system, you know, it can run natively everything in Copilot. S o to say that there's some sort of TOPS requirement that you need to hit to be able to do AI on the PC, not probably the right way to think about it.
As you know, we've talked about, you know, shipping 40+ million units of AI PCs this year, going to 60+ million units for next year. We think that will far and away lead the market, and we're going to dominate this category and help define the category, as it unfolds.
I see. C an we double-click on whether you think of AI PC as an enterprise play or as a consumer play, and what implications does that has? Because, you know, you guys dominate, you know, enterprise. You know, consumer, does that become a more competitive environment? You know, what if... You know, there used to be Intel Inside. What if there is Snapdragon Inside, right? How does that competition-
I mean, listen, we, we think that the utility of the PC, vis-à-vis, bringing AI to the edge, will play out both in the enterprise market and in the consumer market. I, I would remind you that we have pretty healthy market share across the overall market and w e think we've built very strong ecosystems in both of those segments, as you pointed out.
I mean, roughly speaking, enterprise is about half the market, consumer is about half the market. In the enterprise market, you know, a key part of our strength are some of the offerings that we provide around vPro, which makes security and manageability of a remote fleet just very seamless for IT departments.
I t's a value for us, and it's a value for our customer, and it makes kind of our position in that place relatively sticky. S o to the extent that, that, you know, you think there's an enterprise refresh cycle coming in the back half of the year, we think we're particularly well- positioned for that, given our historic footprint.
Even if you think that there's not a critical mass of AI applications by the back of the second half of the year, enterprises will likely future-proof their purchases by buying up the stack because they know that the PC is gonna be in service for 4+ years. On the consumer side, listen, we think we have a fairly strong ecosystem on the consumer side as well.
We spend a lot of time and effort to make sure that our OEM and software partners are extremely successful in that part of the market a nd we're doing that today with optimization of AI-infused applications with our independent software vendor partners. I think we talked about two quarters ago, working with over 200 ISVs.
Today, it's well more than 500 ISVs, and we think that ecosystem footprint, you know, helps us be successful because it helps them be successful. Now, what I would say, if you think that the AI PC sits on top of existing ecosystems, we've got a pretty strong position. If you think for some reason the AI PC creates a brand-new ecosystem, you know, then I would say that Arm perhaps might have a better opportunity within that space.
I want to be clear, you know, we coined the term, you know, only the paranoid survive. We take all competition seriously. We actually like competition. It makes us better. But even before you think about the ecosystems we've been able to build around x86, our silicon roadmap, I think, puts us in a very strong position. You marry that with our ecosystem, and we feel pretty good about how things are gonna unfold for us as the AI PC continues to grow.
Right. Makes sense. I'm glad you brought up this Arm versus x86 question. So we have, you know, Microsoft, who I think for the first time, launched a new PC technology, right, and launched Surface with Arm.
Then, at Computex, the Arm CEO, Rene Haas, right, he said that he thinks there will be a 50% conversion to Arm, right, by 2029. What is Intel's view on how that competition is. Obviously you made it clear that competition, right, is kind of, you know, good for both sides. But how seriously should we take those claims?
I mean, listen, again, we take all competition seriously, and so we're not resting on our laurels relative to Arm coming back into the market. I'll remind people, Arm in Windows PC is not a new dynamic. This is something that was, you know, a big concern of the investment community as far back as 2011.
S o there's been 14, 15 years of trying to break Arm into the Windows PC market with very little success, in large part, because we had a very strong roadmap, in large part because we had a strong ecosystem, and in large part, you know, x86 PCs not only make us profitable, it makes the OEMs profitable as well.
S o we kind of feel like the dynamic really hasn't changed all that much from the 2011 time period. Clearly, Microsoft is throwing more weight behind this. They've done an exclusivity with a single vendor in Qualcomm, and that is up at the end of the year, and we fully expect to see other potential Arm suppliers come into the market when that exclusivity is up. But in general, you know, there's been one successful Arm PC vendor in the market, and that's been Apple.
T hey've had 25+ years in the market, and they've got about a 10% market share a nd quite frankly, you could make the argument that the reason why they do what they do in the market has very little to do with which architecture they're using in their silicon. It's the fact that they've built an ecosystem around their silicon, their software, and their hardware.
S o we very much believe in the power of ecosystems. They're hard things to build, and they're hard things to deploy-displace, and we think we've got, you know, an ecosystem that's gonna make us very competitive as the AI PC roll out.
Got it. John, you've studied the market, right, for a long period of time. Technically, is there anything about Arm that gives it a power efficiency advantage over x86, or is it just a different implementation and that there is no structural advantage that Arm has?
Yeah. We don't believe so. Now, we've got to go off and execute, but if you think about designing, you know, a piece of silicon, there's three vectors that you try to optimize to: performance, power, and historical compatibility. To the extent that x86 has a long legacy of historical compatibility, you know, that is one dynamic that we have that the Arm camp doesn't have.
But we see that as an area of strength, not weakness, especially in the enterprise space, because as you know, many enterprises out there are still running software that's 15, 20 years old a nd having that comfort that no matter what you buy, you just know it's gonna work with every piece of your software, is something that helps to build that ecosystem lock-in, that I talked to before.
You know, I'll give you another example with Sierra Forest and our E-cores. You know, we think our E-core performance on the server side is going to be as good, if not better than Arm, on a performance per watt basis, with still all the benefits of that ecosystem lock-in. Again, we have to go off and execute, but there's nothing structural about an Arm instruction set that means it's always going to be power beneficial over other microarchitectures.
So why not stress the battery life? Because I would imagine that, you know, as a consumer, I would be more attracted to somebody saying the battery life could be, I don't know, 20+ hours, as opposed to some hazy notion of what AI could be.
W e will, but it's hard to stress that until you actually have systems in the marketplace-
I see
... because the CPU is only a small portion of what drives the overall battery life at the system level.
Right. Makes sense. On the data center side, what are you seeing in terms of just kind of near term, second half, you know, outlook? What is the launch of Sierra Forest and Granite Rapids mean in terms of how the market share evolves versus AMD?
T hen if I could just kind of ask the part C of that, NVIDIA launching, right, Grace Blackwell. For a lot of people who want Blackwell, I guess they're getting Grace as well with that bit of performance. So, how does that change the dynamic of the-
Yeah, all very good questions. So we only guide revenue one quarter out. I mentioned earlier that we've given some breadcrumbs about the second half being in, you know, a better than seasonal second half. Let me just build on that across all of our businesses and answer your, your server question as part of it.
But if you think about, you know, a better than second half, a better than seasonal second half, there's a couple of different things I could point to. I, I think first and foremost, we've got a bunch of businesses that are more levered to the industrial, auto, and infrastructure markets in NEX, Altera, and Mobileye.
J ust like every other semi company that has exposure to those end markets, they're seeing the worst of their inventory cyclical correction in the first half of the year, and they are expecting some sort of recovery in the second half of the year.
Right.
So when you think about that grouping of business, not a bad way to think about it. In addition, we talked about now $500 million+ of Gaudi revenue, coming into this year. You know, the vast majority of that's coming in the back half of the year. So when you think about half-on-half growth, that's actually a relatively meaningful contributor driving that half-on-half growth.
For the PC market, we talked about the enterprise refresh cycle that we expect to start to pick up into the back half of the year. I will remind you that we were at 270 million units of consumption last year. We're sort of pegging the market to 276-278 this year, but we were at the low end of seasonality in the first half, and so that will help as far as half-on-half growth.
On the server market, you know, we've been a little bit less explicit on talking about the inflection point. Having said that, the way that we're kind of thinking about the market in general is the first half of the year, units are likely going to decline low single digits year-over-year. As we move into the second half of the year, we think they're going to likely increase low single digit year-over-year, so not heroic sort of unit acceleration.
Having said that, something we have a little bit more visibility on is core count mix and what's happening with core count mix, and clearly, on a unit basis core counts are going up, and that does have a benefit for us, on the ASP front.
Right.
I'll also remind you that what we've talked about from a market share perspective is this year being ± flat. That's really off of the Q3 2023 order level from last year. If you remember how last year played out, we actually had a little bit better share in the first half of the year than we were expecting.
That took a little bit of a step down in Q3. Q3 to Q4 was flat, Q4 to Q1 was flat, and we think ± flat from here is the right way to think about it. That's mostly still on the back of, Sapphire Rapids and Emerald Rapids. While Sierra and Granite are launching this year, volumes really begin to ramp late this year into next year. We do think that those are the product suites that give us the ability to go back and win share as we go into 2025. I think the last part of your question was Grace Hopper.
Right.
Good question. You know, listen, clearly, given how tight the market is for accelerated compute today, suppliers have more power than buyers right now. In a more steady state market, though, I would argue that hyperscale companies would prefer to buy a pool of CPU compute, a pool of GPU compute, a pool of connectivity, and do the integration themselves and not give that margin away to any one of their suppliers.
So we do think longer term, that's the right way to think about a normal buying power in the market. Q uite frankly, you know, we are in a very strong position on the head node for server, accelerated servers, AI servers, because Sapphire and Emerald are hands down the best CPUs out there for AI.
We think that that's really due to the single thread of performance that both brings. Now, I think that there's obviously advantages to bundling, but on a standalone basis, we feel very confident about the performance metrics that Sapphire and Emerald offer, and that only gets better with Granite.
Is the ability for Arm to penetrate the server market different than what it is in the PC market, or it's the same dynamic? You know, just because it does have a lot of champions kind of and on the server side, in terms of custom silicon, you know, Microsoft or Amazon Graviton and, you know, Google now with Axion and-
Yeah, t he raw data would suggest absolutely, right?
Right.
Because if you look at the share of Arm in the server market versus the share of Arm in the PC market, they've absolutely done a good job within the server market. Now, a lot of that has been, you know, going back to my ecosystem comment in areas where new ecosystems have developed, namely internal workloads at the hyperscale companies where they're doing their own silicon.
Right.
T hat is a dynamic that we don't think is going to change all that much. Q uite frankly, we have an opportunity to capitalize on that with Intel Foundry, both on the advanced packaging side and on the wafer side.
You know, and I would be remiss not to remind people, about a year ago, we actually made a joint announcement with Arm, an R&D announcement, multi-year co-development announcement, where we were going to optimize their latest cores on Intel 18A. S o there is a part of our organization that is trying extremely hard to make Arm very successful across all the markets that Arm wants to penetrate, and we are happy to do that.
T hat internal workload for, you know, internal silicon is one where Arm's been very successful and will likely continue to be successful. Now, having said that, when we think about the core server market, we've talked about unit growth in that market longer term, in that 1%-2%-3% range. We think the more important metric to look at is actually core growth, where we think, you know, the cores are gonna grow probably at a 15%-20% CAGR. That would be down from what they've grown over the last five years, which is closer to 25.
Now it's off of a bigger base, but it is still very healthy growth. The big swing factor that you have to be willing to underwrite is we're arguing that ASP per core, which over the last four or five years has been going down almost as quickly as number of cores per unit has been going up, is the rate of decline is gonna slow dramatically. Now, our closest competitor is actually saying flatten. If that's true, then we think it's a market that supports probably high single digit, low double digit in revenue growth over time.
Got it.
Even with all these dynamics.
Got it. John, in the few minutes we have, wanted to touch on two topics quickly. First is Huawei restrictions. So Intel had announced back in May that Q2 could be, I think, at the lower end of $12.5-$13.5 billion. Just what does it imply for the full year? Because when we look at Huawei, I think they only ship, you know, like mid-single-digit million or so, right? So is it really an impact beyond?
No. So, so just to level set, we, we put out an 8-K saying that while we're still tracking to the original range of 12.5-13.5, we're below the midpoint. So we didn't say the low end.
Okay.
We said basically-
Below the midpoint.
... the bottom half-
Yeah, yeah
... is sort of the way to think about that, a nd that's all being driven by the incremental restrictions. We had a license to sell to Huawei that was always up for renewal in Q3. Our sort of working assumption was it was not gonna get renewed, but it is having impact to Q2.
We do think that as we go into the back half of the year, if Huawei can't ship, it doesn't change the size of the market in China, and so we'll be able to recapture that revenue with other OEMs. Just really difficult to do intra-quarter, so that would be sort of the best way to think about it.
We didn't really quantify the magnitude amount, but your unit numbers are about right, and so if you think about it on a quarterly basis, you can kind of back in to the right number, and that kind of is consistent with what we said in our updated guidance.
Does it conceptually mean because this was only, I don't know, like a half-ish quarter impact, that we will see a full quarter impact in Q3, or?
No, because I think even if we always assumed in Q3, we weren't, we weren't gonna get the renewed license.
Oh, I see. Okay.
So that-
It's not incremental to... Right.
As time goes by, if Huawei can't ship, we can recapture that revenue with other OEMs who will ship in lieu of them not being able to.
I see. Got it. T hen the last topic was on Intel Foundry Services, right? So now the name of the combined kind of manufacturing, right, plus external foundry. What came as a surprise was just the period at which Intel would break even in that business. So what went into that, you know, thinking? Is it just the times are different than when the original decision was made? Like, well, talk us through what are the implications for-
Yeah, I'm glad you asked the question because it's a really important point of clarification. When we presented the webinar in early April, what we tried to present to the investment community was a target model. Not a forecast, but really a target model that was based on what we thought was reasonable to conservative revenue expectations.
S o at the endpoint, the 2030 model, we kinda gave at the Intel consolidated level, a 60/40 breakdown between gross margin and operating margin. That's really based on about $100 billion of revenue in that time period, where if you look at Street numbers today, we're roughly at $55 billion, is what the Street's estimating for 2024. If you kind of break down how we get from $55 to $100, we told you that $15 billion of that would be external foundry customer by 2030. It's effectively 0 today in Q1.
So that takes that $100 down to $85. So what we're really talking about is $55 today going to $85. The way we built that up, bottoms up, was just making an assumption that the core business of PCs, data center, and NEX grew at a 3%-5% CAGR. Again, not a forecast as much as kind of an assumption.
Right.
You layer on top of that some share gains for accelerated compute, and I think out in the 2030 timeframe, that share gain would get us to about an $8 billion-$10 billion number, which relative to the size of the overall market, doesn't seem all that challenging.
Still challenging.
T hen if you look at some of our growthier businesses like Altera and Mobileye, that's more in that 10% sort of CAGR range and if you do that math, that's what builds up to $100 billion.
Now, listen, again, it's a target, it's not a forecast. If revenue comes faster in a fixed cost business, we should be able to get to that, those margin targets more quickly. More importantly, when you think about the break-even point midway between now and 2030 for Intel Foundry, which is effectively 2027, a lot of what we need to see for that to happen is somewhat independent of end demand.
It really is mostly about mixing from Intel 7, which is a very uneconomical wafer for us today, to Intel 18A, and our ability to pull back wafers from external foundry suppliers that we'll be more reliant on this year and next , and I would tell you that the economics of moving from Intel 7 to Intel 18A at the end points, you almost have 3x the ASP per wafer here at only a modest increase in cost, and so there is a significant economic benefit. Now, the time to get that mix shift is just gonna take some time.
I mean, one thing I'll tell you, to give you some context here, we talked about 40 million AI PCs this year going to 60 next year. Now, again, that's a forecast. We could be under-calling the market, b ut if that 60 million is right, it means that two-thirds of our units next year are still not AI PC units.
Which means that 2/3 of our units in client are still on very uneconomical Intel 7, and so we've got a lot of visibility over time that this mix shift will occur. We just need some time for it to happen and to catch up.
Got it. Terrific. With that, thank you so-