Good afternoon, and thank you for attending today's Rocket Lab Fourth Quarter 2022 Financial Results Update and Conference Call. My name is Daniel, and I will be the moderator for today's call. All lines will be muted during the presentation portion of the call, with an opportunity for questions and answers at the end. [Operator Instructions] It is now my pleasure to hand the conference over to our host, Colin Canfield and Head of Investor Relations. Colin, please proceed.

Hello, everyone. We're glad to have you join us for today's conference call to discuss Rocket Labs Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2022 Financial Results. Before we begin the call, I'd like to remind you that our remarks may contain forward-looking statements that relate to the future performance of the company, and these statements are intended to qualify for the Safe Harbor protection from liability established by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Any such statements are not guarantees of future performance and factors that could influence our results are highlighted in today's press release and others are contained in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Such statements are based upon information available to the company, as of the date hereof and are subject to change for future developments. Except as required by law, the company does not undertake any obligation to update these statements. Our remarks and press release today may also contain non-GAAP financial measures within the meaning of Regulation G enacted by the SEC. Included in such release is a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to the comparable financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP. This call is also being webcast with a supported presentation. A replay and copy of the presentation will be available on our website. Our presenters today are Rocket Lab's Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Peter Beck, and Chief Financial Officer, Adam Spice. After our prepared comments, we will take questions. And now, let me turn the call over to Mr. Beck.

Thanks very much, Colin. So welcome everybody and thank you for joining us today. Today's presentation will go over our key business accomplishments for the year of 2022, as well as specific highlights from the fourth quarter. We'll also discuss further achievements we've made since the end of the quarter. Adam will then talk you through our financial results for the fourth quarter and full year and also cover the financial outlook for 2023. After that we'll take questions and finish today's call with the upcoming conference we’ll be in attending. All right. On to what the company achieved in 2022. Starting with a quick recap of our launch activity for 2022. It was our busiest year of launches yet. We retained our position as the leading small launch vehicle globally. And once again Electron held the title of second most frequently launched US Rocket annually. Across nine electron launches, we deployed more than 40 satellites to precise orbits for our customers, including commercial constellation, operators NASA and the Electron [ph]. Across these launches, we had 100% mission success rate for the year, providing our customers with a reliable path to orbit. 2022 was also the year we successfully delivered the CAPSTONE mission to the moon for NASA with a launch plus spacecraft solution using Electron and Photon. We completed two successful ocean recoveries of Electron's first stage as part of our rocket reusability program. We conducted five successful missions for constellation operators. We put all three Electron pads to use including our first launch out of LC-2 in Virginia in Q4 which was statistically launched in Q1 2021. And we also caught Electron with a helicopter for the first time. More on each of these achievements later in the presentation. As mentioned in 2022, we reached our highest annual…

Great. Thanks Pete. I will first review our fourth quarter 2022 results and then discuss our outlook for the first quarter of 2023. Fourth quarter 2022 revenue was $51.8 million, which was within our initial guidance range of $51 million to $54 million and well above our revised guidance range of $46 million to $47 million provided in December. Fourth quarter 2022 revenue reflects growth of 88% over the year ago fourth quarter of 2021 and the result to successful launches and continued strong contribution for our Space Systems business. The overage to our revised guidance range was a result of higher than anticipated revenue recognition from a SolAero contract to a major prime contractor program. This closes out a very successful year with full year 2022 revenue of $211 million, up 239% from 2021 with launch in Space Systems finishing the year with revenue growth of 56 and 546% respectively. Now turning to gross margins. GAAP gross margin for the fourth quarter was 3.5% below the low end of our original guidance range of 5% to 7%. Non-GAAP gross margin for the fourth quarter was 15%, which was also below our original guidance range of 16% to 18%. GAAP and non-GAAP gross margin results relative to both our revised guidance and to our Q3 2022 results reflects a combination of reduced launch cadence and related lack of fixed cost absorption below average revenue contribution from the Catch Me If You Can R&D recovery mission and unfavorable mix within our Space Systems components revenue. More specifically launch cadence was impacted by the pushout of the HawkEye 360 launch from the December quarter due to weather and other factors. The below average revenue contribution from the successful Q4 2022 Catch Me If You Can recovery mission was a conscious decision to…

Certainly. [Operator Instructions] Also, on behalf of the management team, we would ask that you limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. The first question comes from the line of Kristy Liwag of Morgan Stanley. Please proceed.

Yes. First question for me, on Globalstar, we've seen the difficulty in raising financing. It's great to see that they finally have a resolution with Apple now prepaying to help fund the satellite build. So in this environment where capital is more expensive, how prevalent are financing challenges amongst your commercial customers? Is this a one-time thing or are you seeing this continue into the supply chain?

Yes, I can take a pass at that and Pete you can also provide your thoughts to Kristine. So, I would say that, certainly, with the capital market's conditions, the way they are, it's difficult for a lot of people to continue to finance their businesses. We've been relatively immune from that, largely given the mix that we have of either direct government contracts, or also with customers who have deep ties and rely on a great amount of their revenue to come from government program. So, I think, we've probably been impacted a lot less than maybe some other folks you come across. But we're not completely immune to it. We've certainly seen some of our smaller customers struggle from time to time and required a little bit longer to pay, or in some cases, having to take small -- relatively small amounts of bad debt reserves for amounts owed us but for the most part, it really hasn't been a tremendous factor on us. Today, hopefully, it continues to be that way, but there's how to determine how this is going to roll out going forward given the environment that we're in. Peter, I don't know if you have any different thoughts on that? A – Peter Beck: -- : A – Adam Spice: And Kristine, I think….

Great. Thanks -- Go ahead, Adam. A – Adam Spice: Yes. Sorry, Kris, I was going to say, I think one of the advantages that we have relative to some of our other new space peers that we obviously have a very healthy balance sheet. And we're also really particular about who we take on as customers. So when we look into our backlog, we don't see a lot of kind of financing risk in there, again, because the mix of customers that we have -- and again, I think that we've been able to be a little bit more creative and flexible in some cases, working with customers to kind of help support their business and also going to make sure that we're in a good position from maintaining and growing market share in many cases.

Thanks for the addition on, Adam. So maybe, Peter, as a follow-up on government contracts. You touched on the Space Force RFP for the national security space launch Phase 3. And right, it looks like Lane 1 is geared more towards medium-sized launch vehicles where Neutron would play in. So can you talk about the timing, milestones to watch and size the opportunity for Neutron A – Peter Beck: -- :

Great. Thanks, guys.

Thank you. The next question comes from Erik Rasmussen of Stifel. Please proceed.

Yes. Thank you for taking the questions. So first, maybe just on launch. -- you sled – slaughtered the three in Q1, two additional coming up and looks like your timing is sometime in March. But Adam, you had previously talked about maybe 14 for the year. We had one slip from Q3 to Q4. So I'm assuming maybe that makes the number 15. Is that still a good number for us to be modeling and thinking about as we look at launch. A – Adam Spice: Yes. Erik, I think so. I mean we typically have seen, I mean, it's a relatively young business, so we don't have a great amount of track record as far as seasonality is concerned but it does seem like Q1 gets off to a slower start, probably a function of a little bit of a hangover from indications launch ranges being kind of closed at the end of the year. So it takes a while for programs to get respun up. But with the targeted three launches in the first quarter, I think we're in great shape to get to that 15 number of launch of the year. Demand actually is higher than -- would indicate a higher number of launches than 15 this year, but we've also learned through the school of hard knocks that we can get burned when we rely really upon what just our customers are telling us what their demands are because customer spacecraft oftentimes seem to slip and push out to the right at the last moment just because of the nature of how these programs develop and when things come through their final qualification and testing. So we think that we've got -- we've risk adjusted the numbers, so we think 15 is the right number for the year given where we're at and given the likelihood that some programs could push to the right. But, yeah, time will tell. But right now it feels like the right number.

Okay. And maybe just adding to that, you've mentioned we're seeing it with the Q1 outlook for launch at $19 million for three launches, but you mentioned that you probably would get back to more of a normalized ASP throughout the year. That's fair to say, right?

Absolutely. Yeah. Again we made conscious choice to get that launch off earlier in the year versus just, kind of, take more time to backfill all the volume capacity on the vehicle. So -- and right now I mean we have very, very strong visibility and conviction in where the manifest is and we know what the launch prices are for those. So yeah we're confident where the ASP is migrating back to where it has been and more towards our advertised sticker price.

Okay. And maybe just my follow-up. On the MBA contract, any milestones that maybe you can call out where are you in terms of building out the manufacturing line and what volumes can you achieve? And then maybe just on the opportunity for launch any updates there? Thank you.

Yeah. I'll let Pete -- do you want to take a first pass on that?

Yeah, sure. Yeah, absolutely. Hi, Erik. Things are looking good, so you can see a fully stacked integration facility at the headquarters. So that was completed last year. And that facility is more than capable of processing the 17 million that are on contract and any further that may be options. So no I think we're in good shape there and we continue discussions for the launch of those particular spacecraft.

And Erik I think I'd just add on a little bit there. The -- we continue to knockdown the gates towards these milestones in the program, so we've cleared quite a few of the scheduled milestones. We're on schedule. Everything looks to be in good shape. So we will go into all the details of all the milestones and sub-milestones. But we've -- so far we've been very fortunate to be hitting all of our milestone dates getting through successful reviews. So yeah all that looks very, very good. So far we've also been pretty fortunate that we haven't been burned by any supply chain issues at this point. So the quarter is still relatively early, but given everything that we're seeing right now, everything looks to be on track. And so far we've got happy customers.

Sounds good. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question comes from Scott Deuschle of Credit Suisse. Please proceed.

Hey, good afternoon. Adam, it looks like the Q1 EBITDA loss you're guiding to is about double the loss in Q4 and pretty close to what the Street was expecting for the full year in 2023. So just given the market's focus on profitability, I was wondering if you could give some further context on what's driving that increase and then how we should think about the trend from Q1?

Sure. Yeah, I think that there -- I don't think there's been a tremendous amount of resolution in some of the models that are out there. I think that when we've communicated to investors kind of the level of investment required for the -- sorry for the Neutron program when we came out we said, it was going to be roughly a $250 million program to get the first Neutron to the pad at the end of 2024. And we believe we're still on schedule of that. So if you kind of just look at kind of what that -- and we got -- we provided a breakdown of how much of that was going to be in CapEx versus prototyping and then OpEx through headcount and so forth. I think the ability there is to model out what that should be, especially given where we are now as we are in Q1 of 2023 and then anticipated launch date in Q4 of next year. So I guess it shouldn't be too much of a surprise kind of where we are kind of on that on adjusted EBITDA basis. And I think that at least for internal purposes, it feels like it's pretty consistent with where we thought we'd be given kind of the -- where we are in the life cycle of the program. From a modeling and trending going forward, we're going to see continued uptick in spending related to Neutron. We've -- I think we've crossed the hump or gotten over the hump for a lot of our Photon Space Systems related pure R&D work. There's still more to come, but a lot of it is kind of behind us. But I think that the -- we'll crest the Neutron spending hump probably sometime in the middle of next year again as we get closer and closer to the launch date in Q4. So again, I think the uptick in spending the current -- or the forecasted Q1 adjusted EBITDA, while we don't give guidance beyond kind of the next quarter, I think that's a number that's going to be -- I don't think we're looking at the low watermark as far as adjusted EBITDA loss in the quarter because again spending has continued to ramp up. But I also don't think that we're looking at it -- that it's going to get dramatically higher than where it is. But we feel like we're kind of in a new range of kind of spending on the program. But we also see revenue increasing over the same time period. So hopefully, a lot of that is because of offsetting. So yes, spending will increase fairly significantly, but we believe that revenue is going to be helpful in growing along with that growth in R&D spend so that we don't kind of balloon that adjusted EBITDA loss on any quarterly basis.

Okay. So I mean, if Q1 is not the low watermark I mean, could full year EBITDA losses be $120 million or more? I'm just trying to put some sort of finer point on it, because to your point there's not a lot of resolution to Street models?

Yeah. Again, a lot of it depends on -- a lot of things are still in flux as far as the major prototyping items when we're going to get invoiced for those types of things. So it's really hard to predict right now like exactly what that -- what the curve is going to look like, what the slope of the line on R&D spending increase related to Neutron. We also have some pretty significant revenue growth coming in the second half of the year related to some of our space systems programs again, which depending on how hard they hit up and the related margins that accompany those hopefully moderates quite a bit of that spending increase. So yeah at this point, I'm not able or kind of willing to go really beyond what the next quarter looks like. But as we spend more time together and we get a little more color and visibility we'll certainly share that with you and others.

Okay. I mean that's super helpful. And then just as a follow-up does the $143 million contract with the MDA, does that include any inflation protection mechanisms on it just given that it's kind of a multiyear contract in you're in an inflationary environment? Just curious on inflation protection on that contract specifically. Thank you.

Yes Scott. No, it's a good question. No, that's a firm fixed price contract. So, we were able to secure some incremental scope under that agreement with the SOCC to operate the satellites on orbit for the customer. So, we got some uplift to total revenue from that. We didn't disclose the exact amount. But I think we feel pretty good because when we were modeling out the BOM and other factors building satellites, we took into consideration a certain amount of inflation. Now, is inflation running hotter than we thought it was going to be a year and a half ago when we were doing that modeling? Certainly, but we also put in some cushioning factors to make sure that we come out on the right side of that. So, we feel very good and we don't see anything right now that would kind of impact the margin expectations for that program versus where we originally modeled it.

Thank you, Adam. Really appreciate it.

Thank you. The next question comes from Suji Desilva of ROTH MKM. Please proceed.

Hi, Peter, hi Adam. So, first question on the launches the $14 million to $15 million -- the 14, 15 for the year, sorry. What number are you roughly expecting from Virginia? And what's the incremental launch opportunities that are available from the US soil that maybe weren't unavailable to New Zealand? If you could talk about that that would be helpful?

Yes, hi Suji. Yes, so of the 14, 15, it kind of depends a little bit on readiness with customers, but -- and it could be ending up to sort of six launches out of that site this year like I said depending on readiness of customers. Yes.

Okay. And the incremental opportunity Peter? US government or other specific division?

Yes, yes, yes sorry. Yes, an incremental opportunity the one thing that we built that pad for was kind of a rapid response for our US government customers. And we are seeing that capability really being valued. And more on that shortly I would say. But it certainly will be -- it certainly opens up I would say much greater access to doing defense or national security, which is frankly why we intended to build that pad.

Yes Suji. Real quick on the impact of having the Virginia launch site now operational, there's some variable incremental costs that come along with launching from that range because we don't own the range like we do in New Zealand. But at the same time, we are seeing a strong degree of acceptance or willingness for customers to pay a premium to launch out of that range for obvious reasons, right? We're -- it's three, three and a half hours outside of D.C. and there's a lot of benefits that come from a logistics perspective of having that in the backyard of some of our largest customers. So, I think it's -- for us it's hugely enabling and it's something that our customers are -- seem to be very, very grateful that it's come online now. So, I think it's going to be long-term to be a very busy range for us. And I think we're well set up to kind of leverage that into more and more US government business.

Okay, great. Thanks for that Adam. And then as my follow-up with the backlog growing here to $500 million should we expect additional direct sell related opportunities like GlobalSat MDA or maybe was that a one-off just to kind of set the expectations for what could be coming now that you successfully won that?

Yes, I mean -- and this kind of goes to the pace at which the backlog grows is we tend to be working on fewer larger deals now than perhaps -- as Adam mentioned before the quality of our backlog is super important to us. So, we're always working on some pretty significant deals. So, I would hope that we would continue to see those kind of larger lumps dropping as we close those out.

Yes, I think Suji I mean maybe a little bit more on that as well. Like -- so, obviously, we're very happy with what we've been able to secure for this type of application and certainly we think that we're at the earlier stages of what this ultimate application could look like for us. But we're also very selective in who we work with and we're not looking to basically go work with every kind of random opportunity out there looking to take advantage of this direct-to-mobile type of opportunity. So, we're pretty focused on staying engaged with the absolute Tier 1 of customers on this type of opportunity. So, yes, we see more opportunities, but it's probably going to be a very concentrated customer area if you will.

Okay, that’s helpful. Thanks guys.

The next question comes from Matt Akers with Wells Fargo. Please proceed.

Hi, this is Eric Yan on for Matt. Just quickly wanted to ask about the margins at SolAero, if there's any progress being made so far for getting to 30% by early 2024?

Yes, I'll take first half of this because there's a bunch of different initiatives ongoing. Certainly, we believe that that 30% gross margin is the right target for that business. I will say that we're still going through the process of burning through the legacy backlog that was there that came at pretty compromised gross margins. But if you look at the new business that we're booking and we've been booking quite a bit of new business, all of that is at or above our target margin. So, we feel very good about how kind of we're replenishing the backlog with new business as we burn off the old business. But there are also some longer term opportunities for that legacy backlog for that to become better gross margin over time, but that's kind of just the traditional blocking and tackling, getting the efficiencies out of the operation, investing more in systems and processes and people and equipment. So, I think that we've got the right things kind of in focus and we're actually in the right things to get the margin up. But I would say that it's definitely -- it's a longer initiative to get the margins to where we thought we would. I think it's aggressive at this point to think that we are going to be at that 30-point target in the early part of 2024. I think it's going to take us a little bit longer. And again, that's just a function of how quickly we kind of burn through that backlog and get some other efficiencies in the business. But longer term, we absolutely feel like that's the right number to be had. And we say longer term we're not talking like three, four, five years. It's a shorter time horizon than that, but it's probably not the next 12 months. Pete do you have any further color on other margin enhancement opportunities for the SolAero business?

Yes. So, I think it's a good point. I mean one of -- good set of points. One of the reasons why we're attracted to that acquisition was the new IMM beta cell technology, which is the highest performing cell technology in the world. So, as we kind of take that from relatively small production volumes and almost R&D into volume production that really changed some of those margin opportunities as well. And as Adam pointed out I mean we're just going to burn off some of those long legacy stuff, but even the team has been booking and is looking exactly where we need it to be. It's just we're going to have this drive a little bit.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Andre Madrid of Bank of America. Please proceed.

Hi, guys. How are you? Kind of wanted to touch base on the comment you made regarding ocean recovery versus mid-air recovery. I mean is there a big difference in between how much you might be able to recover for it to be received in mid-air versus ocean? Is there like an amount of the Electron that you might not be able to recover in the event that it splashes down?

Yes. Hi, Andre. No, not really at all. The reason why we didn't want to get it wet is there is some remedial work that's required when you get it wet, purging and slightly more intense, kind of, recertification activities rather than have been dry. But as kind of with placed whole bunch down now and retrieve them back that's become really well understood for us. So when you trade the extra kind of work that you need to do to, kind of, replenish them and recertify vehicle for launch against the cost of operating the helicopter it's pretty much neutral. So at that point what the water landing does enable us to do is recover more vehicles because we don't have the constraints of the operations of the helicopter. So it's, kind of, financially it's kind of the same, but we get to actually use more vehicles. So -- and as we refresh more and more down we kind of learn more and more. And as I mentioned in the deck, we're making modifications to the vehicle that make it far more kind of seaworthy if you will. So it's going to get better.

All right. Understood. Is there any read-through to Neutron development then? I mean it seems like it's not how much of an issue if it splashes down. Is it worth the incremental development cost to develop the landing system if you could also do recovery from the ocean for Neutron platform? I mean is that something you guys are considering as well?

Yes. So I mean they're just such a different vehicles to scale. One of the advantages of Electron being so small is that these, kind of, sea recoveries and things make it simple and viable. A vehicle that scale an ocean based down is not something we want to do is a very, very large and floating motion. So the big difference between Electron and Neutron is that Neutron is designed from day one to be leaning reusable whereas Electron, I thought it wasn't possible for the longest period. So it was never conceived. And the mass margins you have on a small launch vehicle versus a larger launch vehicle just make small launch vehicle recovery infinitely more difficult. So when you've got a fresh piece of paper and you can design it from scratch then landing a Neutron dry is by far the most sensible thing.

Understood. Thanks.

Thank you. The next question comes from Edison Yu of Deutsche Bank. Please proceed.

Hey guys, thanks for taking the question. First one, I'm sure you've seen there's been quite a few high profile failures since the last earnings call by some of your peers. Have you seen any increased activity from maybe customers that were considering before that are coming to you now because of this?

Yeah. I mean, I'm not aware of one particular customer that's offloaded. But I would say it's a general sentiment that as more of these emerging providers and others have the stated it's a reminder that this is way more difficult than people sometimes give it credit for. So I think as that -- as you get more data points of how difficult it is and more data points of people failing to execute against it, it certainly changes the sentiment. And I would say that customers that we've been in discussions with for longer periods of time those values solidified their decision to come with us pretty quickly.

Understood. As you ramp up the spend on Neutron, how should we think about the next couple of big milestones. And I asked that in the context of maybe a couple in the second half. And also when would you consider announcing when exactly that first launch is for Neutron? Is that like a 4Q 2023 thing? Is that a 1Q 2024? Just how to think about the sequencing of leading up to the first launch?

I'll deal with the announcement and I'll hand it over to Adam to talk about the spin profile. But a launch vehicle, you think you're golden until you do a particular test. And in fact it's across the whole space industry. This is why there are so many satellite delays. You do like a final tee up just to confirm that you've got thermal issue in the containment launch vehicle development. You think you're golden until you go and do a test and realize that something's not right. So you have to operate in the mindset of kind of like a green light schedule until something proves otherwise. So, I wouldn't expect us to make any formal announcements of a launch date until it's pretty obvious that we're ready to launch this. And we've got stuff on the pad and things are moving along because as you've seen from some of the other emerging players some of them have had a rocket on the pad for a year, working through previously the launch vehicle issues. So it's pretty hard to just put a stake in sand, but we'll keep it really updated on their progress. And if there's anything that crops up that we think is going to have an impact to timing we'll see. Adam?

Yeah. I would say that, our baseline plan of record that's built into our financial plan assumes a launch in Q4 of 2024.

All right. Appreciate the color. Thanks.

And the next question comes from the line of Austin Moeller of Canaccord. Please proceed.

Hi. Good afternoon. So just my question about Peter's comment around the ocean recovery of the Electron, if we go from recovering 50% of the Electrons to potentially recovering 60% to 70% of Electrons by doing water recovery what does that do to your projections for gross margins for the launch business relative to your prior expectations?

Yeah, Austin. It's a good question. I mean I think it really doesn't change it, because we – this basically just buys down the risk of getting to that margin target, right? So I would say, the margin targets in a business like this are never slam dunks. There's a lot of hard work that goes into it. Recovery is part of it. There are other elements that we're driving getting to our target margins, including a launch cadence of launching twice monthly also some kind of, I would say, more traditional savings from BOM elements and labor efficiencies and so forth. So all the kind of factors into our longer-term target of getting into the low 50% gross margin range on a non-GAAP basis. So again, I wouldn't build in any increase to that based on this. I think it just maybe it de-risks our ability to get there or what time frame we get there.

Yeah, I'd agree 100% to that. The recovery is one element of the program here.

Okay. And then also just considering your capered [ph] C position within the launch market right now just given the shortage of available launch vehicles, you see Amazon and a Moon Lander company all scrambling to get onto a ULA launch, even though it's a first launch for that vehicle. And do you expect to increase pricing at all for the Electron just given the launch shortage and inflation pressures, or do you plan to keep prices where they're at?

I mean, Electron pricing has never gone down. It's only ever gone up. Yes. Maybe you want to take that Adam.

Yes. I think the -- over time, we -- again we see prices increasing. I think the greatest factor overall that leads to increased pricing is that, as we see more failures from aspirational launch companies and a lot of these folks just won't have the capital in my opinion to execute. And so, I think it's just a matter of time before kind of the natural selection process really leads us down to a point where launch for Electron becomes more expensive, not less expensive. And I think, that also might be the reason why we're starting to see more kind of bulk buys from constellation customers, because I think they realize that. I think as difficult as it is to commit to one platform in -- with the potential of maybe cheaper and more plentiful opportunities coming onboard for launch are coming out to the market, I think they're also realizing that again the difficulty of doing this and having a reliable launch platform is super important, because time is money for a constellation operator. So, I think that my prediction would be that prices firm up again as we see continued kind of challenges for some of these aspirational launch people. But there's still enough noise out there from people who are trying to enter the market where we don't have I would say a tremendous amount of pricing kind of leverage. But I think that's starting to change. I think we are starting to see again people realizing how difficult it is and there's not going to be 100 successful launch companies. Maybe there's a handful or less than a handful of successful long-term players. And I think with that, you would normally see pricing firm up and that's what I would expect to see happen over the course of the next several years.

Okay. Thanks for framing that. I appreciate it.

Thank you. There are currently no additional questions registered at this time. So I will pass the conference back over to the management team for closing remarks.

Thanks very much. That wraps today's presentation. Thank you everyone for joining us on the call. Adam and I will be speaking at these up-and-coming conferences and look forward to the opportunity to share more exciting news and updates with you. Thanks again and we look forward to speaking with you again soon about the exciting progress being made here at Rocket Lab.

And with that, we will conclude today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect your lines.