And we hear me. Yep, that's the classic first person to kick off the call. It's not allowed to talk. Good job, Discord. There's the crew.
 All right. I feel like we can just kick right off. I'm just wondering if there's anything that you want to say from the top.
 We just want to follow up on what we actually said this morning, well, a couple of hours ago. And I'm just going to say, regardless of opinions, which, of course, this is why we're here for, it's just great to see movement again on the channel. It's great to see all so many people interacting. And this is exactly when I said that we're going to have to change the way we talk to communities. Well, this is us following up on that. So as long as we can break any confidentiality agreement,
 I'm here and we're here. And we're not shying away from what needs to be discussed. Of course, I would invite everybody to keep it professional, respectful, because we're still in a professional environment. That being said, I don't think that is off. There are no topics. They're completely off the table as long as we can provide an answer that doesn't get us in trouble. And I will provide that answer. And me and the rest of the team is here for that.
 All right, let's just get into it. I mean, I'd say either come up on stage, drop questions. I see a few that are starting to trigger in here. Insights on the financial situation of Nova.
 If you want to kick it off, because I'm in transition to get to the Wi Fi so I can turn on my camera and I'm happy to supplement whatever you say. Just give me two minutes.
 As we shrink the company and basically shrink our expenses down after the Healy Mobile business sell off, we basically get to a place where obviously there's operational costs. One, two, there is a bunch of growth and carriers that need to come on board. And all of that needs funding. So the actual Nova operational costs, like specifics, I don't know if Mario has that much better in his
 head than I do, but in general, like the requested initial inflation is literally to try to cover those operational expenses. So you can go you can go from there. Essentially, it's not just its operational expenses and growth and deploy your grants and blah, blah, blah. So basically what Nova needs in order to in order to live, certainly in the short term, is part of this is part of that inflation proposal.
 Yeah, one of the things that was covered, I think in chat, I can't remember where somewhere is a question around kind of VC funding versus inflation. I mean, one of the big things that's come up in the last couple of years, we really kind of hit traction on kind of fit around carrier offload and kind of where the future of the network is going. And as we've had discussions with institutional investors, the question that constantly did come up was this tension between, you know, am I supposed to be deploying to Nova equity or the token? And that's the thing that we've
 really wanted to resolve on. For the operating company to go and raise capital through an equity round, that just perpetuates that problem and makes it a priority to prioritize the equity side. The idea of doing it through inflation is we're thinking about resourcing growth and resourcing how we actually continue to drive on business development with carriers, building out the intelligence platform that Mario had mentioned is also in the blog post.
 The idea to do this through the token where the priority becomes value accrual to the token. Again, looking at the advisory council, looking at the oversight, all of those layers were added in there specifically as we want to align this to token. So, when people are asking about kind of when I'm going to just raise money. Well, this is why this direction versus. Let me also add something.
 I'm finally back. Also, I'm really big fan of putting the face on things. So, let me just turn it on. Just give me a few seconds. Okay. Hi, everybody. I'm glad to be the only face. So, I do want to add one thing to what has been said, which is. Sure, we can definitely focus on the operational component that can tell you
 That there's been an extremely, extremely focus on reduce expensive and reduce OPEX even prior to the divestiture because that's what it is of the mobile subscriber business. There has been, as you can probably for the ones that follow us, they've seen how we've been constantly looking at the way we can contract our operation expenses and how we can be linear and how we can
 be how we can be more efficient. However, we can dig into it. If you want, I can give you percentages. That's fine by me. I can tell you that I would burn post-career would be about 75% less than when it was pre-career, things like that. But I can get more details than that. But what I can tell you is that what are we funding? What is this? Like, what are we here for? So, all I know is that collectively, we probably spend between
 me and Joey Pat and another team, something south of 400 hours in C-level executive review of what helium is in front of Telco executive. Those executives, nobody told them to stay on a call with us and listen about blubbing and going about POC trial and POC definition and lab trial success or failure, field trial success or failure for densely populated area. Why am I telling you all this? There is an interest. There is a real product market fit that we hit. Now,
 I agree with you, with all of you, that this is not the first time, this is not the first incarnation of helium. There was lower IoT first, there was CBRS after. And this is not the game of blaming the technology and blaming the people, blaming the strategies, just that when you try to find product fit, iteration is the name of the game. I understand that. I understand that.
 A great deal of frustration, a great deal of investment in things that didn't pan out in the way they were supposed to. But I'll give you an example. CBRS is one. Like, we were crucified by many when we decided to not support CBRS. Now, take a look at the Telco industry, what's happening in CBRS. It's not just no luck. We were the first one. We steered away from CBRS months before
 the rest of the industry decided to do exactly the same. So I'm not saying, yeah, that's great, Mario. That's not what I mean. What I mean is that we're not here yoloing things and yoloing decisions and making sure that we can just make as many changes as possible so the community gets, gets "rugged," which is a term that I didn't know before coming into the crypto world. That's not what's happening. We spent an incredible amount of time in primary research, in secondary research, in talking to the
 engineers, understanding the state. This is what we're doing. That being said, sometimes things don't pan out. The IoT demand never came the way they were supposed to. And the CBRS, well, the device manufacturer never agreed to do the changes in the OS that allowed people to actually use CBRS. We landed on Wi-Fi afloat. Wi-Fi afloat five years ago wouldn't be a dead end because five years ago, everybody was out there buying 5G radios as if it was the
 the way we were going to solve the world connectivity problem. Five years later, everybody understands that there is 25X more cost in deploying 5G than it is in deploying Wi-Fi, hence the renewed interest in Wi-Fi. So going back to the original question, what is the current situation on Nova is that in a situation where we do need to resource the company, we need to resource the network. Now, one thing I want to point out that it's very important because
 words matter is in the proposal, we're talking about deploy your programs. We're talking about deploy your grants. We're talking about international expansion funding. So I don't want to get the impression that all that part of the proposal that talks about inflation will go straight to somehow just fund operations and salaries and all of that. That is that the current development has a cost. And if you want to, actually, if you want, I will pledge to you to come back to you
 with a full list of product portfolio that we are building and that's true value into the industry that, of course, it costs money and effort to build, to go out there, circulate with the telco industry to have them adopt. And I think not only it's a pledge, I think it destroys the table stakes for us to come to you and give all that information to you. Beyond that, that idea of the agent is for the
 deploy your programs, it is for giving more to them, to the deployers. Someone wrote, I don't remember who, because of course, it's been fantastic to see all these people engage, but this is not going straight to, this is not going straight to Nova, Nova balance sheet. That's not the way it is. The reason why we put advisory council in there is to give the ability for, first of all, we try to listen to you. Many times in this core chat, I haven't been able, we haven't been able to
 give information because sometimes they are protected by confidentiality. Well, the idea of the advisory council is that they will have access to that type of information under NDA, under all sorts of like protection measures. But why? Because we want community involvement. We want to give community teeth. And of course, I want you to understand
 that that doesn't mean that it doesn't mean that it will be a complete community base because we do have a structure, we do have a company, we do have marketing and sales and product and technology. So that stays, but differently than before, we do want to give that visibility. Under the circumstances, they are, first of all, legal and second of all, safe for everybody involved. So, I don't know, this is probably a long answer, but I just want to give context because
 so easy to just get focused on just the number, get focused on the storytelling. What I'm trying to say is that there is a way to get this. And I want to discuss with all of you what that looks like. It doesn't mean that this proposal needs to stay the same, this adjustment that can be made. But going back to what Scott said, we could have gone a different route, but that wouldn't be completely different than what this community has been asked for. This community that
 been watching maybe sometimes too silently, and that's something that I plan on changing, is they ask for visibility, they ask for transparency, they ask for focus on value approval on the token. And this proposal, in our view, it's a first step towards exactly.
 scan through and Mark and Joey is looking in the chat right now to see if there's anything that's a specific targeted question right now. There's a lot of stuff around price. Again, some of this stuff is also very, very macro. I know everybody's frustrated around what markets look like right now. I think one of the key questions, maybe for Mark, since it sort of feeds back into the inflation question, is like, why inflate if there is growth? If the growth is already happening, then why is the inflation needed?
 Go ahead, Mario, sorry. Well, because just like any other infrastructure company, there's many out there that we can name from AWS to Tesla to others. When you find the product market fit, that demand outpaces what the product readiness is and the market share of that product. So you do need to
 essentially resource the development of the company in order to gain significant market share. Because, and I've said this before, so hopefully for some of you that we've been talking about in the mobile working group and other things, in 2025, in 2024, we were a complete experiment for the carriers involved, both US and Mexico, in 2025.
 I mean, you guys saw those expansions on world that don't count.
 I think it's a phenomenal, phenomenal testimonial.
 Right. Hopefully FKA Greg was listening. Offload stats are stagnating. Why is that?
 Demand is rising, as we say, is another question. I think part of that is a constant adjustment of the kind of carrier rejections that carriers do. And that's one balance. The second balance is growth takes time, right? Like there's like a bunch of, especially Brownfield deployments, as the earned price per gigabyte goes down, there may be people that disconnect or like cycle out.
 And so there's this rebalancing that happens as the network grows and scales. Our Brownfield pipeline, at least, is still very healthy. We're still growing Brownfield deals and access points quite well. So I don't expect that to last, but there's definitely, there's no doubt everybody can see that it's slowed down.
 I mean, it's going to stay that way. Just what it is right now. One other comment is that on the engineering end, we've been watching for the last couple of weeks and monitoring to make sure that it's not because of resource limitations on the engineering side.
 We're going to keep monitoring and keep looking at it and addressing any issues if we find. And I do want to address a couple of things that I've seen. First of all,
 there is not going to be 170 million, I actually think it's under 41, but let's say 141 million H&T overnight that would be available for circulation. That's not the way that is written. That while the mint might happen in that way, those are not in circulation. And the distribution of that mint is governed by the advisory council. So I want to make sure that this is clear.
 There is not all of a sudden, there is not going to be a 50% more, more supply magically appearing on the market to flash whatever. That was over three years, right? And the advisory council was picked and voted for by the community gets to decide what gets to help influence what that's used for and gets to issue, if they don't like what they say, they can issue a vote to help retract that.
 And one thing I wanted to make clear too, is that if the revenue that hopefully will become clear and clear as we circulate the product portfolio that we are selling to carriers, which is much more than just offload, as the revenue grows, if you get the advisory council will have visibility in our, essentially in our net profit margin. And if that net profit margin are enough
 and they are in the positive, there is no reason we could stop the distribution of those 18T at any time. If that product market fit gets faster than three years, based on what we see in the market, we think that in the next three years, that's where the big cross will happen. And that's why we want to make sure that we fund. But even if you look closely at the proposal, which I really encourage everybody to read it thoroughly, the mint is actually the distribution. The mint is not one time, but the distribution is actually
 is a decaying function over time. Why is that? It's because the goal is to increase the revenue, the dollar revenue coming from carriers, US, Mexico, Latin America, and UK, Europe, and all that over time to offset that distribution of the token that will come into the existence. So I just want to make sure that it's not just that gets clarity.
 Even though I understand, of course I understand the thinking. The other, there is the other question that I saw is I think it's valid, by the way, besides if the original thesis was flywheel pay deployers, more coverage, more usage, higher HNT, what in this proposal actually starts it rather than diluting everybody, everyone to fund while deployer economics keeps shrinking.
 I wasn't here when, I wasn't here when the project started with IoT. However, everybody, I think, can witness and testify that the amount of HNT that we're going to deployers was very different. The economics for deployers were very different because we were at the beginning of that, of that project, that the halvening was a certain state. So in a way, in one way of explaining it, and please, you have to be, I hope you can be.
 Understanding if I'm not understanding correctly, if I'm not stating it clear enough, is that changing, re-emitting HNT, of course, other than help and support in the development that is needed is a way for undo a little bit some of the halvening that happened. Now, that's why that is the lift, the 20% lift because of the service provider rewards that goes away. That is why, for example, there is the discussion about deployer grants
 as part of the mint is not just simply operation funding for Nova. It's a way to relocate those HNTs that are gone because of the halvening schedule and kind of reset that timer in that way. And of course, in the meantime, it's a way for us to continue the operation. And rather than doing it in a traditional way, is to do it where the body of cruel is, which it is for us on the token because
 because if you're not a token holder, you're an equity holder, you have different types of parameters to evaluate the company, to evaluate the value of your stake into the company. That's why also Amir and I have been talking about it and it's been very open in this court about his own ideas about potentially the token represents something else. But I don't think we're there yet personally, but the focus is on the token as a value.
 And this is this is this is exactly what it is in mobile. On the other hand, one of the biggest one of the biggest the truck detraction from the mobile that we've heard over and over and over again from people, from everybody in community was like, it looks like an equity play. There is no correlation with the token. And what is the body of cruel mechanism between equity and and token? And we were
 this proposal, the change that the rest of your mobile maybe doesn't make clear sense and that someone has to explain better. But the goal is exactly that. The goal is to remove all everything that ties to traditional equity and double down on on the token.
 Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. OK. Sorry, Mark, if I interrupt you there, I was going to go through another question. OK, bear with me. I was trying to fix my audio behind the scenes here. But if this was already answered or not, Groot asked a question. Where does the backstop come from?
 100 million HMT in a day to meet the backstop. Does this increase max supply or how does it work? You never meant you never meant more than than what you would need to burn for carrier for for the burned carrier revenue is the is the thing. And like the proposal on the hip says, you only you only re re emit up to 50 effectively re emit up to 50 percent of the tokens that were burned in order to in order to like transit the traffic.
 So max supply doesn't increase. Right. And it basically you're just offsetting the deflationary. You're basically offsetting the deflationary pressure with reducing deflation to get to that floor price. Hopefully that's easy to understand. I know it can be a brain twister.
 Carrier and like a doctor, if you mean like the carrier is carrier revenue, not enough to like to to like pay for operations now. Carrier revenue is used to pay for data. It's not used to pay for operations. None of that flows. None of that flows to Novart or anywhere else. Just scrolling through the list here.
 Great to see. Yeah. Can you rule out the possibility that HNT will be dropped from the deployment payment process, i.e. direct payment?
 If some of you are in our Brownfield program in the Unim+ program, you know that there is an option for payouts to being used. The way we do today is that essentially no one holds the HNT into wallets and remits remit into into USD to the Deployer to Deployer to to the Brownfield partner. Now, that option today
 is mostly taken by institutions like, you know, college campuses and retail stores and in big companies that yet they don't have a structure to hold crypto. And so that's that's today. So I guess to go back to the question, I don't think I don't forecast the way the token is. The settlement services runs on HNT. There is an option for Brownfield for
 some of those enterprises.
 Yeah.
 Right. In terms of real traffic, real
 traffic comes from carrier subscribers that have a SIM card or an authorized credential to get access.
 I think. Their users is.
 Right. So the so the idea is like the effectively there's no proof of coverage. There's literally like we've tossed this term around previously in the mobile working group like proof of utility and the utility is basically the fact that you have authenticated users offloading data and mobile that have that that that happens with there's some qualifying things like Joey mentioned for speed tests and whether whether your asserted location is close to where we think you are like so the location and your back all have to be good or so like quality
 qualifying things. Then you get demand sampling that proves that you're actually in a good location for like actual offload and you get selected and then you start earning for offload. So basically you prove that you're useful and you earn for for for actually providing when you're actually providing utility not for just being there in where you where you may be potentially have utility or not have utility at all. We're well past that point on both networks. Right. Not just on mobile. That's true for both IOT and mobile.
 Which also means on the mobile side at least is that is that the data rewards are paid in pro rata HNT per gigabyte not 50 cents a gig. We're just pro we're just being true already since whatever November or October last year. Right. When it was data eats everything and you basically get get effectively get pro rata HNT out of the rewards pool. That's that's now that will be basically encoded
 because PSC goes away that becomes a permanent thing. Just to be clear on the IOT side the existing peg stays so you get you still get you get paid for data just like where you are now with your PSU where it's go away like IOT has to like prove its own worth as a network to actually be useful data wise.
 I see waveform had a question that I miss in the hip. What happens to IOT Oracle. I do or girl misses data same. So part of the urgency of this. I love that there's this straight scammer in the chat. The great. Welcome to the DGN world. The IOT IOT Oracle stay the
 and all the other stuff goes away because PSC goes away and IOT hotspots get paid for actually translating data based on on what is paid by the LNS to translate that data. So there's all of that all of that stuff still stays. The IOT Oracle fund was never really a thing was never really used. So they were just going to leave that be the whole point is to try to get something that can be expedited so we can actually like capitalize and grow. Right. And so the IOT operations
 will basically absorb the POC overage to cover the cost of maintaining the existing IOT infrastructure. Yes waveform IOT Oracle submissions are burned daily and will continue to be to be burned daily. It's a really small amount to like to not have to go change stuff. Noble Mobile question is like whether Noble Mobile receives service provider rewards. No part of
 this hip is part of the Noble Mobile setup is that Helium Mobile will continue will operate as a carrier offload partner. So not as an on-chain carrier. Right. So the service provider rewards go away and Helium Mobile is just another one of the number of carriers that offload on the Helium network and get and do that under the same conditions as everybody else. Everybody else does. Right. Five gigabyte per user blah blah blah.
 And as an as the opposite side Jade as rewards go do go away completely and the percentage of that they were sort of related to how much data was transmitted but it ended up being about 24 percent as of today. Ten percent of that goes into like the mobile operations fund to sort of mirror
 the IOT operations fund to like keep the systems running. And the other 14 percent goes to data rewards. Right. Which means the data rewards pool actually gets an overall HNT lift of about 20 percent as part of this proposal. Mark can you respond to the question if none of the offload revenue goes to
 How are we at less than 10 cents per gig because I think included in that question is a misunderstanding of how the rewards work. OK.
 Let me try. Let me let me try that. Joey's operations center is pretty loud. The the so there's like two sides of the network. Right. And it's confusing and it's not it's not always easy to explain. There is the consumption side. Right. Where where the carrier or Nova on behalf of the carrier burns the HNT slash data credits to actually pay for traffic to transit the network. Right. Today or
 up until today that was paid at 50 cents a gigabyte. Right. And a lot of and that number was based on what carriers what carriers pay. Right. In terms of their all the various contracts that they have and subsidies. Right. That's that Nova was adding to that. That is going away. This is the this is why this is a realignment and sort of like the reality the reality part. We say like like the actual aggregated rate across the carriers that pay today is about 10 cents a gigabyte. Right. So that
 gets to that. That basically aligns what carriers pay like there is actually pay with what the network gets paid to like transit the traffic versus being subsidized. The other side basically is the network will emit a fixed number of HNT every epoch. And that that HNT is split into like into like different buckets. Right. Six percent of that go to the HNT. Ten percent of that will go to the mobile operations fund. And the rest of it goes to data. Right.
 Everything else goes to like daily rewards. But it also means there is a fixed amount of HNT every epoch that gets split out over all the all the data that is that is emitted that is transmitted. That's sort of the split. Right. There is a consumption side. There's a there's a burn side as we call it. And there's an earn side on the on the on the other side of the network. The reward the reward backstop just to complete it. The reward reward backstop tries to create a balance where
 to basically say like if the HNT price goes goes down a lot or carrier the amount of data is really high compared to what the carriers pay the carrier like up to 50 percent of that carrier revenue will basically be re-emitted on the on the earn side so that there is effectively a floor of 50 percent of what carriers pay to to to help deployers set like at least an absolute baseline as carrier revenue. The nice part here is that we're talking
 trying to and I know it's not great numbers. Right. So it's linked to what it's what it's not compared to what it has been. But it is reality. And we're trying to be honest and real about what what is happening there. Right. And so what the key the key thing for deployers to earn more. Right. Is of course price go up which we can't do. But but like more carrier revenue. Right. More carriers and more and more data leads to like better negotiation for better rates and better
 prices which means more more carrier revenue that gets that gets burned and higher revenue lifts the floor for everybody. Right. And the story usually at least in the burn them in cycle here is that if you believe the long term story of what that does and delivers the price of HNT will reflect that. Right. Which is sort of the other side of that. There is a floor that lifts the bottom and then there is the long term strategy and store value that you that is the pricing into the net to the to the token.
 Which effectively lifts the ceiling. Hopefully that helps. I know I'll be explaining this a few more times. It's good. It's OK. You have something to do that because otherwise I did I did see one and I wanted to address you go ahead.
 Right. So there's one comment that says it's more likely that all other MNOs leave and make not using offload networks part of any environmental negotiation. I fundamentally disagree with that statement. And I'll try to I'll try to build a thesis for it. So a couple of things. One is even if the first part of the first part of the sentence is true the second part
 is not because if you know if you know contracts there are at least five years five years or longer. And even if something like putting that clause would be there by the time those MNO would renew the contract would probably either won or lost the battle they were trying to win. Anyway fundamentally though the first one is wrong in my view because MNOs have all the interests
 in having MNOs win the market because the more MNOs they do the more they're the more they're able to essentially build their wholesale revenue without spending marketing for doing customer acquisition costs. So with that in mind when you have an offload network an Ikellium that being true it is true that on one end it reduces the cost of it reduces the cost of the roaming
 operator on the other end he allows the MNO to be more competitive in the market which means that he allows them to acquire more subscribers. So while you might lose let's say five to 10 percent in roaming revenue because of the lower use of the cellular you may have a substantial increase in the subscriber base that ultimately will result in more roaming charges for the for the roaming MNO. So I think the reason why I disagree is because
 actually a growth in the MVNO subscribers will be welcomed by the MNO to the point that one of the MNO that we're talking to is talking about making the network part of their part of their offer to the MVNOs. And another way of doing this is reselling agreement. There is one international carrier that we're working through with that wants to resell the healing connect healing network to their
 MVNO. So in that case the only it's the only in that case this is not even that way but the network the healing network percent will be actually rated for the MVNO and the MVNO will be charged by the MNO on behalf of so I just want to pinpoint one specific comment that's not what I'm saying what I'm saying is that it is a complex industry and the levers are very
 very complex and they while on one end things move slow and it doesn't help us if in other ways the father things move slow actually help us in other ways things like those market share position which in my view would be a very very good place to stand.
 Once the network is significant enough just a comment on that. So no I'm not expecting now is it possible. I also let me also be straight because otherwise why are we doing this. Is it possible that some MNOs why decided to go different way and no use Wi-Fi or flow anymore. Absolutely it is possible. It isn't the real possibility. And the reason is because sometimes strategy changes sometimes that internal KPIs the change maybe
 they've got a group that wants to really someone at a C level convince the EVP of sales to go sell dust dust systems a 5G system and the revenue and get money. So it is possible that some MNO might drop and all I can tell you for sure is that they all come back. They will all come back. I did post a thesis on fixed wireless access and how
 that would be a catalyst for Wi-Fi. Anyway I don't want to get too long. I can't happy to write it down but essentially the fact that.
 The capacity to be sold as fixed wireless access. So it can be actually one of the biggest catalysts for Wi-Fi or flow the next two to three.
 So for the ones that are not familiar. Historically there is a way for carriers to light up indoor connectivity. That that technology is called DAS which stands for distributed antenna system. The easiest way to think about DAS system is
 a cellular base station installed in door with a very long spider web of coax cable and fiber cables through the building. Then essentially is a is like a pipe system. It's like a leaky is like your garden leaky leaky water system. And that system radiates inside the building from a centralized base station that gets host in the
 mechanical room of the of the building. That's the way traditionally carriers have been have been light up buildings. The problem with their system is that extremely expensive 5G DAS system they run in the order of six dollars per square foot. When you compare that to Wi-Fi Wi-Fi runs on a 25 cents per square foot. Now you can see that what is happening
 the last this is literally 12 months is no more than 12 months. What's happening is that Wi-Fi is getting better because Wi-Fi 7 and Wi-Fi 6 already 6 and 7 are significantly better standards than the previous one. The passpoint standard is maturing meaning there is better support in the equipment and it's getting better and better. And the work that people like Joey Padden and the other people the WBA are doing is exactly to make those rails for passpoint be smoother and faster
 to onboard Wi-Fi gear into passpoint. And the user experience on Wi-Fi is actually better than a DAS system. So if you match all these things together what you what you have you have all these executives in some of the more attentive M&Os they're like why are we spending I'll give you a figure 25 million dollars of DAS in the in the in one of the biggest airport in
 the East Coast when for a fraction of a cost we can actually do similar or better user experience for users the users using passpoint Wi-Fi passpoint. And so what we're seeing in the DAS market is that there is there is companies like CTS Boingo itself is a DAS company all the DAS company their revenue lines on DAS is is going down like quarter over quarter significantly because carriers they
 are asking themselves can I do this better with Wi-Fi can I do cheaper Wi-Fi. So we are in there. That's why I showed up there that weird conference name meaning the weird is the name the conference is great it's called TWA which stands for the infrastructure wireless association because at that conference you have all the real estate owner you have all these depressed dust people and then you have us and we are all trying to figure out how we're going to light up buildings
 carriers won't pay any more for DAS. That's why we are in those places. That's why we're talking about helium in those places. So then market in the US alone is about 12 no it's 12 billion dollar globally is three billion dollar in US getting just a fraction of that at a fraction of a cost for Wi-Fi is already in itself a great a great target for us to acquire. The other example in the network that that is already happening some of the shopping
 malls some of the grocery stores mall grocery stores that we have in the network they the carrier decide to pay for Wi-Fi because they didn't want to pay for for a new DAS system. We are in a replacement cycle for many of those DAS system and so maybe many places like airports and stadium they'll have DAS money for a little longer but everything else other than those very big tier one is getting completely crushed.
 From a point of view of carrier spent. Taking a look at other questions as well chat still moving quickly is great. Lots going on. I see a question about the proposal.
 Excuse me if HIP 149 passes and 141 sorry if HIP 149 passes and 141 million in new tokens are minted does Nova receive more fiat for operations by investors in a separate NDA agreement. Is it a component of a creative funding round. Yes maybe Scott you can take a couple of things like first of all like there is no there's
 no distinct separate funding round and I don't know if that's what the kind of question posed or intended on that like there's there's not like a separate equity around that's happening with this as far as the fiat. So I answered this in another chat. I need to be careful because the fact is like the reality is first of all like any of the any of the mint that accrues directly to Nova nothing is like kind of placed in you know it doesn't go in a
 order book there's not direct sell you're not going to see kind of pressure in the market there. Highest level it is structures through OTC where we work with long term investors who are aligned on helium's vision and mission where you're talking about things where it's cash flow without the pressure of token sales. Beyond that what I'd say is that discussions around the specifics of treasury management really need to be constrained to that
 advisory council. That's the point of that group being there for oversight from more detail under NDA. It gets to a point in some of the specifics here where it's just not healthy for public consumption. Not that we're trying to keep things from the community but it gets to a point of you know some of the activities that we do like the market could effectively front run those things. So suffice to say it is a thoughtful strategy where it brings in cash it is not direct sell pressure directly on the market.
 Do we want to talk a little bit I know a couple of questions around kind of like BD pipeline what's going on on the demand side right now. Maura if you want to speak to that or if Farq isn't here somewhere just kind of I think there's a lot of exciting things that are happening Mario you just alluded to a bunch of them around kind of like the things that we are seeing directly with carriers but I think some of that is what is expansion looking like in the
 U.S. We just you know multiplied one of our largest relationships domestically some of what's happening internationally and again that's just strictly on offload. What we're building on top of offload beyond just as a coverage solution here in terms of the intelligence is something that is completely novel new. Don't forget all of these carriers are vertically built they are managing all of those capital expenditures they're managing all the costs. The thing that we are solving is very much a horizontal
 scaling solution that nobody is incentivized to build this right now nobody is going to have that type of insight across distinct networks and be able to hop from one to another whether that is cellular outdoor indoor you know we're looking down the road to kind of where satellites start to play a very significant role here. But Mario do you want to talk a little bit more around kind of like all the problems inside developments. Let's do it two ways OK I want to talk a little bit about the platform first and then
 As a result of the platform the connectivity platform we can talk about the BD from a carrier wise. So so far the way we've been positioning helium is as an offload network and that's all we talked about is the offload network. Sometimes you hear you hear me or Joey Padden talking about metrics and quality of service but we never we never that's a big word but we have not had the single focus
 on double down our effort in in capitalizing what I mean with that capitalizing the opportunity that we have in front of us with this intelligence layer. Let me talk differently. Until eight months ago this was a network that only was doing quote unquote only was doing meaning it's already hard enough. But let me tell you let me allow me to use that term for a second. What this network was doing all the way to eight months ago was just offload for offload sake.
 We were selling whatever number of Wi-Fi offload we have at a wholesale to to the telcos for them to use. Great. Still very valuable. Still very much. And if all we did was just that it was it is already very valuable and clearly the number shows that the growth is there in the demand. Once we start touching on intelligence in the Wi-Fi with the quality of service metrics that work that we're doing we started to
 uncover additional opportunities. Revenue additional revenue opportunities that we carriers which are not just around offload. It's about instrumenting offload and which means about monitor ability of the offload which means action ability on the offload deciding when the user should connect and how and if the user should connect. So we worked on it. That's part of the reason why like oh why you need developer resources.
 Well because you develop products. So we worked on it. We worked on our concept that actually Joey for the first time in the world demo that the WBA in Dallas three weeks ago which we call walks as is a terminal is allow me the very technical term will have a better marketing name soon but stands for Wi-Fi offload experience which is a centralized which a centralized gateway for carriers to decide how and when to
 use offload. Now in order for that gateway to work you need to have the plug in for our quality of service metrics in the back end of the carrier to make that determination that as you can see and I hope awful is clear enough has nothing to do with the offload per se. I mean you have everything to do but in terms of potential revenue opportunities for us is a completely parallel on top of what we're doing with offload. Then and that's one layer. So you have the
 offload layer you have the intelligence on the offload and that's for both M and O's and M Gino. Then when you look at the deal that we did on that was published publicized on Tuesday with Noble. Now you enter a new level of potential growth which is when we launched Helium Mobile we created all the tooling around managing the subscriber base. We create a tooling to provision the SIM cards to remove the SIM cards and connecting
 the system and connecting compliance and tax compliance service. And and that's very important. We also created the connector to allow those Helium Mobile users to offload into the network which means that for every SIM card that Helium Mobile issued there was always a passpoint profile that was associated with a SIM card to allow for enabling their offload. Well guess what happened. All of a sudden when
 now Noble is going to keep going with the brand and with a subscriber on the customer facing they're still using that infrastructure and that infrastructure is what in what in the world of telco is called as an MV&E which stands for mobile network mobile virtual network enabler. What an MV&E platform does it creates BSS tools to manage MV&Os. All this to say that
 No accidentally because that sounds not correct but as a result of the hard work that we did to launch and maintain Helium Mobile we ended up with a platform that now can be sold to others. And it's the first MV&E in the world that comes with a network to offload into it. Do me a favor and research MV&E platform. See how many they offer an offload network that comes with it. Zero. We are the only MV&E platform that comes with an embedded network.
 Now I'm probably Scott is killing me because giving away completely the announcement that we're going to do in two years in two weeks for now. That's amazing. Doesn't matter. But the platform is that. The platform is exactly that. The platform is the ability for carriers to pick and choose the tooling. I want offload. I want quality. I want to control of that quality. And for an MV&O I want a BSS solution that comes with a network that can offload into it. We are already out there selling that solution.
 The carriers they were talking to in Brazil there is M&Os and all of those deals with all of those M&Os are what I call dual deal. There is an offload deal. There is a QoS deal attached to it for managing the quality of service of those devices. This is what these three years will bring to us. The ability to execute on what I think is the biggest change in the Wi-Fi and network convergence that the wireless has seen so far.
 So if that is not exciting, I don't know what it is. And I got excited to the point that I blew off all my marketing points. Scott, you've got to come find out more for two weeks from now. Actually, I'm going to ask you this off-line and then you might talk about it. Why don't we just because just for folks that we've been in here for an hour. I don't want to suddenly cut us off.
 But you know, but kind of within the next call it 30 minutes. Let's try to get to as much as we can. Just for everybody that's in here, we're taking notice as many of the questions as we can. Obviously, we're looking to put together more of a comprehensive living dynamic FAQ around everything that's being discussed. This is definitely not the only Q&A session. We're going to make sure we are very available. We're obviously going to be in discord. Vote period in this, by the way, we're looking at is a month. So four weeks of discussion.
 So we're talking about, you know, at this point, our plan is for one month of discussion, making sure multiple Q&A sessions being available in discord. We will definitely be having another one probably on the earlier side of next week, but we will compile and try to make sure there's more of a an actual doc that people
 can review asynchronously for an FAQ. So keep the questions coming. We're going to do our best to address as many as we can. Obviously, you all see how fast this chat is moving.
 We haven't been asked to the team here that we haven't got to. Please just post it again on the chat and we'll get it. Give it just a second there. We skipped Mario off.
 Sorry, how we keep going? You did say you were an hour in and so that we would continue in the general channel. OK. Call here to see if there's anything we missed in that week. There was a question I want to I want to answer that.
 Because someone said like, oh, if there is a platform fee that goes to Nova doesn't go to deploy. Well, that the thing is that we need to remember is that those platform fee is what attracts carriers to use the network. So there is many people out there that sell offload. Many is not correct. There is several companies out there that sell offload services to carriers. None of them comes with a platform that supports QoS management. So the
 seeing in the market is that the QoS management is getting us through the door in order to close the offload deal. That's what I mean. So the being able to jump on the platform is actually the enabler for more offload to the point. And by the way, also, when it comes to things like vertex rejects, everybody's probably aware of many of you are aware when it comes to like deciding any platform that manages that the QoS
 allows the employers to allows the network to to steer employers towards better deployments that less of their rejection and more of the acceptance of the offload. So my view is actually the opposite. The platforming actually is what attracts. And also, let's remember if we are what we're saying is that the from the very beginning, the inflation and how that will flow to the fund operation needs to be across with the revenue for
 Nova to keep being sustainable as a business for the next 20 years. So if we funnel all the offload fees to the employers, we can find that platform fee and revenue fee from the platform to fund our own operation independently moving forward three years from now. So that is that is actually the plan. The plan is to us to not take anything from the offload for the employers and get into a point where where we can break not just breakeven, we can do
 actually better and be sustainable and use that. And then whatever we can talk into, like what happens once once we are in the in the block in the black with with the net profit and all that. I don't want to get into that right now. It's too early. But I think that's that's the way you do it. One other comment about vertex and the Waxgate way of giving key area
 is control is key areas want to protect their user experience. Years get more comfortable with offloading when they have control
 of the user experience. So while it initially feels like your offload is getting nerfed, what it's doing is building trust with key areas that the offload network
 is safe to use. Under their control and that trust gets them to use it more and more broadly. Vertex initially is
 a barber. It's what's going to enable us to.
 Just scraping through some more quick questions. What does winning look like in three years? How do we say, man, that really works? In 10 years in three years.
 Three. Three. Let's do a few years. Three, five and ten. Whatever. My hope is that we actually we actually stop that inflation program before the end of those 30 months. That means real product market fit with real revenue coming through the door. Support operation. It means to be at least active in three continent, if not four and north of I would say south of 10 carriers enabled on the platform.
 That that's how we make it. And of course, deployers needs to be correctly and rightfully. Rewarded for the for the amount of work that they do to build the network, which clearly that's not the case today, otherwise we wouldn't be here. Meaning that's why we're doing all this.
 Let me add one more thing. It's not just more. More is just more. Doesn't mean it's better. That is something that I think we should all remind. So what you see, what I hope we can prove to the community is that our decision making is not just based on the concept that more is just more. You make decision based always better in the longer term and in sustainable way. I think that the concept of sustainability
 and viability of the companies is just to be at the front and center of what we're doing. And I think I agree with people that are asking, what's the plan? And I kind of get away a little bit. We'll give more in the next couple of weeks. But the plan is to be viable and to be sustainable for the next for the next 10, 20 years. Also, I do want to be cognizant that this network started a long time ago. And despite all the ups and downs and changes in technologies and changes in the token,
 it's still very much shipping. So our job is to ensure that the network will continue to ship for another 10 to 20 years, if not more. I think that's a good place to take a nap for today. Yeah, again, for folks, please take time.
 We do have a kind of shorter explainer that's on the website. All the links are on Twitter. Obviously, we'll repost them in Discord. We'll be on and off to the extent that we can over the coming days. And then we'll get the next Q&A session posted shortly, which will likely be hosted in here as well sometime early next week. But thank you all for making the time. I appreciate all the thoughtful questions. Look forward to carrying on productively through the process.
 Yeah, just a quick closing note, everyone. I appreciate everyone being back here in Discord and joining us. For the next events, please look at the events tab in Discord. I'll keep that updated. So when we are having a call, you'll be notified about it. There'll be a little button where you can click. I'm interested. Click that and you'll be aware of the next call that happens. If you have any questions about links, GitHub links, the proposal, anything, ping me. Happy to help you out. And we'll see you next time. Thanks, everyone, for joining.
 See you later. Bye.