TechPrecision Corporation

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to today's call. All lines will be placed on the listen-only mode, and the floor will be open for questions and comments following the presentation. If you should require assistance throughout the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad to reach a live operator. It is now my pleasure to turn the floor over to your host, Brent Moss of Hayden IR. Sir, the floor is yours.

Thank you. On the call today is Alex Shen, Chief Executive Officer, and Tom Sammons, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, I'd like to remind our listeners that management's remarks may contain forward-looking statements which are subject to risks and uncertainties, and management may make additional forward-looking statements in response to your questions. Therefore, the company claims the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking statements as contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Actual results may differ from those discussed today, and therefore, we refer you to a more detailed discussion of risks and uncertainties in the company's financial filings of the SEC. In addition, projections as to the company's future performance represents management's estimates as of today, November 13th, 2019. Tech Precision assumes no obligation to revise or update these forward-looking statements. With that out of the way, I'd like to turn the call over to Alex Shen, Chief Executive Officer, to provide opening remarks. Alex?

Brett, thank you. Good day to everyone, and thank you for joining us. Our second quarter of fiscal year 2020 was highlighted by the startup of multiple new projects, following the addition of $11 million in new sales orders since March 31, 2019. Our backlog at September 30, 2019, totaled $16.4 million, an increase of $3.8 million compared to $12.6 million at March 31, 2019. With the new projects coming online in the second quarter, we expect to operate above current revenue and operating income levels and return to profitability during the second half of fiscal 2020. I would now like to turn the call over to Tom Sammons who will tell us more about our second quarter financial results. Tom? Thank you, Alex. Net sales were 3.1 million for the second quarter of fiscal 2020 compared to 3.6 million in the second quarter of fiscal 2019. As Alex commented, our backlog remains strong as new orders for components continue to slow down from prime defense contractors.

Cost of sales for the second quarter was 2.7 million compared to 2.5 million for the same quarter the period a year ago.

Our second quarter financial results were impacted by underabsorbed factory overhead and increased costs associated with a loss provision for certain projects already in progress. Selling general and administrative expenses decreased by 10,000 in the second quarter. Interest expense and debt cost amortization was lower in the second quarter, ended September 30, 2019, and will continue to decrease, barring any indebtedness, as we amortize debt principal to maturity. Net loss for the second quarter ended September 30, 2019, was $291,000. For the six months ended September 30, 2019, net sales decreased by $312,000, or 4%, to $7.4 million when compared to $7.7 million for the six months ended September 30, 2018. Our cost of sales for the six months ended September 30, 2019 was $5.9 million compared to $5.6 million for the six months ended September 30, 2018. Gross margin was 20.6% for the six months ended September 30, 2019.

Total SG&A expenses for the six months ended September 30, 2019 increased slightly by approximately $1,000 due primarily to an increase in outside advisory services almost entirely offset by a decrease in compensation expense.

Interest expense decreased by 20% for the six months ended September 30, 2019 and should continue to decrease as we amortize that principle. For the six-month end of September 30, 2019, our net loss was $70,200 compared with net income of $345,100 the same period a year ago.

Moving to the balance sheet, at September 30, 2019, we had $2.6 million in cash and working capital was $6.2 million. Cash provided by operating activities,

was 0.9 million for the six months ended September 30, 2019. Net debt at the end of the second quarter of fiscal 2020 was 1.3 million. With that, I will now turn the call back over to Alex. Alex? Thank you, Tom. SEC Precision remains proud and honored to serve the United States defense industry, naval submarine manufacturing through its Raynor subsidiary. We continue to see meaningful opportunities in our defense sector, primarily in the nuclear submarine business for the next 12 months and beyond. I am excited with the startup of multiple new projects. I would now like to open up the call for a Q&A.

Thank you. The floor is now open for questions. If you do have a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad to join the queue. And if you're using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset to provide the best sound quality. And we'll pause just a moment to give everyone a chance to signal. And our first question comes from Howard Rouse with Wellington Shield. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Alex, since I've been involved in the company for more than five years, the first time I've seen the backlog jump as much as it has. So one, congratulations. And two, it is exciting for me to hear you as excited as you are, because I've never heard that on any conference call that I've been on with you. So I'm very happy to hear on both. Can you comment as to what the backlog is as of today? Is that possible?

Tom? It's not possible only because we net our POC revenue against the backlog, so we have to understand how much we've realized against the backlog, and we don't have that number yet. But we have picked up additional orders in the quarter, in the month.

So additional orders beyond the $3.8 million backlog. Okay. Thank you. I just want to confirm that Block 5 is effective and that the government has funded it. Is that a correct statement from your knowledge, Alex? It's 10 summaries?

Howard, I think I heard about three questions in there, so let me parse this thing. Sorry. It's okay. Ross does this to me all the time. Don't worry. I think the first question was... He's the next questioner. So I think the first question was on Block 5. Block 5 is a viable program and it is going on. I think your next question was on funding. I can only refer you to publicly available information.

According to the public information, it has been funded for a total of nine submarines plus one additional.

I believe that you're quoting some hearsay that is not corroborated by any contracts. No, there was a public announcement by the Department of Defense. That's not a contract release announcement.

Okay, I appreciate that. Right. That's all I have. Again, I'm very happy that you're as excited as you are. I'll leave the floor to Ross Taylor next, I'm sure.

Thank you for your support.

Always a pleasure, Alex, and thank you.

And our next question comes from Ross Taylor with ARS Investment Partners.

So Howard's pressing. Okay, let's deal with the one thing that really jumps that I haven't seen out of a company, this company since you've been running it, Alex, which is the fact that you had some cost issues on a project loss. Can you talk to us about what that is, how much that loss was, and will that loss have an effect on the profitability long term of the Virginia Block 5 contracts? Okay, so I think there are five questions in there. Let's deal with the first one. Can I talk to the losses? Yes, the losses were due to the startup of multiple new projects exclusive to the new projects and not for repeating part numbers whatsoever. Are they costs that will Were they basically one-time costs that are going to be effectively recovered or not impact future profitability and whatever those? It sounds like they were basically kind of almost spec builds or determine whether you could build something type projects as opposed to things you've already been spec in for. They're not things that we've built before. They're brand new part numbers. Generally speaking, I would like to think that I'm going to go after business that repeats the part numbers over time rather than just one-time deals. So that's how I would characterize those as really startup costs. Do I expect that the losses will repeat? Well, I don't think so. I would point out that our finance group has reserved for the losses already. So all the damage that you expect to be done by these projects is in the numbers that you released today? As far as I know, yes, absolutely. Okay, good, because as I said, I think in Howard was getting to, it would appear that with the not official release of an order, but the statement that the Navy and General Dynamics have reached an agreement to fund nine boats plus an option, that the Virginia Block 5 within a few weeks will be set up to build what appears to me to be probably two years of three boats. And then as the Ohio Columbia class comes on board, go revert back to two boats built a year along with a Columbia class. And so we really have started that event when it is officially signed is a watershed. Is it not for this company? I don't think I can comment. intelligently on that? Because you're talking about the build cycle, but we're not on this. It's a little difficult to answer the specificity of your questions. What I'm actually getting at is What I'm getting at, Alex, is it would appear that from what we have seen and what you have said, you came out a few calls ago and talked about having a $40 to $50 million annual run at $80 to $100 million two-year projected revenue numbers. It's my assumption from everything I've read that that number is based – that $80 to $100 million number is based on – largely on, if not fully on, the emergence of the Virginia Block 5 from the drawing board into production, and that it's the revenues that you would expect, Tech Precision would expect to be receiving as that project rolls forward in the next two years. Is that not correct? So the numbers that you're talking about are the opportunity numbers, not the annual revenue numbers, just to be clear. The brunt of what we do in naval submarines is going to be Virginia-class based as far as volume goes and Columbia-class as well. The Columbia-class has less volume, but it's a much bigger submarine. Right, and it's also out, is it not, in time because the Columbia-class is not on the ways nor is it projected to be on the ways in the next year, I believe. So there's the build cycle of the submarines, and then there's the ordering cycle for components, which is probably long lead ordering cycle is way ahead of the build cycle. Right. Okay. And so basically these things are coming together at this point in time in that it would seem to me that with the company operating basically with a – neutral net debt position or near neutral net debt position with your backlog building, with your historic operating margins being significantly higher than those you achieved in the quarter that just ended, I would expect that we're going to see some pretty substantial increase in free cash flow. And so rather than ask you about that, because I know you'll just not answer it, what I'm going to say is that it's as one of your larger shareholders. It's our position that that assumption warrants the company, the board, and others coming to us as investors and allowing us to understand how capital is going to be returned to shareholders through this process, because as we see it, this is a game-changing event. Getting this contract signed substantially de-risks the outlook for tech precision, you know, you've historically been an exceptionally good operator, I would expect that you will continue to be a good operator. And therefore, I would suspect that we should be looking at the situation where this company in the next few years, is able to generate what would likely be a 20 based on today's stock price of 20 to 30% free cash flow margin against the stock price and In light of that, I would be hoping that there would be plans to, and shareholders would be alerted to them, that you're going to be returning capital to us in a meaningful way in coming years. Because I see the way this stock trades, and it simply trades as though a bulk of your holders do not understand the business model. And I think that's a problem because when you don't communicate to them, and I know why you argue you cannot communicate, but this stock is exceptionally volatile and there's no real need for it. This should be one of the least volatile names going forward. You have such visibility looking out over the next four, I mean, this contract they're talking about is four fiscal years. And I seriously doubt, having been in the defense business at one time, I seriously doubt you don't have a damn good idea what your revenues are going to come off of these boats because I'm pretty sure they've already prepared everyone for what they're going to get. And you have been operating inefficiently because I assume you're carrying extra costs to be ready to produce when you got these orders, correct? We have extra capacity, yes. Are we operating inefficiently? I would say we're not operating inefficiently. I think we're pretty efficient. Well, I would say you're efficient in execution. What I mean by inefficiently is you probably have more bodies hired than you need for the current demand because, and we're seeing this in some of your compatriots who are trying to hire people to fill slots If you put off hiring people until you actually get the fiscal contract, you might not be able to actually hire the people you need. And given your reputation and ability as an operator, my guess is you did not want to take that as a risk. Well, we balance that risk against the lumpiness. So when the demand sometimes spikes for a little while, I need to have the bodies to cover that demand. Yeah. And then on the other hand, when it dips into valleys where, you know, there's just the business is just naturally lumpy, then I don't want to have too many bodies that I have to carry around for an extended period of time. So it's a balance that we just need to watch on a pretty very frequent basis. But you're comfortable that you're adequately staffed to perform the contracts to which you are receiving? I'm comfortable that I have the capability to flex to meet demand. That's what I'm comfortable with. At any given point in time, it goes up and down. So, I'm comfortable that we have the capability to flex to that adequately to meet customer requirements. Good. As I said, I'll step back out of this, but I do believe that it's, you know, given the paucity of information we often get from you, I believe that it's important that the board develop a return of capital strategy for investors because they have publicly stated in previous calls they do not believe this company warrants, a company of this size warrants being public, and I would like to make sure that as we work through this scenario, that the shareholders are rewarded for it. And the best way to reward us is to basically return substantial amounts of your free cash flow to shareholders through a buyback. And there is precedent in your industry. Excel publicly states that they will return 50% of their free cash flow to shareholders in a buyback each and every year. So there are people in the space who do it. And I believe that it's important that we get into that situation because it might help smooth out some of the trading volatility where people who don't understand the long-term outlook for this business feel compelled to sell stock aggressively, which causes others who might be interested to walk away because they're afraid of the volatility. And I'll step back in just a second. Thank you. Thank you for your support, Ross. You're welcome.

And as a reminder, ladies and gentlemen, if you do have a question or comment, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad to join the queue at any time. And our next question comes from Aaron Warwick with ES Capital. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my call. Looking forward with these increased backlog numbers to future quarters and kind of referring to what Ross said about that. 80 to 100 million, which if I remember correctly, you changed later to just 100 million. I wanted to ask you about that, Alex. Is that number that you're looking at, the work that you're targeting, is that 100 million still what you have in mind, or is that increased or decreased at all? That has not decreased. That opportunity is there. Has it increased at all? I'm telling you it hasn't decreased. Okay. Is any of the backlog that was reported as of September 30th, does that include any of the $100 million? The opportunity remains as far as the dollar value. Okay. I have to be very careful in answering these questions because I've been pretty much point blank told by our direct customers to be very careful. Okay. Well, I respect that. Last thing I want to do as a shareholder is get you in trouble and that just gets me in trouble. You had also mentioned on previous calls about pursuing work with carriers and it looks like the Navy is moving forward with some of that as well. Is that something you're still pursuing or have you obtained any of that work? In I think two or three calls previous, I had already alluded to the fact that carrier is now part of our business. Okay, good, and it still remains so. On the international front, I'm just wondering, I asked about it, you know, there was an article before the last call, and I know you couldn't talk about that much, but it made me think about it more here, international opportunities, especially as it relates to submarine tube work. Sounds like some of the tube work could be available for competitors of a company that said they were no longer going to be working on that. Are you pursuing any international opportunities like in the UK or elsewhere? I am absolutely restricted from any comment whatsoever on that topic. Okay. Appreciate your time. Thank you, guys. Thank you for your support.

And our next question comes from Richard Grulich with REG Capital Advisors. Please go ahead.

Thank you. I wasn't able to hear clearly the answer to the question of regarding what the backlog currently is, and I understand not being able to calculate that, but let me rephrase the question. Have you received continued new orders since the last quarter ended?

Have we received new orders since the last quarter ended? Yes.

Yes. And have they run at the same rate as the prior quarter?

I can't tell you that right now.

Okay. Could you tell me what the capital spending program looks like over the next one to two years?

Due to competitive reasons, I'm going to not answer that question.

Okay. Could you tell me what you expect the employment level to look like a year and then two years from now?

That again is going to be in the category of a competitive nature. Our competitors are all private companies and we're the only public one. So we're all watching each other like hawks. So I'm going to decline to answer that question. I would comment to let you know that I watch my employment levels carefully so I can match them up with the up and down fluctuating lumpy demand. and I do not, as a rule, miss customer requirements.

That intrigued me. Could you describe the mechanics of how you're able to flex up and down your employment?

I'm not going to be able to do that due to the competitive nature of how we do it.

Separately, could you discuss any non-defense business during the quarter roughly how much of it was and then what the outlook for that is?

Let me see here. I might not be able to grab how much of it is, but if you use the 80-20, it would be in the minority. So the outlook for that is opportunistically we're going to pursue non-defense business. That is our stated objective and we continue to execute that objective quite well.

Does it look like there are interesting opportunities to pursue in the non-defense area at this point?

Opportunistically, they land. I am pursuing primarily defense business. This company has been converted over to a defense-centric business. If the other opportunities in non-defense match well with our capabilities in defense, we'd be more than happy to take an order. If they don't match, then it doesn't work.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

And our next question comes from Mark Gomes with Pipeline Data. Please go ahead.

Hey, great progress, guys. Just so I'm 100% clear, so, you know, we were discussing Block 5 and how it's not been contracted. So that's safe to assume that none of your orders or backlog include any of that, correct? Correct. Thank you.

And our next question comes from Howard.

Mark, I need you to repeat that question, please.

And this is the operator. Mark is no longer in the Q&A queue.

Okay. Well, I think what I heard, this is Alex Shen talking, I think what I heard was, do your orders and your production include Block 5? And the answer is yes, that's correct.

And our next question comes from Howard Browse with Wellington Shields. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Just just to clear up one issue. The comment from Commander Danny Hernandez, a Navy spokesman says they have reached a multi year agreement with General Dynamics and are working to announce a contract by December 31. So just just to clear that up. Secondly, as a follow up Richard's questions and comments. At one point in time several years ago, you were doing business for Mevion. Are you currently doing any business, or can you not comment about that with Mevion?

I have been asked specifically by Mevion to not comment on their business.

Okay, that sort of answers the question. And secondly, there was a point in time several years ago that you were manufacturing nuclear casks. Can you comment about that?

That was before my time.

Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you.

And our next question comes from Ross Taylor with ARS Investment Partners.

Okay. So some follow-ups. With regard to the nuclear cask, are you doing or looking at the potential of doing business with the Department of Energy? With regard to nuclear casks or DOE overall? Overall. Overall, opportunistically, we will take a look at DOE. And what type of products might you supply them? Ross, just to be very direct, it's not the type of product that we go for. It's really what fits and what they see fit to quote us on. Okay. It's more of a passive approach maybe, but it's not a very laser beam targeted on this type of product. It's not a product-oriented approach. So is your approach with them that they come to you looking for your expertise to see what you can do for them, or are you going to them with ideas of what you can do, supply to them that they might need? I do not go to them with ideas on what products. I go to them with capabilities. Okay. It's up to them to match the capabilities with the products that they know about what they would outsource. Okay. They're not a core customer, so I don't know that much about them internally. And frankly, the opportunity with defense and nuclear submarines is just overwhelmingly large, and that's the space that we primarily live in. Right. Now, looking at that, the press release that Howard Browse referenced talks about a four-year deal. You, in your previous comments in talking about the $100 million revenue base, which you have said has not gotten smaller, talk about a two-year revenue base. If the Navy signs a four-year agreement with electric boats, would that basically – since I assume that would all be Block 5, and therefore any products you're supplying would likely be carried through products through the entire four-year cycle, since my experience, once again, is the types of things you're doing, as long as you execute operationally, your strength, are not things that are going to be – taken and handed to someone else midstream in a four-year block procurement. So does that actually – would your numbers, if we're looking out over four years instead of two, would they be $200 million? I don't know. Am I on the low side? Well, I think we're both on the I don't know side. Because I don't have the visibility into three and four yet. So I don't know how to answer the question is the honest answer. Okay. And then lastly, if it's, you know, obviously being public is a drawback for you. It's a drawback with regard in some ways to for those who you work for. So just to let you know that, you know, If being public is seriously a problem, we, you know, being your largest holder would be open to talking to people about rectifying that situation. Understood. It's exceptionally frustrating as a shareholder to not be able to get what I think is a really incredibly good story out into the public marketplace. And so the valuation of this company is I think going to be, my concern is it will be chronically undervalued because People simply aren't going to work hard enough to figure out what the underlying story here is. And I think we see that on a regular basis. I think we've seen it in the last few weeks in the stock price action. And I think that's about what I have right now. Thank you, Ross.

And our next question comes from Aaron Warwick with ES Capital. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thanks. I just want to follow up with one thing. I think especially it relates to what Ross said about people not understanding the company. And so one thing I want to do, I don't know if this could help provide some clarity, but just using as an example, they said, you know, that this Block 5 thing could close, you know, with the nine boats. by December 31st. So let's just say that it does close by December 31st. And I honestly don't know. I mean, I'm a novice in this industry myself. But how long does it take then for the majority of that work that you're confident in getting? How long does that take to show up in your backlog? When would people see that? That's an area I've been told to really be cautious. on revealing insider information from the Navy and the two prime shipyards. So I'm going to respectfully decline to answer the question because of the cautions that have been put on me by the prime shipyards. Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you.

And our next question comes from Richard with REG Capital Advisors. Please go ahead.

Alex, to date you've only mentioned backlog and orders at the end of quarters. If you were to receive a meaningfully large order in the middle of a quarter, would you feel that would be an event that should be announced to shareholders in the market?

I would need to get permission probably from clients. And I would also need to balance that against things of a competitive nature so that I don't diminish our ability to secure more orders.

Would you be able to make an announcement to the extent of what the numerical numbers are without directly tying that into a specific contract?

In other words, if your backlog were... I think these pauses that I have are both trying to think through the process as well as how to let you know once again that these pieces of information that are put out there need to be carefully managed so we don't lose anything, therefore damaging shareholder value versus the value of the information You know, it's a careful line that needs to be walked. Much of the time, the customers are pretty negative on us bragging about things because they tend to punish us with less. So that's the direct responses that I would end up getting from our clients. And they're very, very large clients, very powerful, and very capable of really squeezing down the number of orders and the value of the orders that we get. And then the competition, once, you know, they know that certain things are happening, well, then they're going to compete more fiercely against us. Okay. Thank you.

And our next question comes from Ross Taylor with ARS Investment Partners.

It's not a question. It's actually more a comment again. I think that the last point was a very valid one, and I would suggest that you listen to how some of your peers handle calls. We have investments in companies that work a lot with three-letter agencies in Washington, D.C., and they have figured out ways to let the market know when something material happens, you are public, and so you talk a lot about the duty you owe the Navy and the submarine corps, but at the same time, as well as electric boats. But you also have that same duty, you owe a fiduciary duty to your shareholders. And if it turns out that the best answer here is that the company should not be public, then that's the answer, but it needs to be explored in a way and enough information needs to be present so investors can make a rational choice. It's a difficult situation for you. I appreciate that. But it's also a difficult one for your investors who are trying to basically parse this through as though you were speaking, you know, Sanskrit backwards in an echo chamber. Understood, Ross. Thank you. Thank you, and good luck finding a solution. Good luck finding a solution to this, yes. I mean, I lived in the world where I knew things for a long time where things didn't happen until much later, but it's tough. When you're a diversified company, it's easier to hide. You're not. And I don't anticipate there will be any effort to become diversified so that you can hide these things. So therefore, I think that it's a puzzle and there's an answer to it. And I think we all need to figure out a way to answer that puzzle so that everyone, so the business doesn't suffer, but your shareholders don't live in the dark so that we can get a more fair valuation for this, for what this company is. I think this is a very unique situation, literally where you have, I've rarely seen such a long pathway that I can see as an investor and I find and my clients find it frustrating when the stock is battered by people who honestly just often haven't done the work and don't understand it and decide to get out by selling aggressively and that doesn't help any of us. I think we'd rather have this in strong hands that are comfortable and willing to sit with you for an extended time while you spin off free cash flow and return it to us whether it be by share buybacks or dividends over the next three, four, five, eight, ten years. And I'll get off my soapbox. Thanks. Yes, sir. Thank you.

And our next question comes from Madge Sowian with GEO Investing. Please go ahead.

Hello. I'm relatively new to the story, so I guess maybe you could help me out a little bit here, and maybe everybody who's new to the story. How does revenue become realized, maybe through this whole process, maybe through the these awards that we're talking about and the budgets being freed up, awards, contracts, what is the process where the orders finally flow to you and revenue has been generated? Can you kind of walk us through that process?

Tom, do you want to take this one? I don't understand the question completely, maybe because I'm too simple. Well, we have two revenue streams. One is items when they ship. So we fulfill an order and ship the product. And the other is on some projects, we are able to do percent complete revenue. So we recognize revenue as we build a unit.

Well, explain the process of how the order, the steps that occur for you to receive the orders.

for us to receive the orders, but not, so this is a different question. How do I get orders?

Well, the steps for receiving them, yes, I guess coming into your backlog, what is that process, all the steps that occur to get there?

I'm not going to be able to tell you all the steps that occur, because that would be really telling you some inside information that I need to keep inside, right?

Not necessarily, no. Okay. I mean, there's customers.

They give us orders. Our story is one that's defense-centric, U.S. Navy nuclear submarine-centric. So those are the customers. The two shipyards and the primes that work for them are our customers.

Right. In terms of You know, when a prime, you know, for example, gets an order, you know, wins maybe a contract. In terms of your experience, how long is that process in terms of when? It depends.

It really depends. Each item is certainly different, and sometimes the same part number is different. It's a very lumpy business.

Right, but you have expectations of what that range could be, right, from your experience running the company?

I have expectations what I want it to be, and then the company can do whatever they like.

Well, I understand that, but from your experience, what is that typical range? I don't know.

Whatever range I try to tie myself down to, I'm bound to be wrong. Okay.

Okay. For the record, I've been doing this for 30 years myself, and it's unusual for a company to come out and say, we can't announce contracts until we win them because we're not going to get contracts in the future. I mean, it doesn't make sense that you would not announce these type of things as they occur. I appreciate your attempt at it. you know, not share everything with us, but there are certain things you can share with your shareholders and winning major contracts and award and these kind of things is material information you probably should share with us.

I understand your comment. Okay. Okay.

And our next question comes from John Hardison, a private investor. Please go ahead.

Hey, Alex and Tom. How are you doing? I have a question that relates to the new orders that you have the one-time charges with. I assume that they're DOD orders. Is that correct?

Well, most of our orders are DOD, so that would be a great assumption.

Okay, and then the part two, are they new parts for Virginia, for Columbia, or for carriers, or all of the above?

Yes.

All of the above? Yes. Okay, that makes me excited because that confirms that you are doing a very good job and they're giving you additional parts that you've never done before. So congratulations on that. And then last, I completely agree with everything Ross said. And it'd be nice if we could get Ross to be your IR person. I'm writing that one down. Okay. All right. Thanks. I'm happy to see the backlog up and Virginia finally coming to fruition. John, thank you for your support. Okay. Thanks, Alex.

And that does conclude our Q&A session for today. I'll turn the call back over to management for any closing remarks.

Thank you very much, everyone. I appreciate your support. Have a good day.

And that does conclude today's teleconference. We appreciate your participation. You may disconnect your lines and have a great day.