[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Vivek Arya with Bank of America Securities.

Hassane, I was hoping you would give us some more color on the automotive environment. Sales were down slightly sequentially, maybe some of it was because of exits. But how should we think about in the context of the 6% sequential you're guiding, how you expect your automotive business to do in Q3? And then what is kind of the typical seasonality in Q4? And the reason I want to ask about autos is that does the pricing lever apply to autos also? Because I imagine you are exposed to large OEMs and Tier 1s, so do you get the same benefit of pricing even when dealing with the automotive customers? So just commentary on demand and pricing and sequentials would be helpful.

Yes. Let me -- there's a lot to unpack here, Vivek. So let me take it and if I miss any, just prompt me again. So overall, the quarter came in exactly as we expected. We still are -- believe we're shipping to true demand now that the inventory is behind us. So that's what we see as true demand. Of course, regionally, automotive behaves very, very differently. I talked about some of the strength with share gains in North America. China is doing very well for us. All came in kind of where we expected. Q2 for us, if you look historically in '24 and '25, Q2 is a seasonally typically down quarter. I think the numbers for the last few years have been like 11% down and a 4% down. So Q2 is not -- is, again, seasonality given a couple of key customers in Europe specifically. Outside of that, we see the demand environment kind of stable. We see us maintaining our content gains with new products we are introducing, whether it's the Treo starting to ramp in some of the zonal architectures already or silicon carbide, which we are expecting growth with a stellar growth coming out of China, again, based on the competitive nature of the share gains we have -- I have talked about here on these calls. So overall, we see automotive kind of, how do you say, very stable with a good outlook. As far as the pricing is concerned, pricing for us is not really market-driven because the price -- the cost increases that we are seeing are, I want to call it, material in nature, material, meaning substrates or gold or a lot of it is -- applies regardless of market. And therefore, yes, our pricing actions that Thad and I both talked about last quarter are offsetting those costs across all of our markets. We do have some surgical cost increases where we see strength or we see really allocation. But in general, where we're offsetting cost, that's across the board, including automotive.

Got it. For my follow-up, maybe one for Thad on gross margins. So Thad, the gross margins went up about 80 basis points, although I think utilization you mentioned went up almost 800 basis points. So is it that a bulk of that benefit you get to see in Q3? What kind of utilization should we assume for Q3? And what is the effect of mix and pricing? And I ask these questions because if I go back to the levels of revenue we saw for on towards the end of '24, it was in this $1.7-ish billion quarterly range, and your gross margins were already in the mid-40s. So I imagine that, that was a different time versus what we have. So just help us think through the effect of utilization mix and pricing for your current trajectory of gross margins.

Yes, Vivek, for the Q2 gross margin, you actually need to go back and look at the Q4 utilization because remember, there's about 2 quarter for utilization to hit the P&L. So in Q4, utilization actually dropped 6 percentage points from Q3 to Q4. So that would have been a headwind to Q2. So we actually offset that headwind with favorable mix primarily, and we saw that coming because our guide was 39%. We came in at 39.3%, so better than we expected. But we saw that favorable mix that we guided to. There really wasn't much of a margin impact at all from pricing because of the input costs that Hassane just walked through. So you can think about anything we did in pricing in the second quarter really didn't give a bump to the gross margin. The utilization increases now here in Q2 that we see going up will obviously impact us in the future quarters, right? So you can think about Q2 hitting Q4. So that's why we're very confident that you'll see additional gross margin expansion through the rest of this year as utilization has been consistently going up since Q4. So as the market improves, as the utilization continues to go up as we catch up supply to demand just because demand has moved so quickly, we'll be able to see that, that benefit coming through the P&L for the remainder of the year.

Our next question comes from Timothy Arcuri with UBS.

Thad, I just wanted to follow up on that comment on gross -- or sorry, on utilization tailwind to gross margin. So is the right rubric still to think like 30 bps per point of utilization. So all things equal between now and Q4, the increase in utilization should drive margin up by, I don't know, 150 basis points to 200 basis points. Is that kind of the right way to think about it?

Yes. The math is 25 basis points to 30 basis points of gross margin improvement for every point of utilization. So as we look into Q4, yes, you should expect a margin increase, all things being equal, that's assuming a consistent mix, those types of things. Now again, we had a richer mix here in Q2. So just keep that in mind. We saw that coming. But yes, we will see additional margin expansion in Q4.

Okay. And then just with respect to the exits. So I think you exited $35 million you said in the second quarter. Can you just talk about, do you still see $300 million for the full year? It sounded like you made a comment that it's done now that the exits are done. So can you just walk through all that?

Yes. The exits are done. So the $35 million was the Q2 impact. So if you take what we did for Q1, Q2 and you annualize it, you get to roughly about $300 million for the year because that doesn't -- obviously, those don't repeat in Q3 and Q4. So the exits are behind us now. We won't be talking about that going forward. It was $35 million for the quarter, and that's it for the year. And that really, if you go back to when we map this out, it's about $900 million of annual revenue that we've exited over the last few years. So right on target to what we expected.

Our next question is from Joe Quatrochi with Wells Fargo.

You talked about like prioritizing data center demand over auto industrial in the quarter. Was that any sort of impact to revenue? Or how do we think about that dynamic?

Yes. I mean, obviously, when we have some technologies specifically in power, where we have constraint, we did see some orders come in, what I would say, within lead time, and we had to make priority calls. So we did shift some, not just automotive specifically, but we did prioritize AI data center that took away from our other businesses in the short term as manufacturing really catches up to the updated signals of demand. So we made those calls within the quarter. You saw that strength in AI data center. We expect that AI data center, of course, to continue strength during the year. So it's not just a temporary Q2, meaning we got the gain. We got the designs. We will continue to ramp and then our manufacturing output will catch up to the, call it, automotive and industrial. So overall, we made those calls within the quarter. That's the long-term beneficial for the company, and we didn't have really a customer impact in the short term, but it is something that we're catching up to here in the third and fourth quarter.

And then just maybe as a follow-up, any sort of help in just thinking about the subsegments of the business looking into 3Q on the guidance front?

Yes. As you look forward, we expect auto to be up low single digits, industrial to be relatively flat, and we expect other, which has our AI data center to be up high teens. Those are all percentagewise.

Our next question comes from Quinn Bolton with Needham & Company.

I guess maybe just following up on that sort of guide. Other was up $100 million sequentially. It looks like it will be up several tens of millions. But the third quarter guide, that certainly implies a pretty healthy AI data center business. I know you guys are saying it's going to more than double, but is it going to be significantly higher than the previous $500 million target you talked about last quarter? I mean how much better than $500 million do you think you can do? Certainly, it seems like if all of the strength in other in Q2, Q3 is coming from AI data center, you've got a data center business with $500 million.

I'll let you run the numbers. But I mean, the fact that we started with not disclosing to doubling now more than doubling, I would just say, highlights of the momentum we are gaining, which is not a surprise. We've always said the AI data center is coming in exactly where our technology is the most competitive. and we're going to win on our technology -- on the baseline of our technology, and that's what you're seeing. We're not breaking it out beyond that at this point, but we are seeing momentum, we're seeing strength. And like you said, it is sustained strength. It's not a quarterly strength. And by the way, just projecting more forward -- forward-looking as we get to the 800-volt DC transition, that's going to fuel more of our content. So we're excited about where we are. Our investments have delivered to the market today, and our investment will continue to deliver in that market.

A follow-up question. I think in the prepared comments, you mentioned that -- I think you said it was your North American silicon carbide business for data center PSUs would be up 60% to 70%. I guess I would have thought that silicon carbide was one of your lead products in the data center business, which is now likely to be more than double year-on-year. And so just wondering, was that comment specific to North America? Or is there a reason silicon carbide maybe growing slower than the rest of the data center business? Or maybe asked a different way, what's leading to that growth in data center if it's not silicon carbide based?

Yes. I've always said our growth in data center is literally from the wall to the core. We do not have a single technology that isn't outsized across the power tree, which gives us a very good distribution from what I call the high voltage because it's not only silicon carbide MOSFETs, we have silicon carbide JFETs, and we have silicon as well all the way to, I'd say, the SPS, which is right at the XPU. Our data center revenue is very, I would say, very equal across all of them. So the growth that we are seeing in AI data center is not necessarily anchored on the high voltage. We are gaining share and ramping close to the core as well. But all of it is growing. And those are -- by the way, those are all consistent with what we've said as far as wins that we've talked about over the last couple of quarters are now starting to ramp and contribute revenue. Silicon carbide is specifically that -- now silicon carbide, obviously, we've made the investment thesis on automotive that's still winning in China, both in AI data center and automotive specifically. And my commentary is more on we're seeing that growth now in North America, in PSUs and so on where high voltage comes in. But it is not only a silicon carbide story for us in AI data center. It's really across the board.

Our next question comes from Christopher Rolland with Susquehanna.

Yes. In regard to the AI opportunity, and I know you've hit a lot of this, but it was a considerable increase in the slide deck for the AI DC TAM. I think you went from $12 billion to almost $50 billion in that number. You also talked about an expanded role in NVIDIA MGX as well as a hyperscale opportunity, I believe, for battery backup at AWS. I guess, first of all, can you talk about that increase in the TAM and what from a product basis is expanding that almost fourfold.

Yes. Yes, a couple of things. So if you look at the number, the number we're anchoring on is 2030. And the projection we are basing on the increase is really correlated to a -- I'm going to call it, a gigawatt scale that would be installed by 2030. And if you take the installed base of power and compute that is really projected in 2030 and you backtrack and convert that to really installation of power that we need at a data center side or a rack side, and we use our content per rack, that's where the increase happens. So that's point number one is just the volume that is proportional to the gigawatt increase that we've seen. This is purely, call it, market data. We do see the correlation with market data, and we're using that data to backfill into our content. Point number two, because that -- my second point is more on across the board, not just on AI data center, our TAM has increased, and that is really a factor of we have targeted, we have invested and we have been introducing products that we did not have last time we updated this a few years ago in our Analyst Day. And as we turn those investments into opportunities and those markets now start coming into the investments that we've made into the last couple of years, we're starting to see that increase. Of course, it's high in the AI data center given the content growth that I talked about, 10x on the high voltage, for example, but also our TAM is increasing across the board. You can think about vertical GaN, you can think about additional opportunities with Treo. You can think about some of our silicon carbide JFET that is both finding its way in the data center, but also the industrial halo, solid-state circuit breakers, solid-state power disconnect and, and, and. All of these are opportunities that did not exist even a few years ago. And when you add all of them up, that is the opportunity in front of us, and that is the investment we have already made in products that we have been delivering, and that's the next 5 years for us. So stay tuned, and we'll love to see you at Analyst Day.

I will certainly be there, Hassane. The other big change here, I think, was the EV TAM that went from like $26 billion to $63 billion. Very interested as to what's driving that. Obviously, the silicon carbide opportunity. I think maybe there was a zonal architecture commentary as well. But what else is almost doubling that EV TAM for you guys?

So you can take a look at it where before, as you get more and more penetration of the EV and more of the acceleration of the EV, remember, we've talked about 2 things in electrification. One is EVs as a higher percent of SAAR. And number two is the acceleration given the -- I guess, the financial side of silicon carbide and the advancements we've made there that silicon carbide, which is the opportunity for us is a higher percent of penetration within the EVs from your standard silicon. And the other one, which we've talked about here about some designs that we have won both in China and North America on the hybrid, where we've always thought hybrid will remain as a silicon or IGBT. And given our competitive nature and what we've introduced and the extended range of hybrids that OEMs are looking for, that's content that we have, again, within the same area that we have products for already. So that's part of our increased TAM. And you mentioned it in addition to a lot of the Treo opportunities that we've had with 10BASE-T1S ultrasonic sensing and, and, and plus a lot of the onboard charging, one of which I highlighted here, which are all coming into our technology domain. So all of these, again, we took a very fresh view of where the market is and is headed given the trends and the technologies we have. And that's -- you can think about it as a bottoms-up TAM adjustment that we've done as part of our work for Analyst Day and our strategic work we have been performing to refine and deploy our strategy.

Our next question comes from Blayne Curtis with Jefferies.

I actually want to go back, I think, a prior question. The growth in other of $100 million, I just want to make sure that was a correct statement that data center was the primary driver there before you were giving out percent of revenue. I don't know if you can just dial us in a little bit better. I want to make sure that, that is the source of the growth.

The AI data center was the primary driver, but the other markets were also up. So it wasn't 100% AI data centers. But that was -- as a percentage was the highest growth in that bucket.

Got you. And then, Thad, I wanted to ask, you mentioned lead times were extending. I was wondering if you could kind of give us a context of what that means. And then I guess you're talking about prioritization. I'm kind of just curious on the utilization, keeping it flat. Is it just a mix issue that you couldn't improve those deliverables? Or I'm just trying to understand -- walk us through the flat utilization.

Yes. The -- let me start with the lead time. So lead times stretched out from about 27 weeks to somewhere around 32 weeks on average. That's across the entire portfolio. We have some that are shorter, some that are longer, obviously. But we did see lead time stretching out. As Hassane said, we're seeing a lot of orders inside of lead time, a lot of escalations kind of points to, I guess, kind of a healthy environment, demand environment, which kind of gives us that indication of the future. And I mentioned the book-to-bill continues to improve. So we're getting better visibility even into '27, and we've got, in some situations, some customers ordering out into '28, trying to lock up supply. In terms of the utilization, look, we've had to increase utilization very sharply to reflect the increase in demand that we've seen, sharp, right? So if you think about a cycle time, a fab cycle time all the way through from beginning a wafer to a finished goods, it can be 4 to 6 months. And so you've kind of got to get that -- you've got to ramp it and then you can catch up with demand. So that's where we expect that happening. Now if the demand continues to increase beyond what we're seeing, we'll continue to take that utilization up. But right now, we believe we can catch up, and that's why utilization doesn't have to go up at least in the next quarter.

Our next question comes from Tom O'Malley with Barclays.

I just wanted to complete the deep dive on gross margins. I know you've gotten a bunch here, but the last remaining component there is depreciation. If you look at depreciation in the quarter, I think it was at a low for over the past 2 years plus. I just want to make sure nothing changed there. And then as you look forward, obviously, you're going to see this utilization step up. But anything unexpected from a depreciation side or anything expected that we can look at September, December? I know that like you've kind of trended in this mid-600 basis points range. Anything changing there just because I know you are doing a lot of these exits that should naturally come down, I would imagine. Anything to help there?

Yes. No. Yes, Tom, so we did that -- we took capacity offline about 12%, right? And so that's starting to hit the depreciation as that capacity is coming offline. I would say the depreciation that you're seeing now is really kind of steady state at this point, right? And if you look at our CapEx, it's maintenance CapEx, I said that's going to be below our 5% target for this year. I think our target over multiple years is kind of in that mid-single-digit percentage range, but we're keeping it tight this year, and it's primarily maintenance. So no, no change to depreciation from kind of what you're seeing a steady state right now.

And then just one if I could sneak it in on the disti side, I saw it stepped up a little bit. Traditionally, you see disti kind of aligned with China, so I saw that step up as well. Is that the right way to think about it? And is that more auto or industrial related? Any color on that step-up in disti would be helpful.

So the mass market actually increased 20% quarter-over-quarter. So you can think about a lot of that mass market tends to be industrial. There is some automotive in there. But it's -- I wouldn't call anything other than the mass market, and that's a good leading indicator, right? So we've been investing and putting inventory into the channel to satisfy that mass market. We're now seeing that happen with the 20% sequential growth in that revenue.

Our next question comes from Tore Svanberg with Stifel.

I just had a follow-up on some of these capacity/utilization questions, Thad. So obviously, Fab Right strategy makes a lot of sense, but it sounds like you do have some delinquencies. So I'm just curious like why wouldn't you ramp the capacity utilization faster? And if you do get continued upside orders here, how much flexibility do you have with your external partners to keep ramping capacity?

Sorry, you cut out for like a few seconds in the middle, but I think I caught onto how would we reconcile divestitures with increasing demand to capture?

No, I was asking how much flexibility do you have with your external partners to ramp more capacity.

Yes. So external, obviously, everything is constrained, whether it's internal or external. When it comes to short lead time, we believe we have good capacity and good allocation coming from the outside. The issue is not really capacity of what we can support as far as max capacity or max revenue. It is how quickly the demand came in. We can service a lot of demand from die bank, but at some point, like Thad said, when we start a wafer today for an order that we got within the quarter that we didn't anticipate, you have a short-term allocation we have to deal with. That's both internal and external, even if you have the capacity secured is how quickly you are able to get to the capacity. So we feel comfortable about external supply. We're not fighting for a lot of the advanced nodes like on the compute side. Our capacity is well understood. A lot of our capacity is also internal. We still do over 60% on internal manufacturing at onsemi even with the divestitures. So all of these put together put us in a good place, and that's what Thad said. It's a short term where we're going to catch up. If demand continues to accelerate, we'll take utilization up. We're not capped out. It's just how quickly we get there. And in the short term, we just have to make these calls of prioritization until manufacturing output catches up.

Yes. Not all capacity is fungible, right? So we do have some supply constraints on certain lanes. That's where we've just got to catch up with that demand, and then we believe we can service it.

Yes, that makes sense. And as my follow-up, and Hassane, you talked about the power from grid to core. You talked about the content per rack, $15,000 going eventually to $115,000. How should we think about that journey? And will it be a gradual journey? Or is there like a step function maybe by -- I guess, is when 800-volt and maybe by 2028 when that market really starts to take off. But yes, any more color you could add there would be really helpful.

Yes. Yes, the content -- look, a rack that is -- an 800-volt DC rack with the backplane at 800-volt is a step function from a prior rack. You're not going to see that as far as revenue step function because remember, you have a build-out that's going to happen. So as these racks start to get deployed into newer data centers and whether older data centers will come in and how quickly they will retrofit and so on. So we model that into a gradual, but a very, very healthy growth trajectory or slope, if you will. But it's not going to be just a step function, but it is going to be a very aggressive longer-term growth that we see. And what you said is right, you can think about it as starting whatever people believe there's kind of a range that I give end of '27, beginning of '28, give or take a quarter. But that's kind of where it's going to start ramping and then mature somewhere depending on the build-out of the data center. So that's how we are looking at it from the time. But we're already starting to see some platforms. That's where they are designed in. So it's kind of starting to look like the content is justified the way we model it. And our content in those, you heard me talk about vertical GaN, JFET and so on. So you're starting to see a lot of that content really solves density and efficiency problems in these new architectures.

Our next question comes from Jim Schneider With Goldman Sachs.

In light of all the metrics you cited around lead times extending and everything else in terms of expedites, and normally, at this point in time, I would have thought you would see OEM customers' inventory start to expand or customers taking a little bit more risk on their own balance sheet. Is that something you're seeing yet at this point in the cycle or not quite yet in terms of absolute dollars or in terms of days?

No. I mean, obviously, I can't speak for our customers because that's unless they publicly talk about it. But we're not seeing -- from our perspective, we're not seeing an inventory build. We are seeing really consumption to demand, and that's why you see it in specifically, of course, in auto and industrial, we do believe we are shipping to end demand. And there are technologies where you would see that is where it's constrained, and we're making a lot of the hard decisions, which is, by the way, the same thing we've done back in COVID, where we decided this quarter to take inventory or days of inventory down in the channel, so we have very close control of potential inventory build. So we're very disciplined about this. We're excited about the signals in the market that I quoted. We're excited about the opportunity in AI data center, but we are maintaining a very disciplined and process-based KPI-based approach to our manufacturing and our deployment of resources. So we don't get ahead of it. By the way, you see that in our inventory position and the drain and so on across the board. All metrics look -- show a disciplined approach even in the backdrop of a strong market or stronger market.

That makes sense. And then just in terms of the input cost increases you talked about, you mentioned increasing price to offset those input costs over the coming quarters. As you look into, for example, 2027, what are your suppliers telling you about further potential input cost increases? And maybe if you could handicap your level of confidence in staying ahead of those in terms of pricing or potentially significantly ahead of those?

Yes. So obviously, we have a very broad range. We have some suppliers where we have long-term views and we give long-term visibility, and we have long-term visibility for increase -- for potential increases that is coming. What I would say is the only consistent message I can say here is it's not going down. And given the fact that it's not going down, we are anticipating to make sure our business also reflects that whether from now because a lot of them will be effective in Q4 or telegraphing that in '27, we're not going to have any reductions or annual reductions and so on. So it's not a one size fits all, I would say, but we have visibility on where we're landing for '27, and we'll get more and more clarity as we get closer to that. But we have started these discussions. And I can tell you, nothing is coming down. And therefore, I'm not expecting a softer pricing environment in '27 either.

Our next question comes from Joe Moore with Morgan Stanley.

Utilization in the low 80s, how do you think that compares to some of your direct competitors? And if we sort of continue to get into a more supply-constrained environment, do you anticipate that you'd be able to take share given where you're sitting with capacity?

Yes, Joe, look, I don't want to comment about our competitors. I can tell you what we're doing in our business, right? Again, we've taken this utilization up quick in response to the snapback in demand. For us, getting to kind of in that low 90% with 92%, 93% is fully utilized. Once we get there, we start flexing to the outside. So there's a certain amount of our products today that we're manufacturing inside that we can take to the outside. So I don't think we're going to be limited. For us to really start to get to a point where we even think about getting capped out, revenue is still 25%, 30% higher than the run rate today. So we're not worried about that given our flexibility with our fab right and our ability to flex inside and outside.

And look, the focus for our growth and our new product introduction, think about Treo, for example, that investment in capacity is done. It's in East Fishkill. East Fishkill is not fully utilized. So we have the runway to ramp. So it's not -- like Thad said earlier, not everything is fungible, but the areas where we have growth and the areas we've invested in, those areas where we have runway, and we will continue to ramp aggressively across all markets.

That's helpful. And then in terms of things getting tighter and starting to see some constraints, are there any specific areas that are more impacted than others? Any hotspots, silicon carbide different than everything else? Just any sense of where supply/demand might be different?

No, I think if you think about it across power, and it's not just high voltage because a lot of the -- for example, data center is consuming power, not just in the high voltage. I mentioned earlier, we're ramping everything from the wall all the way to the XPU and that is high voltage all the way to low voltage, and we see constraints in some of those lanes. We have one of the most efficient power products out there. So we're getting an outsized, and we're running it in multiple fabs now. So we're increasing our capacity and our flexibility to be able to service it. But that we are -- those lead times have extended, and we are working with customers on supporting it. We will win share where others cannot. But that's not how we're winning. We're winning because really the product is superior because if it's a multi-source product, you can imagine the margin is not as exciting, and that's not business we play in. That's the business we actually exited. So we are winning where our products provide a differentiation to our end customers, and that's what's consistent. You see that in silicon carbide. I called out China specifically, given that I keep talking about we always win across the board based on efficiencies and product. You see that in China, you see it in North America, and you've seen it in Europe. So that's our focus. That's our investment, and that's how the margin expansion will continue.

Our next question comes from Vijay Rakesh with Mizuho.

Just a quick question. On the AI data center side, I saw that $48 billion TAM, big increase in that opportunity there. Is there a way to look at it how that -- how your content breaks out between site power, the power in the rack and the compute rack as you broke out? Like what's the split of the opportunity set within that?

Yes, I'm going to give you an approximate. And the approximate is if you look at the numbers we've given as far as content per rack, and you think about high voltage, which I would put the first order in the side card going to 50% of the total, $115,000 of content, 50% of it is high voltage, 50% is medium and low voltage. That gives you that split 50-50. Today, on the $15,000 of content, that split between high voltage and then the rest is 70-30, 30 is high voltage, 70 is medium to low. So the increase from a dollar content is on the high-voltage side, but both are going up, one is going up 10x, one is going up like 5x to 6x. So both increasing, but an outsized increase is, of course, in the high voltage given the market trend we are talking about.

Got it. And then on the -- when you look at your auto, industrial and data center other -- is there a way to look at how the order trends are by the different geographies? Like what are you seeing in U.S. versus Europe versus China, I guess?

Yes. I think if I take it in order, automotive specifically.

All 3.

All 3. Okay. It's like very, very different -- all 3. So I would say automotive, I'll just rank order. In auto, it's China, U.S., Europe. Industrial, I would say, China, U.S., Europe and AI data center is really U.S. and some China that I talked about with Great Wall on this call is starting for us as well, but primarily in the U.S. In Europe, you have, of course, the AI halo that I call out within our industrial business, not on AI data center, but it is an AI halo that's supporting it. I think that's kind of how you can think about it.

I would now like to turn the call back over to Hassane El-Khoury, President and CEO, for closing remarks.

Thank you all for joining us today. Before we close, I'd like to recognize our employees around the world for their dedication, innovation and execution. The momentum we are seeing across our business, the opportunities ahead of us and our confidence in the future are all made possible by their hard work and commitment. On behalf of the leadership team, thank you for everything you do to serve our customers and move onsemi forward.

Thank you. This concludes the conference. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.