...important notice. The agenda is to run through the 4Q performance and also some headline all of FY26 performance data, the outlook, and I want to be very efficient with everyone's time.

We will not go through this whole document. It's 40-something slides, but there's some important market information and value proposition information that sits behind it.

We'll leave plenty of time for Q&A. I think from a headline perspective, we've materially delivered to guidance, which is very pleasing.

We'll talk a bit more about—it's almost a throwaway term in terms of having an AI-first model, but we've truly implemented that across our products and also our operating behaviors. What we've seen is that revenues continue to grow, particularly the subscription revenue line.

Opex is scaling much more slowly as we implement these AI-first procedures and technology capabilities. I won't go verbatim through here, but we hit 33% subscription revenue growth.

We're at about 99% of target. There was just some timing items in terms of revenue recognition with a couple of contracts closing later in March than we had anticipated.

We have achieved positive underlying EBITDA in the month of March, which is something we've been marching towards through all of our FY26 period. Our exit run rate still grew strongly, 21% in a constant currency term.

I'll just front-foot the one question I think that many might be wanting to ask around there's a note in our release talking about one communications company who finished a project, and the month of March was the month where their subscription revenue stopped versus the prior calendar period. Exit run rate is where you take the month that we're talking about, March in this case, and you times it by 12.

They were going full steam in March last year. This is not an alarm bell.

The customer concerned here is called Charter Communications. They serve about 51 million homes and businesses across North America, and their partnership with Cox Communications means they're in 41 states across the US.

We helped them deliver a very important and large project in the state of California, and they're actually one of our biggest advocates. They're certainly not a lost customer.

In fact, we still have software with them in other states, but we expect them to continue to be a very important part of the business. We don't have any expectation that other customers in the comms space are moving in the same direction in terms of project turnoffs, etc.

Hopefully that helps explain that component. Our revenue grew only 6%, but our gross margins up 23%.

Our gross margin percentage is up to 81% from 69% last year. We added cash through the quarter.

Added about $3/4 million of positive cash flow and net receivables grew to $4.3 million. Overall, very satisfactory performance for us through the year.

Again, I won't read verbatim through here, but we've added 83 new subscription customers through FY26. In Q4, we're running at about two new customers a week, added nearly 30 customers through Q4, which gives us a lot of resiliency in terms of customer concentration risk.

The product that our shareholders have helped to fund build, IKE Poleforeman, is now up to $11 million of ARR, and these are very, very sticky customers, more than 200 now on the platform, which we're very pleased about. It's a big credit to the software development team and also the engineering group.

The other thing, and we talked about this in the third quarter update, we're not just talking about AI inside of products, we've shipped automation inside of our IKE Office Pro software. That's all around digitizing an electric utility's network, as assessing what is in the network, and we've automated some important parts of that process, and we were able to increase pricing 10% across the whole product portfolio on a compulsory basis, and we've had no churn in terms of that pick up.

A number of things that I think are moving us forward in terms of market development. We've worked really hard to be a thought leader in terms of training the industry, and we use that as a market development tool, not to be a training organization, but we've now trained and IKE-certified more than 3,000 engineers across the industry across more than 800 organizations.

This is a long game in terms of the electric utility market, and it is about being as credible as possible. We're very lucky to have Grant Glass, who he sits on the main board of the National Electrical Safety Code, he writes the code for the entire North American industry and sits on some of the distribution subcommittees, and he's been leading that.

Lastly, we're really delighted to bring Rod onto the IKE board through the fourth quarter. Rod's got very extensive experience across the infrastructure sector and also in terms of high-growth company development.

Rod's now getting his feet under the table, and we're very pleased about that. I'll pause there and hand to you, Paul, and you can take the team through the metrics.

Thanks, Glenn. I'm going to start with our subscription revenue.

I'll echo some of Glenn's comments and just add some commentary to this. You can see here that for FY26, we closed at $19.2 million New Zealand dollars of recognized subscription revenue.

As Glenn mentioned in the overview, that was a 33% growth over prior year. I would add, in dollar terms, that was 99% of our goal.

Within the margins of the 35% guidance that we gave at the beginning of the financial year. Growth comes from several places, but I would say that as we finished the year and looking back across the year, we continue to add new customers at a decent pace, as Glenn mentioned, between 1.5 to 2 customers per week.

We also still have a lot of opportunity where we penetrate into our biggest customers as they add more licenses and deploy the product across more departments. Overall, the cross-sell, the upsell, and the new logo really driving a lot of that growth that you see on the slide.

If you jump to the next slide, just as a reminder, we look at our monthly recurring revenue and then we calculate what is our exit run rate. Think of this as more of a leading metric to future growth.

You can see that it dipped to 18%. As you know or should know, most of our business, if not all of it, is transacted in United States dollars, there was a bit of a shift in the currency, February into March.

You can see on a US dollar or constant currency basis, our growth was 21%. I think what's important to note, as Glenn mentioned, is looking at the March versus prior year March, the impact from Charter Communications was about 9%.

Really without that one-time, project-based revenue change, our growth would have been at the 30% level for the exit run rate as well. Overall strong as we head into FY27.

If we jump to the next slide, looking at it from a per-seat perspective. Per-seat growth or the seats that we grew not as high as the recurring revenue.

I would say we're seeing higher revenue per unit, higher revenue per customer, which is an indicator of we're bringing in higher quality customers, we're also able to charge more for our products. We've talked on prior calls about the Pole Pilot AI capability and the price increase, we commented on that in our update for the market here in the fourth quarter.

The ARPU definitely driving up the way, helping, and you can see the impact both on our subscription revenue and you can see here seat growth growing at a similar pace, but not quite the same as our recurring. If we go to the next slide, transaction revenue.

This is our business where we look at data that's been pole data that's been pulled into our business, we look at it, we analyze it, we charge on a per-pole basis. You can see that that has been tracking down the way.

Part of that, we've talked a lot about headwinds in the US administration's policy on rural fiber. We're still seeing some of those headwinds.

We indicated that in the third quarter that we've expected those to continue out of Q4 and into the first half of or at least the first quarter, if not the first half, of FY27. You can get a sense there that that business is declining for FY26.

I would point out that some of the changes we've made in terms of looking at the projects that we take on, as well as where the work is being performed, you'll see and continue to see a much bigger gross margin coming from that business. Fourth quarter margins on that business, it was actually 49%, significantly higher what you saw in the first half of the year from us.

If we can jump to the next slide, I'll comment on just the overall revenue. You can see the progression obviously of the dark blue bar is our subscription revenue, and you can see the other pieces that make up of our total revenue.

As you think about the parts of our business that are very resilient, which are obviously the recurring revenue, as well as some of those recurring revenues we get for the transactions business, you can see that we're now at 91% total recurring and reoccurring. If you break that down, which is in the notes here, 72% of IKE's revenue came from subscriptions in FY26, which is up from 57% in FY25.

You can see that the business model transformation that IKE has gone through is really starting to achieve some of the goals we set to really become more of a subscription-based business model. Even on the hardware side, which is that part of that orange bar, we're converting hardware customers to devices-as-a-service.

Then last comment I would make is our training practice is a very good lead generation. Glenn mentioned Grant earlier, but that training business grew 8%, and again, it's a good revenue source, but it's also a very good lead generation source for subscriptions for us as a company.

I'll wrap up with key metrics. If we just jump to the last slide, Simon, just giving you an overall summary.

As Glenn mentioned, just a couple of things to note here. We've recalculated how we think about subscription customers, we're looking at number of customers on a trailing 12-month subscription revenue basis.

We added 83 new customers in the year, which is close to 1.5, 1.6 per week. You can see overall just some of the numbers here, the gross margin progression which Glenn referenced, subscription growth which I've talked about already, and just really giving you kind of that overall snapshot of the business.

Very, very solid year. I think we're very pleased with the results, and we appreciate everyone's support.

I'll hand it back to you, Simon and Glenn.

Thank you, Paul. Just adding some commentary around in fact if I just go back one slide here.

Just talking further to the platform transaction revenue, this is a technology-enabled service, all of these customers are using our software, and we're providing them with capacity. They send us the raw data that they're collecting in our software, and we are doing engineering to process that data.

Again, we make money from doing it, but more importantly, it makes us very sticky with customers. The folk that use this, and they tend to be big communication companies, they love it as a service, and it's like another pillar in terms of how we think about stickiness inside of these big utility and communication companies.

That's the reason that we continue to focus on delivery, and we will keep seeing volatility. There's upside risk and it may go lower, but we're now at a point where we deliver it from a very cash-profitable perspective.

I did want to cover just four more slides before we open things up to questions, and AI as a disruptor is being discussed a lot in technology markets. We truly see AI as an accelerant and almost a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to really disrupt the very big software businesses in our industry.

We've invested a lot over the last 18 months. Putting AI inside of our products, which that's the images on the left, being able to autodetect power infrastructure and conductors and equipment that is attached to a pole and measure these assets.

We're working with partners such as Google to use their Street View imagery to be able to do this at very high scale. That enables us to have pricing power, and I think we've proven that through this last year.

I think the other thing is we are deeply embedded inside of sort of critical infrastructure workflows. Once we become a standard within a utility, it's not impossible, but it's very difficult for a newcomer to come along and displace what we're doing inside of these utilities.

Then the other thing is we do have a proprietary data set. We have more than 20 million human-engineered power assets sitting in our database that we can train these models on, and the general purpose LLMs, large language models, they're amazing what they can do generally, but they're only as good as the data that you can train their learning, etc.

on. We do very specific things in the electric utility market, and we've got a real advantage in terms of proprietary data.

Then the other item is we have trained operationally—so this is different from AI inside of your products, but operationally, we've worked very hard to train the whole business on world-class AI-first work practices. That flows through to product design, product development, code development, support, and other functions inside of our business.

We've built an entire proprietary system, we call it Vitruvius, and it's based on all of IKE's principles, all the things that we care about from a strategy perspective, all of our data, and gearing the team up. We just see this as the most exciting time to be a growth company inside of this industry.

Just a slide on that. We see AI as an accelerant.

We talk about market penetration. I think this is really important for our shareholders and investors.

The US electric utility market is just exploding. The grid has to scale here in the US from 20% of national energy capacity to 50% over the next 20 25 years.

We play a small, but important part of that process in terms of assessing the network and designing it and ultimately maintaining it. We just see the serviceable, obtainable market as being enormous, and we think we're just getting going in terms of growing with these increasing and investment rates.

There are these just macrotailwinds that sit behind what we're doing. It's not just grid capacity, like being able to deliver more power to things like data centers and electric vehicles and power that's coming off solar on homes, etc.

There's also all of the communication side of the industry, joint use. Every time a telco attaches to a power asset, they need to do engineering and do assessment.

We support that. There's grid hardening, which is ensuring that the grid doesn't fail when there's the next hurricane or big weather event or ice storm.

Again, we sit in that process. Then there's also this transition towards building digital twins, which is an overly used term, but what it means is creating a digital replication of your network, and we're stepping away towards building more and more capability around these particular thematics.

We're very lucky to be in the right place at the right time in terms of industry expansion and customer investment. These utilities that we serve are making 10-year, 20-year capex and opex commitments.

We believe the biggest revenue opportunity still sits well ahead of us. We were fortunate to be funded to build two new products last year that they're tracking on plan, and we're very excited around introducing new software modules that add to ARPU in terms of our customer base.

We've got a Customer Council that leads a lot of our decision-making around products and product requirements, and that gives us confidence around building something that fits the market. These products are getting pulled through by the industry rather than us pushing technology at the market.

There are a whole number of elements to distribution power that we're not yet addressing, but we're looking very hard at. That includes things like the underground side of the distribution market, also international market expansion.

We see a real opportunity to introduce more automation and AI, and that will increase pricing, and I think increase market penetration. I'll pause there, Simon, and be happy to take questions, both Paul and myself.

Great. Thanks, Glenn.

Thanks, Paul. Just a reminder you can submit questions through the Q&A button down the bottom of the screen.

I'll get to a few of the questions that guys are going to ask audibly after a couple that have been submitted. First off, we've seen a handful of communication customers churn over the last 12 months.

Has something structurally changed in the fiber market, and how are you thinking about the remaining coms customers? What's the revenue exposure to pure coms customers?

The pure revenue exposure is low, but they're an important part of the ecosystem. The way the communications groups work, they're a lot more brutal in terms of if they're running a project, they want to go full speed, and then as they slow anything down, they want to put the brakes on.

We still charge. Every one of those customers is paying an annual subscription in advance.

They're still pure subscription businesses. As I mentioned, we flagged in June that Charter was slowing down.

Unfortunately, our technology helped them go much faster on their California project, so that was the item there. We'll do a lot more business with Charter.

Cox Communications now, who they're just merging those two businesses, they become the biggest communications company in North America.

Thanks, Glenn. I believe we've got a question from Jackson.

Jackson should be able to go ahead. We'll remove that one.

Jules Cooper at Shaw and Partners. Jules, please go ahead.

Thank you, and thanks for taking the question, Glenn. A couple from me.

Just if we could on that sort of project churn event, Glenn, you've highlighted that you've got a long-standing relationship with this customer. Do you expect that they would return to a similar level of spend in the coming year, or is it something that you sort of don't have visibility on, but when there is work, they'll be giving you a call and they'll be a customer again?

I just sort of want to get a sense for, is this something that comes back again quickly in your mind, or is it just sort of open-ended a little bit?

I believe it does come back. We've worked very closely with Charter for a couple of years, met with them weekly on their project requirements.

They're our number one reference customer actually in terms of when we put other communications companies onto the platform. As I said, they operate across 41 other states.

This is how the coms market operates. They go in, and they're running projects as fast as they can.

These guys are interested in getting their fiber put up in a particular geography as quick as they can. In terms of visibility, I'll just be honest, ferociously compete with one another [unclear] geographies, but they're investing massively for the next five years.

I think there's a really big opportunity with them. I'm

not sure if that's my internet reception. Jules, is that okay on your end?

I think Glenn might be cutting out, might need you, Paul, to jump in when need be.

Okay. I've got a couple for Paul.

Just so we're clear, Paul, with the price increases that went through for Office Pro to sort of reflect the AI feature set in there, did they trigger on renewal, or is basically the full benefit of that included in the ERR exit rate for FY26, or is it still to come as those customers renew at different points?

You're right on the first point. We added the price increase, it came into effect when the customer renewed their contract.

I would point out a couple of things. One is 50% of our Office Pro, which is where Pole Pilot is used, 50% of our renewals happen in the fourth quarter.

In terms of full year subscription revenue, we'll still see a lot of benefit from that price increase as we go into FY27, but by March, I would say that quite a significant amount of renewals had that price increase in it. Yes, it is in the ERR, but no, it's not in the full year subscription recognized revenue because, as I mentioned, those renewals came in in the January, February, March timeframe.

Okay. All right.

Good. Then it's good to hear that the new products are on track, and I think you mentioned you expect they'll deliver more revenue than any other product that you've got, so that's really helpful.

Just a comment around moving to customer beta now within the next nine months, do you expect a significant contribution in revenue from that, just trying to understand how much that beta testing might contribute in terms of revenue, or does it not, and revenue sort of comes later when they go live proper?

Can you hear me okay, Jules?

I can now, Glenn.

Sorry about that, don't know what happened. We expect to close contracts through the end of the third and the fourth quarter, again, you'll see it in ERR, but it'll flow through to recognized revenue in the following year for the same reason.

Yep. Okay.

All right. Then just on the cost base, the closing cash looks good, and great to see the milestone around EBITDA positive in the March month achieved.

I just wondered if you could, Glenn or Paul, just make a comment. From our cut of the numbers, it looks like your opex was largely flat half on half, but I was just sort of wondering with the new products, should we still expect that step up in capitalized development in the second half?

I can answer that, Glenn. In terms of dollar spent, Jules, we did actually increase our second half spend by about 2% of revenue.

To really accelerate the product development, we did start to add more development resources, but you're not seeing that necessarily because a lot of that work was capitalizable. In terms of dollar spent, resources hired, it was about a 2% increase in R&D, but again, towards the end of the year, mainly in Q4, we did see a step up and a lot of that cost getting capitalized.

Okay. All right.

Excellent. Thank you.

That was great. Thanks.

Thanks, Jules. Next up we've got James Lindsay.

James, please go ahead.

Thanks, Simon. Good morning, gents.

Thanks for the update. Hey, just interested in the transactional revenue margin, which has jumped around a bit.

It looked like the sort of first cut is around about 50% in the fourth quarter versus 54.5% in the third quarter, and obviously had been substantially lower in the first half. Just interested where sort of more sustainable numbers will be, or will it be quite volatile with projects, etc.?

The first half, James, had a lot of US resources doing a lot of the work that Glenn described, and so I would say Q1's characterized by predominantly US and Mexico resources doing the work. Second quarter, we had a restructuring cost in our numbers, you saw the margin drop.

Then as we got out of the second quarter into the third quarter, you saw margins improved, both third quarter, fourth quarter. I would say that in the fourth quarter, the mix of projects were slightly less in terms of the average price we were seeing in the third quarter, but overall, 49% was the margin, I think it was low-50s, as you mentioned, in the third quarter.

As we go forward, I would say that low to mid-40s is really where I would guide in terms of the go-forward transaction margin.

Yep, thanks for that. Just with regard to, yeah, sort of the project completion that you mentioned, thanks for the detail on that, do you have any sort of visibility into other large projects that are starting?

Because, yeah, obviously we haven't yet seen sort of a rebound in transactional volumes yet. Just keen on, yeah, there's a visibility for '27.

Are you referring to just the transaction piece?

Yes, just transaction, yes.

Yeah. Most of the time we are supporting communications companies, fiber companies, with the transaction piece of the business, and that's where they all had a wobble with the new government administration, federal funding, regulatory rules, etc.

We are seeing a lot more confidence come back across the communication space. There are some—I hate the term, but green shoots in terms of hearing from our partners how they're planning to accelerate, but nothing imminent.

I think, importantly, what we've done is just reset the operating model to deliver those transactions so that it's profitable and we've got a variable cost base that matches variable revenue as these things eventuate. As I mentioned, it's an important part of our business because the market really appreciates the fact that we can do this for them, but obviously our core business is growing the subscription software base, and the transaction and the training and the education are just a very important part of our market development essentially.

Yeah. Thanks for that.

Then obviously with Poleforeman, looking like it's pretty successful without the churn as far as that sort of 10% price rise. Just sort of interested, I think on one of other results calls you'd said that you may review that pricing depending on how it sort of got implemented, just interested, would you look at a second price event for that for '27 or '28?

We're constantly reviewing pricing and price optimization. We will raise prices through this year as a matter of course from a CPI perspective.

Then typically, we increase pricing when we release new features and new modules so that the value is justified, so that's still our intention. We've got some pretty solid plans now in terms of other automation that we can put into the product, and you should see one of those new automation tools coming to market very very soon.

That's great. Obviously things like Poleforeman is embedded inside Office Pro, just with regard to the new council-backed products, would they be like that and integrated, or would they be a standalone, saleable module?

Standalone, saleable module, but obviously integrated into the whole IKE platform. Our products all work very well together, and they make the entire workflow faster and easier.

Our objective is to build a platform that engineers a network through its entire lifecycle, assessment, digitization, design, construction, maintenance. These modules are going to work together, but customers can start with any particular module.

We think that's extremely important in terms of winning this market. It's very hard to sell a whole platform to a utility because they're so big and they're so siloed, but if you can get in through one particular product module, that gives you the opportunity then to cross-sell.

We've got a lot of good examples of that now in terms of the cross-sell process.

No, that's great. With regard to that, I think, yeah, Poleforeman might be around $2,000 US a seat or something like that.

Just with regard to the new module and the sort of framing it as being well north of that, can you give us sort of any sort of quantum? Is it sort of 2 or 5x, or what sort of quantum could we consider as success?

Look, I think we've still got the work to do to finalize where we think price can be optimized. It's always just based on value, value-based pricing, we're working to understand where we set that, it's a little bit early, James, to probably put a number on that.

I thought I'd try anyway. Done obviously on the ARR, Poleforeman getting to 11 mil.

I think one of the times I sort of guessed that might be sort of halfway through what could be sort of endgame for that. Do you have a view about where that could get to over time?

We're optimistic. We want to go and win the other 3,000 utilities that we don't have today, including the 100 investor-owned utilities that we don't currently have.

We've got eight of the 10 largest, but we don't have the next 100. That requires a lot of sales effort and delivery, etc., but I think there's just such a big opportunity.

It will take some time because shifting these work practices for a utility, a critical infrastructure business, they don't make fast decisions, but they make very deliberate ones. I think there's a long way to run with Poleforeman.

Yep. On that, just on that sales staff, etc., where is that sales number of staff versus where it was pre-raise?

Have you already started to lift that number, sort of just interested in either absolute or percentage terms?

We've got 12 quota-carrying sales people, and then we've got a solution engineering group that work under sales. That's pre-sales engineering and post-implementation.

That's a 16-person group. They've been very efficient.

We've continued to just grow at 35%, 40% from a subscription growth rate pretty efficiently in terms of what we're spending on sales and marketing. Looking at other items as well in terms of channel partnerships and other ways to efficiently kind of reach the longer tail of the municipality and cooperative market.

Yeah. Maybe one for Paul, just with regard to sort of the AI adoption flagged as a sort of internally helping our operating leverage, just interested in sort of quantifying where that growth in opex could go to.

Obviously it's been pretty impressive this year.

I would say that the area we're focusing on first, James, is around development and product management. Glenn briefly mentioned Vitruvius, which is our proprietary system.

As we look at taking the data that forms how we think about our product requirements and actually then take it all the way through to development and launch, that's where we're spending a lot of time with kind of the AI capabilities inside the company. As we see that R&D is a big piece of our opex and over time, I see that tracking down a lot faster than we would if AI didn't exist, James.

It's probably a little bit too early for us to put a number on it, but as we progress as a company, I see that R&D percentage drop significantly, not because we're not innovating, but it's more because we're using a lot of the tools that are out there to really get products to market faster and code faster. Again, not ready to put a number on it just yet.

Got it. Mindful of other people's times and thanks for the update.

Back to you, Simon. Cheers.

Thank you, James.

Just a couple questions left remaining. What makes up hardware and other revenue, and why is that decreased?

That's a good question. The two primary revenue sources in there are hardware and training and development.

The training business is actually growing 8%, and the hardware is declining because of a business model shift, Simon. Typically in the past, IKE sold the hardware device as a capital purchase, customers would buy the device outright.

If you remember, we sold devices to collect data, allow customers to collect data. We've shifted our model from selling hardware as a capex item to more of a device-as-a-subscription, which is a revenue number that sits inside our platform subscription category.

A lot of it is driven by business model shift away from one-time non-recurring hardware sales to recurring devices-as-a-service, so that's an intentional shift away from selling hardware as a capex item.

You mentioned AI at IKE as a business accelerant. How has this impacted the development of new products and talent at IKE?

Does the company and or its engineers have a token budget, and has the development of new products seen a reduction in timelines due to improved engineer efficiency, and are the new products more ambitious in terms of their intended features? Quite a bit in that.

We've very intentionally sought to train the whole organization in terms of we call it Vitruvius, so that's the IKE-specific AI engine, and we're using—some of you are probably very familiar with this, but we're using a lot of very IKE-specific data and strategy documents and obviously database information, also a lot of our pillars in terms of how we run and how we engage from a CX perspective. We're using Claude, Claude Code, Claude Project, platform called Cursor, which is the code development engine, Notion, which is like the intelligence repository, and some other tools, but we've made it completely proprietary to IKE.

We've built it, we're not using the general platforms that are available on the web. We've also trained the whole business.

We've used a group called Section AI, and they're world-class in terms of training and bringing a whole business up to speed on standardized use of these tools, and in a brand-safe way as well and data-safe way in terms of use. The impacts are very dramatic in terms of productivity.

It's really changed I think how to think about getting products to market because you can build things now much faster from a software perspective. The constraint has become quite quickly distribution, how you get your products to market, how you support customers, brand, customer experience, those types of things, which really matter to electric utility and communications companies.

Fortunately, we've again invested in our customer experience and our direct go-to-market model for many years now. Our NPS score is in the 90s, which is not common in terms of NPS, and that's because of how we go to market as much as our products.

We just see this as an amazing opportunity, and obviously it does change the way you think about scaling software development costs as you keep scaling the revenue lines and the go-to-market component.

Just last question, just with regards to the broader industry and strategic nature of it. There's been interest in the past both in IKE and you've looked at other acquisitions in the past, how should we look at that going to the future, both from an IKE perspective in terms of strategic interest, and also just on the M&A front?

This industry has become a hot topic for investors, particularly the private equity community, and also some of the strategic operators who are just looking at what is going to happen over the next 20 years and getting a foothold in terms of distribution, power infrastructure. That has become very lively.

It wasn't the case five years ago, but now the world has really changed on that front. Then secondarily, we are looking constantly at potential acquisition opportunities for IKE where it makes strategic sense for us in terms of those pillars of operation that we talked about earlier.

I think there are a couple of interesting businesses out there, a couple of interesting spinout opportunities potentially. It's certainly nothing imminent, but things that we think could be valuable, and we can add I think a lot of capability to them in terms of modernizing the technology stack and also improving brand and go-to-market.

The build-buy decision has changed with these tools that we just talked about, you can now build things faster. I think that changes the way you think about valuation potentially.

A few moving parts, Simon. I hope I answered that clearly enough.

Done, Glenn. That concludes the Q&A segment.

I might just hand it back to you for closing remarks.

No, thank you, Simon. Thank you, everyone, for joining.

We've gone over time, but I appreciate everyone's time, and as always, both Paul and I are available anytime to cover further questions or comments. Our contact details are at the front of this presentation, thank you.

Thanks, all, for attending.