Palo Alto Networks (TICKER: PANW) Palo Alto Networks Inc Panw Presents Ubs Technology Conference Transcript

Start Time: 10:55 January 1, 0000 11:28 AM ET Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (NASDAQ:PANW) UBS Technology Conference November 29, 2023 10:55 AM Company Participants Nikesh Arora - Chairman and CEO Conference Call Participants Roger Boyd - UBS [Advertisement] Roger Boyd All right. We will get started. Thank you all for being here at the UBS Tech Conference. I'm Roger Boyd. I cover cybersecurity for UBS here. Very happy for this next session to be hosting Nikesh Arora, CEO of Palo Alto Networks. Nikesh, thanks for being here. Nikesh Arora Thank you for having me. Roger Boyd Thank you for having me. For all you in the audience, we're going to do a quick fireside. You can submit questions through the Q&A app. I'll be happy to forward them on to Nikesh. But maybe just to start, I want to touch on the threat environment. A couple weeks ago in the earnings call, you pointed out that there's just a never-ending supply of threats. And I think point in case we're seeing ransomware evolve from encrypted encryption to double extortion to they're going to now file SEC complaints for you. We're seeing what's happening with SolarWinds. We're seeing attacks that are costing hundreds of million dollars in lost revenue. Just how do you think about that contributing to the demand environment security, which I think you would argue is still strong? Nikesh Arora Well, first of all, thank you for having me and thank you for being here. I think in the last 12 months what has begun to happen, and you saw signs of this earlier, if you go back four or five years ago, the cyber-attacks were, you equated a cyber-attack with some kid sitting in a basement on a computer and trying to get into the NSA or the FBI and say, I'm so cool. That's like you get cool cred by doing a cyber-attack. Then sort of nation-states got into it. They started trying to figure out how to do cyber-attacks and build offensive capability. And then you saw a switch. And the switch was, it said, why are we wasting our time going after one person at a time? Let's go crack the code on some piece of software that everybody's got. Many years ago I used to work for a large tech company and we saw that they were trying to get into the backend of Gmail, right? That way they could go find anybody they wanted. And so that became a theme. So you see SolarWinds, you look at some of the CVs that have been exploited from Microsoft or some of the stuff from many tech vendors. Because once you get in the backend of a software supplier, then you can go to all their customers and hack them. So that trend began to happen. Coupled with that, this notion of this wonderful thing called crypto, which we figured out was a way of collecting money. And if you look back, does anybody here know how many people have been convicted for cyber-attacks in the last 12 months? Less than 10. Does anyone know how much money has been paid in ransomware in the last 12 months? Billions of dollars. This is the best ROI, bad thing in the world. You don't get arrested, you don't get caught, you collect a lot of money. So that's what causes this huge amount of activity out there. There's people out there, you mentioned this, I think I found this was the funniest thing that ever happened. This group -- this company was hacked. They didn't respond to the ransomware emails. Four days later, the ransomware actors filed an SEC complaint saying these guys have not disclosed the fact that they've been hacked. So that's what's going on out there. It's not getting, it's not slowing down. It's getting bigger and the dollar amounts that are being asked are getting bigger. Roger Boyd Do you think that the buy-in from the C-level, the board level of companies is getting there? I mean, there's a lot of talk about the new SEC regulations and the increased oversight that they want on boards in reports and filings. Do you think we're getting there? Is that meaningful? Nikesh Arora Look, the way we parse it, and I think you'll hear that from every cybersecurity company, not just us, there is no lack of attention to cybersecurity as an issue at C-levels or boards around the world. Pick your company, they're all paying attention. How does that translate into money? How does that translate into business? The way it translates into business is cybersecurity budgets do not get cut. You see your Chief Security Officer shows up and says, I'd like to do this. The CEO doesn't say, you can't do this, do it next year, because now they're petrified that if they're the ones who said don't do that project, they take responsibility for postponing the project. And then the C-level says, okay, you said I can't do it, I don't have the money. They'll tell them, get a better deal, try and break it down into a milestone, try and phase it out. So you see those things which means it's one of the most robust tech spending sectors because the budgets aren't getting cut. The more hacks, more attacks that happen, more people need to go upgrade their infrastructure, the more awareness there is. So I think all of the stuff we've talked about, whether it's the threat actors or whether it's the C-level attention or the SEC attention, it just tells you that the demand environment does not have any systemic issues. Now, will they negotiate? Yes, they'll negotiate. Will there be payment duration changes? Yes, there will be payment duration changes. But it's hard to find an industry or tech subsector where you can say, other than possibly AI chip stuff, that the demand factor is not tucked in the macro. Roger Boyd What do you think the answer is here? I mean, there's a lot of talk about generative AI, and I think you've been pretty clear with some skepticism around what we're seeing in security operations around generative AI being meaningful in detecting attacks. I think you made the comment that you don't want ChatGPT driving your car, and similarly, I don't want ChatGPT driving my car. Roger Boyd I think generative AI... Nikesh Arora There's a Waymo stuck on the way. If you just drove up here and there's a car stuck in the corner, there's nobody in there. It's just stuck. It's kind of pointing towards the hedge. Roger Boyd It is. Nikesh Arora Go out and look at it. Roger Boyd I think one thing that the co-pilot area is shedding more light on is, all the investments that cybersecurity vendors like yourselves have been making for years around machine learning, detection, algorithms. One, can you talk about the data scale that Palo has, what that means to drive machine learning through that side of it? And then again, with generative AI, how meaningful do you really think that will be to security operations? Nikesh Arora Let's do the quick two-minute version of AI, right? The good news is with all this ChatGPT and all this AI conversation, suddenly everybody's focused on AI. This is a good thing, right, because people are paying attention to AI. The way we see it is there's, on one side, this world of precision AI where you need to be right. You need to know this is a hedge, not the road, otherwise you'll get stuck there in your car. So you don't want precision AI to hallucinate. Cybersecurity uses precision AI. Most car driving algorithms will use neural networks and machine learning and for reinforcement learning. So there's a category of learning that uses precision AI. You need a lot of data to get it right because you need to know where every tree, every bush, every -- you need to know all normal behavior to figure out the anomalous behavior, that's how we work in security. When we see anomalous behavior, we need to know what normal looks like. I need to watch everything to be able to find what's anomalous. You can't look at a little bit and say, a little bit tells me the answer. I got to look at everything. As a consequence, we have on a daily basis, we ingest five petabytes of data. We have one exabyte of security data stored in Google Cloud. We are the largest storers, if that's a word, of security data in the world. Not only that, we're the largest storage in Google Cloud of any company in the world, after Google. And we only have 35 customers running our XSIAM products so far. We want to have hundreds of them getting there. So just imagine the amount of data we're going to have. What do we do with that data? It belongs to every company. We look at all the normal, look for the abnormal and then identify the abnormal and try and stop it mid-flight, right. So security is interesting. It's only done in two ways. Either you know some, a known bad, you stop it. You see a bad URL, bad IP address, you stop it. If it's a suspicious thing, you send an alert. Well, we've got to get better at looking at suspicious things and having a point of view saying this is bad and stop it. And that's what you need a lot of data for. So there's the world of precision AI. Then there's this world called generative AI, which is beautiful because there -- the way I describe it, it's a phenomenal tool when many good answers are possible, you don't have to be right. So, you can go to Mid Journey or Runway and say, show me a bird with a blue background. Show me a white bird with a blue background. It's going to show you 17 white birds blue backgrounds. You may like one, you may like the other, and she may like another one. That's fine. There's no wrong answer. It's ugly answer, but it's not a wrong answer. And you can see that, you're going to write me a rap song about the Warriors. My eight-year-old boy does that. He goes, write me a rap song about the Warriors in Shakespeare style and it pops up something pretty crappy, but it's not a wrong answer, it's just a bad answer. So that's why generative AI is very interesting. It has three values. One, it can let you talk in natural language. Two, it can summarize large amounts of data statistically and give you the better answer. And three, overtime, it can give you insights from disorganized data. So if I took all my customer calls and put them in a large database and ran LM [ph] them against it, it might come back and give me insights I didn't know I had. So from that perspective, I think generative AI is going to be hugely transformative in how we conduct our business, how we deliver -- co-pilot, how we deliver assistance to our customers who are the cybersecurity complex. So I think every cybersecurity company is working on some version of a co-pilot, which the purpose of co-pilot is going to be to make your products easier to use, not solve security problems. Roger Boyd Do you see that becoming table stakes or do you think it can be a differentiator? You've done some unique things introducing... Nikesh Arora Look, I think it's going to become table stakes in the next 12 to 18 months. I spent six hours doing an AI review yesterday across all of our products. The two biggest challenges are latency and hallucination, right? And the problem is, I know when I look at the answers it's giving that one out of seven times, one out of 10 times, it's hallucinating. You don't know. You can't figure out which one of those 10 is wrong. So you have to decide which one is wrong. Would you want a product where you, when I tell you, listen, it's like playing, what is that game people play? You put a bullet to your head and roll the thing, and there's one bullet, and keep shooting, and one of them is going to kill you? You can get one wrong answer in security, use it. You say, oh, this is a great question. Reboot your firewall. You reboot your firewall, and poof, goes the magic dragon. So we're still waiting for the hallucinations to minimize latency to get better. But I think 12 to 18 months we'll see co-pilots in most products. I think the question will become how do I deal with so many co-pilots? Because you have 40 security vendors, you have 40 security co-pilots now. How do you deal with them? So, then that goes back and reinforces the theme of consolidation, platformization. And then the question is, can every small startup afford to build a security product and a co-pilot next to it? Roger Boyd Makes sense. I wanted to shift to XSIAM. I think it's what you would call a huge opportunity over the next couple of years. I mean XSIAM is really aiming to solve pain points that have existed in security for years. Can you just talk to those pain points and improvements you've seen with your own deployment of the technology and what you're seeing from the initial customers that have picked it up? Nikesh Arora Yes. So let me give you a little bit of background on why we think it's interesting. If you look, security has big streams or big categories and then smaller categories. There's a big category of firewalls or firewalling, big category of identity, big category of endpoint protection, big category of SOC management, now a big category in developing cloud security. There's four or five big categories out there. We play in four out of the five. We don't play in identity. Now, if you look historically in security, every one of those categories has hit an inflection point at some point in time. Firewalls hit an inflection point. There used to be Juniper, a bunch of other companies, I don't even know I wasn't there. And then suddenly, Palo Alto came out with next-generation firewall that was an inflection point. People wanted the next-generation firewall. It was good enough for them to rip out what they had. If you look at the endpoint business, there's McAfee and Symantec. And you found an inflection point called EDR. You saw the likes of CrowdStrike and [indiscernible] and all these others show up and McAfee and Symantec had to take a backseat. You take a look at what happened in the world of SASE. These can came out, did a great job, built what they built, and now every one of us is chasing SASE. So there are inflection points in the industry. And those come when technology changes, there's 10 to 12 year-old software in that category. There's not a lot of innovation that's happened and somebody built something too amazing that it's worth ripping out the old stuff. I think that inflection point is now coming to SOC management, right? Where there's 12 to 15 year-old technology in the whole SIEM category, in the SIEM space, which was designed to be reactive security. Now we need real-time security. To do real-time security, you have to look at data very differently, right? You just can't take data used to store last year and run AI against it. As most people will tell you were here or over here that the biggest wrong with AI is we don't have good data. So we're all busy cleaning up data. Well, 4, 5 years ago, we said, an inflection point will arrive in SOC management that will require better data. So we went and instead of buying many of the options that were out there, and the one thing got sold recently, we went and said, we're going to build it from scratch. That is how we're able to ingest and store 1 exabyte of data in GCP and run AI against the machine learning against to go make that happen. So early days. I don't want to get out of my skids, but really good promising outcomes. We are able to bring down the mean time to remediate a security incident from 5 to 6 days to on average 1 to 3 hours. Now that dovetails the SEC requirement. You have to report with it 4 days. When you get brief, everybody looking at say, go, I'd like to get my security issues resolved much sooner because I don't want to be telling the SEC I've been breached and like, oh, I haven't solved the problem yet. So it's promising. We've had a few really big deployments recently, which have gone very successfully. There's a lot of customer interest. So we're building capacity, we building capability and we're working with third-party partners and you'll hear more about it from us in the coming months that we're creating other people who are going to deploy this for us because we think this is a huge opportunity and I think most inflection points last 2, 3 years, then everybody starts to flood in there with their own versions of products in SASE part. So we think we have an 18 to 24 month window and it pulls down how quickly and welcome the executed that timeframe. Roger Boyd Okay. I mean you've talked about this $1 billion pipeline in less than a year of launching, it's really impressive. I think you just talked about 18 to 24 months, but how do you think about the customers you're going after? You have 5,300 Cortex customers that I think would be kind of logical first step. But how do you think about it? I mean you talked about this being a transformational shift in SOC technology. How do you think about that being -- something that brings customers to Palo Alto? Nikesh Arora Yes. So there's three categories. One care of customers that already deployed our XDR product, which is somewhat a prerequisite for us to deliver the AI capabilities of XSIAM. So those become much easier conversations because an upsell. You say you already have the hard work is done. Let me sit on top and sure you all the beauty of analytics that I can do and replace all bots of stuff. And in the meantime, I'm building more capability every day on XSIAM, so I can create more outcomes from my customers. That's one stream. And we know those customers, they're fully deployed, they're happy. Another stream is people who are going through as part of the regular process this year, we're going to redo our SIEM or SOC, it's coming up for renewal in 12 months. It's too expensive. We don't like the current solution. We have to evaluate what's going on in the market. So there we show up and say, look, please consider us, we have this very cool product. It's new, it's amazing, please try. So it's kind of another opportunity, right? And the third opportunity is, where we're working with third parties like SIs, people who advise people to redo their cyber security architecture, we're trying to get ahead of that and say, listen, bake us in, into the thought process as you go create this new architecture. So they all have sort of differing lifecycle in terms of when they're going to get done, but like it's early days. So the 3 to 5 years we're sitting here, hopefully in turn around and say this is the fastest-growing security category and product that we saw in the industry. Roger Boyd You just talked about XDR being prerequisite. And you've been building credibility in the EDR XSIAM market for some time. You have -- it's not the Traps product anymore. You've got credibility from MITRE and third-party valuations. Any color you're willing to provide on where you think you are in terms of market share, kind of growth there and customer awareness? Nikesh Arora Look, the XDR product or to start off as a replacement to the endpoint. The whole -- the last version of endpoints was, I pushed a lot of signatures to your endpoint. It checked at the door. If it's a bad thing, I told it's a bad thing and I stopped it. And the world figured out, well, latency is gone, you can send stuff to the cloud process and send the signal quickly back. So we came in at EDR, where you collected data the endpoint, you ship in the cloud, you analyze it, and you stop things mid-flight, much better because it's more real-time and then you can do all kinds of wonderful AI stuff. We're taking it one step up, so they can now collect more data from there, send to the SOC and use that as a basis of cross-curating and cross-multiple security categories. So yes, XDR is a prerequisite to doing better SOC management. It also is a category in itself. But I think over time, it's going to blend into this category of redoing SOC, especially AI is going to be relevant. So if you think about it 5 years ago, there were north of 10 players in the endpoint space. Some of them are sort of naturally attriting. Some of them are up for sale, some of them being shut down. So there's a lot of movement. I think we're down to 4 or 5 real contenders in that space. I think we probably end up with 2 or 3 as it starts to consolidate around AI plus soft management plus sort of the endpoint capability. It's not hard to figure out who those 3 are likely to be. Roger Boyd Do you think that Palo needs to be more aggressive in that space in particular, or do you think that, kind of to your point, as people look at SOC modernization, that kind of just pulls along that category? Nikesh Arora I don't know what more aggressive means. We're not aggressive when it comes down to it. We don't say, yeah, you take this one, I'll take the next one. We don't do that. We fight every one of them like everybody else. So we do have a broader portfolio. It's kind of -- I guess the question becomes, there are two or three ways you can think about business. One way is that, I want every customer, every small, medium-sized customer gives me $5,000, $2,000 and I need $1 million of those, and I'll make a lot of money. Now, that's great if you have a self-signed product, and you don't have to have a truck drive and do a sales call. You don't have to have customer support. That works beautifully in products which are sort of developer-led or user-led. It's harder in complicated security products where you actually, they want to talk to you, and they want to deploy it, and it's a really important product. So there's theories out there. If you can sell one customer a lot of things, your cost of sales goes down, right? I think the hard-known understanding of this enterprise is that, the largest enterprise companies in the world that are out there, their cost of sales is about 30%. If you look on my P&L, the biggest cost is, cost of sales and marketing, even today. If you look across enterprise, R&D is 10% to 15%. Pick your favorite tech company, amounts of $5 billion to $10 billion. That's roughly where it is, 8% to 15%. 8% will be struggling in a year, in a few years, 15%. It's probably where they're doing lots of innovation. Look at G&A, it's between 4% to 8%. If you're Broadcom, it's probably a lot less, but whatever. 4% to 8%. So the majority of your difference in your operating margin and your sort of revenue is cost of sales. So enterprise CEOs should pay attention, how do I minimize my cost of sales long-term as I scale my business, that's the way to get lots of operating margin expansion. The only way to do that is to sell more things to the same customer. So we're trying to make sure that we can sell more things to the same customer, which is good for them, by the way, because it gives them consolidation from a platform perspective. It gives them a better security outcome. It's better business for us. So from that perspective, I don't look at these things as individual streams that I've got to go sell individually a lot of them, I look at collectively, how can I give a platform to a customer which gets them a better security outcome? Maybe make Palo Alto a big trusted partner. I think there's tons of room out there in the market to do that. Roger Boyd Maybe shifting to Firewall, you've been very candid about your expectation that that market should slowdown to kind of a low single-digit pace for a couple quarters now. The last two years have been maybe abnormally strong periods of demand for a number of factors. And then within your medium-term guidance is, an expectation that the hardware side of product kind of grows at the low-end of that. How should investors think about the software piece of Firewall? You've been kind of a leader on the software form factors, how should we think about growth of that, especially as you push into areas like Firewall as a service and personal cloud? Nikesh Arora Let's go back to basics. What are Firewalls? They inspect traffic. When there's traffic, you've got to look at the traffic to see if it's got bad IPs, bad internet, bad DNS, [indiscernible] bad stuff floating in your network every three to five years, generally speaking. And each one of those bits has to be inspected. There's no free traffic, you have to decrypt it, inspect it, and recrypt it. Some people don't decrypt it, don't look at encrypted traffic and that's kind of one part of it. So, A, volume is continuing to double. This is like whatever the right version of Moore's Law for traffic is, it's happening and it's not going to stop. It doesn't stop. More internet shit, more videos, more everything, more Zoom. There's more and more traffic in the world. So the act of inspecting traffic is not going to go away. Historically, the act of inspecting traffic happened at the data center where large volumes came in you had a big box of firewalls, which was hardware. Now, hardware, by the way, is the most efficient way to inspect because hardware is generally cheaper than software, right? What happened though is that, people said wait a minute, now I need to inspect traffic when everybody's working remotely, traffic's getting distributed. I don't need a big box. I can have small boxes. And people said, well, you don't need a small box. You just spin up a piece of software that does that for you. So what has happened is the form factor is changing, but the demand is not going away. Now some companies are very over-indexed on hardware, so they don't have a lot of software form factors, they don't have SASE, they don't have software firewalls. Some companies like us have hardware, software, and SASE. In the last five and a half years, I'd say we've shifted 50 -- 30%, 40% of our demand to software. And we know that, we can somewhat control it. You go to a customer and say, hey, give me a solution to inspect this traffic. I'm like, you can have the small box, or I can run a VM. I think, technically, VM is much better. I can upgrade it much easier. You don't have to have somebody go upgrade the firewall if it goes down. I can remotely upgrade, and I can remotely upgrade all the software. That's a good idea, we'll take the software one. Now, if you only have hardware, you can't sell them a software one. So we've done a lot better. We have north of 50% market share of software firewalls. We have SASE, which we think we had a 50%, 60% of these get out of business, give or take. So we've been shifting there. We see what's happening in hardware. The only problem is, for investors, hardware is recognized as instant revenue, software becomes ratable, so it gets confusing. You took a dollar of hardware, you recognize the revenue. Took a dollar of software, you recognize the third, the third, the third. Oh shit, now what do I do? So all you're seeing is, you're seeing dollar transitions happening on our P&Ls. The volume is not going, the demand's not going, yes, hardware is constrained because software is winning compared to hardware in the firewall space for lower traffic volume use cases. Roger Boyd On SASE, I think including Palo, there's maybe three or four vendors, let's call it 15. Nikesh Arora I said 2.5, but okay. Roger Boyd 3, 2.5, we'll call it... Nikesh Arora Maybe 4 or 5 now, yeah. Roger Boyd With maybe 15,000 customers total and it's been a huge growth area for Palo, 60% growth over the past couple of years, but it still feels very early in the adoption curve. And I'd love to get your perspective on, if you think we're going to start to see SASE become more mainstream? I mean, there's a reason why? Nikesh Arora I heard people here in the States say firewall's going to go away and it's all going to be SASE, so that's great. We're in the SASE business too, I like that. I think the more simplistic way of thinking about SASE is like this. When everything was going back to the data center, you had a big box there. Now everything's distributed between public cloud, between remote access from home, between the data center. So you have a new network topology. It used to be one topology going back, now it's a distributed topology. Re-architecting your network security on the distributed topology can be called SASE. The right way to do it is to have some hardware for a data center, it's still cheaper to do it that way. Have some VMs for your certain use cases and have remote access for certain use cases. So that sort of hybrid architecture is what is the zero trust SASE architecture, I think the whole world is going there. So you will see in the next 5 to 10 years that SASE as we know it is going to become bigger and bigger because hardware as we know it is going to become smaller and smaller and more software firewalls are kicking because the traffic continues to increase. So there is a natural demand of traffic which is causing the drive in SASE and there's a shift from hardware to software going on. So I don't think it's a category. So that's why in the early years we used to have this thing called firewall as a platform and that thing is still growing at double digits. It's still growing at 15%, 20% rate, has been consistently. So we think the market is growing at 15% to 20% and there's a form factor shift happening in the middle of it. So yes, SASE is going to be a very large category, will continue to be a large category. Now it's sort of bringing in SD-WAN into it as well. Roger Boyd A lot of talk about all the entrants into that market. Some of your direct competitors ramping up investments there and Microsoft wants to be in the conversation. How do you think about the competitive environment and how important is it to customers to have that track record of having had this solution in the market for four or five years? Nikesh Arora It's very funny. I was on holiday last week and some other security companies were going to report this week and my wife said to me, she was like, what do you think's going to happen? I said, I'd like all of them to do well, which means the market is strong and demand is strong. And they all did. The way I think about competition, remember, five years ago we had 1.5% market share of $180 billion market. We probably have 3.5% now, which means 96% of the time somebody else has got the business. I live happily with competition. It's great, it's wonderful, drives more innovation. Our platformization continues to get us more and more share. The more people there are in the market, the more innovation there is, the more they could tell customers and say, listen, you should move to SASE. You know what happens when a customer is told you should move to SASE? They say, let's do an RFP and see what Palo Alto have? So I'm happy that people are out there telling them that SASE is important and they should go deploy SASE because then it allows us to go participate in that market. So I think right now we can all grow without trying to steal from each other. Roger Boyd Fair enough. Maybe last question on cloud security. You recently disclosed some pretty impressive module adoption stats. I think the pushback I get from investors, maybe that's not directly translating to ARR growth, but it's still very early market, architectural decisions are still being made. How do you think cloud security evolves from here? Are we at a point where we're moving past visibility as the main pain point, some of the vendors that have done very well solving that use case into a place where detection response and code to cloud are becoming more important and driving more? Nikesh Arora That's a great question. I think we all get confused because you need large numbers from the hyperscalers that come out there, they did so many billions of dollars of business. If you look at the world of actual deployment on the other side, I'd say there's three sets of companies. There's the cloud SaaS companies. You take the workdays and the ServiceNow and all these people who deliver SaaS products. They have to have good cloud security. Those guys are busy buying platforms. They're not buying point solutions because they know their entire business depends on making sure they can keep those customers' data secure. So most SaaS companies are moving to platforms already out there. Then there's a bunch of people who are early in their deployment lifecycle of public cloud. If you go ask your traditional companies, say, how much your mission-critical applications are in the public cloud, the answer is not many, 10%, 15%. So they haven't moved their mission-critical stuff there. The moment they move their mission-critical stuff there, they're going to get more serious about cloud security. The third ones are people still dabbling around, still doing development, looking at point solutions. So I think you're right, it is an early market. There's no doubt in our mind that it's going to be a large market. It's going through its paces. It's slowly growing. We track consumption. Our consumption shows that 30% to 40% growth is consistent over the last few years. We think that stays at those levels for the next 5 to 10 years. If something is consumed on a consistent basis at 30% to 40% a year, I think revenue's follows that consumption track. We're very happy that we keep building the platform in the process. We need growth levers in the future. Otherwise, you guys won't like us. Question-and-Answer Session Roger Boyd Right on time. Thank you so much for an insightful discussion. Thank you all for being here. Nikesh Arora Thank you for having me. Roger Boyd Thank you, guys.