Yet Another Value Podcast - $DRVN Cruising through the Driven Brands thesis | Kyle Mowery GrizzlyRock Capital

Episode Date: May 14, 2026

Driven Brands ($DRVN) puked on a February accounting restatement. Kyle Mowery (GrizzlyRock Capital) walks through why Take 5 remains a crown jewel and could be worth the entire EV of the company (making the franchise and autoglass businesses a free option). We also dig into how the April and May 8-Ks took the scary left-tail risks off the table, why Roark Capital (65% owner) might run a sale process later this year, and the bear case (corporate cost bloat, weakness in the non-Take-5 brands).disclaimer: Andrew is long DRVNKyle's late 2024 DRVN podcast: https://www.yetanothervalueblog.com/p/grizzlyrock-capitals-kyle-mowery?utm_source=publication-search[00:00:00] Intro and disclosures[00:03:23] What is Driven Brands today[00:05:14] Why the car wash divestiture sold so cheap[00:09:19] Why Take 5 is the crown jewel[00:11:15] EV risk and the US ICE car park[00:13:21] Franchisee demand and unit growth[00:15:31] Take 5 vs. Valvoline[00:18:13] The addbacks problem[00:20:57] Inside the accounting restatement[00:23:22] The cash adjustment[00:28:50] The ATI revenue recognition issue[00:30:12] Reading the April and May 8-Ks[00:32:40] Debating adjusted EBITDA[00:34:55] Corporate cost bloat[00:37:54] Is this fraud? No[00:39:49] Weakness in the non-Take-5 brands[00:43:45] Sum-of-the-parts: Take 5 covers the debt[00:46:30] Why public markets misprice the franchise brands[00:48:04] Durability of franchise cash flows[00:50:14] Timing the resolution[00:53:26] Roark Capital's strategic options[00:57:40] Labor Day or Halloween?[01:00:00] Capital cycle stories Kyle's watching[01:03:02] Chinese supply pressure on industrialsLinks:Yet Another Value Blog - https://www.yetanothervalueblog.comSee our legal disclaimer here: https://www.yetanothervalueblog.com/p/legal-and-disclaimerProduction and editing by The Podcast Consultant - https://thepodcastconsultant.com/

Okay, when I sell my business, I want the best tax and investment advice. I want to help my kids, and I want to give back to the community. Ooh, then it's the vacation of a lifetime. I wonder if my out of office has a forever setting. An IG Private Wealth advisor creates the clarity you need with plans that harmonize your business, your family, and your dreams. Get financial advice that puts you at the center. Find your advisor at IG Private Wealth.com.

You're about to listen to Yet Another Value Podcast with your host, me, Andrew Walker. Today I have one of my favorite people in the industry, Kyle Maui from Grizzly Rock Capital on. We're going to be talking about Driven Brands. The ticker there is DRVN. Disclosure, as I'll talk about on the podcast, I'm long, but you can see the disclaimer about everything not being investing advice in the show notes at the back end of this podcast. Look, we're talking about it because Kyle came on. We did a podcast on Driven about two years ago.

A lot, as we are going to talk about, a lot has happened since then. I think it is a fantastic combination of event-driven, value-driven, lots of fundamental research to be done, lots of game theory to be applied. Hence why I'm long. Again, disclaimer, disclaimer, disclaimer. But yeah, look, it's an awesome podcast. I think you're really going to enjoy it. Kyle's one of my favorite people industry.

So we're going to get there in one second. But first, a word from our sponsors. Today's podcast is sponsored by fiscal.a.i. Fiscal.a.I is a moderate financial data provider for global equities. In addition to their web-based terminal, Fiscal is one of the leading data connectors for Claude and Chad GPT. With their self-serve API, you can connect in real-time fundamental data directly to your LOM.

And look, I set it in a podcast before and I'll say it again. They're not just an advertiser. I've been doing lots of cool stuff with Claude and coworker, in particular, building all sorts awesome tools and I need an API. So guess what? I signed up with my own money, tossed my own credit card down and said, hey, fiscal. I need you guys to plug it to my Claude co-work for me so I can keep building these tools and have assets to real-time fundamental data and stock prices everything.

And that includes more than 20 years of financial statements, ratios, filing, segments, KPIs, and all sorts of other things. Unlike other providers, their data updates within minutes of earnings reports, not days. So whether you want powerful out-of-the-box terminal or the real-time AI connector with API, you can use my link at fiscal.a-i-i-slash-YAv, that's fiscal.a-i-i-v to get 15% off. And there'll be a record of show notes too. All right, hello and welcome to yet another value podcast. I'm your host, Andrew Walker, with me Zay.

I'm happy to have one from Grizzly Rock, my buddy, Kyle Maui. Kyle, how's it going? Good. Thank you for the time. I'm really excited today. Before we get there, quick disclaimer, nothing on this podcast is investing in advice. That's always true, but two things to remember about today's podcast. A, I have a pretty decent size, long position in it, so I'm very much talking my own book.

That's my disclosure. I'll let Kyle give his own if you want to in a second. and then B, this company is going through as we're going to address a big accounting risk statement, which increases all sorts of risks and everything. So just remember, not investing advice, full disclaimer at the end of the podcast and in the show notes. Kyle, the company we're going to talk about today is Driven Brands. The ticker there is DRVN. We did a podcast on it.

It must have been two and a half years ago at this point. I was re-listening to parts of it to prep for this pod, and I think it holds up well. I'll include a link to that in the show notes if you want to listen to it. But I'll just toss it over to you. What is driven brands? What has happened in the past two and a half years that have made us kind of want to do a new podcast on them? And then we can go from there. Well, the question on the podcast is reasonable because I thought we're only allowed to talk about AI related things these days, Andrew.

But you know, you joke. And I saw you last week. As you know, every day I look at the memory stocks, I'm like, what am I doing with my life? And every day I do something with AI. And I'm like, how long? give him i'm a very handsome man but how long am i going to be able to make a living with my brain so oh existential the jokes aside driven brands is a very simple business in terms of a products that they offer it's automotive aftermarket uh the crown jewel is take five take five is a wonderful business

it's a prick blue business it's it was the underpinning of our original thesis and it underpins the thesis today there's been a lot of of noise and we'll get to that. But just a level set for anyone to listen to the pod fall of 0-04, 20-24, the stock was in the 14s and the thesis was, hey, look, they're going to exit car wash. Carwash was this capital allocation disaster, frankly, and that actually occurred. The catalyst has occurred in that both U.S. Car Wash and international car wash. were not only divested, but those sales have closed as well. And so that was a main catalyst that we were looking at

and a reason that we were long then and candidly were long now based on Take 5, but those catalysts actually didn't materialize. And the large reason was low purchase price for sure, or low sales price on those businesses, but also this accounting issue. But I do find driven very interesting here in terms of catalytic. I know we'll get to that in a little bit, but it's cheap, it's growing, and it has cash flow, and it's catalytic.

So I think even in a world for, you know, eventy value-oriented folks, it's worth a look, in my opinion. You use catalytic twice, and I think you're going to have to start saying pun intended, if you use catalytic when you talk about a car wash business. So let's maybe ignore the element. of it in the room, the accounting restatement for a second. And we will talk about that, and I'm happy to wax poetic on that. I want to ask a historical question. And then I want to dive into the, I want to dive into the take five business. Because I do think, unless you think everything is,

you know, out and out, I rarely use the term term, but in an accounting restatement, but in an accounting restatement, unless you think this is out and out fraud, there are no take five's in existence, all this sort of stuff. I think we can bucket the, the accounting restatement and focus on take five as a whole start. Let me ask you this. The historical, question, which I probably have less information on. The car wash sales look to me, when I look at those 2025 car wash sales, they looked at like a very low multiple to me. And I just want to ask that because, again, take five is the whole ballgame to me and we'll get

there at a second. But when I look at those multiples to say, hey, man, these car wash multiples, even though it wasn't a great business, it was stuff, especially the European one, it came in pretty low. And it makes me wonder, hey, am I wrong that Roark who owns 60, 5% of this that they're like going to realize reasonable value for this or was I just so wrong on the business? Does that mean I'm wrong on other businesses here? So I'd love to just start with that past thing that we were kind of alluding to in the last podcast. Yeah, but I keep a couple books on my my literal desk, my main desk, and one of them is capital returns. And I think

anyone who focuses on capital return style investing understands supply and demand, Very simply, the car wash business in the United States became oversupplied in a dramatic way. And that was the initial foray that allowed this share price to re-rate to a level that I personally found it attractive a couple years ago. But yes, this oversupply was persistent. The quality of driven's car wash individual locations was not great. and ultimately in an oversupplied market, the price was low. The price was lower than we had put in our original deck, which I believe I put into the public domain concurrent with the pod in late 2024.

So you can go back and check the numbers there. Yeah, the price was lower. I think in the end, they just wanted out of any business tied to weather. They just wanted to simplify the business and narrow the business to high margin, current franchise revenue and take five, which is the crown jewel. So the simplicity, I think they just said, look, we really, we really screwed up in terms of capital allocation a couple years ago. Let's just start over from car wash perspective. Let's just take it off the board. Let's simplify and get back to focusing on cash flow and growth. I completely agree. But again, I don't,

I'm trying to flip through my notes. I didn't put the car wash multiple, but I think they sold these things for like mid-single-digit EBITon multiples. It was like eight times on US and let's call it seven-ish on international. I thought it was a little lower than that. But yeah, and especially international, I thought it was like a fine business. And you looked at those multiples and you were just like, eh, you know, if I was a turn or two off here on the lower quality business that were lower multiple,

what if I'm more than a turn or two off on the crime? So let's go to take five. Again, I think people are going to look at this and they're going to see the accounting restatement and the accounting restatement is scary and it's the near term headline and we'll talk about that at the end. But I continue to believe take five is the whole ball game. You know, I think it's a crown jewel. I think you think it's a crown jewel.

I'm happy to lob in a lot of thoughts and as you know, I've done a lot of diligence here, but let's just start high level. Why do we think take five is a crown jewel and let's start kind of trying to build out the value of take five. Sure. So take five is a typically a two-bay, stay-in-your-car, quick-loop service. It's cheap, it's friendly, it's efficient, you get in, you get out, and the locations are good, okay? So the four-wall unit economics are very, very strong.

This started down in the south, in an area that you're near and near. Started in Louisiana, Metery, Louisiana. That's where I'm from. That's right, Louisiana. So from there, it grew quickly in the southeast, and now it is national, right? So they have almost 1,300 locations across the United States. They're going to 2,500. So there's significant embedded growth of units, and each unit, each box, whether it's corporate-owned or franchisee-owned, and that tends to be state-by-state, if it's franchise or

corporate. But the point is that the returns are very, very good on capital, whether it's. Driven's Capital or franchisees capital. And the reason is it's a simple service and it is very, very quick to get people in and out and the customers are happy. And so you have a situation where win, win, win. And to make things very simple, Valvalin, which is, albeit a more known brand, a little larger as well, but Valvallane has very similar returns on capital. And that business trades at 11 times. And they're also, you know, 11 times this year's EBITDA.

And what you see is the returns for Valbulin are strong. The returns for Take Five are strong. But what you, what public markets investors can't see past is all the noise associated with driven as it relates to take five. But the reason I bring up Valvillane returns on capital and, you know, multiple is it speaks to the quality of that very simple, straightforward business. Perfect. You hit on a lot of the points that I wanted to make, but let me go through a few. You know, when we did this podcast in 2024 and just fast forward today, I think there were a few

questions that even if someone's listened to the first time, the first question they're going to have is, hey, what about the rise of electric vehicles, right? What happens as electric vehicles rise? And I think there was an answer then, and I think there's an answer now. I think they're similar. But I'd love to just ask you, you know, if electric vehicles are coming and slowly displaces, part of the car park. Why is this a, I was kind of surprised when I heard this three years ago. Why is this an 11 times you without business? Doesn't this feel like it should be a, you know, kind of, it's a sunset business. So why can you put a growth business, crown, jewel, multiple on this? Well, in the United States, over 90% of the cars sold are

ice powered, and that's for even 2025, right? So the costs of an electric car are significant. there's still range issues. I think those problems will be solved down the road. But the reality is that the U.S. car park is over a decade old on average, and that car park is mostly ice cars. I think we as investors, tend investors on average probably skew a little bit higher socioeconomic. And more of our friends probably have EVs. But when you just look at the data, when we did our original cohort of in 2024, we projected that the U.S. car park in terms of ice-powered vehicles was going to

peak in 2032, 233. And we're not seeing any data that would consider that to be changed. And when you think about the franchisees and the cash-on-cash returns here, you know, that really, where the car park is now and where it's going, that speaks to a 20-year life cycle for each unit. And I mean, maybe let me flip this script and ask you. I know you've spoken with some franchisees in the Quick Loop industry. You know, what are you hearing from these guys? No, you hit the nail on the head. You know, and the franchisees range from kind of, I don't want to see mom and pop

because you do need a little bit of money to get started here. But it ranges from people who I think are more in this for a real estate or hobbyist play to serious, sophisticated small private equity shops who are looking to open 20, 30, 40, boxes. When I talk to the more mom and pop to say, hey, I get the real estate. That's a problem for 10 years down the road and I'll have taken all of my cash out multiple times over by then. And when I talk to the private equity firms, a lot of it is exactly what you're saying. Hey, I think two years ago, they would have said peaking in 2032, 233. I think now they're saying, hey, the ice car is going to peak in 2035 to 2037, maybe later. And, you know, we're all dead in the long run. And by the way,

after, if it be 2035, there's another 15 years of servicing behind it. And the other side of that coin is, hey, we get great cash on cash returns. And we also think we get a big tailwind from both premization, higher, more synthetic, more synthetic oil changes. And we're going to continue to take share from maybe not dealerships as much, but just kind of legacy oil changes. Because I do think there is an interesting push and pool with dealerships, putting people in warranty and stuff. but definitely legacy auto mechanics. They just think this is where the puck is going. There's going to be a lot more share.

So that's what I'm hearing from franchisees. And one of the reasons, we'll probably talk about this in accounting, one of the reasons I kind of liked this was when I talk to the franchisees, they are confirming what you and I are saying. They like this business. They want to open more stores. The business is good now. So I've been, you know, I've missed the mark on a franchiseees before,

but it's a pretty broad base who I'm hearing it from. I'll pause there if you've got anything. No, I mean, just, you know, don't take our word for it. Look at the units. The units are growing, double digits, franchisees and corporates, and driven. And Valvillen, very similar in terms of growth profile. So you're seeing multiple different types of investor put their capital to work in the industry. The other Valvaline also, one of the reasons I've taken a lot of comfort here, you mentioned Valvaline, is you've got to public.

peer who is saying everything we're saying, and there's a public multiple on them, right? So if you don't believe take five is worth low double-digit multiples, right? Valvaline's got a low-diver-digit multiples. Like, one of them can't be correct. So I think there is that. Let me, just on the Valvlene, I think both you and I anchor on Valvlin, and it's funny, you said 11 times EBITDA because I have the same number. When I fear value, take five, I've kind of got something similar in there. But I do think a person could look at take five and even setting aside the restatement stuff. You know, Valvillian just reported, I think, last week. And they did 8.2% same store sales.

And two thirds of that from memory was price, and a third of that was increased transaction volume, right? Take five did, they came out with a prelim report because they're in the accounting restatement, but they did 4%. And this is off a high threes in the last quarter of last year. So I think a skeptic might look at this and say, hey, you guys are comping to Valvaline, forget the accounting, forget all this. You guys are combing to a better system with, you know, they do have differences in how the boxes are run. You're comping to a better brand that's better run and it's a better system. So if Valvaline's worth 11, maybe take five is worth nine or something.

So what would you kind of say to that on the multiple discrepancy? I don't disagree, but driven's trading at eight. not nine. So I don't believe that we're taking quote unquote multiple risk, right? It's already trading at eight. It's on this year's numbers. It's going to keep growing so that number goes down out into that out years. I think there's a chance for take five to improve. But if they don't, I think, you know, I think the reasons that driven trades at eight and Vivalent trades at 11 speak to leverage and just all the chaos that's been driven since it became public, right? I mean, that is, you know, I think I've said to a few friends, three strikes and you're out

here, right? You had car wash, strike one, CFO. Now, this is a couple years ago even, but CFO, strike two, and now is this strike three, the accounting restatement strike three for driven into public markets. I know we'll get to the event part later, but I do think there's a significant possibility that things begin to happen and value begins to unlock here. You know, just let's start transitioning to, you know, kind of the elephant in the room, the restatement, but just one other thing I would add there, you said the strikes, you know,

when I talk to a lot of friends, especially before, I mean, maybe after the restatement, too, but before the restatement, I know a lot of people who looked at this and said, hey, I think take five is a good business. I think the other business are fine. But, you know, if they're going to do 500 million in EBITDA next year, 180 of that is going to be ad backs. And they were looking at that ad backs and saying, that is not a clean number. You know, and this relates to the restatement because I think they were saying,

I don't know if I can trust the accounting. I don't know if I can trust the numbers. And that's an issue. I think as we start talking restatements and we'll go there in one second, I think it will shine through. I don't know if you want to say anything on the ad backs or if you want to go into the restatement. It's a valid point. Our thesis, when I did the first plot, undriven with you, was that the numbers were going to get cleaner. The, you know, the ERP was going

in. Car wash was, you know, sort of like, is it in a process? Is it not in a process? It was. But the point is, you know, corporate costs were 20% of revenue. Now they're 25, right? The numbers are extremely noisy today, and I had anticipated that they got less noisy. So that was just something that my base case did not occur on that, on the noise. But I still think with, I think there is an opportunity for those to get less noisy. I think this ERP, and I guess this will probably take us in the accounting particular, you know, this ERP is one of the reasons, in my personal opinion, that this accounting restitution, even happened, right? But it's done, it's in, it's about getting things clean and, and getting simplicity, right? Debt down, getting resegment. This is the second time they've re-segmented,

and they resegmented two weeks right before this happened. And that tells me, let's just, I guess, get into it. Yeah, yeah, yep. Step on it. You know, if you're putting out data for the first three-quarters of 2025 two weeks before you have to kind of pull the plug on the 10K, that tells me that the magnitude of the accounting restatement is not as large, because if it was huge, they would have known about it two weeks before they pulled the plug, right? So you have this issue where they're working to get to that cleaner, clearer number, and that is certainly the goal in what they were saying to the street throughout 2025. Let's go to the accounting restatement then. So This is anybody who wants to.

You can go pull up. It's February 25th of this year. They file an 8K that says, hey, we're not going to be able to file a 10K. They have a, it's a short 8K, but for a restatement, there's a lot of stuff that they're restating. And the market pukes all over this, right? This is an accounting restatement. People say, I can't trust this. This is a business with leverage.

So if you've got a restatement, you can't trust it, you know, even a small change in the EV is going to drive a big change in the stock price. I, you know, when it came out, I know you and I were talking. I think that day. But to me, I looked at this and I said, hey, this looks like a scary headline. And I think you and I came out different ways. You said, hey, look at the resegmenting there and all that sort of stuff. I just kind of, I looked at the 8K and I said, to me, again, people go read it. All the stuff they're talking about happened in fiscal 2024.

Like basically all of the things that they talk about relate to not fiscal 2025, the numbers that we're really caring about, not the current business. it was way in the past. So I believe it was an Oracle ERP that got implemented of July 2024. A new CFO comes in October, 2004 or something, if I remember correctly. So to me, I looked at it and said, hey, I think they implement an ERP, new CFO comes in. They sell both car wash, U.S. and international. And then when they're getting ready to close the books on 2025, there are all these old

issues from the old ERP that are getting surface or that might have been immaterial when they filed 2004, but now they are material because they've disposed of assets. So that's kind of how I looked at it. I mean, an accounting rest statement is hard to talk about on a podcast. We can talk about any which way. I've got notes on every single line of the AK, but however you want to talk about wherever you want to go on the economy of your statement, let's do it. Yeah, not to get too wonky. There was four line items. Three were innocuous. One was spicy. Wait, wait, wait, let me get. So there was lease adjustments, cash adjustments, expense classification, and other errors. You said one was spicy.

The one that always jumps out to me is cash adjustments was the spicy one, but were you referring to a different one? No, cash. Yeah, that's the one. What? Cash should be the one thing that's readily accountable. We are on the same page. The cash adjustments one's the one that gave me a little heartburn when I was thinking of this, yeah? Yeah, but again, just to double click on.

on the magnitude, right? So CFO didn't resign, the auditor didn't resign. You have a combination of ERP and magnitude, and there's just a lot of things moving in the shuffle. Real estate that was purchased for car wash, leases that were entered into for car wash, et cetera. Now that's all leaving the system, right? So I think there's a materiality argument, if one wants to make that argument, for this being nasty, for sure, look at the stock, look at the reaction.

Yeah, if you get under the hood and you just think, okay, first principles, you know, is this business, you know, does it exist? Yes. Do these locations exist? Yes. Is the cash flowing through these businesses? Yes. And so when you go and look, you know, operationally, it gives you a sense that the accounting issues were probably overblown when the stock, I mean, the stock went from 16 to 10, right? And that was at 19 last year, and now it's at 13 and change. So at 10, I would argue that there was overly punitive for what it probably is. And we'll find out in June. in about a month, they're going to file their K and a guide for 26.

Look, and I would say it was and is scary. We can talk about some of the filing since this came out, which I think takes a lot of the left tail risk off, but you can disagree. But yeah, I just kept looking at this and saying a lot of this looks pretty innocuous. As we talked about, you can talk to the franchisees. This is not, you know, the worst statements are percentage of completion buildings for engineering companies and stuff. because then you're like, oh, this might be a complete bag of goods. Here, you could talk to the franchisees and not just at take five.

I mean, there's a take five, two minutes from my house in Kenner, Louisiana. You know that there's something there. You can talk to the franchisee. You can see the FD. It doesn't mean that there's not fraud, but it was just hard to marry that with this. Let's go quickly line by line. And I'll tell you when you tell me from. We mentioned there were four.

The first thing was lease adjustments, which is errors related to right of view. assets and right of use liabilities. I mean, I saw that and I was pretty much like no big deal. You can agree or disagree with me. I agree. Okay. The next thing was expense classifications. Now, expense classifications, I'm not saying it's great.

I'm not saying it's great, but it was during fiscal years 2003 and 2024. Notably to me, when I was reading it, it did not have anything in fiscal 2025. And I think it said that it caused overstatement of company operations stores expenses. So maybe they were more profitable. But I read that and said, oh, if I'm thinking of this as a business on a go forward-basedness, I don't think this is a huge deal. You can agree or disagree. I agree.

And really what that was was back in the day when they were trying to be this giant, it was a 2021 IPO and they were building out this wonderful platform, right? that had this platform segment even. It was a crazy time, 2021. We all wanted platforms, man. Yeah, yeah. So I think a lot of that was related to, you know, are we building this supplier within the business

that also supplies other businesses and sort of this. So that accounting is like, okay, well, was it platform? Was it at the store? Is it, you know, where does it go? an account, honestly, if you got three accounts in a room, you might get two or three different answers. And so that to me was also less, quote, unquote, scary. Other, we mentioned the cash adjustments. I mean, that's the scary one. It says certain errors relating to cash accounts. You say, oh, my God, like, the one thing you should be able to account

is you just pull up a, here's December 31st, the cash statement in the bank. Like, you feel like that should be pretty good. But when I read it, I really noted, I've got this highlighted. cash amounts primarily originating in fiscal years, 2003 and earlier. So I looked at that and I said, hey, even if there were stuff missing, I think I can trust fiscal 2024 and definitely fiscal 2025 year-to-date on the cash balances. So maybe there was, is there any fraud going on here, Mike? Maybe there was some light cash issues years and years ago, but I don't think I'm missing anything there.

That was the one, as you said, that gave me heartburn, but you could tell me if I'm, you know, justifying it to myself or if it was too. crazy? No, I think the question is magnitude, right? If it's $5 million, that's a lot of money in the real world, but for something like driven, that would be a wonderful side relief. If it's a giant number, then we, I guess, will be wrong. But even if it was a giant number, again, now if they filed, and this is why I think some of the left tail risk has come out, because they filed subsequent things, but if they filed and said, hey, our 2020, cashman balance was 100 million short, but no changes to 2024, 2025. I don't even know how that

be possible, but the thing that just kept jumping out to me was it didn't say anything about the cash statement in the present day. I agree. Yeah. And then the last thing was other errors, and there's a lot of things in here. Again, when I looked at this, many of them are fiscal 2023 or 2024. This has the only thing that's really in fiscal 2025. It says inappropriately recognize revenue for our ATI business in fiscal 2025. I mean, that's where you start getting to the spicy accounting things. But the way I justified it to myself is, I look through everything. And ATI is like their absolute smallest business.

So I was like, even if this gets written off and there's nothing there, you know, it's so small they never even mentioned it anymore. It's not going to impact the value. It's a training business, if you will. It's a training program might be a better word for franchisees, of which. they have many, right? They have them not only at Take 5, but also they have Myniki, they have Mako. Yep. Number of automotive, auto body repair, et cetera. So.

Yeah. And I should note, they just put out an AK saying that, you know, in Q1 of 25, you know, the revenue is going to go down one to five million. So let's just pick the midpoint, call it three, pick a margin on that. They're talking on gross profit of probably less than a million dollars for that quarter. Well, I'm glad you mentioned the recent 8K, because I think we can go, we can fast forward a little bit. You know, we kind of froze for that discussion at the February 25th, 8K. We have had subsequent developments. And the two big ones I would say is April 21st, they file an 8K that's preliminary on audited

results for 2025 and Q-126. And just last Friday, you and I are recording May 11th, May 8th, they file a NT10Q for the Q-1-26 quarter that says, as you said, one to five million number statement impacts for 2025. So I said, hey, I think between the two of them, I think a lot of the left tail risks that were really scary when that February 8K came out, I think they're off the table, you know, because they started giving you information. But I don't want to put words in your mouth

or if you've got different feelings, I'd love to hear how you're looking at that. No, I don't think so. I mean, I was telling another friend of ours, I said, look, the lawyers are in charge here. The lawyers are signing most of these documents. The lawyers are not going to let numbers leave that aren't buttoned up at this point, right?

Pretty embarrassing for the company that it got to this point, but we are where we are. and now they're going to be, they're going to be buttoned up three different ways. And so when you start talking about numbers of these magnitudes, it is a small side relief for driven investors. Let me flip to, you know, when I talk to people are skeptical or bearish on Driven right now,

I think the main things I'm hearing now are, hey, look at what they file on the April 21 update, right? The first thing they'd point to is they'd say, Driven gives you, they say, hey, here's what our 2025 like, looks like, but they did not give an adjusted EBITDA number for Q1 of 26 or any guidance. And they say the reason they can't do that is because of the accounting restatements. And both them and I'll be honest me, I think I'm the one who coined this line. You know, as I said earlier, about 500 million EBITDA and like 120 million is ad backs.

This company has never had any issue with doing adbacks. Why can't they just say, hey, here's our adjusted EBITA. And by the way, we're going to be adding back 20 million of counting your statement. So I think a lot of the bears look at that. It's the dog that didn't bark, right? These guys won't give an adjusted EBITDA number, and they're worried that the fundamentals here are really bad. And I think there's counters to that, but I'll pause on that.

I think the counters are fairly weak until we get the numbers. We're speculating about what numbers they're going to file and what ad backs they're going to include. I mean, my sense is with the ERPN and the finance function built out here that this should not, this accounting restatement is probably going to be one time in terms of accountants and lawyers primarily. But their finance systems should be okay to run a simpler business XUS and international car wash, right? I mean, I don't know why. If they have to add $30 million of cost to the income statement structurally, then maybe the bears have the argument.

But in the absence of real numbers, it's very convincing for the bears to make that argument. This other bear point will come up when we talk. I'll walk you through my sum of the parts or we can do some of the parts together, whatever it is, but I want people to know kind of what we're playing for. The other bear point is there's a huge corporate expense burden here, right? It's approaching, it's not quite, but let's just use round numbers. It's approaching 200 million per year is the corporate expense burden. And the reason I mentioned now is because you mentioned, hey, tacking on another 30 million of ongoing finance costs.

I think another bear point is, Andrew, you are using a take five EBITDA number. You cannot use that number. It is not fully loaded. They're putting, there's tons of stuff that, you know, any. standalone business would do, that they're pulling out into the corporate number. And I will be honest with anyone, there's an activist here who's published stuff. We can talk about it. The corporate expenses here have ballooned.

And I kind of look at this and I don't know what they're spending so much money on. And we can talk about the controlling shareholder, but I look at them like, am I missing something because the corporate expense is so high? So this ties into the fundamentals, it ties into the restatement, but I'll just toss it over to you. Like, what do you think about that corporate expense load historically going forward as it relates to this investment? Well, the corporate, the growth in corporate expenses is probably my biggest question for when they come back into the public markets in terms of speaking with investors, having their crawl, guiding. Because if you just, if you look at, and the timing can be odd, but if you just look at straight up 10K, SGNA is about 20%

of revenue for Valvillin. And for many years, it was about 20% for Driven, right? But that number over the last couple years for Driven kind of drifted towards 24, 25. So you're talking about four to 500 basis points of SG&A that is quote unquote unexplained. And I think in my mind, like when I read that 10K for 24, I said, okay, well, look, they got car wash and they got all this noise and they're still trying to grow, take five. There's just a lot of, it's chaotic. And so they needed people. Or there's some other costs that are rolling through.

Now, this is clearly a ROR control company. They own over 60%, right? They're making those decisions and the disclosures are not, they have more information than we do, right? So they know exactly what it is at the line item level. And we don't, and we may or may not ever. know the grand, you know, with granularity, but we have the advantage of liquidity. So that's the offset and price, right, to get in and get out. So, but just to kind of focus on that,

does that answer the question? I think it did. I mean, the answer is, hey, we, we aren't 100% sure. Because as you said, 20% of sales, you know, this is a $2 billion revenue company. So if it goes from 20 to 25%. You're talking 100 million of ad on expenses if I'm doing that half my head right. Like, it's a lot of money. Let me ask the work question. We'll come back to work in a second.

But again, maybe this is just me being, maybe, you know that meme with the bell curve and the guy in the middle is the dumbest and the guy who's drooling actually says something really smart and the guy who's like the Jedi agrees with him. Maybe this is me being on the far left of the curve. But when this came out, one of the reasons I got so interested, I was like, look, there might be issues.

But I feel like I can cut off. the far left tail where this is a complete and outright fraud. A, because I've talked to franchisees, B, because I've seen take fives, and C, because Rourke owns 65% of this, and they IPOed it. And I don't think there's ever been a private equity vast company like this, right, where the private equity firm, work literally built this. I'm sure private equity is invested in fraud. I know that for sure. But I don't think there's like a Rourke built this and IPOed it. And it's like kind of consumer brands where it was fraud. And I don't even know how that would have been possible. So one of the ways I got comfortable was I was like, Rourke might not be the best controlling shareholder.

We'll talk about that later. But I don't think they could have been part of a fraud here. Was that too dumb? Was that right? How would you feel about that statement? Yeah. I don't believe there's a reasonable possibility that it's an out and out fraud. There's too many people.

There's too many channel checks that have been done. There's too many reinvestment of growth, et cetera. I don't think that's even on the table. And again, another reason I got comfortable here was this is not percentage of completion accounting. There's not, I mean, at its core, the main business is take five. Somebody drives in, they swipe a credit card, they pay you 50 bucks for changing your oil, and then they drive out.

It's done in 10 minutes. You know, like, it just, it shouldn't be that hard to account. And unless you think somebody ran off with the cash, it's tough to see. Last bear point, I'll throw out there. And then we can maybe talk some of the parts. anything else you want to hit. You know, we already talked about, hey, maybe you can't comp take five to Valvling because Valvene just seems to be executing better, even though returns on Investing Capital, all sorts of other stuff. But we already talked about that. I think the other

bare point people would make is there are other brands beyond Take Five. You know, there's Mining Key, there's the auto glass business. There's some other smaller franchise business in here. They don't seem to be doing that well, right? And the performance seems to be deteriorating. If you look at the Q1 guide, it basically implies that the non-take-5 business is probably flat on same-store sales. And, you know, this is an inflationary consumer environment. Flat on same-store sales is not great. Net unit growth at the non-take-5 businesses has basically stalled out. So I think the last bare point would be, hey, you guys are talking about this,

and take-five might be good. But if you took a one-turn multiple away from Take-5 versus Valvlin, and then you said all the rest of these businesses are X growth and maybe shrinking, and I know you and I've looked at franchisees that are shrinking and the multiples get challenged real fast. If you kind of do that math, hey, you're buying an accounting restatement without that much upside, I think is what a bear might say to us. Yeah, kind of two parts there. So on what they now call franchise brands, it has Mioneke, which is General Automotive Repair, and then Autobody, which is mostly an insurance pay customer. and then there's MAKO.

And MAKO is, you know, we talk about the K-shaped economy, right? MAKO is auto paint, and their core customer is on the lower part of that K. So it's a more discretionary older car. I want to fix my paint or paint a different color or whatnot. And so what you saw was they had a pretty good hiccup, actually, Q2 of 2025.

And a lot of that was related to tariffs, economic questions, low end of decay kind of pressure. And I would just say that, yes, that occurred. But in terms of, can that business over time be flat? Yeah, I think it will. Right. And they're not trying, they driven, are not trying to grow the franchise brand units. Okay, they're trying to maintain them. And what is that worth in today's market?

Right? So Jiffy Loub just sold the tail was private, but depending on what source you read, you'll hear multiples between eight times and nine times. And that is not for a franchise system, right? Franchise is very, very low capital intensity for driven. There is some operational intensity, and maybe you're seeing that as part of corporate costs.

But you are seeing good pre-cash flow conversion. They also fund the debt, which while the debt is in the threes right now at Driven, it's coming down over time, clearly. And it's very, very low cost. So I would say that, you know, pick a multiple on that. I think in my original deck I used a double-digit multiple on that, on that line item, if you will. I don't think that that multiple can be compressed much below 10 just because of the capital light nature of that revenue stream.

You know, it is interesting. Like, one of the reasons I was able to get comfortable with Take 5 is because I could talk to franchisees. But the funny thing is, if I'm just looking, I think Take 5 is 780 corporate stores and 500 franchise stores if I'm just looking very fast at some notes. So 60, 40. The funny thing is, franchise business, as you said, capital light, recurring somebody else, everybody loves it, but it's worth a higher multiple.

But the funny thing is, one corporate store is worth probably 10 franchise stores just in terms of value to the company. And even if you think it's split 50-50, right, that means, you know, 50 times 500 of the value, 500 of the values from the corporate stores, 50 is from the franchise stores, maybe 70 because is a bigger thing. So the corporate source is where all the value is. And that's just one of the interesting things thinking about this that I've thought, that I've thought about. I'll pause there. I want to switch over to some of the parts, but I'm just going to pause there. You can comment on anything on my Eureka moment on corporate versus franchise or anything else in the bare points,

anything you think we haven't hit on the fundamentals, anything. No, there's a lot that I want to get to in terms of go forward. What do I expect to happen after the pod, but let's do some of the parts first. Why don't again put this script on you? How are you thinking about I know this concept seems trite these days, but intrinsic value or value

to a private purchaser? So, as I've said, I think all of the value, not all the value, but the vast majority of the value is in take five. And I started investing, buying this again, disclosure I'm long, like right when

the right when the accounting issues cropped up. And because of that, I stress tested the Take 5 valuation. I mean, I've got like 15 different ways I stress tested it. But it's so funny. You mentioned Valvene trades at 11x. All of them kind of centered on all of the values that I did. And I mean, I did unit by unit, friendship, like everything.

All the values ended up centering around, you know, if you think Valvillian's worth 11x, driven's probably worth about 11x. So if I just say, hey, I think the Take 5 business, you know, it does about 400 million in EBDA. Slap an 11x multiple on that. That covers all of the debt, and that covers the share price up to $17 per share. And then I get the franchise business, the Auto Glass business for free. Now, franchise does, I think it's $180 million in trailing EBDA.

Autoglass does $20 million trillion EBDA. Corporate is negative. It does about $150 to $170 in corporate costs. There are a lot of adbacks there, but what I basically thought is, hey, I think auto plus franchise is worth more than corporate plus adbacks, but just call it a wash. And I've got Take Five up to 17. And, you know, now we're at 13. It was kind of 11 to 12 when I was doing this math. But I think that's a pretty large margin of safety for the other reason I like this is I think Take Five, everyone knows.

I love a shitty company that will not grow in value. And that's just got a bunch of cash and I just need management to unlock it. I think Take Five will grow in value. So, you know, if I sat here and for some reason, things hadn't evolved a year for now, I think TA5 would be worth $20 per share. And I kind of like that combo. So we can dive into any piece of that. What did you think of that just very quick, high-level SOTP?

I don't disagree with it. It was, you came out with fresh eyes, right? You were able to kind of take a newer look at the system. and Take 5 has the majority of the value here. But I would say that on franchise brands, I think people are overlooking the sustainability of the cash flow. And I think a lot of people, I think people in the public markets would be shocked

at the private market value, specifically to a distinct private equity purchaser from Rourke of that line. because the cash light nature of the operation, excuse me, cash, you know, there's no CAPEX. Yes, yes, yes, yes. And I think the multiple would be a lot higher than people in the public markets are using. I think because there's no growth and we're in a market that focuses on growth and momentum more than free cash flow today, I think that many in the public markets are underestimating

the multiple that that would trade at if it traded. Secondly, Autoblast. I was overly bullish Autoglass in my original write-up, but I don't think that business is dead.

I think it's delayed. What Autoglass is is they built a national number two to Safe Flight based on compiling together 13 different geographical regional players.

And it's all-on-one operating system. It has the chance to grow tremendously. So I don't know what multiple that should trade at because the disclosure on AutoGlass has been very, very limited. And that may, in fact, be a large part of the corporate cost. I don't know. That's my number two question when they come back to speaking public is kind of what's going on with AutoGlass,

where do you think the business will be in three to four years. But I do think those businesses have latent businesses, value that is very hard to see in your sum of the parts. I don't disagree with it, but I think that if those businesses sold in the private markets this summer or this fall, I think they would sell higher numbers than you had in your sum of the parts. You know, the only thing I wanted to add there is you and I are familiar with some franchisee streams that might have a little bit more cyclotality or questionableness of terminal value. And I won't disclose them here, but, you know, think about something like CrossFit.

If you were looking at a CrossFit franchisee stream and you say, hey, it grew like crazy from 2016 to 2019. Well, now you've got to start saying, well, I don't know how sustainable this is, fitness, ads, and flows. Well, they'll be new. Mynicki and Mako were started in 1972. You look at the past 10 years of financials and it is just rock, solid steady. So, you know, people who are familiar with some of these smaller franchisees might say, oh, I knew franchisees that trade for 8X in the public markets. And I'd say, A, they're probably worth more in the private markets. But B, Mideke and Maco do not have that same people are going to be getting their cars repaired and their cars painted for the next, I guess, until AI takes over and never has an accident again.

But I just think the quality of that to add on to what you were saying might be lost in the public markets. And Autoglass I'm with you. If you talk to the company, they'll say, hey, it's a matter of when, not if we will get a big national contract that will take this, that'll make this investment like really work and turn it into take 5.2.0. Let's, okay, so it sounds like we're kind of aligned on roughly some of the parts and everything. Let's go do, I want to do two more things before we wrap this up. How we think the accounting plays out and then works motivations. And let's do accounting plays out because work can't do anything until the accounting plays out. So I think the other bear point I didn't mention is the company has come out and said,

we will file our 10K by the middle of June. I can't remember the exact date. A lot of the bears I've talked to, and I will admit, I've got some suspicions. We'll say, hey, if you look at the history of restatements like this, they're saying they're going to get this done in four months. You can't find an example of getting done, you know, this is going to be an eight-month rest statement.

This is going to be a year-long restatement. So they think the company's underselling how long the receiptment takes and extra months introduces extra uncertainty. It introduces extra costs on everything. So I'll pause there. What do you think, kind of will this get resolved in the middle of June? Or do you think this is going to drag on longer? The simple answer is I don't know, and you cannot prove, disprove the counterfactual.

When this all hit, my estimation was late May. And I had a lot of people who I highly respect disagreed with me on that, both shorter and longer. Now it looks like it's going to be early June. My thinking is no CFO resignation. no auditor resignation. They put out new information two weeks before they pulled the numbers. My sense is that this just barely is a toe fault to use a different sports analogy. It's a toe fault.

It's not, they're not driving right over the line and just, you know, kind of leaving bodies in the wake. That is accounting and it's particular on, you know, leaseholds and where does the expenses go, that's fine. The lawyers and accountants can figure that out. Look, I don't know, and I hate to say, oh, it's June for sure, and then it's September. It could be anything. But the probability and the magnitude here, I think, is manageable and certainly manageable in the context of the event path, which I do, which I do want to get to once we finish the accounting section. No, look, I talk to these, I talked to the bears there. And my overarching thing would be, I kind of agree with you.

Again, I was a little skeptical of June. I think they've kind of put themselves on the line with it. But I can be like, I talk to the take buy people. I see the take five value. If I'm buying this whole company for less than take five, for less than the value of take five and getting the other brands for free, like why do I care if it's June or September? Now, maybe that's too cavalier because everybody says they don't care about market to market.

But at some point, everybody cares about market to market. And I don't think that the market's going to be too happy. this isn't done in June, but at this point, I think they're going to do June, but if it comes in September, I think that'll be fine. Let's talk about what Rourke does. Again, Rourke is, for those who aren't familiar, Rourke is the private equity company. They own, let's just call it two-thirds of the company here. They've owned this for a long time. They obviously took a private, sold a little bit after this went, took it public, sold a little bit after they went public. You know, I think their motivations and what they do on the back end of this are really interesting. And I will turn it over to you for

what they do, but I will just mention one thing that I know you and I've talked about. We're recording just May 11th. May 8th, there's actually a news report that goes out. Inspire Brands, which Rourke owns. It has to be their largest investment by far. This is the company that owns Dunkin, Jimmy Johns, Arby's, Sonneth, Buffalo Wild Wings. Inspire Brands is going to IPO in the back half of the year. I just can't hope and think of does Rourke really want this. Inspired brands is a big franchise retail focus. Does Rourke really want this dog of an accounting restatement out there while they're going to pitch Inspire Brands. So I have kind of softball-in-teed up, but I'd love to just turn over to you.

Like, what do you think work does? Once the accountings resign, what happens here? Yeah. And the caveat here is that I've never spoken to Roark about Inspire or Driven. I've never tried to speak with Roark about Inspire or Driven. So it's pure speculation, one man's opinion. I'm conflicted because that point that Bulls made to me over the last couple years, like, oh, they're going to clean it up before they IPO inspire.

Maybe, maybe not, right? It's a different segment of investor. It's large cap, simple growth. Like, that story is different than, look, there's only $800 million of public market cap undriven, right? A lot of that's held by folks that have held it for a long time, firms that it's all public that are well respected in the fundamental investing community, such as Northpeak and others, right? And is that the same segment that's by, you know,

is someone looking at driven, looking at Inspire? Maybe, maybe not, right? And I don't know. I don't know if they, I don't know what Rourke's going to do. I wrote to my investors a couple months ago and I said, look, here's what I think's going to happen. There's two paths forward. There's one. No, we sold car wash. We're going to just simplify with what we have. Yeah, we had this toe fault with accounting, blah, blah, blah, explain it away, get the revenue, continue growing, get the debt

down, and you remain in the public markets. And in that scenario, you probably never get the multiple you deserve because investors have long memories and nobody wants to get burned by buying driven because, you know, all these three strikes that I talked about earlier. And in that scenario, it probably takes a couple years for the stock to kind of wander into the low 20s, right? Take five growth, de-leverage, et cetera. That's a fine return. But I think for event-driven or catalytic, pun intended, per year. There you go. There you go. Unintended.

I think the catalytic angle is RORC runs a process either for the entire business or for the franchise brands and that may or may not have Car Wash stapled to it. And I think in that scenario, Rourke probably won't disclose if they're running that or not. Same thing they did with Car Wash. They never disclosed it to the day it were sold. So I think this summer or this fall, we could see a scenario in which part of the business or all of the business is off the board, publicly speaking. I think, you know, if you look at the history of auto body, that is classic private equity owned and built that industry. So there's a lot of people on private equity teams that understand these businesses. And we can talk about, you know, some of the safety improvements, reduction of collision,

et cetera. I think we hit that on the last spot. But the reality is, I think we will know by Labor Day, or at least Halloween, where this is going. And, you know, we shall see activists or other private equity, whether that comes public or private. I, you know, I don't know towards Rourke. But, yeah, Rourke doesn't want to deal with this. I mean, they own this in fun vintage. that are 10 years old and 14 years old.

So, you know, the question, like, if it was a newer vintage fund, you might see them kind of reach into their pocket and take minority shareholders out and fix it in the private markets away from scrutiny and podcasts and the like. But when you're in a 14-year-old fund, like, what's your time frame? You're probably already into your sort of extended, you know, a couple years here. So I don't think it's, Roark probably wants out more than they want back in, is my job.

I think that's right. I mean, to me, obviously the ideal would be, they clean this up and they say, hey, we're done with this. We're running a full process. We're selling everything, and this goes off the board for, I know some bulls who say you won't pry a hand out of my, you won't probably share out of my hands, but before we get 25, I know some bulls who say,

you won't probably share out of my hand before we get 35. I'll take either. Thank you very much. But your dream case is restatement done into a full sales process. But I will tell you, restatement done into selling franchise brands, as you said, and maybe turning this into just Take Five and Autoglass. I think you said maybe they staple franchise with Autoglass. But if you had Take Five plus the growth upside of Autoglass and a very, you know,

the corporate expenses were either way cut down or maintained. I think this would be a very attractive public market kind of compound. you know, hey, we run similar to Valvene, we run this at 3X. Maybe we can find Valvene just bought Breeze for, I think that's going to be a pretty good acquisition despite the FTC making them to best. Maybe we can find a bolt-on-ar-two to the Take-5 system. If not, you know, we're going to run this at 3X leverage, grow auto glass and return all the capital shareholders.

Like, I think that'd get a pretty strong multiple in the market. And either one of those, I think the stock would respond very well to the path A&B I laid out there. Yeah, I think there's a pretty straightforward way to making 50% plus over the next, let's just call it 12, 18 months. You know, when you're dealing with memory stocks that go up 50%, I mean, is it a week? Is it a day?

It sounds trite, and maybe it is trite, but I would be very happy with that return. And again, I'm long get. That's kind of my base-ish case, to be honest with you. So I think we are pros because it's been about an hour. We've hit just about everything on my question list. I think we did a really nice job discussing anything, but I'll pause here, anything else you want to talk about or anything else we should be thinking about mentioning?

No, I don't think so. I appreciate the time. I know this one's sort of, it's always sorted, if you will, or come back a year and a half later and say, oh, all I did was lose a dollar on a $14 stock and all the noise associated with that. So I appreciate the platform and the intellectual back and forth, sir.

Well, I appreciate it. One of the reasons I could ramp up so quickly is because I studied this so hard. And look, it went 14 to 19 and then they had account issues. Last one, and then I'll let you go. You mentioned capital cycles, which I've been thinking about a lot more. I think in my younger, dumber days, I was like capital cycles. Who cares? We studied the fundamentals.

But I've been thinking about a lot more. I know the one you've been looking at is not to disclose too much. I think you've been looking at housing related a lot. I've been looking at a little bit senior living. How are you feeling about capital cycles? Where are the most interesting capital cycle stories these days? We started working on housing on the back last summer. We haven't made many investments.

It's publicly disclosed in our 13-F that we're along, Olin. Olin actually, chloralcoli and its downstream products is actually wildly interesting. as it relates to housing and other general industrial production. The rest of the housing work that we have done, we haven't put as much capital there because the correlation to the tenure, right? If the 10 years at 4, the housing stocks would do well. 10 year at 4.4, roughly, where it is today,

they're not going to do as well. And the correlation to rates is very, very high. so it's functionally a macro play. There are some very interesting things. We've been studying brokerage and some of the building products, but there's very little capital that we've actually deployed out the door. But, I mean, senior living is a home run because the demographics are so strong, especially on the private pay side.

Again, there, it's management quality and what they're going to do because the multiples are typically high. So, you know, I think Sinita is a wonderful. I'm not long. I should be long. But it's a wonderful business run by an exemplary capital allocator who's well-known in the fundamental investing world. We are talking May 11th.

It is 3 p.m. Eastern right now. There will be a Sanita write-up going out in the next 24 hours on yet another value blog.com. So, Cineida is the reason I was thinking about it for this, but, you know, there are others out there. But yeah, just as I've got more grays on my head, you know, the capital cycle stories. And it does kind of speak to being a value investor. You wait until something is so shelled out that nobody will put capital in it. And that's where you can get spikes in.

Look at memory, right? Like memory, this is a capital cycle story right now. Now, the question is, when is somebody going to say, hey, all the memory stocks are trading like they'll make 50% REs forever? Why don't we just go build the fourth memory player? Like, the stocks keep doing this, somebody's going to do it. But it's all capital cycles. I suppose in the spaceman shooting, the meme always has been.

But yeah. Yeah, no, again, probably a little bit downstream, but people are still with us. I mean, there's just, there's headlines today about Chinese ramping supply. Chinese ramping supply has destroyed so much value in industrial production, Western industrial Western industrial production businesses, there's either in AI and they're doing great or they're not in AI and they're doing poorly. And the ones that are not in AI and doing poorly is almost all of that pressure is due to increase Chinese supply in the last five to eight years. So anyone in memory, and I'm not involved long or short, anyone involved in memory needs to study what's being produced in China or what could be produced in China very, very closely. But as now, shortages and price up.

Well, I'm going to have to wrap it up here, but, Kyle, this has been great. As Kyle knows, Kyle's one of my favorite people in the industry. So I appreciate you coming on, and we will chat soon, whether it's on the podcast or offline. Doug to see, somebody. A quick disclaimer, nothing on this podcast should be considered an investment advice. Guests or the hosts may have positions in any of the stocks mentioned during this podcast. Please do your own work and consult a financial advisor. The Madamy Holmes bike for brain health

supporting Baycrest returns on May 31st for its fifth anniversary with a new start and finish at the Aga Khan Museum. Join thousands of cyclists as we take over the DVP and Gardner Expressway in support of dementia research and brain health. Riders of all abilities are welcome and both regular bikes and e-bikes can participate.

Bring your friends, family, or corporate team, and make an impact. Register today at bikeforbrainhealth.ca. Thanks.