Ken Peterman: Thanks, Mike. As Comtech moves further into our fiscal year 2024, the practical impact of our transformation is playing out positively and clearly across all the assets of our business. As Maria and Mike both highlighted, our operational performance is steadily improving. We’re winning more business because we’re providing more sophisticated technologies and solutions than our competitors. We’re generating more revenue because we’re solving our customers’ most challenging problems. The implementation of our One Comtech transformation is unlocking growth opportunities in a difficult overall market environment that includes inflationary pressures, interest rate shocks and rising geopolitical tensions. And of course, we work every day to make sure our business is managed effectively, bringing the right resources and the right people together to support our ability to deliver on our customer commitments.
Everything we are doing is being done to put our company on a durable growth trajectory that I believe will create and deliver value for years to come. Thank you as ever for your support and confidence. With that, we’ll take any questions that you may have.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] And we’ll move first to Greg Burns with Sidoti. Your line is open.
Greg Burns: Good afternoon. In regards to the balance sheet and the refinancing, I think at the last earnings release, you had hoped to get something done, I think, before you reported this quarter. Obviously, that hasn’t been the case. So, could you just maybe give us an update on why that might have been? You’re not seeing favorable financing opportunities or you’re waiting for something more favorable. Could you just give us a little bit more color on the timing of when you expect to get this done?
Mike Bondi: Sure. Good afternoon, Greg. It’s Mike. Yes, in terms of the refinancing process and the timeline, I think what we’re afforded us is really a good trajectory and strong results. Looking back, we have about $61 million of trailing EBITDA for the business. And I think when we’re going into our discussions and negotiations, I think we have a good amount of alternatives to explore and we have been going down each one of those in detail to review the pros and cons of it. One of the things that we’d like to do is make sure that we’re getting a good deal for Comtech in this environment. And so I think we’re trying to be methodical about that and considering the tools that are available to us. I think from our perspective, there’s a lot to balance and I think we’re going through it at a good pace and we’ll get it done.
Greg Burns: Okay. Thanks. And then in terms of the Canada E911 opportunity, the win you announced this quarter, was that a previous one that just got deployed? It didn’t sound like it was necessarily tied to the Canadian mandate. And then can you just talk about the differences or similarities between the Canadian market and the North American market? Is it similar competitors up there? Maybe in terms of the size of that opportunity — market opportunity for you?
Ken Peterman: Yes, this is Ken. How are you, Greg? I don’t want to give the timing because I don’t know the specific date of the award, but it was recent. And I think that it’s significant because there is a Canadian mandate. The mandate is to roll this next-generation capability out by March of 2025. And so that’s a fairly short timeline when you think about rolling it out across an entire country. It is significantly similar to the next-gen capability roadmap that we’re implementing in the United States. So, I think it’s — the thing that I’m most excited about is that we’re the leader in terms of being the provider of the Next Gen 911 capability, this very first Canadian county that launched ahead of all the others. I think we’re well positioned. I think it’s right in our sweet spot. And I think that it holds a lot of promise in the near term from a orders and growth perspective.
Greg Burns: And in terms of like the market size, like comparing it to maybe the U.S. is Canada similar addressable market? And is it the same competitors that you’re seeing in the RFP process?
Ken Peterman: It’s a similar technology. You remember the — I’m speculating here a little bit, but I think the population of Canada is roughly the same as the population of California. So, I think from a market size perspective in terms of people, I think you can think of it that way. I would not be able to speculate the number of public service entering points to stretch across Canada, but I think that gives you some gauge in terms of the market size.
Greg Burns: All right. Thank you.
Operator: And we’ll move next to Mike Crawford with B. Riley Securities. Your line is open.
Mike Crawford: Thank you. You talked about this revenue visibility of $1.7 billion, including a couple of the big new wins you had. But is that entirely synonymous with the unfunded plus funded backlog numbers you used to give? I know we have the funded backlog number, but not the unfunded backlog number.
Mike Bondi: Yes. The methodology has not changed. What you’re seeing is an increase in the number due to some recent large awards, namely the GFSR contract, the initial funding was in the $40 million range on the $540 million contract. So, the balance of that $500 million or so went into that unfunded section of our calculation because we have the contract, we have visibility to what the customer is looking to do over the almost five years of that contract. So, we’ll put the $37 million in the funded column, we’ll put the $500 million in the unfunded column. And that’s really the — probably, the largest driver to the revenue visibility of $1.7 billion. We also have the EDIM contract, which was almost $50 million contract. That will be another good example of initially the funding that we received was a smaller amount.
