Greetings. Welcome to the Aehr Test Systems Fiscal 2025 Third Quarter Financial Results Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. [Operator Instructions] Please note this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your host Jim Byers of PondelWilkinson Investor Relations. You may begin.

Thank you operator. Good afternoon and welcome to Aehr Test Systems third quarter fiscal 2025 financial results conference call. With me on today's call are Aehr Test Systems President and Chief Executive Officer, Gayn Erickson; and Chief Financial Officer, Chris Siu. Before I turn the call over to Gayn and Chris, I'd like to cover a few quick items. This afternoon, after market closed, Aehr Test issued a press release announcing its third quarter fiscal 2025 results. That release is available on the company's website at aehr.com. This call is being broadcast live over the Internet for all interested parties and the webcast will be archived on the Investor Relations page of the Aehr website. I'd like to remind everyone that on today's call, management will be making forward-looking statements today that are based on current information and estimates and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. These factors that may cause results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements are discussed in the company's most recent periodic and current reports filed with the SEC. These forward-looking statements, including guidance and other issues, are only valid as of this date and Aehr Test Systems undertakes no obligation to update the forward-looking statements. Now I'd like to turn the conference call over to Gayn Erickson, President and CEO.

Thanks Jim. Good afternoon everyone and welcome to our third quarter fiscal 2025 earnings conference call. Thanks for joining us today. I'll begin with a few opening comments, and then I'd like to spend some time discussing tariffs and Aehr perspective on the near and long-term implications, as this topic is obviously on everyone's mind. We received many inquiries seeking answers regarding this matter. I'll then provide a brief overview of the quarter’s key highlights and share updates on the primary markets that Aehr targets for semiconductor testing and burn-in, including the significant progress we've made so far this year in new markets. After that, Chris will deliver a detailed review of our financial performance and finally we'll open up the floor your questions. We're pleased to report third quarter revenue growth and solid bookings and backlog and that we exceeded The Street financial forecast consensus for both revenue and bottom-line for the quarter. We're particularly excited by the significant progress we've made expanding into additional key markets and unlocking new opportunities to attract customers and drive revenue growth. Recent wins have helped us meaningfully diversify beyond silicon carbide and into high growth markets like AI processors with our industry leading wafer level and package part test and burn-in solutions. Okay, so tariffs. Currently it appears that the actions and announcements from the U.S. Administration regarding tariffs are dominating the news cycle. At this time, we do not believe that the impact of the tariff announcements made by the U.S. Administration last week will significantly affect Aehr directly. However, we're looking at the near-term secondary effects on our current and potential new customers along with the uncertainty this quarter regarding possible pauses or delays in customer orders, shipments, or supply chain delivery delays or disruptions. Our immediate goal is to…

Thank you, Gayn. Before reviewing our financial results, I would like to provide an update on the integration of our InCal acquisition, which closed last July. Our plan to consolidate personnel and manufacturing into Aehr's Fremont facility is progressing well, and we remain on track to complete the integration by the end of this fiscal year on May 30. As part of this effort, we have upgraded [water and power] (ph) systems and added new clean rooms to our remodel Fremont headquarters to ensure the infrastructure supports the needs of both organizations. We'll be shutting down the InCal facility no later than the first quarter of fiscal 2026. Since the acquisition, Aehr has committed significant financial and human resources to successfully integrate InCal into our operations. We have completed the migration of InCal's financial, HR and manufacturing functions into Aehr Systems. In addition, we have finalized the transfer and documentation of all product designs, source code, and work instructions for assembly and test into Aehr release processes. I want to extend my sincere thanks to both teams for their dedication and outstanding execution throughout this integration. Turning to our Q3 performance, which included a full quarter on the financial results from the InCal acquisition. Our Q3 results exceeded the analyst consensus on both the top and bottom-lines. While we faced a challenging environment marked by continued softness in the silicon carbide power semiconductor market. We were encouraged by our success in penetrating the artificial intelligence market. With AI processors burn-in now representing over 35% of our business this year. During the third quarter, we had four customers representing over 10% of total revenue, and two of these customers are new customers that target AI market. Revenue for the third quarter totaled $18.3 million, a 142% increase compared to the $7.6…

Thank you. At this we will be conducting a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Christian Schwab with Craig-Hallum.

This is Tyler on behalf of Christian. Thanks for letting us ask a couple of questions here. So maybe first to start on the tariffs and the uncertainty here. I guess, any color on maybe which end markets you are seeing maybe the most potential impact or most potential uncertainty being caused on the near-term here.

I think we certainly prepared lots of different things. That's a good question. No, I don't -- it's not market. Sometimes it's more customers and geographies, right? So in this case, I will give you one example. Our hard disk drive customer, has systems that are going to be going to a location outside the U.S. It includes a prober, a heart -- we're basically worked with a supplier that developed a high-power prober specific for this requirement. Prober companies are out of Japan or Korea, basically, okay, without saying which one it was, okay? They both are currently subject to a tariff. If that prober landed in the port tomorrow, it's going to get hit by a tariff. If it gets -- if it lands Friday, it may not. And so I think people are like, well, let's wait and see what happens. I mean because I don't think anybody believes that if you write a check for the tariff, you get it back necessarily. Now having said that, we are also looking at tariff drawbacks, which is basically a process by which historically with duties, you can. If we import something do assembly and then export it out, you can actually recover that up to 99% of it or so, although there are some people saying that the people that help you with that get a cut. So we are working through that as well. Now in the meantime, I'm going to drop ship the probers directly to that customer past the first one. So the very first one is being impacted by , which is kind of the over under like with respect to the end of our fiscal year because we are going to do some integration of it here. We may have to relook at…

All right. I appreciate that. That's a bunch of really great color. So I guess following up on that, then giving those comments uncertainty around additional orders and timing of when customers might demand shipments, you had $18 million in backlog exiting the quarter, $22 million effective since then, would it be reasonable or erring on the conservative side, at least a reasonable to think that you probably won't even ship all of the backlog you currently have on hand in the quarter? Or is that not a great way to think about it.

One of the keys is if we're going to say we're not going to give guidance, we can't really give guidance. But nevertheless, let me still answer that directly. For sure, some of that backlog is not going to ship this quarter because it is multiple systems for the hard disk drive guy. And we're only planning to maybe ship one of those, we said that last quarter. So the over under right now is one, maybe a second one for this quarter but not all of them. So some of those are already planned for that. The interesting thing is we have multiple customer forecasts for things to ship this month or this quarter that they haven't ordered yet. You're like, okay, is that going to happen? Would that happen that I can still turn that? Some of it, we have material on hand and some of it is stuff that's inbound. So I'd love to tell you it's that simple. And if it was, I'd probably just give you a new guidance, but it's sort of there's kind of upside and downside to all of this. So I apologize for not being really clear. I think the important thing is we missed it. We missed it by a little whatever. It's going to be close. It might chip on the next week. That's the thing that's really can be very scary as a public company, right? If you are private, I wouldn't even worry about it. I'm only worried about the customers getting their shipments, getting to them on time. But plus or minus 1 day on May 30 is a big deal to us as a public company. So this is more -- the things I'm talking about here, this is just timing stuff, we think, okay? This is more timing things. I don't think the customers that are already buying, they've taken, in some cases, six months to a year to qualify. I mean if you look at the GaN customer, the hard disk drive customer, this AI customer, the package part burn-in AI customer, we've worked with them for over a year. They're fully qualified. They're committed. Now the question is how do we make sure that they can get the equipment on time with the least duties or tariffs at all possible?

All right, I appreciate that, that’s great color.

If you think of another one, Tyler, you can always come back to. Go ahead, what's the next question, sorry?

No, let's move on past the tariffs. So as we think about next year in growth, you've diversified your revenue nicely away from silicon carbide maybe at least rank order. It sounds like silicon carbide is expected to continue to recover, we would expect to see growth there. But maybe AI is going to be the primary growth driver, as we look out the next year or two? Just any color kind of rank ordering and where you expect to see the growth from your more diversified end markets going forward.

Yes. I mean we're really -- we're feeling really good about next year. I mean there definitely is evidence that silicon carbide will kind of get back to capital equipment growth and putting more capacity in place. We are also seeing a shift from low-voltage gate to high-voltage testing. Something we've done by working with several of the OEMs, the actual EV suppliers for quality that they're driving to their customers, which drives them towards us that even if they have equipment, they may need to upgrade it. That also turns into WaferPak revenues. So we think we can see revenue from our current installed base in both WaferPaks and system upgrades, but then also incremental capacity. And there's still a few customers that effectively selected us, if you will, or -- and haven't bought their first systems because they've delayed some of their fabs that Yole is saying they will start to turn on in '26 and '26 is when they say it's calendar, my fiscal '26 starts June some of that capacity may be second half, but we feel some of this already in our first half or so our second half of '25. Our fiscal year has kind of messed people up. Let's see here. GaN, we are pretty excited about that. There's some we have done a large number -- I mean, a good number of designs that have been qualified into automotive industrial applications. They're now just going into production. So we've kind of got our fingers crossed related to that around their capacity and their needs to grow. And we are talking with several other customers. We've actually heard our silicon photonics customer is talking now about ramping this year. And that's with the very high power. Remember, we upgraded their fleet to the…

That’s great. All right. That’s all for us, thanks Gayn.

The next question comes from Jed Dorsheimer with William Blair. Please proceed.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. So Gayn, I don't want to ask you a bunch of questions you don't want to answer. Just I guess, first one, just on the balance sheet. I'm curious, AR, your accounts receivable jumped up quite a bit. Is that just from InCal? Is there a change in terms? Could you just talk about what was going on there? Because I saw that positively, inventories actually came down while revenues grew. So I'm just wondering about the receivables seem to jump out. And then I got a follow-up.

Yes. So we also have an unbilled receivable in our receivable balance that we were able to recognize revenue that cannot be yet. But I think by now, we have sent out the invoice at this point.

AR, it's called shipments towards the last month of the quarter, not atypical of that, and yes, I think that was it. I think we may have had a special term with one of the customers with respect to billing at final shipment or something in the first tool, a couple of those things. I wouldn't read too much into it. Over time, and I want to be sensitive to this because we have customers listening as well. We do down payments under most circumstances, sometimes with short lead times and things like that. We will work with the customer, billing them 30% and then 2 weeks later, hitting them with the other one, sometimes isn't most optimum. We try and be balanced on it. But in general, we want to make sure that customers have skin in the game when they're placing the orders on these systems. And so there's a little of that. But yes, there's no flags, nothing -- there's nothing there.

Okay. And then just on the AI on the processing side of things in burn-in, I was wondering if you could go through the value proposition and a little bit more granularity. And what needs to be achieved for this, has this gone from R&D to commercial level? Or -- or do you feel like there's still -- even though the size and scale of the orders might be commercial size compared to that of silicon carbide for this for these customers, do you feel like it's progressed that that's it's gone beyond and your -- what are you looking at to get the determination that, okay, we are going to start ramping on this in a durable way.

So Jed, I think I understand it. Let me try and answer it while repeating the question a little bit along the way. So if the question is, is this sort of like an NPI prototype like a trial run and they haven't really worked that kind of thing, that's not the case. So this customer, and we've alluded to it before, and we have to be somewhat sensitive to what -- what's known publicly and what they've said. And yes, we have not identified who it is yet, okay? But they -- what we have said is that they were doing, which is very similar to a lot of other AI guys they were doing this burn-in at what's known as system level test, okay? So this is very late in the process, basically damn near at the product side of things, okay? And the problem with doing at a system level test is that it's very late in the process and any processing implications, et cetera, and you have to use a much more different and sophisticated piece of equipment or the equipment itself to burn-in itself in to actually find these failures. The other challenge is that in a system level test, you often have this memory or this processor is co-exist. And I'm going to be a little careful about too much detail on this because people are all trying to figure out is that what kind of AI processor is it? We hope to come much more public with it. The customers talked about doing that. But it exists with other things, memories, infrastructure, heat sinks, power supplies and all this. Burn-in I know a lot of people understand is what it sounds like. You basically are heating it up and you are actually adding…

It does. What's the stability of the power over that duration? Is it -- that seems like it would be a critical feature in terms of -- within a tight tolerance.

Yes, some of the mini tricks and the keys are being able to actually regulate and drive power to each device on the wafer individually. That doesn't seem intuitive, right? In traditional package part burn-in systems, like those from our competitors, they have bulk power supplies that supply to the devices, all with the same voltages, they achieve a parallelism by actually trying to share all that. That didn't work very well because each of the devices need a different voltage Sonoma, one of the greatest things about it as a package part burn-in system is we can individually program the power for every device that's being tested. We'll actually read an ID in the device, come back, adjust our power and tune it for that device for an optimum burn-in. That's an amazing thing that people don't have in packaged part burn-in we do in Sonoma. We're doing the same thing at wafer level. okay? So -- and there is more tricks and I'm just not going to do them publicly. There is other things that we've done. In fact, there are some patents you can go and find that we've done. We can implement in our wafer level burn-in system in our wafer pack that you just can't do in a normal wafer probing environment either. That allow us to be able to test these devices. But it is pretty fun talking with the customers because they kind of light up as you talk about what you can do and they're like, wait a minute, I never even thought of that before. I'll give you one other hint, okay? There's -- one of the reasons everyone says this will never work at wafer level burn-in it is because these devices might -- one core might take 100 amps,…

All right. Well, listen, that's it for me. I'll jump back in queue. Thanks, Gayn, for the additional color.

You’re welcome.

Okay. The next question comes from Larry Chlebina with Chlebina Capital. Please proceed.

Hi, Gayn. When was the first AI processor XP see -- was that with the auto aligner? When was that up and running at that OSAT?

That's a good question. We had it up and running here first. As you -- as those that have haven't visited us, they know we have these test cell labs, which we are upgrading. And we were actually shipping wafers out of our facility here. It is now up and running the first one, and we'll have the rest of them all completed this quarter, whatever, in the next few weeks here.

But it was running at the OSAT, when?

We haven't just always said it's up and running now.

All right. Chris, I got a quick question. What was the package part revenue in Q3?

Package part in Q3, well, in the past, we only disclosed it end of the year, but I would say let me say it this -- I would say more than 20%.

It's going to be in the Q but that all right. Gayn, is there any product launch on your flash customer that they're particularly wanting to use your systems on. I know this is an enterprise application. And I see these big SSDs coming up later this year that they have like [123] (ph) terabytes of data capacity on it, which if you do the math on it, they consume with a decent yield, each one consumes like a wafer and a half of NAND, just to stuff into that 2.5-inch form factor SSD. Is there a product like that, that's their interest in using your system to improve the yields because obviously, they are stacking a bunch of diodes, is that the motivation?

Okay. I would add -- [indiscernible] this is three in a row, we're answering a little bit indirectly. I just want to be a little careful of customers. But we talked to multiple. There's not that many NAND customers, and we have not talked to every single one of them, okay, for some geographical obvious reasons, okay? But we've talked to several of them. And there is a general theme going on with those customers and with the industry if you watch what's going on. And that theme is -- so a couple of things. In general, revenues are growing, Okay? They were down last year and the year before, and they're growing again. But wafer capacity is not, okay? So there is not a lot of NAND fabs that are being coming online, and the capacity may be going to higher utilization, but the [bibs] (ph) are exploding, right? So what that means is that there's more and more density per wafer, okay? As you do that, the test methodology is either going to increase in test time or you are going to need to increase in power to address it? The other thing that's going on is there is multiple kind of technologies out there that liked stacked or not stacked that's wrong one in, layers. So the NAND layers are going to hundreds of layers, which are just basically when I think of like a high-rise building, there is a lobby floor and then there's floors above. The lobby floor may have the logic on it for the interface and the floors above or what store all of the information, okay? Now some people might say the [isle] (ph) is on the top, but don't go into that. This is on one device. Then they take those…

For the flash -- for the NAND component of that, right?

And/or the combined combination of it, et cetera. So there's some -- I don't want to get into too much of it, but there is technological things that are breaking the infrastructure. And those are the opportunities to get in because it is not that someone is throwing in the new fab, make sense. And why would you want to go build a bunch of new equipment for that. So that's just -- that's the message I want to get across. And that's provides an opportunity for things to be disruptive enough to actually change the way your process is doing. And it's not just one company. Ultimately, it would be all of them.

I was just looking at the -- one of those SSD drives and the amount of NAND that they consume for a reasonable expectation on sales of those drives, you worked that number backwards and it seems like they would need something like $70 million worth of your equipment, just process those wafers in order to improve the yield that they get as they stack all those dies on top of each other into that small package.

Yes, that was where I was going with in the prepared remarks that -- and I'm not trying to get -- there's a couple of different ways of cutting this thing. But if you're spending $80 billion -- if you're incrementally selling $80 billion a year of NAND and the process is technology is changing to allow you to be competitive to get more [BIBs] (ph) to do whatever, what kind of spend would you be doing? It's interesting if you're seeing that you're not necessarily spending it all on new capital equipment, your test budget might be bigger. So being able to spend $80 million, as you said that's not at all out of reasons.

It was pretty astounding that one customer, one flash memory customer on one product could require that kind of spend in order to get the yields where they have to get them. Anyway, I want to switch your fine pitch WaferPak that I guess you're developing for that application. Does that open up the DRAM high-bandwidth market for you guys?

It opens it, yes, in terms of being able to test the DRAM. There is other things that would need to be done in order to do that, particularly around the DFT and low pin count test mode. But the interesting thing, and I've shared this, you've all people kind of track it over what the last -- how many quarters. If you go back and look at what I said 2 years ago, I don't know whatever it was, just any quarter prior to AI, chatGPT, I kept saying that wafer level brand will first go to NAND. And then ultimately, it will go to DRAM. But in order for it to go to DRAM, the DRAM guys need to have the critical -- there needs to be more pain and the pain needs to be when they start stacking DRAM. And then when they do that, they'll have to figure out a low pin count mode and testability or us, they're going to get eaten up in yield. So now what you see is with HBM, which is still not the biggest part, but it's certainly the fastest-growing part of DRAM. HBM requires this advanced packaging and stacking. And guess what, yields a big problem for them. And now you saw was it just last month, NVIDIA came out and told and said publicly, I'm now asking that all DRAM suppliers start supplying me with known good stacks of DRAM. What does that mean? Well, obviously, it means they're not good. And I already told you 10 minutes ago that on my package part burn-in systems, when we burn in those devices, we're burning in the memories, too. Why are we burn-in -- in the memories there what a horrible place to do it. Anyhow kind of interesting.

But I thought the fine pitch WaferPak though, gets to the point where it can touch down on all those contact points on the DRAM. So opens that up. Is -- am I missing something there?

No, no, no, not really. Okay. So on the HBM memories, they may have 1,000 pins on them. They're all TSVs. They're at like 10 microns, no 1 can touch those TSV pads, not form factor, not anything. There are still testability pads. But on a DRAM like that, maybe used to have 50 pins or 60 pins or something times 3,000 die. You go through that math, that's a big probe card. . And so a full wafer probe card is quite expensive and cost effectiveness is it really there. If you implement a DFT mode, Interestingly, like is done in the package, but anyhow, you can drop down to a JTAG I/O port or an MBIS I/O port, which is a single I/O pin. So why not do that that NAND guys did. So as that is implemented, you could see that people might drive towards the DRAM. And if any of the DRAM guys are listening, I'd love to talk to you again if I'm not already talking to you about this because I think we can help.

They definitely have a yield issue. Last question real quick. There's a long-term customer of yours that's ramping up on a 3D packaging facility in New Mexico. And they're assembling 3 to 5 chiplets onto a sub chip. And I don't know, I think the throughput of that facility eventually will be at least $25 billion worth of product. At what point do you go to that your customer and say you're already in that fab on the optical side. At what point do you say, hey, what would you spend if I could improve your yields, some of the things you said earlier, if I could improve your overall yield 3% on those heterogeneous chips. What would they spend to achieve that going forward? I mean, every year, spend at once. Won't they spend like $300 million to get that capability. I know you'd be testing all the incoming component wafers before they get singulated and put it in the chiplets, but is that a hell of an opportunity for you guys?

Okay. Well, I've never mentioned we have systems installed in New Mexico or all those things that you've said, and I won't confirm or deny anything here. I don't want to get myself in trouble with any potential customers. But someone who's doing that would certainly be attractive to us. What we've definitely said and what you were implying there is that we have, what, six, seven optical customers related to silicon photonics, one in particular that has been our lead customer in a 10% of several years. And they within that -- those customers, we have worked with the largest to build this very high-power silicon photonics-based system that is amazing. And we've qualified that. We shipped it for the first time last year. They spent the last year qualifying. We've been doing all kinds of engineering runs and things with different types of wafer packs. And we've heard that they are talking about ramping this year. With these new optical devices, which the target for those are chip-to-chip or chiplet type things when we say that out loud. So I'm excited about that. I think as you said well, why not use it in every other chip along the way. I think that's a good point. And if we can do very well with what we are planning right now, maybe that opens up an opportunity with our customer, if not others. I would just as a reminder for everybody listening on the call, our tools set primarily around the wafer level until the InCal acquisition of package part, was a system that was designed around these megatrends with semiconductors that are growing to $1 trillion, where semiconductors are not more reliable year-to-year, they're less reliable due to line widths, the compound semiconductors like optical and silicon carbide stacking them all together in multi-chip modules or in modules like memories that are put together for SSDs or modules that are powered going to electric vehicles. And then unfortunately, they're putting them in things that matter to the reliability like automotive devices or data centers or these very expensive AI processors. So that opens up an opportunity to do this burn-in stress conditions on those devices before they're put into the packages. And that's why the burn-in market now is so much bigger and more interesting than it has ever been in its history, at least going back to the early '80s because of it's enabling capabilities, technology otherwise you wouldn't have been able to. We are picking up customers and markets along the way. And I always say, give it a year, and we'll have another one. And Larry, if you have a specific contact on someone along those lines, it would not be the first time one of my shareholders has introduced me to a customer and I got an order out of it. So thank you.

That would be a big one. All right, thanks for the time.

Okay. Your last person in queue is Charles Tow, Private Investor. Please proceed.

Hi, good morning. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. I think my first question has been asked by Larry. So my second question is, again, if everything is on track, when do you expect to receive mass production orders from the flash memory company, you are currently working with?

Yes, it is a good question. What we've said right or wrong, so that we are trying to be relatively visible. It's always a little dangerous for all your potential competitors listening in is that this year, we spent the year working on some technological steps to prove the proof-of-concept of our low-cost test cell that is really around this WaferPak carrier that allows everything else to be lower cost and allows higher power, higher density. If with that, our hope is upon successful completion of that, which we were targeting and trying to be around this next quarter or so, we then want to work with the customer around the next step, which would be in co-development of a test system that would go into that machine. We think that's going to take about a year or so. Maybe it could take longer, but there's reasonably maybe a year. And so I wouldn't expect volume orders for that until the following year. So we're a year out or so, but you know what, if we -- if you told me I was taking volume orders and shipping for revenue in our fiscal 2027, which begins in June '26, I would tell you that's awesome.

Yes, what size -- how big the size you can imagine?

How big is the site --. The size of the market. Yes. I mean this is where -- what we think is if you were to look at -- and I don't want to pick on any customer okay? But the market just this year is $80 billion. I think it's growing at maybe 10%, 20% revenue. BIBs are growing 40%, something like that. So 2 years out from now, I mean, okay, maybe it is $100 billion, something like that. There, how much that is? You divide it by what there's 6 customers, 5 customers that matter. They are not all even, but H1 is 20%, maybe a little less okay, then that spend by them is substantial and the cost savings advantage to be able to do that would be substantial. So in order for us to actually help them with yield, there's a considerable market. I -- this is embedded in the number that I said during my prepared remarks that the total available market is a combination of $500 million in test and $500 million in consumables. And the flash memory could be certainly 10%, if not more, of that overall market. So $100 million, $150 million, just wafer level burn-in for flash memory in that time frame minimum.

Okay, thank you.

You’re welcome.

Okay. I show no further questions in the queue. I'd like to turn the floor back to management for any closing remarks.

All right. Well, I appreciate everybody, as always, for jumping on here. I just want to -- before closing the call, just 1 personnel-related thing I hadn't gotten to. I'm just happy to announce the addition of a new member to the team, [Didier Wimmers] (ph) to our organization as our EVP of Engineering. He's replacing Avi who as we previously announced, passed away unexpectedly last year. Didier is an incredible addition to Aehr. He brings decades of direct experiences leading engineering teams in semi test. He's pretty well known. I joked around and said he's famous in the ATE space. He headed up all of Schlumberger ATE for many years, also managed the engineering team at FormFactor, who's basically one of the largest semiconductor test probe card companies in the world. I work with FormFactor for many years in my memory experience before, and that's where I had met [Didier] (ph) in the past. So I've known him for a long time, maybe 20 years myself. He's a great leader, sense of knowledge in ATE, wafer probing, great experience. He's a great manager and also a nerdy guy, which I say very in a warm way. He's a great member -- team member, I'm excited to have him on because of his experience in ATE system-level testing and even burn-in systems before joining Aehr. So we welcome him on board and excited to have him. As always, we appreciate everybody joining in. If you happen to be anywhere near the Bay Area, and are interested, we can try and set up something. Our facility here, we're getting right down to the final -- we're about a month away from it being pretty well completed. And we've done a little bit of just a remodel in general for cubes and facility areas for the employees, which they really love. But we did a major remodel in the manufacturing and the clean room labs which allow us to increase both manufacturing prototype engineering capacity, but particularly manufacturing capacity of our systems, our new packaged part systems from Sonoma that those systems will be coming over here over the next couple of months and also our WaferPaks and our BIM consumables from the package part side. So all that will be consolidated here Q1-ish, I don’t know, this summer, okay? But if you come by then, it will probably be finally happy with everything kind of put together and all the lights are up and everything, too. So I thank you, everyone, for your encouragement. I’ve gotten a lot of calls of hanging in there. A lot of people very excited about the stuff that we’re working on and kind of enduring through all these tariff things, but this too – my favorite saying this too shall pass. So thank you all, and we’ll talk to you next quarter.

This concludes today's conference, and you may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.