Ladies and gentlemen, greetings, and welcome to the Perimeter Solutions Q3 2025 Earnings Call. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host for today, Seth Barker, Vice President. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining Perimeter Solutions' Third Quarter 2025 Earnings Call. Speaking on today's call are Haitham Khouri, Chief Executive Officer; and Kyle Sable, Chief Financial Officer. We want to remind anyone who may be listening to a replay of this call that all statements made are as of today, October 30, 2025, and these statements have not been nor will they be updated subsequent to today's call. Today's call may contain forward-looking statements. These statements made today are based on management's current expectations, assumptions, and beliefs about our business and the environment in which we operate, and our actual results may materially differ from those expressed or implied on today's call. Please review our SEC filings, particularly any risk factors included in our filings for a more complete discussion of factors that could impact our results, expectations, or assumptions. The company would also like to advise you that during the call, we will be referring to non-GAAP financial measures, including adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA margin, LTM adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EPS, and free cash flow. The reconciliation of and other information regarding these items can be found in our earnings press release and presentation, both of which will be available on our website. With that, I will turn the call over to Haitham Khouri, Chief Executive Officer.

Thank you, Seth. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us. We're pleased to report Perimeter's third quarter and year-to-date results. Third quarter adjusted EBITDA was $186.3 million and year-to-date adjusted EBITDA was $295.7 million. The three primary drivers of these results were: number one, execution on our operational value drivers with particularly strong results in our international retardant business, our suppressants markets, and IMS; two, the impact of our efforts to drive more consistency and predictability in our retardant business with reduced dependence on the North American fire season; and three, a more proactive initial attack strategy by our customers, which drove greater retardant use. We continue to deploy capital during the third quarter, investing nearly $17 million across capital expenditures and the purchase of product lines at IMS. I will provide a summary of our strategy, followed by an operational update, then discuss our new forest service contract. Kyle will then walk through our financial results and recap our capital allocation in the quarter. Starting on Slide 3 with a summary of our strategy. Our goal is to fulfill our critical mission by providing our customers with high-quality products and exceptional service, while delivering our investors private equity-like returns with the liquidity of the public market. Our strategy is built on three key operational pillars. First, we own exceptional businesses. These are niche market leaders that play critical roles in solving complex customer problems, qualities that support high returns on invested capital and durable earnings growth. Second, we rigorously apply our three operational value drivers to the businesses we own. We drive profitable new business, achieve continual productivity improvements, and provide increasing value to our customers, which we share in through value-based pricing. And third, we operate our businesses in a highly decentralized manner, granting our business unit managers full operating autonomy, paired with accountability to deliver results with a tightly aligned incentive structure for our managers to think and act like owners. We believe that our operational pillars will optimize our durable long-term free cash flow. We then seek to maximize long-term per share equity value through a clear focus on the allocation of our capital as well as the management of our capital structure. Turning now to our financial results on Slide 4, and starting with Fire Safety. Fire Safety's strong third quarter and year-to-date results were driven by three key factors. First is continued progress on our operational value drivers. We grow our sustainable earnings power through the rigorous implementation of our three value drivers. This improvement is evident in our Q3 and year-to-date 2025 results. Sales increased as we drove profitable new business and earned the right to share in the customer value creation across both retardants and suppressants. Margins expanded as we improved the efficiency of our operations via productivity initiatives, and revenue and margins benefited from our increased operating investments and capital expenditures. We expect the impact of our value drivers to compound over time and drive sustainable growth in our earnings power. Looking across our products, our international retardants business and our Suppressants business continued their momentum in the third quarter, with particularly strong volume performance from our profitable new business initiatives and meaningful top and bottom line impacts from our productivity and value pricing efforts. Our U.S. retardant business also saw contributions across all three operational value drivers, driving top and bottom line growth, despite a relatively mild North American fire season. The second driver of our financial results is the structural changes we've made towards greater consistency and predictability in our retardants business with reduced dependence on the severity of the North America fire season. We renewed substantially all of our key retardant contracts over the past two years. And in doing so, prioritized contractual adjustments to drive greater consistency and predictability in our business and financial results. These adjustments were well received by our customers who, like us, benefit from greater consistency and predictability. While the correlation of our fire safety results with the North America fire season is not eliminated, we believe it is notably reduced, relative to history as is evident in our 2025 financial results. The third driver of our 2025 results is a shift in our customers' approach to wildfire response. Our key U.S. customers adopted a more proactive approach to wildfire management this year, which we believe contributed meaningfully to lower acres burned, and to significant associated cost savings. With support from Secretary Brooke Rollins of the Department of Agriculture; and Secretary Doug Burgum of the Department of the Interior, Tom Schultz, Chief of the US Forest Service, issued a wildfire letter of intent in May, which directed the Forest Service to suppress fires as swiftly as possible and to focus on safe, aggressive initial attack. This directive from Chief Schultz drove greater mobilization of resources, including aerial resources deploying retardant to quickly attack nascent fires. By quickly getting retardant on fires, agencies were able to limit their spread and mitigate the devastation they cause in our communities. This more aggressive initial attack posture helped limit acres burned despite the increase in fire starts while driving meaningful use of retardant. The actions taken this year by Secretary Rollins, Secretary Burgum, and Chief Schultz, and the men and women of our agency partners undoubtedly saved lives, property, and our environment. As always, Perimeter is proud to play a part in our customer success. Moving on from this year's operational development and looking to the future. We were pleased to have signed a new contract with the US Forest Service during the third quarter. This contract, amongst the most significant in our company's history, builds on Perimeter's 60-year legacy of working with the Forest Service to protect lives, property, and the environment. By combining our customers' unwavering commitment to the mission with the best of private sector efficiency, this contract delivers a win-win outcome by: first, delivering substantial savings to the U.S. taxpayer; second, driving Perimeter's continued financial momentum; and third, enhancing our national wildfire preparedness and response capability. A key element of the contract is the savings it provides to the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior, the US Forest Service, and ultimately, the American taxpayer. The contract lowers the price of retardant in its first year and delivers additional savings by expanding the services Perimeter can efficiently deliver over the contract 5-year term. One example of the contract's mutually beneficial outcome is the transition to our full-service model. Substantially all federal bulk bases, which we serve with product will transition to our full-service model, which we serve with our comprehensive solution spanning product, service, staffing, equipment, and maintenance. We capture meaningful operating efficiencies by incorporating these bulk bases into our full-service network and simultaneously drive savings to the customer as well as profitable new revenue streams and incremental productivity opportunities to Perimeter. In a similar win-win, federal bases are transitioning from a mix of liquid and powder product to an all-powder footprint. Our powder product is lower priced and more efficient to handle than our liquid product, which drives direct customer savings. Simultaneously, powder conversion enhances our profitability through a lower cost and complexity manufacturing, distribution, and logistics footprint. Finally, this new contract enhances national wildfire preparedness and response. The contract's unprecedented 5-year term allows Perimeter and the Forest Service to jointly plan and invest behind meaningful multiyear initiatives, such as the all-powder product conversion. To safeguard future air tanker fleet uptime and reliability, Perimeter has also committed to aiding the Forest Service on the development of retardant testing standards that ensure all retardant products match Perimeter safety standards developed over the past 60 years. And building off of the supply chain resiliency advanced by our new Sacramento facility, Perimeter is working to build that same continuity further up the supply chain by enabling more domestic supply of raw materials. Together, these features deliver the safest, most resilient and best-performing retardant solution our nation has ever had. We'd like to acknowledge and thank our agency customers for the collaborative engagement on this landmark contract. We look forward to continuing our successful 60-plus year collaboration over the next 5 years and beyond. Switching now to our Specialty Products segment. During the third quarter, the significant operational and safety events that have plagued our Sauget, Illinois plant since One Rock Partners purchased the Flexsys assets in 2021 not only continued but escalated. There was once again a substantial amount of unplanned downtime, which significantly impacted Specialty Products' financial results in the third quarter. While that was disappointing, significant safety events during the third quarter are of greater concern. These events demonstrate the urgent need to get these assets out of Flexsys' control as soon as possible for the safety of workers at the plant. Unfortunately, Flexsys and their parent, One Rock, continue to fight our efforts to take operational control of the plant, despite their clear contractual obligation to do so. Recently, Flexsys made a bad faith proposal that we lease the land under the plant for more than 10 to 20 times the cost to purchase identically zoned and similarly configured and resourced land in the same general vicinity. We will not capitulate to these tactics. We will continue to doggedly pursue our rights under the contract in court as our previously disclosed litigation progresses. We know that it may take an extended period before there is a resolution, and we caution our investors to expect a continued financial impact until this issue is resolved. Regardless, we remain fully committed to taking over the plant no matter how long it takes or how difficult the path is. We are doing this not only for the benefit of our shareholders, customers, and the community where we operate, but also for the safety of the employees at the plant. We are confident that we will eventually operate the plant and consistently and safely produce the highest quality product. Lastly, IMS. The business continues to perform well, and we again acquired new product lines during the third quarter. Our IMS acquisition team remains active, and we expect to continue to drive IMS' profitability through enhancing our operating value drivers on both existing and newly acquired product lines.

Thanks, Nathan. I'll start on Slide 8, comparing the growth figures to the same period last year. In Fire Safety, revenue for the quarter reached $273.4 million, showing a 9% year-over-year increase, and $430.8 million year-to-date, a 15% rise. The segment's adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was $177.2 million, up 13% from last year, and year-to-date adjusted EBITDA reached $265 million, marking a 24% gain. Our operational value drivers significantly contributed to this year-over-year growth, with robust performance across our product offerings and regions. Our suppressants team expanded sales and secured new volume wins at favorable pricing, leading to an overall increase in suppressants revenue of $12.4 million compared to the prior year quarter. We continue to successfully convert airports to our newest products and build a base of replacement volumes for the installed base. Our retardant products performed strongly outside North America, growing sales by $5.5 million from the previous year. Major markets like Australia and France showed strong results, and we made strides in entering new markets such as Italy, focusing on new applications for retardant products in rail lines. In the U.S., our retardant revenue saw modest growth, despite the significant decrease in acres burned. We experienced solid performance across all three OBDs in our retardant business, driving new opportunities as we extend our reach to new bases and enhance loading equipment, productivity, and value-based pricing, where we have established a right to share in the value we create for our customers. As noted by Haitham, we have worked to decouple our revenue from fire activity as we renewed contracts. We have intentionally shifted sales toward fixed services revenue while proportionately reducing variable products revenue. This shift aims to make our revenue less sensitive to volume fluctuations, improving the quality of our revenue base and contributing to strong Q3 performance. Moreover, our customers' more aggressive initial attack strategy this year, combined with an even distribution of acres over time and geography, largely offset the volume decline from fewer acres burned. The adjusted EBITDA growth reflects how various growth drivers in the business and improved contract structures can effectively lessen our sensitivity to burned acreage in any given year. In our Specialty Products segment, Q3 net sales reached $42.1 million, reflecting a 15% increase from the same quarter last year. This performance includes a $10.8 million contribution from IMS acquisitions, offset by a $5.3 million decrease in the base business. Year-to-date net sales hit $119.3 million, a 20% increase, driven by $27.7 million from IMS acquisitions, partially countered by a $7.6 million decline due to ongoing unplanned downtime at the Flexsys-operated Sauget plant. Specialty Products' Q3 adjusted EBITDA fell to $9.1 million from $12.9 million in the prior year quarter and slightly declined year-to-date to $30.8 million from $34.5 million. The operational challenges in Q3 are a continuation of issues initially mentioned in Q1, and the ongoing downtime has contributed to lower sales and higher costs, negatively impacting adjusted EBITDA. While we cannot predict the plant's performance under Flexsys and their parent company One Rock, we expect operational issues to continue affecting us until we gain operational control of the plant. Our IMS business continues to perform well with four product lines acquired so far this year and is exceeding our initial expectations. The process for additional product line acquisitions has proven effective in converting our pipeline into closed deals. We aim to implement our operational value drivers to enhance adjusted EBITDA on existing product lines while also expanding into new ones through M&A. Considering the segments together, consolidated third-quarter sales grew by 9% to $315.4 million, with adjusted EBITDA also rising by 9% to $186.3 million. Year-to-date, consolidated sales reached $550.1 million, an increase of 16%, and adjusted EBITDA grew 20% to $295.7 million. Regarding our adjusted EBITDA's impact on EPS, for Q3 2025, our GAAP loss per share was $0.62, slightly up from a $0.61 loss per share in the same quarter last year. In Q3 2025, adjusted EPS was $0.82 compared to $0.75 in Q3 2024. Year-to-date GAAP loss per share stood at $0.45, improving from a loss of $1.03 in the same period last year, while year-to-date adjusted EPS reached $1.24, up from $0.99 previously. Moving to our long-term assumptions shown on Slide 9, our expectations remain unchanged from Q2, with Q3 aligning with these figures. Q3 interest expense was $9.9 million, while taxable depreciation, amortization, and other tax deductions totaled $5.8 million. Cash paid for income tax in Q3 was $15.4 million, compared to $27 million in the prior year. Typical variations in quarter factors are usually timing-related, and our overall yearly tax expectation remains stable. Capital expenditures for the quarter were $5 million, and our working capital needs fluctuate seasonally, consistent with our expectations due to activity levels in Q3. Our year-end net working capital outlook remains unchanged, and we ended the quarter with approximately 147.9 million basic shares outstanding. We define free cash flow as cash flow from operations minus capital expenditures. In total, we had free cash flow of $193.6 million in Q3, with free cash flow of $197 million for the nine months ending September 30, 2025. The cash flow generation for 2025 is consistent with historical trends, typically seeing significant working capital investments in the first half of the year for fire season preparations, followed by cash conversion in the latter half. Our full-year adjusted EBITDA to cash generation conversion aligns with the assumptions presented, barring potential timing differences in cash taxes. Lastly, we anticipate our business will remain well insulated from policy and economic shifts. The impact of trade policies is within our initial expectations, representing less than 2% of consolidated adjusted EBITDA. Additionally, we are facing minimal disruption from government funding, which ties to essential federal emergency response initiatives. More broadly, our portfolio continues to demonstrate resilience against economic fluctuations, owing to the essential nature of most of our products. Regarding capital allocation, we invested nearly $17 million in the quarter, with expected returns exceeding our minimum targeted equity returns of 15%. We are committed to organic reinvestment, allocating $5 million to capital expenditures this quarter, primarily supporting our growth and productivity initiatives. Our project pipeline continues to expand, which is crucial for our long-term organic adjusted EBITDA growth trajectory. In terms of M&A, we invested $12 million this quarter to acquire product lines for IMS, adhering to IMS's original investment thesis. We are integrating these acquired product lines into our manufacturing operations and are working to implement our operational value driver strategy. Acquiring IMS product lines will remain a fundamental approach to deploying capital at attractive internal rates of return. We anticipate being able to invest tens of millions of dollars annually into IMS product line acquisitions for the foreseeable future. Our M&A capacity surpasses what we plan to allocate to IMS, and we are actively assessing larger acquisition opportunities. As Haitham mentioned at the call's start, our objective is to cultivate a portfolio of high-quality businesses where our operational value drivers lead to meaningful improvements in financial performance, as experienced with Perimeter's portfolio over the past several years. Our portfolio is guided by strategy rather than being industry-specific. The key unifying feature of our businesses is the quality of the enterprise and the relevance of our operational value drivers. A business containing a chemical, fire, or safety component does not automatically qualify it as a potential fit for Perimeter. We anticipate that future deals will emerge from new subverticals within the broader industrial sector. Let me restate the strategic characteristics of businesses we seek to incorporate into our portfolio. Firstly, the business should produce a small yet essential component of a larger solution. We first evaluate if the broader solution addresses a significant and complex problem for customers. Then we assess if the target meets a niche requirement within that broader solution. Finally, we ensure that no alternatives provide comparable value to the customer. Collectively, these traits support our value creation strategy, helping us to assist our customers in overcoming their most pressing challenges better than anyone else. This paves the way for us to drive profitable new business, identify efficiency improvements for productivity, and earn the right to share in value creation through value-based pricing. Besides the crucial element of shared value creation, we favor companies with recurring revenue, secular growth, high free cash flow generation, strong returns on capital, and potential for add-on acquisitions. Successful M&A at Perimeter hinges on identifying targets with these attributes and ensuring the applicability of our operational value driver strategy, with diligent execution of the transaction. Once the deal is closed, the real work begins as we strive to apply our operational value drivers and replicate the success experienced in businesses acquired four years ago. Our team is actively seeking new targets that align with these criteria, and we're committed to expansion via M&A as a significant part of our long-term value growth strategy. Finally, on Slide 11, the second pillar of our capital strategy is to maintain moderate leverage that enhances equity returns. Our advantageous debt structure comprises a single series of fixed-rate notes at 5%, maturing in the fourth quarter of 2029, without any financial maintenance covenants. By Q3, we had a leverage ratio of 1x net debt to LTM adjusted EBITDA, supported by $675 million in gross debt, $340.6 million in cash, and around $329 million of LTM adjusted EBITDA. We also maintain significant liquidity, with an undrawn $100 million revolver available at quarter-end along with our cash reserves. Before concluding, I want to mention our plans to participate in Baird's Industrials Conference in November, where we will broadcast our presentation for our shareholders' benefit. In closing, our mission as a company is to uphold our purpose and enhance shareholder value. The U.S. Forest Service's decision to extend its trust in Perimeter for another five years underscores our team's dedicated commitment to our vision. Our increased earnings power in Q3 is a direct result of the disciplined execution of our operational value drivers and continued enhancements in our contracts, which collectively generated enough improvement to more than counterbalance the challenges posed by a milder fire season. We take great pride in how our team continually embraces our vision and strives to create value with enthusiasm, discipline, and pride, as we look forward to building on this momentum in the forthcoming quarters. With that, I will turn the call back to the operator for Q&A.

Congrats on the strong results. So I wanted to try to ask first was really what do you think is the normal, I guess, earnings power within the Fire Safety segment overall? So understanding kind of the more aggressive tactics, pulled more gallons into a weaker fire season. If we think next year would be normal, which would maybe be a 30% to 40% increase in acres burned, will you have any increase in your gallons as you go to that level? Or are you tapped out in terms of capacity?

Josh, it's Kyle. I believe there are two parts to your question, so I'll address them separately. When we consider the earnings potential of the Fire Safety business, this year's performance reflects what we can expect in a more typical situation. That's the first point. There are factors influencing that, as you pointed out. Our volumes faced a challenge due to the acres, which we mentioned was completely compensated for by our increasingly aggressive strategies. Looking ahead to next year, regarding the second part of your question, we would gain additional advantages if acres increased compared to this year's figures, but there are two important considerations. First, the benefit from acres won’t be as significant as it could have been due to the initial approach we took. Second, we're uncertain about how that approach will evolve. Last year was very successful, and we hope to see continued positive results, but we can't predict what that will look like just yet.

Yes. I guess, I mean, related to that is, I mean, did you benefit in terms of the amount that you were able to load, because of maybe a more dispersed and less chaotic fire season in that, if we have more unplanned fires, it becomes harder? Or has your ability to load increased enough where, again, if the activity is maybe slightly more unpredictable, you could load similar to more gallons?

You're hitting on exactly the right factors here, Josh. Disaggregating them is tough. So yes, we definitely benefited from a more even dispersion of acres burned across both geography and timing. There were less large fires concentrated in a very tight band where our resources were fully utilized. That said, there is a benefit coming from both the growth in the air tanker fleet, which obviously comes from the agencies and our partners in the air tanker community, as well as our own ability to load more retardant out of our bases. So there's a tailwind from that. Disaggregating those out, and to be able to quantify them for you is pretty difficult to do, just because they all interact with each other.

But Josh, to be clear, we were not tapped out on capacity this year and wouldn't expect to be tapped out on capacity in a stronger fire season.

That makes sense. And if I could ask just one more broad one, just on the new USDA framework that you have for next year. I don't know if you can give a little bit more framing on two components of it is to, I guess, first, between the price down and services up, how do you think about the net impact to your earnings potential '26 versus '25? And then second, with that, in terms of a split between services, which would maybe be more of a fixed fee versus a dollar per gallon type charge, how has that transitioned in this contract and that does the makeup look materially different in '26 on versus what it's looked like over the last few years?

On the first part, Josh, we expect to grow our various financial metrics, certainly, EBITDA in our North America fire business in a like-for-like acre season in '26, inclusive of this contract. As I mentioned in the prepared remarks, this contract continues our positive financial momentum. As far as your second part of the question, this contract further moves our business towards consistency, predictability, and stability by increasing the proportion of revenue and EBITDA that comes from services and other fixed components, and due to the year 1 price cut decreases the proportion that comes from fewer gallons.

Congrats on the results. So I wanted to talk about another kind of government update that we got 1 month, 1.5 months ago, and that was around the plans to form the U.S. Wildland Fire Service, which would effectively combine the USDA's US Forest Service and then all of the DOI wildfire agencies. Just wondering, I know it's early stages, but just any initial thoughts on the implications of this, I guess, merger for lack of a better term, and 2 customers that are previously spaced on acres burned data, they each kind of represent 1/3 of the Lower 48 market. So those two organizations coming together, would love any thoughts on potential for debottlenecking and maybe more resources or efficiency, which could lead to more robust firefighting efforts and increased retardant demand. And I guess the other question we've been getting on this merger is that they mentioned in the press release that one of the goals is joint contracting and procurement. So I've been getting questions around whether the contract that you guys entered with USDA could potentially extend to the DOI agencies as these organizations combine.

So in many ways, our existing federal contract is the template for this new Wildland Fire Service. And what I mean by that is our contract has historically and continues in the new contract to combine all five federal firefighting agencies into one contract. We refer to it as a Forest Service Contract, but it really applies to all five federal firefighting agencies equally and will continue in that way going forward. The merger, as you call it, of these agencies is very much in line with the spirit of what our contract has always done, and we view that as a material positive for the industry, certainly for the air tanker companies, and most importantly, for national wildfire preparedness and response and our wildland firefighters. It's just much more efficient and effective and streamlined to have one empowered agency and have the industry and our federal partners speak with one voice. So we're very supportive of this change.

Awesome. That's really helpful. So maybe just a broad question on contracting, in general, because it seems like across several of your product lines, you have some large customers or customers that kind of represent a big portion of demand for your products. You had the USDA, and then it sounds like it's actually more broadly the U.S. wildfire agency's contract. You had the PFAS-free U.S. military contract for the present business. The question is, in the same way that you kind of target economic criteria and operational value drivers that inform your M&A and operational strategies, any general thoughts or tactics or items that you prioritize when you're negotiating big contracts with customers, just kind of the puts and takes between stability and hedges, and durability versus contract term and cost pass-through, pricing or maybe there are some markets where product lines where flexibility or spot pricing or cost exposure could make more sense. Just wondering if you could kind of walk us through generally some of the puts and takes that you think through as you're negotiating larger contracts.

I'm going to have to give you a bit of a high-level answer, Dan, just because there are so many contracts in the different parts of our business. But what I'll say is contracting is remarkably important. You can drive or frankly, destroy a very significant amount of value through optimal versus sloppy contracting. And so when we take it, we take it really seriously, and we always approach contracting and train our folks to approach contracting in a highly, highly collaborative manner. First thing you do with contracting is you understand the customers' needs, the customers' pain points, the customers' constraints and you try to present them with an optimal outcome for them that, at the same time, touches on what we care most about as far as the stability, predictability, growth, etc., of our business. And those principles are extrapolatable across contracting in all of our businesses. And when you look at our financial results in 2025, and the general, I would call it, outperformance of revenue and EBITDA versus various end market metrics, that reflects years of applying that contracting attitude or approach across our businesses.

Great. Also really helpful. And then maybe if I could just sneak one more quick one in. So a couple of comments that you guys had about the international retardants business being strong. I think it was a year-to-date comment. But just wondering if you could kind of unpack the international business results a little bit this year, just kind of relative strength year-to-date versus 3Q? And then just remind us what the key markets are in the northern versus southern hemisphere and kind of the relative strength of those markets and Perimeter's results this year.

Yes. International has been strong for us for the past several years. And given where international retardant is in the very long-term maturity curve, we would expect international retardant to remain very strong for us for the foreseeable future. Both 2025 year-to-date and Q3 were a continuation, Dan, of that trend. Our business in Europe was excellent in Q3. Our business in the Middle East was excellent in Q3. Our business in Asia was strong in Q3. And then our business in the southern hemisphere, both Australia and South America was strong in Q3. Our international retardant business really is firing on all cylinders. Part of that is self-help and strong execution, part of it is it should be very strong. It's very early in the adoption cycle. The economics of adoption make a whole lot of sense, and we're riding that wave. Very good. Thank you for the great job hosting today. Thank you, everyone, for taking the time to join us. As a reminder, as Kyle mentioned, we'll be at the Baird Industrial Conference in a couple of weeks, and we'll webcast our presentation. Thank you all for the support.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, the conference of Perimeter Solutions has now concluded. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect your lines.