Welcome to the Eversource Energy Q3 2020 Results conference call. My name is John, and I'll be your operator for today's call. At this time all participants are in listen only mode. Later we will conduct a question and answer session. During the question and answer session, if you do have a question, press star then one on your touch tone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. And I will now turn the call over to Jeffrey Kotkin. Thank you very much, John. Good morning, and thank you for joining us. I'm Jeff Kotkin, Eversource Energy's Vice President for Investor Relations. During this call we'll be referencing slides that we posted last night on our website. As you can see on slide one, some of the statements made during this investor call may be forward looking as defined within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The forward looking statements are based on management's current expectations and are subject to risk and uncertainty, which may cause the actual results to differ materially from forecasts and projections. These factors are set forth in the news release issued yesterday. Additional information about the various factors that may cause actual results to differ can be found in our Annual Report on Form 10K, for the year ended December 31st, 2019, and our Form 10Q, for the three months ending June 30th, 2020. Additionally, our explanation of how and why we use certain non-gap measures and how those measures reconcile to gap results is contained within our news release and the slides we posted last night, and in our most recent 10K. Speaking today will be Phil Lembo, our Executive Vice President and CFO. Also joining us today are Joe Nolan, our Executive Vice President for Strategy, Customer and Corporate Relations, John Moreira, our Treasurer and Senior VP for Finance and Regulatory, and Jay Buth, our Controller. Now I will turn slide two and turn over the call to Phil. Uh, thank you, Jeff. Uh, good morning everyone. Uh, hope everyone on the call remains healthy and that your families are, are safe and, and doing well. Uh, this morning I'll cover a variety of areas, uh, review the results of the third quarter, uh, discuss recent regulatory developments including the acquisition of the assets of, uh, Columbia Gas of Massachusetts, provide an update on recent developments around our offshore wind partnership with Orsted. I'll start with slide two, uh, noting that recurring earning were $1.02 per share in the third quarter of 2020, compared with recurring earning of .98 cents per share in the third quarter of 2019. Gap results, uh, which include a charge of one cent per share relating to the recently, uh, completed acquisition of the assets of Columbia Gas of Massachusetts totaled $1.01 per share in the third quarter of 2020. In the first nine months of 2020, our recurring earning excluding Columbia Gas acquisition costs totaled $2.80 per share, compared with recurring earning of $2.69 per share in the first nine months of 2019, and excluding the Northern Pass transmission impairment charge. Gap results for September of this year were, uh, $2.76 per share. Turning to our business segments, our electric trans, uh, distribution segment earned .60 cents per share in the third quarter of 2020, compared with earnings of .61 cents per share in the third quarter of 2019. The low earnings were a result of both higher storm restoration costs and property tax expense, as well as the impact of, uh, of share dilution. Our electric transmission segment earned .36 cents per share in the third quarter of 2020, compared with recurring earnings of .33 cents per share in the third quarter of 2019. Improved results, uh, were driven by the continued investment and reliability in our transmission facilities, proximately offset by share dilution. Our natural gas distribution segment lost four cents per share in the third quarter of 2020, compared with a loss of five cents per share in the third quarter of, uh, last year. Improved results were due to higher revenues. I should note that, uh, because we didn't close on, uh, our acquisition of Columbia Gas of Massachusetts assets until October ninth, the transaction had no impact, uh, on this, the gas segment, the segment, uh, during the quarter. Uh, each quarter this year, uh, we've booked acquisition related costs at the parent. It has segregated them for, uh, increased transparency. Beginning in the fourth quarter of this year, ongoing results of our new gas franchise, which is named Eversource Gas Company of Massachusetts, will be reflected in the natural gas segment. Integration related costs, however, will continue to be recorded separately at the parent, and excluded from our recurring gap, uh, earnings. Our water distribution segment earned seven cents per share in the third quarter of 2020, compared with earnings of six cents per share in the third quarter of 2019. Improved results, um, were due to a three, three and a half million, uh, dollar after tax gains on the sale of our Hingham, Massachusetts <inaudible> facilities, uh, to the town. Eversource parent earned three cents per share in the third quarter of 2020, excluding the Columbia Gas of Massachusetts asset acquisition costs, uh, equal to our earnings in the third quarter of, of last year. As you probably noted in our earnings release and can see on slide three, we are reaffirming our 2020 earnings per share guidance of $3.60 to $3.70, and that is excluded the non-recurring costs related to the purchase of Columbia Gas of Massachusetts assets. We are also reaffirming our long term EPS growth rate of five to seven percent from our core regulated business through the year 2024. We continue to be, uh, to expect to be somewhere around the middle of that range, uh, largely due to the investment we need to make on behalf of our customers as we've outlined to you, uh, earlier in the year. As a reminder, uh, while we fully expect the Columbia Gas assets to be <inaudible> to our earnings per share starting immediately, uh, in 2021, we have not yet updated our long term financial outlook to reflect the acquisition of Columbia Gas, uh, assets in our, our capital, our cap ex or our earnings growth. In addition, as we've disclosed previously, earnings from offshore wind would be incremental to our core, uh, business growth. We'll provide a comprehensive update of our regulated capital investment forecast, uh, adding in, uh, Eversource Gas Company of Massachusetts projections, and provide an update of our offshore wind partnership, uh, during our year end call in late February. From the third quarter results I'll turn to slide four and our experience restoring power after tropical storm Isaias ravaged Connecticut on October fourth. We serve 149, uh, cities and town in Connecticut, and every one of these communities suffered damage from Isaias, uh, much of it catastrophic. As you can see on the slide, we had nearly 22,000 damage locations that we had to address, and brought in an army of electric, uh, restoration and tree crews to restore power, all the while working on the restoration in a pandemic setting. The restoration process lasted nine days, meaning we completed our work one to two days faster than we had in the last two tropical storms that hit Connecticut, even though we had, uh, 30% to 35% more damage locations. And most importantly, we completed that work safely with no serious electrical contact and no COVID exposure among the enormous workforce we brought to Connecticut. Just, just a tremendous effort, uh, by all of our employees from across all parts of, of Eversource. At this time we estimate that deferred costs across all three states will total more than $275 million dollars, with the vast majority of that, um, incurred in Connecticut. That figure will be adjusted as the actual invoices are received. We're still, we're still actively pursuing, uh, invoices from hundreds of vendors that assisted us during the statewide, uh, restoration effort. Uh, where we were setting new poles or hanging miles of new wires or replacing hundreds of transforms, there related costs are to be capitalized. The ultimate recovery of storm costs and the evaluation on performance, uh, and safely and expeditiously restoring power to our customers is pending an ongoing review by the Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, or PURA. That review is scheduled to be completed in late, uh, April of 2021. Sticking with our regulated business, I'll throw up the slide, uh, five and a review of this year's, uh, distribution rate reviews. This past Friday the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities issued its decision in the NSTAR Gas Rate Review that we filed last year. It supports our continued investment in the NSTAR Gas system on behalf of our 300,000 customers. The decision allows NSTAR Gas to increase distribution revenues by $23 million dollars on an annualized basis. The BPU approved the <inaudible> of 9.9% and a capital structure with, uh, 54.77% equity. It also permits us, uh, to implement performance based rating for a 10-year term that, uh, which sounds, uh, uprating performance by NSTAR Gas will target annual base rate increases of inflation plus one point, uh, zero three percent. This is an earning sharing mechanism that would return 75% of the benefit to customers should we receive the ROE of 10.9%, and sharing mechanism on the down side if our ROE falls below 8.4%. Uh, also exciting is the decision also approves our first ever geothermal pilot program. Another longstanding rate proceeding involves Public Service of New Hampshire. In <inaudible> last month we and all the parties to the PSNH rate case filed a proposed settlement in the rate review that, that has been pending for nearly, um, you know, a year and a half. As you can see from the slide, we settled on a $45 million dollar annualized rate increase that includes a 9.3%, uh, return on equity, and a 54.4, uh, percent equity layer. Should regulators approve the settlement, the permanent, uh, increase would take effect in January, January first of 2021. You may recall that the New Hampshire Public Utility Commission allowed us to implement a temporary rate increase of approximately $28 million dollars back in, uh, July, July first of 2019. The final approval rates would be retroactive back to that date, uh, 18 months. We would, uh, recover that in a true up, uh, over the course of, of the year 2021. We can settle, consider the settlement to be a constructive outcome to PSNH's first <inaudible> decade, and have asked the, the New Hampshire PUC to approve the settlement before the end of November. From the rate review, reviews <inaudible> six, and our recently completed acquisition of the assets of Columbia Gas in Massachusetts for $1.1 billion dollars of cash, excluding working capital adjustments. Most of these assets were assigned to Eversource Gas Company in Massachusetts, a new subsidiary I mentioned that we formed in May of 2020. As you can see on the slide, most of Eversource Gas's service territory is adjacent to NSTAR Gas or Yankee Gas service territories. Additionally, NSTAR Electric already provides electric service to about 20 of the communities that Eversource Gas serves with natural gas. As a result we expect to realize operational benefits for our newest 330,000 natural gas customers in the communities where they live. The finance the transaction we sold approximately $500 million dollars of equity in June, and we financed the debt portion of the transaction in August. And again, we are very confident that this transaction will be <inaudible> to our earnings per share in 2021, and incrementally <inaudible> in the years ahead. A critical factor in ensuring that this transaction brings benefits to all stakeholders is an eight-year rate plan that we negotiated with the Massachusetts Attorney General and other key parties prior to our filing with the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities. The key elements of that plan are listed on slide seven. It will allow us to make the necessary investments in our Eversource Gas of Mass system, and reflect those investments in rates in a reasonably timely manner. We are thankful that the DPU approved the settlement and the acquisition very quickly. Uh, now that we have the keys to the property and a, and a long term plan in place, we are, we are focused on providing our new Eversource Gas customers with the same high level of service that we provide our other 550,000 natural gas distribution company's customers that we have in Massachusetts and Connecticut. As I noted earlier, we plan to integrate Eversource Gas of Massachusetts into our updated five-year projections that we'll provide you in February. We continue to project approximately three billion dollars of regulated company capital investments this year. Despite the challenges posed by the pandemic, and the need to take crews off of capital projects for a significant part of August to deal with the aftermath of tropical storm Isaias, through September our capital investments totaled approximately $2.2 billion dollars. That's approximately the same level as this time last, last year in 2019. We made considerable progress on our transmission capital program in the third quarter, putting several projects into service at or below budget. And these benefits of, of, uh, lower costs will flow through to New, New England's electric customers. From the regulated business, alternative offshore wind partnership, uh, with Orsted, uh, on <unk>. We've had a few developments since our July 31st earnings call. Uh, the most significant development was that in August the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management posted a complete review schedule for our 130 megawatt South Fork Project on Long Island. The schedule culminates in a decision on a construction and operations permit, or COP as it's known, in mid-January of 2022. We are also making progress on the other permits. In September we filed a settlement proposal with the New York Department of Public Service to resolve much of the stakeholder feedback related to the construction, operations and maintenance of the project that lies within New York jurisdiction. In October several of the New York State agencies signaled their support for this proposal by signing on to the agreement. We've structured an agreement on host community payments in the necessary real estate ranks with the town of East Hampton, where the offshore cable would land, and would be connected to the Long Island grid. New York Public Service Commission siting hearing for South Fork is scheduled to commence the first week of December. We continue to expect the state signing to com, to be completed in 2021 before BOEM issues the COP. Based on that schedule we now the project to enter service in the fourth quarter of 2023. This is consistent with the expectations we disclosed during our May and July earnings calls while we were still, uh, waiting for the review schedule. Turning to our other projects, you recall that, uh, we filed our BOEM application for Revolution Wind in March. We expect BOEM to establish a review schedule for that project in the first quarter of 2021. We do not expect to provide an updated in service for this, uh, project until the schedule is issued, but at this point it, it, it's unlikely that the project go into service by the end of 2023. Also we filed our Sunrise Wind application with BOEM on September first, and expect BOEM to establish a review schedule for the project next year. Once we receive that review schedule, we'll be able to better estimate, uh, more up to date inservice schedule. But again, at this time it would seem, uh, that the end ' 24 in service is, is not likely. We're very optimistic about our offshore wind business and expect to have many opportunities over the coming months and years, uh, to expand our offshore wind partnership beyond the 1700 and 14 megawatts currently under contract. As we mentioned before, uh, we have enough lease capacity con, to construct at least 4000 megawatts on the 550 square miles of ocean tracks that we have under long term lease, uh, off, off the, uh, southeast, uh, coast of Massachusetts. To this point, on October 20th we submitted a number of alternative bids into the second New York offshore wind RFP, where the state is looking for between 1000 and 2500 megawatts. New York State officials have indicated that they expect to announce the winner or winners before the, the, the end of the year. Our Sunrise project, uh, as a reminder won the largest portion of New York's first RNP last year, uh, 880 megawatts. Additionally, just last week Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo, uh, announced that her state will target early next year for issuing an RFP for 600 megawatts of additional offshore wind. As you know, the majority or our Revolution Wind capacity, uh, 400 megawatts, will be sold to Rhode Island, with a, with the balance, uh, going to Connecticut. Uh, uh, thank you very much for joining us this morning, and I'll turn the call back over to Jeff. Thanks, Phil, and I'll turn the call back to John just to remind you how to enter questions in the Q&A queue. Thank you. If you do have a question, press star then one on your touch tone phone. Once again, that's star then one on your touch tone phone. If you wish to be removed from the queue, please press the pound sign or the hash key. Thank you, John. Our first question this morning is from <unk> from Guggenheim. Good morning, Char. Good morning, Jeff. Good morning, Phil. Good morning, Char. So a couple questions here. Um, I just, just for some your language around sort of the growth rate, um, you know, obviously which still excludes Columbia Gas and offshore wind. Obviously these are, you know, very creative and you're already conservatively kind of well within your band. So should we sort of be thinking about these incremental items as potentially ringing your growth to maybe six to eight percent? Or something that will hit you to the top end and then sort of extend that runway with your current trajectory? I mean, the reason why I ask is six to eight percent seems to sort of that new top quartile bucket in our space where five to seven percent is becoming a little bit more typical. So curious how you're sort of thinking about this. Do you see value to be a talk, to be in the top quartile, or you don't think you need a <inaudible> for it? So curious on, on that as we think about <inaudible> plan. Sure, uh, Char. Thanks for the, for the question, and I hope you, you are doing well. Um, uh, certainly the addition of Columbia Gas and, um, will be, uh, additive to our existing, uh, forecast. So, uh, we're, we're working through all the, the details of that we we're able to provide you with a full up, uh, update in February, but we, we expect to get, um, a significant, uh, benefit from that, from that franchise. And in saying we also expect, uh, as those offshore wind projects come online, uh uh, online to also be additive, uh, to remind folks, I know I said it, but a new gig that the five to seven percent growth rate is from the, from the existing core business which doesn't include, uh, Columbia, uh, assets. Uh, it also doesn't include, um, you know, grid modernization activities that are currently pending in, in Connecticut and New Hampshire or, or AMI that, that, that uh, could, could be a potential, uh, to move forward, um, relatively soon in, in Massachusetts, uh, in terms of taking a, a look at that by the, by the regulator. So um, I see that we have a number of levers to, uh, grow and grow at, uh, at, at, at even a higher rate than we had expected before. Got it. That's helpful. Uh, and then, uh, so just lastly for me is can you just maybe talk a little bit about your expectations for the legislation in Connecticut. I mean, the legislation that passed was more constructive than the giraffe legislation, but obviously some disappointment with the refunds and, and penalties offset by the potential upside from like PBRs. So sort of how are you guys thinking about this internally? Uh, sure. The, uh, energy legislation, we've, we've said consistently that, uh, PBR is a, is a, uh, formula and a template that, that, that we think is effective. We have PBR structures in, in other states, and um, we think that, um, having a, a robust discussion, uh, on PBR in, in Connecticut makes a lot of sense, and we're very, very supportive of, of that provision. Yeah, really, uh, you know, the energy legislation, uh, directed PURA to, to evaluate that, and, and open a docket by the middle of next year, so June of, of 2021, and it, it, it authorizes, uh, PURA to, you know, establish storm standards and potential penalties, as you, as you mentioned. There is an, there is an increased potential, um, for penalties. Uh uh, currently those penalties are two and a half percent of our distribution revenues in Connecticut, and that goes up, goes up to four percent. So you know, it also gives PURA some additional time, you know, to, to review cases. So, you know, which is also something that, you know, seems to be appropriate. So, um, the, the legislation as you, as you indicated, uh, it out there, uh, and uh, PURA is working through the details of it, and we expect to be, uh, working through that in a constructive way with them over the next several months. Got it. Terrific. That's all I had today. Uh, thanks, guys. Thanks, Char. Thanks, Char. Our next question is from Steve <unk> from Wolf. Good morning, Steve. Good morning. Um, Phil, can you hear me? Yes, Steve, I can. Okay, great. Uh, so just question on the delays in your offshore wind projects. Could you maybe talk to, uh, I know we don't know the exact timing, but how should we think about the impact on the economics of those projects from, from delay or, uh, or puts and takes? And is it hurting the economics of the projects you're already have signed up to? Yeah. Uh, thanks for your question, Steve, and I, I hope you, you and your family are doing well. Um, I, I just the, to, to go to the, the puts and takes, uh uh, piece. You know, I, I don't think that, uh, folks should automatically think that, um, schedule changes result in, uh, ups or downs. It's some benefits or, that, that people may not, um, may not consider in that. So certainly, um, if you are looking at, uh, adjusted schedules, you might be able to adjust your installation vessel optimization better, um, you know, uh, the turbine sizes themselves are getting larger, so you could, um, move to larger turbine sizes if, if, uh, projects are, are due at a later time period versus an earlier time period. And certainly the cost, um, supply chain and availability of materials and supply chain is only getting better. So, so I'd say that, um, you know, there's opportunities for improved, uh, cost, uh, economics as you move into a schedule that, uh, you know, you may not think of. You know, I think people generally think of projects as, you know, if there's a delay, it's a cost increase, but that, there are other elements at work here on the offshore wind business that, um, offset that. How about, how about any negatives? How about like do you lose, are you going to lose any tax credits or anything else? Yes, certainly depending on- I guess just time value. Yes. Um, uh, in terms of the, the schedules we're looking at, uh, we don't expect to have any impact on our tax, uh, assumptions. But certainly, uh, significant delays, um, delays could have impacts on, on your tax assumption. Delays could also have, uh, impact on a contract that you have with counter parties, but, um, in, in our specific case, so that's the general case, in our specific case, uh, we're confident that we have the ability to work within both of those, uh, the tax area and the contract area in an effective way with, uh, where we, we see the schedules going in the future. Okay. Thank you. <crosstalk> Our next question is from Angie from Seaport Global. Good morning, Angie. Good morning. Um, so I have a question about Massachusetts. You, you guys have this, uh, very constructive, uh, decision for, and for gas, of the state, uh, is clearly looking at the future of gas LDCs. Um, and so how do you guys see it, uh, especially in light of the fact that you just, uh uh, acquired, uh, an additional, uh, gas utility in Massachusetts? Uh, uh, good morning, Angie, and uh, thank you for you, your question, and hope you're doing well. Um, but you know, the, the way that I would, uh uh, position it, or the way that, uh, I think people should think about it is that there's nobody, first of all, who's more aggressive in terms of looking at clear energy strategies and carbon reduction than, than Eversource in terms of having a carbon neutral goal by 2030. Uh, we have worked effectively with all parties in, in, in, in all states, but in Massachusetts where, uh, the Attorney General and others want to take a look at, um, you know, sort of the, the, the future or outlook in terms of the, the, the gas, uh, business, um, we've, we've been working with, uh, these intervening parties for, for many years, and we'll continue to work with them on what we think an appropriate, uh, strategy is there. So, um, this is a long term, um uh, outlook in terms of, uh, if the state wants to, you know, be, have aggressive clean energy and, and carbon reduction, um, targets. Uh, we're wholly supportive of that, and we, we look forward to working, you know, with all the parties there. But we don't see it as a, as a threat to the, uh, gap distribution business, um uh, in the region at all. Okay. And, and in Connecticut, um, you know, this, this recent, uh, back and forth between you guys and PURA about the extension of, uh, the, uh, the lack of basically disconnections on the back of COVID. Um, I mean it's, it sounds a bit concerning, uh, that PURA is pushing back so strong that they don't need to sign off on that extension. Um, I mean, I would assume that it's a, an actual practice, normal practice for a regulated utility to seek, uh, recovery of these, uh, you know, under recovered, uh, revenues. Um, can you give us a sense, you know, how you see it in Connecticut, um, given the latest, um, you know, legislative changes and also some deterioration and, and, you know, regulatory relationships in the state? Um, yes. So we are not doing, uh, shut offs, uh um, across all, any of our franchises at, at, at this point. And specifically, you know, we're working, you know, we're working with customers. We're working with, um, fuel agencies, assistance agencies on, uh, an approach here that works, that will work best for customers we've lost. We engaged with PURA, as you mentioned, and other government, uh, officials, um, you know, on this issue. So I'm, I'm, I'm confident that we'll get to a, a good place here. You know, nobody wants to, uh, burden customers with, with anymore than, than we're already, all of us are bur, burdened with in terms of the economic conditions and, and, and COVID, etc. So, um, we're, we're working through the issue. Uh, we're working with customers, as I say, and some of the assistance agencies and, and um, uh, I'm, I'm, sure we'll get to a, a good outcome here. Very good. Thank you. Thank you, Angie. Uh, next question is from Julian from Bank of America. Good morning, Julian. Hey, good morning, team. Thanks for the time. Uh, hope, uh, all of you are doing well and safe, uh, families as well. Um, perhaps just to, to pick up off of, uh, or perhaps clarify if I can some of the last rounds of questions. Um, when you talk about, uh, the, the 4Q roll forward, are you gonna be rolling to 2025? And then more specifically, how do you think about including or excluding offshore wind in light of the uncertainty you described? Should we expect that offshore wind should continue to be, at least for those projects where there's an un, uh, determined date, to continue to be excluded there? Uh, Julian, thanks for your question and your comments, and I hope, and hope your, you and your family are doing well, too. Um, just to clarify, we will, uh, our history has been to, um, add another year into the, into the outlook. So 2025 would be that, that year since our forecast goes through the 2024 time period. So that is something that, uh, you should expect to see. And really our, our view on how to look at offshore wind, it, it doesn't change by, by any of the schedule items we, we talked about today or, it, we've, we've look at it as, um, showing the, the core business as, uh, as the driver and the foundational element of the, of the growth rate. And then to show that wind is additive to that in, in, in what way. So that would be the intent going forward. I think that, um, when I've been asked this question before, the answer is, is, is, was and still is as, as more years of wind come in to the actual results of that particular year, then to me it makes more sense to, to roll it all together. But uh, at this stage the expectation, especially in this, uh, upcoming February update would be to have the core business, extend that through 2025, and then, uh, show, uh, offshore wind, uh, in, in addition to that. And, and if you don't mind elaborating a little bit further, I, I know that there's a certain degree of uncertainty on exactly the perming schedule that inhibits your ability to say when these projects in a region service. Can you at least try to put some more parameters around what, um, each of these pieces of the process could take? So if there's like a window, if you will. It may be too early. Yeah, so it, in terms of, um, you know, there, there's, uh, people have, uh, realized out there, and, and we've been asked questions, and I, I think you've asked us, uh, the questions in terms of, you know, with, with delays on <inaudible> Wind and other things, uh, there's been some delays in terms of BOEM's notice of intent, uh uh, of intent and, and to prepare their environmental impact statement, and frankly we, we would have, we would have expected, uh, in our original schedule, uh, schedules that some of these, uh um, <inaudible> lags that, you know, to prepare the, the environmental impact statement would be, would be out by now. So these are expected. I, I believe, um, you know, that, that plans scheduled for reviewing, uh uh, and releasing these is, is underway. So I wouldn't expect, uh, you know, significant change in the schedule, but uh, at this stage it would be, uh, prudent to wait to see the, the, the, uh, schedule that comes out of BOEM before we, we commit to a final, uh, inservice date. But I wouldn't expect it to be significant. Got it, excellent. All right, I'll pass it from there. Thank you so much. Thanks, Julian. Uh, next question is from <unk> from Evercore. Good morning, Dragesh. Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking my question. Uh, just, just following up on, uh, you know, the, the offshore wind here. What to expect, you know, the, this, uh, EIS, uh, decision I suppose that is going to be out, <inaudible> statement rather than month, or, or, uh, early December, what to expect there. And then how does that impact your, your future project timelines? Yeah, the, um, these notice of in, of intent, they contain, um, a plan schedule, you know, that, that in the, analyze they have contained BOEM's plan schedule for reviewing each of the costs. So that would be an important, um, piece of information to, to have available. So that, that's really the, what's included in, in that is it's a plan schedule for reviewing the costs that, that comes out with the, the notice of in, intent. All right, so I guess maybe I'm talking about the environmental impact statement. Isn't there an environmental impact statement that BOEM is supposed to, uh, sort of put out here in, in the next few weeks? You're talking about the one for Vineyard, right? Yes, yes. Oh, okay. Yeah, I'm not, um, I, I apologize. Um, you'd probably have to ask, uh, Vineyard Wind on, about that. Okay, but, but, but that doesn't have a read through for you or your offshore wind projects? I guess that's what my question was. Well, certainly, um, all of the developers off the coast, uh, they, we've been going through this <inaudible> of impact study and, and looking at spacing, and um, of, of when turbines, and we came up with a, a one nautical mile, a one nautical mile spacing. So certainly, uh, there could be components that come out in, in any decision for, um, Vineyard Wind that you'd have to, you know, take a look at to see if they have any impact, uh, you know, to other developers including us. But, um, in terms of what might be in that or the exact timing, um, I think, uh, Vineyard might, might have a better perspective of that. Okay, perfect. That's all I had, guys. Thank you so much. Thank you. All right. Thanks, Dragesh. Uh, next question is from Jeremy from JP Morgan. Good morning, Jeremy. Good morning. Thanks for having me. Just want to start of with, uh, what are the benefits of looping Con Ed into the proposed Sunrise II, uh, Sunrise Wind II RFP here? Eversource has, uh, experience in building transmission, and I'm curious what additional competitive advantages Con Ed provides here to this specific project. Uh, can you provide details on potential ownership interests for each entity? And does ownership interest change once construction is complete and the project is inservice? Uh, thanks for your question, Jeremy, and hope you, hope you're doing well. I, I, I guess I would say on the, uh, first part of the question that, um, sort of obviously Con Ed has, uh, local knowledge of, uh, of New York and their service territory and the, and their network and the operation of the transmission and delivery system that, um, that are valuable, uh uh, to any, uh, party if you're, if you're operating in New York. So I'd say they bring a, a knowledge and skill set of, of the area that, uh, certainly we don't have, um, you know, as, as depth a knowledge as, as they would. So, uh, certain skill sets there that the local, uh uh, player would bring. Um, so in terms of, you know, what the, um, components of a relationship would be, those things are all to be discussed as we, as we move through, but it's certainly, um, beneficial I think to the project to have, uh, somebody with, um uh, Con Ed's skill sets involved. Got it. And as far as potential ownership interests, is there any kind of thoughts on how that could develop? Um, not at this time, no. Got it. And then will the delay in offshore wind permitting have any impact on the <inaudible> plans? Is it, is it fair to assume the $700 million of equity in your current five-year plan moves to the back end here? And how is offshore wind cap ex, uh, spending tracked year-to-date versus the $300 to $400 million range that, uh, you expected? Um, we haven't disclosed a, uh, range that we've expected. We've, we've talked about how much we expected to, to spend, um, you know, this year. You know, you know, um, just for, uh, the year 2020. Uh, and it's tracking somewhat close to that. I'd say it's probably a little bit, uh, under what we expected at, at, at this time. Um, in terms of the financing, uh, you're right, that's… we announced a year ago, you know, this two billion dollars of, of equity need that would support the forecast, and we, we issued $1.3 of that, so there's $700 million remaining that, um… and, and I would say the same thing as I've said, uh, all along is we'd be op, opportunistic and consider what our capital forecasts are and, and what the market conditions are, um, you know, as we look to, um uh, fulfill the rest of that, uh, offering that we discussed. Got it. That's helpful. I'll leave it there. Thank you. Thank you. All right, thanks, Jeremy. Uh, next question is from Paul Patterson from Glenrock. Good morning, Paul. Good morning, guys. Good morning, Paul. Um, I just wanted to follow up on the, the, uh, the draft decision in Connecticut, uh, on Monday, and um, what your thoughts were on it. Um, any… if it, if it were, in fact, to become a, a final order, what the, uh, what the potential impact, uh, could be? Are you talking about the draft, um, information on, on rates or what? Can you be more specific? Sure. There was a draft decision on, on Monday in the, um, the PURA case, uh, associated with, uh, with the rates, right. The, the rate review that was reversed, um, that proceeding. I, I, uh uh, I can tell you that the, the specific name. Um- No, that's okay. I, you know, I just wanted to, um, I just wanted to be specific because as somebody else mentioned, there's been a number of different, um <crosstalk>. Sure, so this, um, so as you recall, we, uh, that PURA suspending the rates, uh, that we had implemented over the summer, both we and, uh, <inaudible> to take an additional look. Think this is what you're referring to. So we did receive a draft order, and really it's kind of hot off the press. We're apparently, um, evaluating that, and um, and, and we're going to, you know, see what comments we might have, and comments on the draft are due, um, I thin it's the, the 12th of November, so we have some time to, to flush out any, anything. But it's consistent with, uh, on first blush I'd say it's consistent with, um, PURA's desire to have, uh, some rate changes, you know, move… instead of implementing rates at peak times of usage, maybe such as July, implement them on, you know, change the time of it to implement it, uh, maybe in a, in a shoulder month like as, like May or something, um, and move to annual reconciliations as opposed to, uh, semi-annual. So this, this would, um, you know, it does, it does, delays this could have, uh, effectively this is a cash flow, uh, item, and it could have an impact on our, our, our deferrals, um, that, that we have in place there. But you know, I think it generally is consistent with the desire, as we said, to move off of these peak periods for making rate changes, and shoulder period and, um, see where we go from there. But we're, we're, we're actively reviewing that last night and today, and we'll be… and, and have, uh, any comments that we would have reviewed by, as I said, on the 12th. Okay. Um, there, there was one part of it that would reduce the, the carrying charges, um, from the, uh, from <unk> to a prime rate on a variety of reconciliation mechanisms. Um, is there any, um, do we have any… I know this is hot off the press and everything, but do we have any sort of forecast as to what the, um, those reconciliations mechanisms, like how much capital might be tied up in those? Uh, no <inaudible> that is a point, too, um, the, uh um, the carrying costs at, at prime, which is consistent in, in some other jurisdictions I guess. So, um, that, it's not a significant, um, you know, item, but, um, it, it's certainly one that, uh, PURA had put out there in the draft just to, uh, recover the deferred balances with, uh, with a prime, prime rate, um, versus a, a wack. Okay. Uh, and then just, um, we, we don't know who the president's gonna be it seems, um, but if there was a change in administration, um, do you think that could have or not have maybe a, a significant impact on the BOEM permitting process with respect to offshore wind? The, um, the, the permitting process, I mean, when, when we meet with, uh, with BOEM, B-O, B-O-E-M, you know, the, the, uh, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, you know, that people are active, we're, we're actively working, we're actively having, you know, Zoom meetings or team calls or whatever, uh, the, the, the, uh, the, uh, video capabilities are that we're using. But, you know, we're actively working that, and I can assure you that the people in the agencies are working full speed regardless of, um, you know, who, who's, you know, president or what the election results are. But certainly it would be good to have, um, you know, the results of the election. I think we've all as a, as a country, um, you know, that, uh, the election results are something that we've all targeted out there, and wherever you fall on the, uh, the political spectrum, it's good to have, uh, certainty as opposed to uncertainties. So I think we're all looking forward to what the final outcome is there so we can, we can move forward. Okay. But just so, it, just so for my clarity, the process of the BOEM is pretty much the, the agency that, that so the bureaucratic process is going on, really you don't see a significant change one way or the other, it, it, regardless of the, the outcome of the presidential election. Is, is that the, am, am I right understanding that? Yeah. I'd say, uh, that the work at the agencies is, is going on. You know, they're, you know, we've been meeting, uh, regularly going through, uh, questions. Uh, we're working through, uh, the various state agencies. So no, I, I'd say that the work is continuing, um, at the, at the, as you say, the, the bureaucrat level. Okay, awesome. Thanks so much. You're welcome. Thanks, Paul. Uh, next question is from Mike Weinstein from <inaudible>. Good morning, Mike. Hey, good morning. Morning, Phil. <crosstalk> Hi, good, uh, hope you're, uh, hope you're doing well. Hey, I, I, maybe you could just give a quick two second update on, uh, what you think, uh, the outcome at FERC might be for, uh, transmission ROEs and, you know, considering, uh, if the election outcome may, has any effect on any of this, uh, in accelerating an outcome. Um, well, Mike, that's a, that's a very, uh, big crystal ball that you're asking <crosstalk>. So, but again, thanks, and I hope you're, you're doing well. Thanks for your question. I, you know, it's, um, I wish I had a, uh, you know, a better answer than to say that, um, you know, it's working its way through. We, we don't really have, um, a specific clarity as to, um, when FERC might, um, you know, come up with something on the New England <inaudible> pending, New England cases, and certainly, um, impact of the election one way or the other, what, what that could have in terms of commissioners and that type of thing. So, um, you know, the only thing I know for certain is we're, we're looking at, uh, our ten point five seven rates, and uh, reserving to that level, and actually 11.74 cap, um, and you know, we'll just have to wait and see what the final, the final outcome will, will look at. But I don't really have a, uh, an answer. I know in, in years past when I've tried to, when I've tried to think that one was coming or it was going a certain way, it really hadn't, hasn't materialized, so I think it's best to wait 'til the, the final, the final order comes out at this point. Or orders, as it may be. Right. Hey, and uh, bigger crystal ball question, uh, would be, uh, you know, I know that Hydra Quebec has a pretty big long term construction plan for gen, you know, hydro generation up there, and I know that their long term plans included lots and lots of Northern Pass type transmission lots. Uh, you know, do you think there's ever a time at some point where there might be another, uh, another wack or another go at transmission at some point? You know, big transmission project? Think a lot of that is dependent upon what the states want to get, right? So this, this, these are gonna be processes now that are driven by state's clean energy policies and the state's desire to, um, um, have, uh, either offshore wind or solar or hydro in, in the mix. So, um, you know, there are certainly, there's a lot of activity at the states now. I mean the states in our area all want, uh, aggressive, uh uh, carbon reduction targets. So it wouldn't be out of the question to see a state, you know, want to, um, you know, contract for, for more of that, but there's nothing, uh, there's nothing planned on our end as, nothing that I see at this stage on the state's agenda that would, would say that. But when you say the word ever, you know, that's a long time. Right. So it seems like the offshore wind program really has kind of, uh, supplanted that, uh, at least for the time being. Yeah, I'd say that's a, that's a good, uh, way of looking at it. Okay, great. Uh, thank you very much. Okay, Mike. Thanks, Mike. Our next question is from <unk> Kim from Goldman Sachs. Good morning, Ensu. Good morning, guys. Um, my only question is, and apologies if I missed this, but could just give us an update on the, uh, Connecticut <inaudible> filings and, uh, any updates on expected deci, decisions from the commission and, you know, timing of investments, etc? Uh, thanks for your question, too, and I hope you and your family are doing well. Um, you didn't miss it. I, um, I mentioned, um, uh, you know, in terms of what items could be additive to our five to seven percent core business, uh, growth rate I alluded to <inaudible>, uh, in Connecticut or New Hampshire or, uh, potentially additional AMI, um, uh, dockets in, in Massachusetts. But, uh, there's really been no change there. We, uh, all the parties filed comments and plans back in, in July, and certainly you can understand there's been a lot, there's been a lot going on, and, and I, I think I may have said Isaias was in October, but we all know that Isaias was in August. Um, so since August, uh, there's been a lot of, uh, you know, there's been a lot of focus on, on, on storms, and there's been a lot of dockets, and somebody else mentioned we have dockets going on in terms of, um, moratoriums and whatnot. So there's, you know, the expectation was there was going to be another, uh, sort of go round, uh, and another process in Connecticut towards the end of the year. I really haven't seen anything that would indicate, uh, specific schedule, um, on that. So I guess our best guess is still, you know, it's still in the, in the pipeline, and you may see more activity on the grid bond there in Connecticut as we move, uh, over the next, uh, several months. But in terms of it being in our forecast, um, you know, I want to be clear that there is currently no, uh, you know, zero, there's no grid bond, um, spending in our capital forecast, uh, for any, you know, grid bond programs that haven't been approved like in Connecticut or New Hampshire. So, you know, once, uh, they are approved, and once we see what, what our role would be in them, um, and once we see what that, you know, looks like, then if we have more confidence in putting in the, in the plan. So, uh, that could be something we have information on by the time we get to the February, uh, update. So, um, you know, I'll, I'll, we'll have to stay tuned on that. It makes sense. Uh, that's all I had. Thank you guys, and stay safe. <crosstalk> Thanks, Ensu. Next question is from David Arcaro from Morgan Stanley. Morning, David. Good morning. Hi, Jeff. Hi, Phil. Thanks so much for taking my questions. Um, <crosstalk> had a quick, um, follow up on offshore wind. You know, in light of some of the recent delays I was wondering if that changes how you're strategizing around other bids that you're putting into future, um, RFPs, uh, like baking in more contingency, anything that might give a greater level of comfort around the economics of future projects that you might win? Uh, thank you, Dave, for your comment, and I hope you and your family are doing, uh, well. Um, certainly, um, every piece of information that you get, you know, and this isn't just offshore wind. You know, this, this is, you know, on, on all our business, but I'll, I'll focus on offshore wind since that's the question. You know, every, every month that goes by, every quarter that goes by we gain more insight and information about, uh, construction, about, you, you know, uh uh, weights, about, about, you know, lot of factors, and all of those things, all of those things are factored into subsequent bids. So the information that we have available to us, you know, as we're moving into a bid, uh, recent bid in New York is different than we had from bids that we made, you know, in Rhode Island or Connecticut or Massachusetts. So every, every data point is important to us, and we factor that into the next bid. So I, I say that absolutely that, um, schedules and how, how you make it through the siting process and all of that, uh, informs, um, you know, subsequent bids, and um, so I can assure you that all those things get, get, you know, up to the minute, uh, attention before a bid goes out. Okay, got it. Um, that's helpful, and I just wanted to touch on, um, just O and M costs in the O and M budget. Could you remind us, um, how you see that trajectory, uh, just for the overall business going forward. You've been, you've got a great track record of controlling O and M, um, so what are the key levers, um, in your, uh, in your tool belt so that you, that you would focus on going forward for managing O and M? Um, so there's a, you know, we've, we've got, uh, people process and, and technology, right? So all of those things are, um, are leveraged to help, you know, our capital program as well as our, our operating program. So, um, you know, we continue to, uh, implement, uh, systems and technologies that, uh, improves processes that makes it more effect, you know, efficient and, and effective workforce. So we have, um, still a robust I'd say series of, uh, technology improvements. Um, if you, if you, uh, I'll start off by just setting the stage. In the guidance we did we said that we expected O and M costs to be, you know, down this year, and then just for the forecast period kind of, uh, flat, uh, going, going forward. So how, how are we able to do that? Um, it, it is by some of these technology changes, and we've been implementing more productivity management tools and tools for our, you know, individual line workers and gas fitters and in the field to get their work, to update their, um, work that we can then take that and automatically update drawings and files. We don't need, you know, to hand it off to somebody. And so there's still, um, these productivity, uh, technology changes are happening. Some went in last year, some going in this year and, and more planned for next. So that, that will be I'd say the lever or the under, the, uh uh, the underpinning for us to have the ability to continue to improve processes and, and take, uh uh, unneeded costs out of the business. Okay, great. That's helpful. Thanks so much for the caller. You're welcome. Thank you, David. Uh, next question is from Travis Miller from Morningstar. Good morning, Travis. Good morning. Thank you. Quick clarification on the storm costs. That $275 million number, if I heard you correctly. How much did you expense in the quarter, and how much was either deferred or capitalized or, and will be pending that, uh, the regulatory filing that you mentioned? Sure. That, that amount that you, uh uh, repeated was the deferred. That's how much of a storm cost that we deferred in, uh, for tropical, uh, storm Isaias, and that was across, um, all states but primarily, uh, in Connecticut. So that's our deferral. That would be, you know, once a storm gets to a certain level, it triggers a deferral. So we, um, that, that all is deferred storm costs right now. In terms of if there are other storms, certainly we have, uh, we have an active corner for storms in general, but there are other storms, uh, other than Isaias that did impact the quarter. I mean, our, our storm costs were up, you know, about $10 million dollars for the, for the quarter, and went through, you know, our, our O and M. So it's not the, you know, for the quarter, it, it's, it's at that level, and then the $274 or five you mentioned is the, is the deferred across the system. Okay, great. That's, that's very helpful, thank you. And then, uh, a quick follow up to the discussion on the Connecticut legislation, and there's some language in there as I understood it about the General Assembly having some, uh, review power there. What's your thought in terms of the scope of what the General Assembly separate from PURA could do in terms of either taking back some earnings or, uh, rate changes, stuff like that? Separate from what's going on in the PURA. Well, certainly the General Assembly, uh, can enact legislation that it feels is appropriate in, in any, uh, matter. So, um, you know, I, I do think specifically to the, the energy legislation that was enacted, uh, recently in Connecticut that most, you know, things, um, all were, you know, for the most part moved to, to PURA, you know. So the, the regulators of the, the… I guess I'd look at it as the legislation would provide the intent, the framework, the direction, and then PURA is the one who's going to be implementing. You know, they're gonna be the ones who evaluate the performance based rates. They'll, they'll be the ones who, uh, initiate the storm, um, standards and, and things like that, and, and look at, um, you know, should there be penalties? Should there be food, you know, penalties and things like that. So I think that effectively, you know, the, the, the General Assembly can, can certainly enact, uh, any and all legislation, uh, it, it feels, um, it, it should. And, and the way that this legislation seems to have turned out was that then the implementation of that legislation is in the hands of PURA. Okay, so the potential for any other risks for any other call backs would likely go through PURA instead of going through the General Assembly based on that Connecticut legislation that you talked about. Great. Yeah, as I say, you know, the, um, PURA, the dockets are active in, uh, in, and will be active over, you know, a certain time, um, dates that the legislation has given PURA, so would expect that, uh, PURA will have, um, have the pen on this. But again, as I say, you know, what legislation can, can always be enacted in, in any, um, in any area. Yeah. Okay. Great, appreciate. All right, thank you, Travis. Our next question, um, is from Andrew Weisel from Scotia. Good morning, Andrew. Hey, good morning. Uh, thanks for fitting me in. Um, first question is, uh, with the two rate cases now completed, can you remind us what subsidiaries might be next to file general rate cases? You have plenty of regulatory items, of course, with <inaudible> other initiatives, but for general rate cases? Um, well, according to, um, the requirements in Connecticut, uh, Connecticut could be, uh, an area that is required to file, uh, by the, uh, interesting, uh uh, framework that's there, um, and that would be something that would be sort of a, you know, next year sort of event. But other than that, um, we're, we're pretty much out of the regulatory arena. Okay, great. Then on offshore wind, um, can you just thinking, uh sorry, can you share your latest thinking on how big you're willing to let that business get? You've talked a lot about the opportunities that you're pursuing, uh, beyond the three existing projects. Any thinking as far as from an earnings mix perspective if there's a limitation? Or would the, will you plan to just bid, bid, bid and get as many projects as your leases will support? Well, I wanna be clear on this because I think it's a very important point that, um, bid, bid, bid is the best strategy. Our strategy is to have a financial discipline about growing that business in a way that provides appropriate levels of, of returns that, that benefit our shareholders. So just by winning a bid, um, you know, that doesn't do it. It has to be, we have to, and we continue to maintain financial discipline in terms of the, uh, amounts that we bid and the returns that, that we're looking for. So, um, it, as long as the returns are at an appropriate level that, um, uh, for that business, it makes sense to, uh, make the bid, win the bid, and, and, and expand the business there. Um, the, what we've said is we, our tracks, the, what we own off the coast of, uh, or what, what we have access to in terms of the lease areas, you know, we could do about, uh, 4000, at least 4000 megawatts of offshore wind. So there's kind of a, you know, that, that's the maximum capabilities that we, we have. So it's not an, an infinite, uh, growth type of thing, and um, we had indicated that, uh, when leases were available that are not in our region that we were not interested in them. So leases in our region like the ones we're involved in are, are good, but other lease areas, you know, that's, that's not for us in other parts of the Mid-Atlantic, etc. So it's a, we're constrained by the lease area and, um, when our, we're guided by the financial discipline too, on our bids and our returns. Got it. That's really helpful. I guess I should have said bid, bid, bid responsibly. Okay. <crosstalk> Thanks a lot, guys. And I hope you stay well, Andrew. Thanks. All right, Andrew. Thank you very much. Uh, that sort of wraps up today. Um, if you have any follow up questions, uh, please give us a call or send us an email, and we look forward to speaking and seeing many of during the virtual EEI Conference next week. And thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's conference. Thank you for participating, and you may now disconnect. Thank you. All right. Thank


Good afternoon and welcome to SiTimes third quarter 2020 financial results conference call. At this time all participants are in listen only mode. At the conclusion after this conference call, instructions will be given for the question and answer session if anyone… if anyone needs assistance at any time during the conference, please press star key followed by zero on your touch tone telephone. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded today Wednesday, November 4th, 2020. I would now like to turn the call over to Ms. Leanne Sievers of Shelton Group Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Good afternoon and welcome to SiTimes third quarter 2020 financial results conference call. On the call from SiTime are Rajesh Vashist, Chief Executive Officer and Art Chadwick, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, I'd like to point out that during the course of this call, the company may make forward-looking statements regarding expected future results including financial position, strategy and plans, future operations, the timing market and other areas of discussion. It is not possible for the company's management to predict all risks nor can the company assess the impact of all factors on its business or the extent to which any factor or combination of factors may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed during this call may not occur and actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied. Neither the company nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the forward-looking statements. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of this call, to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in the company's expectations. For more detailed information on risks associated with our business, we refer you to the risk factors described in our 10K filed on March 2nd, 2020 as well as the company's subsequent filings with the SEC. Also during this call, we will refer to certain Non- GAAP financial measures, which we consider to be an important measure of company performance. These Non- GAAP financial measures are provided in addition to, and not as a substitute for or superior to measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with US GAAPs. The only difference between GAAP and Non- GAAP results is stock-based compensation expense. But please refer to the press release issued today for a detailed reconciliation between our GAAP and Non- GAAP financial results. I'd now like to turn the call over to Rajesh, please go ahead. Thank you, Leanne. Uh, good afternoon. We appreciate you joining us today and hope that all of you and your families are staying safe and healthy during these unique times. Even with the challenging macro backdrop SiTime continue to execute demonstrated by a record quarterly revenue of 32.7 million for third quarter 2020, which was above our updated guidance range of 31 to 32 million. Our results demonstrate the diversity of our end market segments, our customer base and the exceptional dedication of the SiTime team, all of which have benefited SiTime during the current environment. During this third quarter, revenue grew 52% sequentially compared to our second quarter 2020 revenues. We anticipate that continued strength in the fourth quarter will allow for SiTime to set another quarterly revenue record. And Art's going to discuss our third quarter financials and fourth quarter outlook later in the call. Now SiTimes fabulous model and multi-source strategy continue to provide a competitive advantage in this market while at the same time providing added assurance of quality and reliability to our customers. In contrast, we believe that the quartz industry infrastructure has several points of failure which can cause supply disruptions some of which we have heard about through recent industry commentary. Additionally within the timing market, responsiveness is becoming the key theme and we believe that many competitors in quartz may not be set up to support industry needs and requirements for the future. In infrastructure applications, our speed of response to environmental disruptors such as temperature change minimizes the system level impact. In mobile IOT, our kilowatts products help reduce radio power by turning it on and off more quickly and precisely, something that's unique to SiTime. On the supply side our programmability continues to enli… enable the flexibility, speed and delivery required by our customers. With the recent introduction of our ApexMEMS family of resonator products SiTime now offers all three categories of timing products, which are the oscillators, the clocks and the resonators. As of the third quarter we have cumulatively shipped almost two billion oscillators, all of them with an embedded MEMS resonator. Our combined knowledge of the MEMS, the analog chips, the package and the materials is unique to the industry and offers a system level understanding for our resonator customers as well. Now we know that the manufacturing MEMS products in high volume is not easy. MEMS product leaders in other markets, non-timing markets, maintain their leadership position because they invested early, focused on developed innovative solutions at a rapid pace as well. And we believe today that SiTime is in a similar position for the timing market as we continue to build upon this market leadership. Our ApexMEMS resonators are ideally suited for high volume, space constrained mobile and IOT applications such as Bluetooth <inaudible> high-speed connectivity interfaces, asset tracking and microcontrollers. In addition to these applications, other system on a chip vendors can use our ApexMEMS resonators that could be core packaged with their chips, just like we do in our oscillators. Given a broad knowledge of timing market solutions across all three categories we believe our system timing, our system level timing solutions save customer design time, increase the end products performance and reliability while also reducing their overall board pri… footprint, uh, creating value. Moving to 5G, in 5G the opportunities available to SiTime continue to drive the company's expansion into the communications market. Our products continue to see solid design traction in 5G applications at tier 1 manufacturers of telecommunication equipment. In addition, we had previously mentioned ORAN which is Open Radio Access Networks, and we continue to see significant interest in ORAN hardware solutions that are being developed for Greenfield operators as well as the traditional carriers. ORAN is getting traction because it gives operators best in class equipment and performance while driving better deployment economics. And the need for successful interoperability of equipment from different suppliers is a driving factor for SiTime success. We're getting significant traction with ORAN customers worldwide across the entire radio networks, including our use, small sale and distributed units. In the area of 5G optical transport, where we are engaged with 100 to 800G optical and SOC suppliers, with our SIT 9505… 9501 products we find that we are able to offer unique value with high performance in the smallest form factor. In conclusion, SiTime is uniquely positioned to disrupt the market as the first company that continues to provide system level timing solution. That said, this is the only the first step of a multi-year strategy to extend our market leadership in timing solution. We remain a results driven company with a culture that encourages creativity, leadership and a strong commitment to our customers, which continues to be reflected in our recent quarterly trends. I'd now like to turn the call over to Art as we'll discuss… as he will discuss in more detail our third quarter results and our outlook for the fourth quarter, Art. Um, thanks Rajesh and, uh, good afternoon everyone. We are very pleased to be holding our fourth financial results conference call as a public company. And during my review today, I'll discuss third quarter 2020 financial results and we'll provide guidance for the fourth quarter. I'll focus my discussion on Non- GAAP financial results and refer you to today's press release for a detailed description of our GAAP results as well as reconciliation of GAAP to Non- GAAP results, which excludes stock-based compensation and related payroll tax expense. So first of all, Q3 was really an excellent quarter for us. We had strong revenue growth, significant gross margin expansion and very positive Non- GAAP net income. As you know, at the end of August we increased our revenue guidance for the quarter by more than 10% and I'm happy to report that actual results exceeded the high end of that revised guidance. Revenue for the quarter was $32.7 million, up 52% sequentially and up 29% over the same quarter a year ago. To provide some color on end markets, our report sales by market group as I have in the past. The first is mobile IOT and consumer, which consists primarily of sales into mobile phones, wearable devices and consumer products. This was the segment most impacted by the global slowdown in Q2, but it came back strong in Q3. Sales were $20.9 million or 67, 64% of total sales, up 105% sequentially and up 19% over the same quarter a year ago. The second is industrial automotive and aerospace, which goes into industrial, automotive, aerospace, military applications and includes broad-based sales. Sales were $6.4 million or 20% of sales up 5% sequentially and up 23% over the same quarter a year ago. The third is communications and enterprise which consists of wireless infrastructure including 5G, data center and networking. This was the fastest growing segment over the same quarter last year. Sales were $5.4 million for 16% of sales up 3% sequentially and up 103% year over year. We had just one end customer where sales exceeded 10% and sales to that customer were 45% of total sales. We've had a number of initiatives within the company to expand gross margins and those initiatives are paying off. Non- GAAP gross margins during the quarter were 52.1%, up 530 basis points over Q2. Non- GAAP operating expenses were $12.5 million, up 5% sequentially comprised of 7.0 million in R&D and 5.5 million in SG&A expense. The interest expense was $0.1 million. And this generated Non- GAAP net income of $4.4 million or 23 cents per share. And that's compared to a loss in the prior quarter of 2.2 million or 14 cents a share. Stock based compensation expense and related payroll taxes were $5.1 million. This was higher than the 3.4 million in Q2 due to the higher stock price, some new higher stock grants and the establishment of an executive performance stock bonus plan. Trade receivables were $17.2 million, that was up from 13.0 million in Q2 due to the higher revenue. But DSOs decreased from 58 days in Q2 to just 49 days in Q3. Inventory was $15.2 million up slightly from 14.8 million in Q2. We generated $4.2 million in cash from operations and used 2.5 million for the purchase of assets. We had $35 million in bank debt going into the quarter but we paid this off entirely and finished the quarter with no bank debt. We then ended the quarter with $69.2 million in cash and equivalents. I'd now like to provide some guidance for the fourth quarter of 2020. We expect Q4 to be another great quarter, with continued sequential revenue growth, gross margin expansion and increasing net income. We expect fourth quarter revenue will be up 10 to 15% sequentially. At the midpoint this would put revenue at about $36.8 million or 30% higher than the same quarter last year. We expect continued gross margin expansion with Non- GAAP gross margins increasing to approximately 53% plus or minus a point. Operating expenses are expected to increase between eight and 10% sequentially, which at the midpoint would be approximately $13.7 million. We will not incur any interest expense since we no longer have any bank debt. Income taxes will be nominal and less than 50K for the quarter. The basic share count in Q4 will be approximately 17.0 million shares. In addition, the diluted impact of employee RSUs will add approximately 2.2 million shares taking the total diluted share count use for our EPS calculation to approximately 19.2 million shares. Stock based compensation expense will be approximately $5.5 million up from Q3 due to the higher stock price and a few new higher grants. So based on the guidance just given, we expect fourth quarter Non- GAAP EPS will be between 28 cents and 32 cents per share. So in summary, we have an exceptional workforce that is performing extremely well working from home. We have truly differentiated products that address large and growing markets. We have a number of new products in the pipeline an enviable list of tier 1 customers, a strong balance sheet and we're looking forward to a very strong Q4. So with that, I'd like to turn the call back to the operator for Q&A. Operator? At this time, I would like to inform everyone in order to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. Again, that's star one to ask a question. We have your first question from Blayne Curtis from Barclays your line's open. Good afternoon guys. This is Tom O'Malley on for Blayne Curtis congrats on the really nice results. Uh, my first question was around, uh, the improvement throughout the quarter. Obviously you updated guidance in late August, possibly and then you're- you're now coming ahead of that range now. Um, what most materially improved between now and then? Uh, and then if you could look out into December, you're obviously guiding for some more expansion there. Could you give us a little color on segments, uh, between the three where you're seeing that growth sequentially? So from Q2 to Q3, as- as I mentioned, the most significant growth was in our mobile IOT group, right? Part of that is seasonality but, um, we just had real strengths kind of across the board with our customers in that, in that segment. We also mentioned in our, uh, revised… in our press release with our revised guidance in August that we had won a design win, a phone design win that also contributed. Um, you know, we're not gonna report that the, uh, the phone revenue specifically one, because we're not allowed to but I will provide some color to that. When we increased our guidance in August, about half of that increase was related to that new phone design win. And the, uh, the balance was obviously then, uh, strength in non phone. So that, that was kinda what happened in, in the third quarter. In the fourth quarter, we're seeing very strong revenue growth. Uh, as I mentioned, our guidance is that revenue will be up 10 to 15%. Uh, I'll mention the phone again, not specifically, but phone revenue will probably account for about a third of that sequential improvement, um, and therefore non phone, uh, basically accounts for the balance of that. But we're, we're expecting, uh, growth in all of our market segments going from Q3 to Q4. Great, that's super helpful. And then my follow-up is just really around, uh, the lar… the largest customer for you guys that obviously stepped up materially into September. Uh, along with that margins clearly stepped up as well. Can you talk about what's driving that better margin performance? Clearly you're, you're seeing some accretive gross margin dollars, uh, as that customer steps up but, uh, can you talk to your other segments as well? Is- is there a material part of that uptick that's also coming from the comms enterprise and the auto industrial space as well as, as those products move a little… move a little- Oh. Oh, ab- absolutely. Ab- absolutely. You know, we've talked for a long time about the gross margin drivers, uh, in our business. Um, you know, our newer products generally are higher ASP and higher performance. Uh, as, as those newer products become a larger percentage of our sales that drives higher, uh, blended gross margins, that's one. Two, we're taking more of our sales direct that cuts out the distributor, uh, that improves our gross margins. Uh, we've made a lot of progress in reducing our product material costs that would be wafer costs. Uh, that improves gross margins. Our ops group has done a great job at, of improving sort and test yields and package costs, that improves gross margins. Volume helps us our, our manufacturing overhead. Even though we're fabulous, we have a certain amount of manufacturing overhead that's relatively fixed. So as the volume goes up, uh, that manufacturing overhead is percent of sales decreases, that helps gross margins. And so, you know, we- we've been working on this now for, for a while. And, you know, we saw very significant gross margin, uh, expansion from Q2 to Q3. As I mentioned, gross margins increased 530 basis points from Q2 to Q3 and, uh, I've guided for at least another point of improvement plus or minus going from Q3 to Q4. Great. Congrats again on the next results guys. Thank you. Thank you. We have your next question from <inaudible> from <inaudible> your line's open. Yes thank you and congratulations on the record results. Um, Rajesh you- you- you, um, called out some, some challenges in the, uh, in the quartz industry, you know, your competitors. Could you maybe elaborate a little bit more on that and, um, what- what does that really mean for sort of new engagements and new design wins for- for SiTime? Yeah, I think we talked a little bit about it last time. Um, basically the quartz industry as we know has done a stellar job in the last 70 years of providing, uh, product to everybody in the electronics world. Uh, but I think, uh, that it is still a batch process. It is a fab process. It's a factory process, or everybody has to invest in factories and these factories are purpose made so they can't be used <inaudible> they don't have the scale and they don't have the flexibility that a fabulous company like SiTime which uses semiconductors, uh, can get. I mean, as a reminder, um, uh, when we build our MEMS resonators, we can, um, a- a- a million, uh, sorry, uh, 10,000 wafers should give us about a billion units and these are 180 nanometer technology wafers so not really that, uh, difficult to get. So we… it's fundamentally their supply chain is batch made and I think it has these issues with it. There were some reports of some stumbles in fabs in, uh, in, in the Asian markets. And I think, uh, we saw a spike in demand coming, that didn't impact Q3, by the way. I'm just talking, uh, that we, we saw spikes in people because people get nervous when that happens. And this is not the first time, 10 years ago there was, uh, a big, um, uh, a big problem with, uh, ceramic packaging. As you know, all quartz made products with the oscillators, the resonators are quartz packaged because to… because they're fragile and they want to, to keep a very strong packaging. Those quartz, uh, packaging, ceramic packages come from only two people in the world and sometimes there's a shortage. So I think they have these multiple points of failure potentially. Uh, and, uh, that's what I was pointing out too. And yeah, there have been some, uh, there have been some, you know, anecdotal, uh, events in the last few months and in the continuing we expect to see that. Um, it- it's just a, it's just a reminder to our customers. It doesn't significantly change our revenue but what it does is, in the medium to longer term, it gets our customers a reminder that they, they're probably better off in moving to more stable supply chains. Yeah. That's, that's great, uh, perspective. Thank you for that. And as my follow-up, uh, congratulations on, on entering the- the resonator market, uh, and now obviously you- you're, uh, covering the entire gamut of- of the timing market. I know in the past you've talked about, uh, targeting, uh, uh, about a $10 billion <inaudible>. If you kind of combined all three sub segments, um, could you update us where your sum is now, uh, with your, uh, penetration with new products into the resonator market? Yeah, our sum is, it's still around 1 billion to 1.2 billion. It might be a little bit higher depending on when, when we introduce products and so on, but it's certainly less than 2 billion. Uh, it's also mostly concentrated right now in, um, in oscillators. So while we do have resonators that have been introduced, while we do have, um, uh, analog, um, clocking solutions that have been introduced, our ramp into that from a revenue point of view, we have already set expectations will be relatively slow. I think our entry into these markets is significant for customers, um, in the following way, in the way that they can then come and have conversations with us on all of these products and not every customer wants to talk to us about every one of them. Sometimes they want to talk to us only about resonators or oscillators or clocking. And then that becomes an entry point to talking about other products. So it's a, it's… from a TAM point of view we're still pretty tiny, uh, you know, one and a half billion in TAM out of a $8 billion total market <inaudible> at one and a half billion <inaudible> out of an 8 billion total TAM. And of course SiTimes revenue is, you know, still pretty, pretty small in comparison, you know, at around 100 million. Um, so we still, even if we maintained and did not grow our <inaudible> very much, we would still probably have a long way to go before we fill out those boots. Thank you for that Rajesh and congratulations again. <crosstalk>. We have your next question from Quinn Bolton from Needham your line's open. Hey guys congratulations on the, on the nice results. Wanted to start off, uh, with the supply chain issues you've, you talked about with quartz. I believe that was one of the factors that led to the, to the phone, uh, win that- that you announced last quarter. You know, if you look forward do you think that those quartz supply chain issues are positioning you to potentially win additional skews either at, at that customer or other large smartphone vendors? I think that'll have some impact Quinn, uh, but I don't think that it's forecastable, uh, I think it's a, it's a general slow trend. Uh, and I've talked about this several times. It's a general slow trend. It's- it's- it's not at the point where it's gotten… that snowball has become very big but it's a trend that we see and we've always said that people design us in for, uh, performance reasons as well as for supply chain. But overwhelmingly they design us for performance reasons. Uh, just to, just to pick, uh, you know, uh, uh, I would say less than 15% of the time we get designed in, uh, for supply chain reasons. But those supply chain reasons are important, uh, because when, uh, people look at their supply chains and see these <unk> that happen from time to time and these, by the way, these perturbations are not new, they've been going on for, for a long time. But, but customers did not have an alternative. Now that they do have an alternative, it just becomes one more faster in their thinking. Um, uh, particularly when they're looking further out in time, particularly <inaudible> for example, in automotive or <inaudible>, uh, or- or, uh, or, you know, longer term industrial products that have a slow ramp in multiple years. Uh, many of them start to think it might be prudent to do that. Um, but I would still push on our performance benefits as being the primary reason for adoption. Great. And the second question I know, um, with, uh, with the recent introduction of the ApexMEMS family, you're, you're moving into the resonator market, are you targeting select frequencies, um, you know, where, you know, high volume frequencies with the initial resonators? Um, and I guess a related question, you know, since you design this in silicon, do you need new mask sets every time the frequency changes, um, in those resonator structures? Thank you. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Uh, we… to answer the second question first. We do need, uh, a new mask set, um, but, um, sometimes, uh, those are very similar. Uh, they're not, uh, the- the- the design of the resonator is not very different. For example, between a 24 megahertz and a 26 megahertz, it's not going to be very different. However, between a 24 megahertz and, uh, 76.8 megahertz, I think it could be different. Uh, but, uh, generally the good news is that the se… the resonator industry has worked around the quartz limitations in the past. And there are basically a handful, maybe two handfuls. So I'll call it a dozen qu- quote, unquote, popular frequencies, uh, that exist. And, um, and so I think, uh, that makes our task easier as we go from one frequency to the other. And you're absolutely right, we will <inaudible> target the most popular ones but we'll target the ones where the frequency is one thing, but where we bring the combination of size, of, uh, of resilience, of, uh, environmental stability and clearly of high volume because these are low priced products. They are sub 20 cent products in price and so obviously the volume has to be… opportunity has to be in the tens of millions for it to be interesting for us. Um, those are some of the key, key reasons to do it. Now, there's another thing that's going to happen, uh, over time as frequencies of SOCs increase, um, the, the requirement for frequencies beyond say 75 megahertz, uh, increases. And that's an area where we think, uh, that quartz technology has, uh, has difficulty getting to, uh, a high volume, high frequency, high reliability, small size product. And that's where also we would shine. And I'm thinking two, three, four years out, uh, particularly in consumer products, perhaps some phone applications. Got it. Great. Thank you for that additional detail and then just quickly for Art you mentioned each, each of the, uh, segments would grow in the fourth quarter. Just wondering if you might be able to rank order, um, if one's growing much, much faster than the others or do you expect all of them to, to grow about the same rate? Thank you. Sure. Fair, fair question. I don't think we wanted to get that detailed in our, in our guidance. We do expect a growth in each one of those segments, um, and I'll leave it at that. And, and, uh, we'll, uh, we'll announce that segment growth in, in more detail when we actually announce the fourth quarter. Understood, thanks Art. Thanks Quinn. We have your next question from <inaudible> from <inaudible> your line's open. <inaudible> congratulations on the strong results. So, uh, perhaps for Art would be, uh, increasing mobile, uh, content you have now, can you… in this framework we're thinking about seasonality going forward first half, first second half, first Q, uh, versus maybe before, um, you know, coming into this year? Sure. Well, if you look at, uh, the seasonality in our business and we do have seasonality. Go back to last year 2019, right? Second half of the year, much stronger than first half people can go back and- and quantify that. We saw pretty much the same thing this year. Uh, you know, the back half of this year, much stronger than the first half of this year. Q2 of course, was, was somewhat depressed in our mobile and IOT segment because of the global slowdown and the fact that so many retail stores were closed. And I think next year it's gonna be somewhat similar, uh, in terms of first half versus second half. Obviously we expect, uh, uh, year over year growth, you know, Q1 next year should be nicely higher than Q1 of this year. And Q2 over Q2 and three and three and four and four. So we, we expect, you know, next year we'll have good growth. We're not quantifying that at this point. Uh, but in terms of the seasonality, it's gonna look, I think, similar to how it looked last year and this year. Okay Art that's very helpful. And then perhaps on the, um, the infrastructure side, 5G, uh, wireless infrastructure in particular, um, are you having design wins kinda showing up every quarter that <inaudible> that be a steady growth driver or might you ebb and flow with the 5G build out, uh, puts and takes? Yeah I think it's a slow, steady <inaudible> of products. Uh, you know, our, uh, our products are also showing up, you know, we talked about the 9501, uh, we… in the optical module business, that's clearly showing up. Uh, the ORAN, uh, that I referred to earlier. I think we have, uh, tens of, uh, design wins that showed up in the last, uh, in the last, uh, few months. Um, yeah, so, so it's just a steady growth. And what I'm excited about is the breadth of where 5G touches. So, again, as I said, it's not just the distribute… the digital unit or the <unk> it's, it's the mid haul, the back haul, the microwave, the, you know, it's in the servers, it's in, it's all, it's in so much of the infrastructure. And as I've mentioned before, this is probably a five, seven year, um, rollout and, uh, should be a very, very solid place for SiTime. Helpful color, thank you Rajesh. <inaudible>. We have your next question from <inaudible> from William Blair, your line's open. Uh, sure maybe a quick question for Art, um, just on operating expenses. Can you update us on the long-term operating mar… um, model and how we should be thinking about it? You guys have really had our… done a tremendous job, um, growing revenue, the last couple of quarters with very little, um, opex flow through. Yeah. Uh, so I'm wondering, uh, how to think about it. Yeah. Great, great, great question. Well, revenue kinda got ahead of our expenses, so that's, that's a good thing. You know, our kind of stated longterm goal is that we would grow opex at about half the rate of top line growth. So just for sake of mathematical example, if we were to grow revenue year over year by 20%, then I would expect opex to grow by about 10%. So that's kind of a- a- a generalized long-term goal. If you look at the last couple of quarters, um, you know, Q2, our revenue went up 52% sequentially but only five… but opex only went up 5% sequentially. So, you know, we, we couldn't ramp expenses quite fast enough. My guide for Q4, uh, we're guiding revenue up 10 to 15% and I'm guiding opex up eight to 10%. So that's a little more than, uh, half the top line rate but that's because of a little bit of a catch-up because we were s… so low in terms of, uh, opex growth in Q2. So does that, does that kind of frame it for you? Uh, yeah, that helps. Um, and then- And I- I- I have a, I have a comment. I have a comment on that. And that comment is that, um, a reminder that SiTime's an analog semiconductor company and when you think of other semiconductor companies that are using seven nanometer tape-outs, uh, we're doing 180, 130, 65 nanometer tape-outs. Uh, when you think of other companies doing a bunch of software in opex in scaling that, um, we're not in the software business or not meaningfully in that. On the other hand, uh, the number of opportunities that are coming at us are coming pretty thick and fast. So we always would like to retain the ability to invest, uh, at a, at a greater rate, you know, within reason, um, to the model that was put out by Art. Understood that, that's helpful and a helpful reminder on the, um, on the geometries. Um, and then just one more question. I believe last quarter, when you announced the Cascade product, the clock IC product, um, that you expected revenue to really be, you know, a 2021 <inaudible>, um, and then probably ramping, um, beyond that. As we look at the standalone resonator product, should we thinking about the timeframe to revenue in a, in a similar fashion or what are the puts and takes <inaudible> from a customer standpoint? Yeah, I would say that's even slower <inaudible>. Okay. Uh, I would say that, uh, you know, be- because, uh, there's two kinds of design wins we would have. We would have standalone design wins, so we would go to, uh, OEMs and sell them resonators, that's one. Uh, and then the other one would be to go to SOC vendors, the ones we sort of for example gave, and they would design it into their products. Both of them, particularly the second one take a long time. So the gestation period for that, for meaningful revenue is easily twice as long as the, uh, clocking business. Um, so, um, yeah, so of course there can be other times when it can happen very fast but, uh, but generally that's a good rule of thumb. Um, that's helpful. Uh, that's it for me. Thank you. Thanks Alex. We have your next question from Ch- Chris Castle from Raymond James, your line's open. Yes, thank you. Good evening. Um, I guess the question on, on margins and, um, uh, I- I- I guess as we go forward into next year, there's a lot of different factors with, um, uh, seasonality. Uh, some of the different margin profiles or the different segments that are gonna move in seasonality. Could you give us a sense of, you know, what, what should we expect as we go through the year, particularly in the first half of next year as some of the, uh, consumer related products, uh, you know, typically would be seemingly weaker? Yeah. Great, great question. So, you know, our longterm goal for gross margins that we've talked about, is getting gross margins somewhere closer to 60% and that's gonna take us two to three years, give or take. So, you know, if you just kinda do that math, you know, we're- we're targeting gross margin expansion of maybe three points a year. Now we obviously did much better than that going from Q2 to Q3, but, you know, just for the next couple of years, if we can add three points, we get to 60% margin, um, you know, in, in two to three years. Within a year, there are some dynamics that affect gross margins by quarter. And you're right in the first half of the year, generally our mobile IOT and consumer business which is, uh, somewhat lower gross margin not that much lower but a little bit lower, would argue that gross margins would be a little higher in the first half of the year just because of mix. But the counter to that is, we have this leverage on our manufacturing overhead so the lower volumes actually hurt us on that side. So taking all of that into account, just like we have dynamics this year of gross margins being nicely higher in the back half of the year versus the first half, I would expect the same thing next year. So if you're modeling this, I would model gross margins to what you think it would be for the year in total, margins will be higher in the back half than they will be in the first half. Right. And- and that's as the, the, the, the, the poor mix is offset by the higher at, uh, uh, manufacturing efficiencies in the second half of the year. Right. And, and the volume, uh, is, is a little heavier weighting. So, uh, I would actually expect gross margins to- to pull back just a little bit in the first half of next year but I expect them to be much stronger in the back half of next year, uh, even stronger of course than they are in the back half of this year. All right, that's very helpful. Thank you. Um, a- as a follow-up, um, uh, perhaps you could talk to us about, you know, kinda what you're targeting for next year and there's a lot of opportunities in- in front of you, uh, you know, wha… in- in- in terms of, what do you expect, wha- what do you expect to drive the growth next year? And, uh, uh, the- the- the- there's a lot on your plate, there's a lot of opportunity there. What are the things we should be paying attention to most closely as we go into next year? Um, I think the market, um, that we, the market trends that we have outlined continue. So purely comms enterprise data centers are a big play. Um, uh, we are continuing to find, uh, more traction in automotive, uh, as more and more, uh, electric vehicles show up. 'Cause a lot of automated driving is happening in that. Uh, we have a nice little story and connection growing in the middle aerospace market. And then finally, uh, the mobile IOT piece <inaudible> the consumer, the mobile IOT piece of it is always a natural place for SiTimes growth, uh, because, you know, the size, the resiliency, the performance. So I- I think, uh, we're also, um, continuing to expand our customer base. You know, five years ago we were, uh, addressing about 2,000 customers. Today, we're about five X that, maybe a little bit more. And, uh, so I think the expansion of customer base, this is not the big customers. This is customers that are of much, much smaller size where we are working in the channel to, to connect with them. I think that's a, that's a good initiative for SiTime as well. So I think those are some ways that we think about it. Great very helpful. Thank you. Great, thanks Chris. I'm showing no further questions at this time. I would now like to turn the conference back to Mr. Arthur Chadwick, sir, please continue. Great. Well, we wanna thank everybody for joining us today on the call and, uh, we hope that you have a great day and, uh, thanks again for all your support. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation and have a wonderful day, you may all disconnect.