All right, we're going to get started. I'm Laura Martin, Senior Media and Internet Analyst here at Needham & Company, and we're going to interview John Carpenter at Comscore, the CEO of Comscore. Thank you for being here.
Thank you. Always a pleasure.
Let's start with, like, level setting. Tell us what Comscore is doing now, and tell us where you guys are in the cross-platform measurement space, which was the sort of great light hope of merging with Comscore with Rentrak in 2016, I think it was. Where are we on that? And then where are we? I think you guys have been really leading, Nielsen, in terms of real-time measurement, like, really closing this gap to real-time measurement.
Sure.
Update us on the product suite of Comscore these days.
Yeah, you're right. I mean, we lead with our cross-platform capability. I mean, that was the original thesis when the original Comscore business and Rentrak came together in the 2016 timeframe. I think if you look at what's happened with media, broadly speaking, that thesis is arguably more important today than it's ever been. When you look at our product suite and where the investments across the portfolio that we're making, they're going directly into cross-platform. You know, just, you know, you point back to, you know, 18 months ago, the cross-platform capability was roughly less than 10% of our business. Today, in 2025, it'll make up somewhere close to 20% of the business, growing, you know, 30-40% a year. We've really leaned into it.
We feel like the capabilities that we have are meeting a lot of client needs that the marketplace is looking for, and that is where our time and energy is spent. We have had a lot of success here over the course of the last.
What was so hard? This is 11 years later. Okay, no, 16 years. I'm lying. It's 9 years later. What took so long and what was so hard that we didn't see in 2016 that took all the extra time to get a decent cross-platform?
Yeah, I think it changes incredibly hard. It still is a hard solve. If you look at the way the industry transacts today, it still does transact very much in silos. You go to the buying teams in many whole codes, they're still siloed between local, national, digital, programmatic versus traditional buying systems. You still have siloed ecosystems that have been built up over time and have been built to, you know, a certain way of transacting. That workflow, if you will, that inertia is still very much in place, and we've got to work through that. I think what's different today is look at the consumer experience. Pre-pandemic, you still had, you know, 75-80% of all viewing happening through the traditional pay-TV bundle. You fast forward to today, and that fragmentation is rapid. Broadcast linear television viewing is 50% of all audiences.
Pre-2020, right, you can make the argument that the market really was not ready or in need of a true cross-platform solution. You fast forward to today and some of the challenges that, you know, the incumbent measurement partner has had, and keeping up with the pace of change from a fragmentation standpoint is a real reason why we are winning in some of our capabilities, because just going back to that original thesis, we started with digital, we started at the household level with our linear TV product, and we built from the ground up. We think that is an important differentiator as we think about solving for cross-platform.
What's been happening to pricing? Because you guys had really robust pricing. This cross-platform product is sort of by itself in the marketplace, right? Or does Nielsen have one now?
Nielsen has. Nielsen, they talk a lot about NielsenOne and their Big Data Plus panel. You know, I think when you look at how we're positioned in the marketplace, most of our growth is coming from programmatic environments where we're embedded in the places where the bulk of advertising is being transacted today. I think because we've built our product to be interoperable with the workflows and with the way media is transacting, especially digital media transacting in programmatic environments, we're having success capitalizing on that.
Right. Because they're not on the computer. So you're in a sense dividing up the market. They're doing linear first, you're doing digital first.
They're very much focused on that combination of, you know, call it, you know, of the U.S. ad industry between linear and connected TV, maybe $100 billion of total ad spend. We absolutely play in that space. If you look at, you know, the programmatic ad spend that exists, that TAM is $300 billion. If you're talking about how do you work with a partner and a client on solving for, you know, omnichannel measurements that captures a holistic view of audiences, you've got to have capabilities that can span across linear, connected TV, traditional, digital, and, you know, now social, which is becoming an increasingly bigger chunk of all video viewing here in the U.S.
I would say one of my learnings on the stage today, John, is that how many CEOs have sat up here, just the comment you made, whereas their competitive advantage and pricing power is coming from creating a product or service that crosses walled gardens to the open web, that increasingly the demand that has pricing power by ad buyers is measure for me something or give me comparisons open web to walled gardens. Because even within the walled gardens, I, the buyer, can't compare Amazon to Google to TikTok to Facebook. Somebody that can connect all those, and then you may as well on your way out, you probably those guys start from the open web, they don't start from the walled garden guys.
Sure.
An open web guy that says, "Oh, we have the ability to add these other, like, pieces of.
What's the incrementality that you're getting across all those things?
Yes. Or even just put them on the same basis. Do not even tell me increment. Just tell me that the unit on the open web is worth a tenth of Google, but it is worth five times more than Amazon, and it is worth a quarter of TikTok. They just want that measurement, I think, is valuable to them. Can you, and you just said that that is one of the things you are doing is walled garden to open internet.
100%. I mean, some of our largest clients are walled garden, the kind of new media companies that have built massive advertising and video viewing platforms. They're some of our largest clients today. You look back, you know, 18 months ago, and, you know, that was a very different client picture. I think it's because we've got products and capabilities. Again, going back to that combination of big digital at scale plus big traditional TV at scale from a measurement solution, those three things packaged together, and you bring that to light for the buying community and for the content creators in environments where they want to transact, walled garden, open web, we're there.
Okay. Because you're really data, so you're really agnostic is where your data sits.
Correct.
Are you taking advantage of this? Another thing that showed up on stage a lot today was this what we'll call curation, which is this moving the data from being on the DSP to being on the SSP. Are you guys benefiting from that transition?
Yeah. In fact, we just announced a curated deal ID capability that we launched with Magnite on their platform, where we're essentially bringing together Comscore's, you know, trusted, you know, credible digital rankers, right? You've got publishers that are in the Comscore top 500, top 250. We're creating curated audience buying IDs that marry our Proximic audience segments together with Comscore's traditional digital business and creating those curated IDs inside of Magnite. That was just launched last Monday.
That's a targeting idea. That's a user, that's not like a cookie idea, right? It's an ID idea. It isn't a target market idea, is it?
It is allowing advertisers who are flighting to quality and want to have confidence that they are buying audiences that are on, in this case, trusted publisher sites, audiences that they can target directly. They are leveraging Comscore's targeting capability, which is our Proximic audience segments, coupled with the tried and true Comscore digital product, now curated in one environment that is available for you to buy against in Magnite's platform.
Okay. Okay. So they haven't adopted DoubleVerify. Is the reason they haven't, Magnite have not adopted DoubleVerify is because they're doing your segments? Or would they, like, they just did Comscore first and then they do others? Like, I don't really get this.
Yeah. Look, we're excited about our offering. I think it's fair to say that in the future, this opens up a lot of opportunity for us to partner with, you know, brand safety, brand verification capabilities, fraud detection capabilities, and make that part of the curated experience as we think about how we expand our offering across these platforms. You know, our first approach here was to take the trusted Comscore digital product that all the buying community is leveraging and buying today, making that available programmatically through a curated ID coupled with our audience segments. That was the first step.
The SSP does not charge you a fee, right? You make more money here than if it is attached to the DSP.
Correct.
Right? Are you, is there a different product here or are you attaching the same stuff to the DSP already so it's not that much extra?
Our audience segments, the product that I just described doesn't yet sit in DSP environments. That's not to say that it can't. Our Proximic audience segments do sit inside of the large DSPs and are available to buyers to transact against.
You did not just take those and put them on the SSP?
We did. We coupled those same audience, that same audience capability with the differences. We have coupled it with the Comscore digital syndicated digital offering, which is our Comscore digital rankers. Think about, you know, if you're a publisher in the top 100, top 250, making those IDs available with qualified audiences inside Magnite, that's what we brought to life. That does not yet exist inside of the DSP.
That's so interesting. That's really interesting. Okay. In terms of take rates, are you seeing any pressure on your pricing to the downside? Or do you still have pricing power?
One of the things, we took advantage of some pricing capability here early in the second quarter, and we've been happy with how that's performed both from a volume standpoint in terms of impressions that we're seeing scale coupled with obviously the revenue upside that comes with the volume.
We, you know, we strategically and surgically took price in a couple of places, meaning we increased price in a couple of places based on the uniqueness of our offering, particularly inside of the Proximic audience segments where we know we've got a competitive moat around some of the privacy compliance segments that we make available to, you know, health and wellness, big health and wellness buyers, think financial services, any regulated environment, the privacy focus there, and the fact that we've got, you know, a ton of data governance and history managing that kind of audience targeting capability allowed us to be surgical in terms of.
One of the things that used to be a big difference is if you're on a programmatic platform, it's easy to take price. You just raise the price, and when somebody checks the box, you get the price increase. You used to have a lot of stuff under contract, and it was so hard to raise price on those people because they were under margin pressure. They wanted to try to get you a lower price. What is happening with this mix of programmatic where it's easy to raise price versus contracts where they're negotiated annually, but it's just really hard to get price increases?
Yeah. I think for us, it's just been surgical in terms of, you know, how do we monitor our impression volume against, you know, where we've got uniqueness that we can differentiate. You know, we've got a differentiated product that's not available elsewhere. Again, I go to the privacy compliance stuff that we do with Proximic as a great example where there's not a lot of other places that you can go to to get that kind of quality when you're placing a campaign. And so that's where we've been surgical, and we've had success doing it.
I know you came in with a clear vision of what you wanted to achieve. What ending are you at, and what do you have yet to achieve to get to your destination?
Yeah. We think we're on to something with our cross-platform capabilities and the scale that we're creating. Like I said, it started with something 18-24 months ago that was less than 10% of our revenue to something now that more approaches 20%. There's no reason to believe that that doesn't continue to scale, and that's where we're focused. I think we're still in the early innings in terms of what that opportunity is for Comscore as we continue to invest in that side of the business.
One of the things you were really good at is you made an acquisition of a Comscore girl that you brought back in-house, and she was all about real-time. And maybe I think her product was real-time, but you guys shortened your feedback loop from like two weeks to, I don't know, 24 hours, 48 hours, I can't remember. But where are you now in this real-time ability to, like, mid-campaign adjust and change based on feedback?
The longest pole in the tent there is how quickly we can turn around our linear TV data as part of our cross-platform offering, and we've got that down to 48 hours. We're within what many of our clients would consider a perfectly acceptable, optimizable window. If you're trying to optimize your digital spend against, you know, what you're seeing from linear, you know, it's that linear that's typically the long pole in the tent in terms of just given the amount of data providers we have and how quickly they are to give us the data and then how quickly we're able to turn. We took that from what was a two-week window down to a two-day window. Now both our linear TV product and our cross-platform product are within, you know, an optimizable window from an advertising optimization perspective.
Is there a product that just is real-time? It just doesn't have linear? Because that's, like you said, that's the one that gives you the cross-platform. Is there a product that doesn't, is like a pre-look, like fast-look product that just doesn't have linear? Or is that?
Our digital data is, you know, digital on its own tends to be a much faster turnaround. And so that capability, typically we can turn around audiences, especially within Proximic, within 24 hours, depending on what you're wanting to model against. But in terms of a cross-platform capability and market that has the size, scale, transparency, and credibility that buyers demand, there's not a product that's faster than Comscore's capability.
That gives you competitive advantage, I assume.
Yes, sure does.
Right. Because if you can adjust in the middle of a campaign, you save a lot of money.
Yes.
If you can optimize. Okay. Do you have any play in this, you know, generative AI is going to allow us to do content creation? One of the issues I have with programmatic writ large is we're doing a lot of work on targeting an ad to the best target market, and we keep the creative the same, which seems like a really lost opportunity. To the extent we're spending a fortune in the programmatic world finding audiences, it feels like those audiences might be best served by the girls in pink, the girls 21, not 47, or vice versa. You know, it feels like there should be content iterations that generative AI opens up. Do you have any play in that? Do you benefit from that kind of trend at all?
I think one of the other differentiators that Comscore has versus, let's say, some of the other measurement players that we bump up against is that we do cross-platform ad measurement and content measurement. If you think about it, you're a content producer, whether you decide you want to put something on your local O&Os, you want to put it in a prime-time lineup, you want to put it on your D2C channel, or you want to license it all together, clients will leverage Comscore's cross-platform content capability to help them determine how they monetize their content across their platform or outside their platforms. You know, as they're making investments in AI and creative around what's showing up on their platforms, our audience capability in terms of a measurement function plays a critical role in that.
We see the content measurement arm of this as being as big a differentiator in market as our Proximic audience segments are. We do not play directly in the creative. There are some of our competitors that are more upper funnel. They get involved in some of the creative measurement. We generally do not get involved in that.
What's interesting is that just thinking about DoubleVerify, DoubleVerify used to have, they started when they came public, it's only a post solution. You'd run your campaign, and then they were a currency after the fact and said, "Look, a million of these impressions were not viewable. You know, it was a bot, not a human that viewed it," or they were out of the demo target. Like you delivered a 49-year-old and then you don't have to pay. But then they smartly introduced a pre-product that's bundled. Like you can't buy the pre-product without the post.
It feels to me like this thing about content, what would be smart on measuring content is to have a pre where you basically, it's like an A/B test where you're doing pre before you roll it out, where you would do a, and then you would only roll out the one that had the better of the A/B test. You would bundle it with the post. You wouldn't let them just measure that because that's probably small, it's probably 100,000 people each, but you would bundle it with the post product, but it'd be an upsell. Do you guys ever think about that for content?
Yeah. I mean, virtually every case where we've got a cross-platform capability, it's more often than not married to, again, one of our traditional products. So you're not leveraging Comscore's cross-platform capability unless you've got a subscription to our, you know.
It's an upsell, not a standalone.
It's an add-on. If you want cross-platform capabilities, you also need to be laddered on with our linear TV product and our digital product.
Those are all after-the-fact measurement.
Those are all 100%.
I'm saying, isn't there a space here to do pre-measurement that's tied to the post that makes, doesn't waste as much money? The way you guys have it, somebody runs an ad campaign, you measure it. Now they go away and fix it for next time. A pre-measurement product lets them do like a little test market before they.
That's generally where we're working with, whether it be the buying community or in other cases, it could be directly with the publisher ecosystem with their planning capability. Oftentimes our data is already integrated into their planning capabilities where they're looking at prior campaigns that ran or something they want to run upfront and how's that going to perform. Our product helps them determine where to optimize again. You know, I want to suppress linear eyeballs and target social or digital display, video display programmatically. They're using our product to do that, but that's all based off of some of the pre-upfront planning work that we would have done with them ahead of time to integrate that offering.
Questions from the audience? Okay. I'll keep going. Okay. Great. Okay, bring us up to date on the balance sheet. What's happening with the balance sheet? Because I haven't looked lately. What's happening with the balance sheet?
I think we've made quite a bit of progress over the course of the last 12 years on the balance sheet, 12 months on the balance sheet. At the end of the year, we raised a $45 million facility, which helped us address an old Bank of America line that we had in place, gave us some extra dry power to spend on investment against our cross-platform capabilities and some of the product enhancements that we talked about here today. I feel a lot better about our balance sheet now than I did 12 months ago. That said, you know, we still have a capital table that frustrates a lot of my common shareholders that, you know, we spent a lot of time talking about and figuring out how to resolve.
You know, in terms of balance sheet, flexibility to put capital to work in the areas that are going to drive growth for the business, I feel a lot better about that today than I did 12 months ago.
Great. I know you needed access to capital, and it was frustrating with the capital.
I mean, look, the company hadn't had any growth capital to speak of since that 2015, 2016 timeframe. You talk about, you know, how far the market has come. You know, on one hand, it's remarkable what the team has been able to achieve just in terms of the product progress that has been made in the absence of any meaningful capital. Now to have a bit more dry powder, we're excited about the investment opportunity in front of us.
One of the things that the two, let's talk about Comscore first. The Comscore, let's call it legacy Comscore, had such, I would say, a siloed, had such a siloed, and there was so much inefficiency in it. I don't know if it was poor work ethic, but have we gotten rid of a lot of those issues in the culture of the historical legacy Comscore?
We've made a lot of change over the course of the last three years. You know, we still have some wood to chop, but I'm pleased with the way we've reorganized the company to get hyper-focused on the areas of the business where we've got a very clear right to win. To me, that is bringing together, going back to that original thesis when Comscore and Rentrak came together, that cross-platform omnichannel capability. We've totally aligned the organization around that mandate and have been very deliberate about the things that we say yes to and the things that we say no to. We're saying no to a lot more things than I think the company has done in the past. I'm pleased with the progress that we've made.
Like anything, a company that's been around 25 years, you're sitting on a fair amount of tech debt, and that creates resource debt. There's still work to do there, but we've come a long way. I think the team is excited about some of the growth prospects that.
I remember Rentrak essentially had a monopoly in local, and Nielsen had been uncredited or discredited, whatever it's called, had lost its accreditation is maybe how you say it. I think they recently got it back. I mean, what's happening in the local side of the business? You had two monopolies. One that was a real monopoly, which was your box office measurement, which was really a monopoly. Then you had what I would call a monopoly. Or a clear, what do you call it? A clear right to win in local measurement. Are you guys the currency now in local?
We are the currency in many instances in local. Our main competitor, we're the only measurement company outside of Nielsen that can produce a local rating. I'd argue that Nielsen's ability to produce a local rating is highly suspect. I think what we've been able to do, because we've invested in that part of the business, because we believe it's a big differentiator in not just our ability to command and win in that marketplace, which is, you know, a $20 billion marketplace that is not going away. We're the only other player that can deliver a product there, but it's also core to what our cross-platform capability is.
If you're an advertiser, your ability to not just advertise at a national level, but to be able to optimize down to a hyper-local level requires you as a measurement company to have that, not just the linear data set, but the digital data set to help them do that. You know, we think, you know, our local strength is a big differentiator, and it's the Trojan horse for everything that we're unlocking as it relates to our growth strategy going forward, whether it be cross-platform, whether it be our ability to work with advertisers across both local and national traditional measurement landscape. Yeah, we've taken share in local. The clients recognize the investments that we're continuing to make there.
The good news is, it supports not just those local broadcasters and local ad marketplaces, but it supports the double-digit growth that we're driving in cross-platform.
One of the things that's been happening is this, I'm going to call it the defunding of news that affects local broadcasters, affects a lot of things on the open web too, right? A lot of Washington Post or USA Today. So my question is, I mean, is there a future for local broadcasters and/or for news on the open web that needs measurement if we don't turn around this ability or the willingness of advertisers to advertise in live news content?
I think you still, I mean, like I said, it's still a very robust marketplace. You look at just last year's political season, those battles were all won at the local level. The amount of money that got dumped into local markets and local broadcasters specifically was significant. The power of local, think about it, like most purchase decisions are generated at the household level. We all live hyper-locally. We live in the restaurants that we go to, the weather we care about, the news that we're tuning into most often or not. It all comes back to a local root, if you will. You see the biggest players in the market investing against their local offerings. Amazon just announced a big team that stood up their local capabilities.
Look at all the investment that local broadcasters are making in sports and against the demise of regional sports networks. The local broadcasters are the ones that are making significant investments in those spaces, and the advertising dollars are falling.
We'll stay on that. It doesn't actually save an industry to every two years have record levels of political fundraising go into broadcasters if they can't then sell in the other year and a half between those six-month political cycles. That's my question. In the 18 months between political money coming into the area, if news isn't getting funded because people don't want to be near political, they don't view it brand safe because it can hurt people purchasing their brand. A lot of it's war, which, so they don't like news. The question is, can the open internet survive not funding news? Actually, can linear broadcast survive 18 months if people aren't going to fund news?
I think that's why you see many of them again continue to invest against their sports rights in their local communities.
It's diversifying their content offerings, you're saying. News might not get funded, but if they spend a bunch of money on a new form of content, that might be able to get funded as well.
You're commanding audiences that still do tune into the lineup of programming that you have across your offering. You know, we're certainly, you know, focus group of one here, but I don't see a future in which local, the way it transacts, the way sales teams maybe make their inventory available may change, but audiences are hyper-local and I don't see that changing certainly in the next five years, five, ten years.
Which makes your currency, your best-in-class local currency for broadcasters.
Correct.
Okay. I'll be interested to see. Somebody was on my stage this day and I haven't seen any content, guys, was saying that they're going to do more with RMNs. Oh, they were saying that the RMNs, which are going bankrupt, are now the leagues are creating FAST channels and they're putting the FAST channels programmatically on platforms to generate ad revenue directly to the FAST channel that represents not the big, not like the NFL, NBA, but like the sports you and I don't think of, cricket, sailing, and biking and stuff like that, which I thought was sort of a smart idea.
Yeah, agreed.
Okay. So let's talk about your recent data partnerships with the MVPDs, the OEMs, and the platforms and how it affects your measurement capabilities in your competitive mode.
Look, we've got, when we think about our data partnerships specifically in terms of what it supports for our business, we think about it in a couple of different ways. There's the data that we collect from our MVPD relationships that support, you know, largely, you know, that pay TV bundle, traditional broadcast, linear television viewing. And we've got partnerships with all the major players in that space. We see, sure, anybody can buy that raw material, if you will. Other measurement companies do. It's one thing to be able to turn that data into a product that can be used as a currency in the marketplace to transact billions of dollars of advertising. I think that's where we've differentiated ourselves in terms of that capability.
We've got over 145 patents that support the work that we do around all that data that we bring in on the linear TV side. That is one piece of it. We've got partnerships with, whether it be direct integrations with D2C platforms to ingest their data to then complement the linear TV data. We capture the streaming behavior that way. ACR technology is another investment that we have made to capture streaming viewing. We invest, you know, in any given year, you know, call it $15 million or so against a panel asset that gives us real first-party intelligence in terms of what consumers are doing on a fully consented, opted-in basis that we then calibrate our big data sets against.
That gives, you know, gives us the ability to have a true set, if you will, against our big data offerings that we bring to market. Of course, we have got the Comscore digital footprint, which is, you know, in some cases, the combination of third-party data plus first-party data across 10,000 publishers globally that makes up our digital footprint. Those partnerships are what make up the anchor tenets, if you will, of our, you know, our cross-platform and overall measurement capabilities.
Okay. All righty. So you have all these, you have big competitive advantage. Has the price, so one of the things you guys have always bought is you always had this sort of anchor tenancy in all the big OEMs, Comcast, Charter. Is their price going down? Is the number of data points they give you, or do they want a price increase even though the number of linear TV subscribers is falling?
I mean, most of those contracts have been in place for many years. Charter's an investor in Comscore. And so we've had, in a lot of ways, a unique data partnership relationship with them. Part of the deal that we did at the end of the year was we renegotiated that element of the contract. It was our most expensive data partnership. You know, that renegotiation will result in at least $35 million of cash and operating expense savings over the remainder of that deal, which goes till 2031. As these deals have come up or where there's opportunity to engage in conversations, we've taken the liberty to try and right-size those as their business models have changed to benefit, not just, you know, their business models are changing too.
They're getting data from, you know, you look at some of the deals that they're doing with, you know, with content providers, they're getting different data today than they were previously. We are trying to be, you know, take a very strategic approach when those things come up to try and reduce our costs and reliance on them.
Because I would guess you do not need as many of them to the extent, like you probably used to have everybody. Now you could probably get away with half of the market because you only have to compete against the other guy who has a panel of 40,000 people.
Yeah, it depends, right? Because there's not a lot of overlap, right? Charter and Comcast are in completely different markets.
You must know by now how to turn one into the other.
That's the beauty of, you know, having a nationally represented panel as well that we continue to invest in that also allows us long-term to take more control over our data costs as things change.
Yeah, that makes sense to me. Even with 10 years of data knowing how Comscore can change, I'm sorry, how Charter versus Comcast lives, if you got rid of, let's say, Charter, you have to keep because they own part of you. I mean, it seems like you could get rid of Comcast if they were being ridiculous on the price of their data and just model that based on historical behavior because households don't change that radically.
Their viewing behaviors do, right? If you just look at how rapidly things have changed. And so we feel like we've got.
Have you compared to the Charter people?
We've got, again, there are data, this is another thing that gets lost, but from a data governance standpoint as well, many of these agreements do require us and other partners they work with to have multiple parties so that they're not the only source of viewing in a particular marketplace. That comes into consideration as well as we look at our measurement capability. Again, you know, we're so diverse that I feel like we're uniquely positioned versus some of the other players that are out there that don't have the history that we have to know this.
It's about cost and negotiating leverage. Like even if they need, they don't want to be the only guy in Mississippi, you don't want to have to pay for Comcast data as your second source to keep them not being the only one because Comcast isn't a professional negotiator as a person.
Of course, yeah.
You'd rather be able to say, Comcast, we're willing to walk away and we'll find iSpot or Samba in this market to be our second, right?
Yeah, good luck getting accurate measurement.
Good luck. Still, but again, that's my point. If you have 10 years of how Comcast viewers compared to Charter viewers, you still have the Charter viewers.
Yeah, I'm not disputing the point. Like cost is a big factor and data costs have been, they're a large portion of our P&L. I think what we continue to do is figure out ways in which we can take more control over our future as those deals come up for renegotiation. Investment in.
Five-year deals are longer.
Some of them now are, we've got an annual opt-out on some of our data agreements now, but most of them we try and lock in because we're building products, right? We need to be thoughtful about that investment against the right time horizon.
Yeah, yeah, no, that makes sense. Usually you can get cheaper prices if you do it longer so that you can lock it in. Questions from the audience? Okay, I'll call it there then.
All right.
Thank you very much.
Yes. Thanks.