Elena Marquez
Analyst · B. Riley Securities
Yes, Mike, I will start that and then pass it over to Chris for some additional remarks. As we've commented in the past, we speak to different audiences in these calls, and we need to continue to maintain our negotiation leverage as we negotiate with our incumbents and keep our costs down and returns up. Those different audiences, of course, yourselves, the analysts, our investors, incumbents and customers. In addition, given that there's now optionality to how we may monetize this spectrum, if we continue to monetize geography by geography, the cost may be lower as they will be over several years. If there's a nationwide buyer, of course, that is looking to clear the spectrum faster, then that cost estimate may be higher given that there may be higher level of incentives to be provided and so on and so forth and just the process will need to be accelerated. But regardless of the cost estimates, even with the most conservative highest estimates, we believe that there's significant upside in the gross value of our asset as compared to the current market cap. And I wanted to also, in addition, comment on the gross value of the asset. I mentioned in my prepared remarks that, you know, the current two most relevant benchmarks to us are our own, which is the average of all the deals that we've closed, which is the 12 deals over the last several years. That's about $1.40 per megahertz-POP. The gross value of the asset of the remaining 3 billion POPs, if we use that benchmark, would put us at well over $4 billion. If we use the most current, most latest auction by the FCC, which averaged about $2.50, the gross value of our asset would be about $7.5 billion. Again, we believe there's significant upside as compared to our current market cap. Chris, did you have any additional comments on clearing?