Good morning. Thank you for standing by. Your conference call will begin momentarily. Again, please continue to standby. Thank you. Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the KAR Auction Services Q1 2022 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions ]. Please be advised today's conference is being recorded. [Operator Instructions ]. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Michael Eliason, Treasurer and VP Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Amanda. Good morning. And thank you for joining us today for the KAR Global First Quarter 2022 Earnings Conference Call. Today, we'll discuss the financial performance of KAR Global for the quarter ended March 31st, 2022. After concluding our commentary, we'll take questions from participants. Before Peter kicks off our discussion, I would like to remind you that this conference call contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may affect KAR's business, prospects, and results of operations. And such risks are fully detailed in our SEC filings. In providing forward-looking statements, the company expressly disclaims any obligation to update these statements. Let me also mention that throughout this conference call, we will be referencing both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations of the non-GAAP financial measures to the applicable GAAP financial measure can be found in the press release that we issued yesterday, which is also available in the Investor Relations section of our website. Now, I'd like to turn this call over to KAR Global CEO, Peter Kelly. Peter.

Thank you, Mike, and good morning, everybody. I'm delighted to be here this morning with all of you to provide an update on our performance at KAR Global. So on today's call, I will detail our first quarter results and provide you with some guidance in context around are expected performance for the remainder of 2022. But first I would like to update you on the status of our divestiture of the ADESA U.S, physical auction business. Our transaction is expected to close within the next week. It is a significant, even historic milestone in cars history and transaction that will be transformative for our company, our customers, our employees, and our stockholders. And I believe that the rationale for the transaction, as we outlined on our investor call back in February remains intact. Together with our customers, we're driving a channel shift from physical to digital marketplaces. A transactions allow us to more rapidly develop and deploy the digital solutions that our customers need and value the most. In doing so, this transaction would advance our vision to build the world's greatest digit marketplaces for used vehicles. Used vehicle market in North America represents a $40 million vehicle per year market at the retail level and over 20 million vehicles per year at the wholesale level. We believe that our leading digital brands, platforms, and technologies will help us advanced digital transformation of our industry and fuel future growth. And with approximately 350,000 vehicles sold on our platforms in the first quarter, we have plenty of opportunity to grow. This transaction will also simplify our business. It will enable us to focus our strategy, energy and investments on expanding our capabilities, growing our volumes and increasing our market share. We believe this focus will help us generate the greatest…

Thank you, Peter. I would like to start by explaining the basis for the presentation of the ADESA U.S. physical auction business in various filings. First, we're required by GAAP to treat ADESA U.S. physical auction businesses as a discontinued operation. This results in removing all activity from the ADESA U.S. physical auction business from the financial statements for our continuing operations. For clarity, I will refer to our continuing operations as KAR RemainCo throughout this discussion. The first impact of discontinued operations is we remove all detailed activity for the discontinued ops from our income statement, balance sheet and statement of cash flows. As you can see in our financial statements in the press release, the financial information for discontinued operations is presented in aggregate in each of the various statements. We do not present line item detail. For example, revenue, cost of services, SG&A and so on in the income statement. It is presented in a single net line item. Income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes. In each category of the balance sheet, we present the aggregate activity in a single line item, asset or liability held for sale. And then the statement of cash flows, we present the cash flow activity for each category of cash flows as a net cash provided or used by discontinued operations. And all financial statement presentations, we restate prior year financial statements in this manner to reflect the ADESA U.S. physical auction business as a discontinued operation. We have completed this restatement for the first quarter financial statements. We will be determining the impact of discontinued operations of each quarter of 2021 after we complete the transaction. We do not have that information to share with you today, but will provide it as soon as it is available so…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions ]. Our first question is from the line of Ryan Brinkman with JPMorgan, your line is now open.

Great. Thanks for taking the question. This is Roger Gupta on for Ryan. Just a first question on the EBITDA guidance for the year. Could you give us a sense of the trajectory from 1Q to the full-year in terms of what's driving the sequential movement? How much of it was volume versus GPU, or SG&A improvements or/and if you could also give us a sense of how much of the commercial services agreement is embedded in that guidance, as well? That was the first question I have a follow-up.

Thank you, Rajat. Let me take that question. In terms of -- sort of the bridge from our Q1 performance to 265 for the full year, I guess what I'd say there's a number of factors that are additive to our Q1 performance. Let me outline what those are. And I would say that the factors [Indiscernible] in our Q1 performance, I expect to continue. So I see the Q1 performance as a base for these additives to it. We expect an improving EBITDA contribution in the digital D-to-D businesses. Eric spoke about some of the changes on the monetization side that we made in March. So those weren't really fully-reflect -- certainly not fully-reflected in Q1, but these will be reflected every month going forward. So that's an importance aspect. We expect to see some improvements in the OPENLANE performance and corresponding services businesses. We have a number of new programs going live with certain customers, and we expect these to have a positive impact starting as soon as May and some of them going live in June and July. And I'd also say these programs don't require incremental top of the funnel volume. So we expect incremental positive movement there at OPENLANE, which will be positive for us as well. There will be a contribution for the Carvana commercial services agreement. It's -- I'd say it's relatively modest, but it is incremental and helpful. And then, as you mentioned, SG&A reductions do play a role, although those will tend to ramp up over the course of the second half of the year. But they will be incremental to the Q1 story as well. So essentially that provides the bridge, Rajat, to the -- from the Q1 to the 265.

And Rajat, if I could add something on the commercial agreement. We have a -- there is a contract minimum volume in the commercial agreement. Our guidance assumes only the minimum is achieved. So there is no risks to the number we've assumed in there because of a contractual minimum. We will not disclose the specific terms of the transactions, but I wanted everyone to know while it is a volume-oriented number, there is a minimum and we have used the minimum in our expectations.

Understood. That's helpful. So maybe just following up on that. We will obviously heard of many dealer customers deciding to look at alternatives due to the physical platform. And you also see a lot of public announcements from the OEM partners. So moving away from ADESA, the physical business, can you give us a sense of how much -- of how this is maybe impacting OPENLANE or Backlot? How the customer conversations has been, maybe from the OEM side for OPENLANE and then just dealers or are you using ADESA? I mean, are you seeing more of a shift to the digital because of that or are you seeing some kind of a backlash, maybe, because our competitor are acquiring the platform and maybe just if you can give us an update on that. Thanks.

Thanks. Rajat. Obviously, my focus is on, as Eric described it, RemainCo and the platforms that stay with KAR post-transactions, I'll confine the remarks for that. And no, we haven't seen backlash in that regard. I think our customers understand the strategy and I think the -- I'd say uniformly pretty much our customers see a future where there are more digital transactions, not fewer, and understand the strategy and very interested to see what we can do for them, and the solutions we can bring to them in that regard. But let me provide a little bit more context on that. For sure the announcement of the transaction was a big event in our industry. It did take a little bit of time to digest and there was some, I'd say confusion in the very initial stages as to exactly what has been required -- acquired, or divested, and all that sort of stuff. Given all of that, it's important for us, certainly in those early days and weeks of initial weeks post announcement to spend a lot of time with our customers which we did and frankly which I did personally. And I guess I'd characterize the response as regards RemainCo as follows, our customers understand the strategy, they understand the rationale, and I think they're enthusiastic about working with the new KAR. They, again as I said whether it's Commercial or Dealer, whether it's Seller or Buyer, most customers see, more digital transactions in the future than in the past. And, it's possible this transaction might accelerate that to some extent, I'm not saying it would, but it's probably another step along that road. And I think our customers are very interested to see how this transaction enables us to focus our investments on the digital solutions and what are the types of offerings we can bring to them, and we've had some initial discussions of those. And I think there will be exciting product development opportunities in that direction, which I'm excited to start to bring to market. So,um, I guess one other comment I'd say if I look at our commercial sellers in particular, I talked about our conversion rates have increased through COVID and to the present, even though the top of phone supply is very low, the conversion rates are stronger than they were pre -pandemic. I would say our customers are keen to sustain those strong conversion rates into the future. So they're looking for opportunities. How do we ensure that as volume returns of top, we can still keep high conversion through that channel. So listen, I think there's a lot of opportunity and I think there's a good alignment between our strategy and what our customers are looking for going forward.

Understood. Thanks a lot for the details, and I'll get back to the queue.

Thank you Rajat.

Our next question is from John Murphy with Bank of America. Your line is now open.

Good morning, everyone. This is Aileen Smith on for John. So I wanted to ask you another question around the $265 million outlook on -- just make sure I understood it correctly in the context of some of the prior comments you've made. I think your last comment headwinds the sale of the ADESA physical auctions was announced that the transaction was going to reduce 2022 adjusted EBITDA by $100 million, which I'm assuming is equal outside of any changes in the market or the business more broadly. Within that new $265 million outlook, is it fair to assume the $100 million reduction from the ADESA physical sales holds and the remaining incremental negative, particularly on a year-over-year basis versus pro forma results is just due to persistent industry headwinds in the secondary market.

Yes, I think that's a reasonable assumption. I think that indication on the $100 million I think is still valid. And I would say candidly, the new vehicle supply issue and the challenges that are OEM customers are facing in addressing that and getting their production back to normal levels let's say, I think that's just proven more challenging than perhaps what we would have expected six months ago. So I think the way you summarize it there is accurate.

Okay. Great. And then I wanted to follow up on Rajat's second question. And specifically whether dealers continue to spend vehicles to an auction houses on by a competitor. And I wanted to ask instead of whether you are or not seeing change in traffic or shifts, other alternatives which you commented on. But rather how do you actively change the discussion with some of those dealer customers of moving to the online marketplace offered by ADESA or offered by KAR. Is there an extensive education process that you need to go through? I think you mentioned that your customers are interested and they understand the industry shift is happening. But is there any incremental costs of time or resources that you need to make to catalyze customers to shift from physical to digital? Or is it happening relatively quickly?

Let me -- I'll attempt to answer that here in a second. Let me just go back to your prior question just for a moment just to give you a little bit more context. I talked about some of the challenges facing OPENLANE on the Services Businesses. Those are significant, I would say, my assessment is that that off lease declined represents a headwind of something like a $100 million in terms of current performance versus normal performance. So I see that as an opportunity to grow back, but that is maybe indicative of how does this headwind show up in our business. And I'm talking about RemainCo in that regard. So to go to your other question on, does this require additional education or effort on our part? I guess, I would say no, because we have been with our customers. I think part of our company culture is to stay in very close communication and close partnership with our customers. We've been in communication with them, for many years around digital transformation. I think our customers understand that we're a company that has, helped to drive the digital transformation of the industry both at the Commercial and on the Dealer-side, and on the Sale and Buy-sides of the business, so that's something we're obviously very experienced in. And I think our customers, like our digital solutions, they find them very effective, powerful, I think in, the case of many of our customers, our digital solutions represent their highest performing channels. So I would see it as a redoubling of that effort. But I would say the advantage to us is being exclusively focused on that, enables us to sort of be fully committed and not to be ambiguous in terms of, well, you could do this or you could do that. We're going to have a very focused message of, hey, these are the solutions we bring to market. We think these are the best. What can we do that would make these solutions better? And how would we deliver that for you? So that's kind of the discussion we want to have with our customers.

Okay. Got it. That's very helpful commentary. And then one bigger question if I may on AFC since I'm sure we're going to get a lot around ADESA. But does the sale of the ADESA physical auctions have any near or longer-term implications to AFC that we should be thinking about. Obviously, the customer side is in many cases dealers that are using ADESA Auction Services, and then getting financing from AFC. And I'm not even sure if that financing capability is something Carvana can offer, they acquire the physical auction. So as you digest the physical site, is there any risks to AFC going forward that we should be thinking about from a modeling perspective.

I don't believe that there is a risk or that AFC will be hurt by the sale of the ADESA U.S. Physical Auction business. And to provide some context on that. As you mentioned, AFC serves independent used car dealers who are purchasing cars in the wholesale market, including at KAR's marketplaces, at ADESA, but also at our competitors marketplaces whether digital or physical. So when AFC establishes relationship with the dealer, it's very important that they support that dealer's vehicle purchasing irrespective of where the dealer requires the inventory. So that's very much has always been part of their strategy. And as a result of that, only a relatively small percentage of AFC's total loans were purchased from KAR's marketplaces or from ADESA, okay. So I think AFC really has a channel agnostic point of view. As long as the dealer wants to buy a car, AFC will finance the vehicle. So we don't see any risk. We haven't seen any risks show up in the numbers. We haven't seen any erosion of the customer base whatsoever in the past 60 days since announcing this transaction. So I don't think there's any knock-on effects there.

And Aileen, let me add. As part of our commercial agreement with Carvana, the AFC personnel that are on-site at ADESA U.S. Physical Auction locations will remain on-site through the duration of that contract at no rent costs to KAR RemainCo. So that's an attractive logistics arrangement for us relative to having the AFC resources still available to the customers at those locations.

Okay. Fantastic, thanks for taking the questions, guys.

Thank you very much.

Our next question is from Gary Prestopino with Barrington Research. Your line is now open.

Hey, good morning, everyone. Hey, Peter, Eric, when you talk about, over time reducing your SG&A as a percentage of sales, what do you feel would be optimal, percentage number there? I mean, it was running at 32%, versus 29%, year-over-year, but what will be an optimal number for you?

I guess what I'd say is we have two businesses, if I described the segments, the [Indiscernible] segments and the AFC segments. And they have somewhat different characteristics when it comes to SG&A as a percentage of revenue and margin structure, so on and so forth. So to some extent, thought the total number for KAR is ultimately help those to blend together and it might make more sense to look at them separately in terms of that analysis. But I guess what I'd say is, we do see a significant opportunity. I would say some reduction of SG&A in absolute terms relative or what it is today, and then as our revenue and volumes grow, which we fully expect they will, that SG&A will grow at a much slower rate. So I do have some targets that I've honestly, I'd rather speak to in our Analyst Day with the broader group, but I look forward to going into a more detailed. But for sure, SG&A as a percent of revenue declining is part of our expectation and part of our modeling. We'll go into more detail in that in June.

Okay. And then just a second question. You mentioned in your commentary and some of the growth that you're anticipating, some new programs with OPENLANE. Could you -- my understanding is you had most of the OEM programs there, so could you maybe elaborate where this -- these new programs are coming from?

I would characterize these, Gary, as new programs with existing customers. So we've had frankly and I'd rather not go into the specifics, we don't talk about specific customer contracts. But our customers -- the reality that they're experiencing today in terms of their off-lease portfolio is markedly different to what it was certainly 2.5 years ago. And I'd say these programs would be more reflective of, okay, how's the vehicle selling today? I talked about conversion rates being higher, but also this sort of where is the vehicles are selling? Within the channel, within the funnel is a little different. So we had some programs that address some of those aspects and working with customers in that regard.

Okay. Thank you

You're welcome, Gary. Thank you.

Our next question is from the line of Bret Jordan with Jefferies. Your line is now open.

Hey. Good morning, guys.

Good morning, Bret.

Could you talk a little bit about the integration of CARWAVE, just going to give us an update as to where that is? And maybe how you're seeing it merging into the backlog business?

Thank you. Yes, good question. So that is on track, we -- from a integration perspective, we've broke it into, we called it two waves, Wave 1 and Wave 2. Wave 1 is now complete and Wave 1 in essence had a number of key attributes. First one, was the deployment of a new and improved common inspection format for both Backlot and CARWAVE, so that the intake point of the vehicle into either channel would be the same and consistent across both. So that new inspection platform was deployed within the first quarter. We're pleased with how that has gone, and that's an improved inspection capability relative to what BacklotCars had before. So it's an improvement and a consistence experience. The second aspect was we addressing a lot of the -- I call it the policy and the pricing aspects of the programs. As Eric talked about the improvement in monetization of BacklotCars, really what that was the deployment of a common policy and revenue framework, that can apply to both platforms. That has been done and that has a number of impacts; 1. In terms of customer benefits, it provides both the seller and the buyer increased protection in terms of the transaction. There are guaranteed type products or increased protections the buyer has at the seller has that the, vehicle is not what was expected, there's protection, but then we monetize that protection, okay, it has the impact of doing both of those things, we wanted to complete we're pleased with how that's gone. It's going to maturity positive for our performance past Q1 with Q, we're currently tracking towards Q3, and that's the deployments of, the more integrated technology solution. And, more to come on that we were team is working hard on that and looking to get that done by the end of Q3

Okay. Great. And then I guess you commented that AFC obviously continues to do well regardless of the ADESA relationship, but just could you give us an idea maybe what percentage of loan originations of AFC came at physical ADESA sites or was most of this digital or didn't really dependent upon that ADESA salesperson?

Just in general terms, [Indiscernible], it's about 30% of their floor planning is from ADESA sites. I do not have a breakdown that would include Canada, which will still be part of KAR RemainCo. So 30% from ADESA. And we I don't major again in that portfolio of Canada versus U.S. Although U.S. would be a substantial amount of that.

Actually, Eric, can I -- I actually think maybe [Indiscernible]. I think it's 30% car,

I'm sorry, you're right. 30% KAR across all platform.

Yes. ADESA U.S. is in the low teens.

12% - 13% --

12% - 13%

Generally speaking ADESA U.S. That would be right. Thank you for correcting me, Peter.

Yes. So to clarify, it's about 12% ADESA U.S. 30% KAR properties.

And KAR would include BacklotCars, CARWAVE, TradeRev, [Indiscernible] OPENLANE. So it's more than just ADESA Canada. Yes.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

You're welcome. Bret. Thank you.

Our next question is from Bob Labick from CJS Securities. Your line is now open.

Great. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions.

Good morning, Bob.

I wanted to just pick up kind of big picture step back in terms of the free cash flow profile of the business now with this transformation. Can you discuss a little bit the kind of conversion from EBITDA to free cash flow? What's the CapEx profile going forward? And what's the targeted leverage? So what's the kind of interest expense we should expect going forward a couple of years out?

I'm going to let Eric speak to a little more specifics. Let me offer just a couple of perspectives, Bob. Appreciate the question. First of all, I think the strong cash flow generation of the business, those characteristics will continue. The business will continue to be a strong cash flow generator, so that is a positive story for KAR. If I also then look at areas where we have reduced cash expenses or cash outlays, there is a reduced need for capital investments given that we have a reduced physical auction footprint, which was a meaningful amount of our annual CapEx. So that has diminished. And I'd say also, obviously, cash to service debt. Those expenses are reduced as well. I'll ask Eric to provide a little more color on some of that.

Bob, we have not set a leverage target with our board yet, although it's all understood. We've had the discussion, it's substantially less than the three times leverage target that we've had for many, many years. So it will be significantly less than that. It will take us a little while to get there because of some of the mechanics of repaying the senior unsecured notes that I described in my discussion. But also, we've disclosed and you'll see it in the 10-Q filed today, that our expectations for CapEx will be $75 million to $80 million for RemainCo, for 2022. That will be down from a $115 million, well towards the expectation for KAR Global, prior to announcing this transaction. And that number have been previously disclosed. The reduction in cash interest expense is likely to be $70 million to $80 million year once the bonds are regained. And I don't know the timing of that. There's several factors that will influence the timing of that redemption. So as we look at it, the free cash flow conversion actually will be slightly improved over what it was at par once we get past the transaction. One qualifier on that, I am excluding from cash taxes, a substantial tax payment that will be do on the gain from the sale of the ADESA U.S. Physical Auction Business. I am not including that in my ongoing cash tax, and that tax payment in '22 will likely be in excess of $400 million, so I'm excluding that.

Certainly, fair enough. And thank you for the details there. And then two, dealer-dealer, digital-dealer questions. I'm not sure how much you will say now, maybe we have to wait, but hopefully you can give us a little insight. In terms of what is the brand strategy going forward, what are the advantages and disadvantages to having multiple U.S. dealer-to-dealer brands, and Backlot and CARWAVE. And just is that going to continue indefinitely or might you consolidate brands or how should we think about that going forward.

Bob, I would expect with Wave 2 of the integration, we consolidate brands. Now, we may see the CARWAVE format live on as a format within the BacklotCars model. But I think ultimately we have -- a digital marketplace business, we're dealing with network effects both on the seller and buyer side of those marketplaces. Fragmenting that marketplace doesn't make sense.

Okay, great. Absolutely.

By the way, Bob, sorry to interrupt. I would say the strategy goes further than that, candidly. And again, we can speak to this more, but we have Dealer-to-Dealer vehicles, we have off-lease vehicles that also flow into an upstream open marketplace. And we have the potential to get other types of commercial vehicles. As I mentioned, our RDN platform is used by the vast majority of companies we possess in vehicles across the United States. As vehicles of any type flow into an upstream digital marketplace, it makes sense to get them into one single marketplace. So I think you're going to see that's going to be an important part of our strategy going forward. And we will provide more details on that in our call in June, as well.

Okay. That's super and appreciate that as well. And then maybe last one and maybe kind of again, trying to take a little bit from June here. But in terms of the trajectory, I think the goal for the digital dealer-to-dealer was maybe a million, two units by 2025 and maybe a $100 per unit in EBITDA. Are those still like the general parameters of how you're thinking about the opportunity set? And if so, what's the path to profitability in terms of getting to that 120? Is it linear? Is there an investment phase now for market share with profits turning on at the end or how should we think about the trajectory of growth for the digital dealer-to-dealer.

I guess what I'd say, Bob. Good question. I think as a target, and again we will provide a more specific update in June, but I would say that target, I think we're still looking at that as being in the zone of the target we think is appropriate. Okay. So I think we're still looking at a target very much from a volume perspective in that regard. I think the EBITDA per vehicle target is also reasonable. I will say that we saw EBITDA per vehicle in our TradeRev marketplace that exceeded that in Q1. So that gives me confidence that that level of EBITDA per vehicle is possible in this marketplace, and maybe even possible to exceed that in this marketplace. But again, we will provide more specifics, I hope. So I think as a set of targets, that's generally the right area. And I think it's plausible and that's what we're aiming for. In terms of how we get there. I think we're -- listen, we've got to continue to invest in these businesses in terms of product development and so on and so forth. But the businesses now are also generating substantial revenues and gross profit, so I think we're out of the phase of having losses and being a cash drain. I think my expectation is we're going to see more of a linear progression in terms of the profitability. Maybe it's not perfectly linear, probably -- it probably ramps up a little bit over time. But frankly this year, certainly at the business unit level if we exclude a bucket of corporate costs, these businesses will be profitable this year. And I think their contribution in absolute terms will increase from here.

Okay, super. Thank you very much.

You're welcome Bob. Thank you.

Our next question is from Daniel Imbro, with Stephens. Your line is now open.

Hey, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking our questions.

Morning.

I wanted to talk about the core ADESA Gross margin first, maybe excluding purchased vehicles, that I think it was down, pretty materially year-over-year to fight the fee increase. Can you talk about just the drivers of that? And if it was just driven by lower volume, is this really the high 30s, the right way we should think about quarter Gross margin until we see volume where [Indiscernible] pick back up?

Well Daniel, one of the things I'll point out is there's a substantial impact from purchased vehicles. When you look at net of purchased vehicles, it was down -- again I'll do this, about 49% from 52% net gross profit on a consolidated basis. But it does look in the ADESA segment, it's much more substantial than that. So as I look at it, although I'll say it, there's a lack of scale in the first quarter especially January and February. The gross profit in March was much stronger, much more consistent with what we've been experiencing, so I don't think there has been a change in the business model. We just suffered from extremely light volumes in the first two months of the quarter. As I look at it, I don't think anything is broken, I think you have a bit of a mix issue in Q1, mix of revenue. We have a high impact of purchased vehicles, which was a little bit unusual given the platforms and it did not include purchased vehicles from the ADESA U.S. Physical Auction business, which was taken out. So all in all, I'm looking at it and thinking, you'll start to see what you were experiencing last year as the year moves on and volumes normalized. I won't say they'll get back to normal, but normalized from where we were in January and February.

Yeah. If I can add maybe one more comment, I'd also say, the mix shift relative to OPENLANE. OPENLANE is probably our highest gross profit generator across the portfolio. And with that business volumes being down at set top of the funnels, 60%, that showed up in the aggregate numbers as well.

Got it. And then a bit more of a conceptual question, Eric, I know over the last year most transactions have been fully digital, but how much of that is a function of just the environment with the lack of inventory? Just trying to think that as prices declined, if I think over the last few cycles, you guys have said how the Used to Reconditioning and Physical Assets picks up when prices decline, so why wouldn't commercial sellers need reconditioning similar to past cycles? Or how do you plan to meet those needs for your customers given the pending sale of the ADESA U.S. Physical locations?

I guess what I'd say there is there is some continued needs for those services. That is true. But I would also say that the fundamental trends, the secular trend, is towards more and more digital seller. And I think that's consistent across all types of sellers and all types of buyers. So is there a space for that? Yes. But is that going to diminish overtime? Yes. That's how I see it. And when I look at the types of vehicles we sell across our portfolio, we sell everything from high-end, premium, off-lease vehicles with very little damage of high prices all the way down to some $1000 vehicles that are quite heavily damaged. And they sell in a purely digital format. So there is an element of sort of customer choice there, right? But -- so I'm not saying there's no need for that, but I do think that need has been diminishing over time. I think ultimately continues to diminish over time, but I don't think it goes away forever -- goes to zero, and I guess I should say.

And Daniel, let me add, out of necessity, we had to look at our capabilities and capacity. We started selling reconditioning services through the buyer. We call it retail-ready recon. It would not surprise me if the seller continues to believe that the buyer can handle some of the responsibility for reconditioning the car. They've learned, they can get full value for the vehicle even if it needs reconditioning. And our marketplace as evidenced by the transaction we're doing, the buyers are more willing to do reconditioning of the vehicle after they've purchased it and I think that will continue.

Got it. That's not just a function of the inventory shortages right now. That's helpful. And then just a follow-up to clarify on the guidance quickly. Peter, I think you mentioned in the remarks the 265 of EBITDA this year would be 11% growth if we excluded the equity gains from last year. Does the 265 excludes the equity gains this year or would that include the $17 million in 1Q and then any equity gains going forward.

No, it does not include any. There are no equity gains in this year's expectations. So the 265 excludes that. And on a like-for-like basis, had we excluded that in last year's performance then that would -- then comparing those two numbers will be 11%.

Got it. The 265 doesn't include the 1Q 17. Got it. Thanks.

Absolutely not. You're very welcome. Thank you, Daniel.

Amanda, we're out of time. I believe there may be one more question. If we could make it one quick question, I think we'll try to fit it in.

Our final question comes from Ali Faghri from Guggenheim, your line is now open.

Awesome. Good morning, thanks for squeezing me in. Just a more specific question on the implication on OPENLANE from the sale of the U.S. physical business to Carvana. So over the years, KAR management has talked about the [Indiscernible] around OPENLANE being the company's physical asset in the ability to offer OEMs vehicle reconditioning and storage. With the sale of the U.S. Physical Auction business to Carvana, how do you see that impacting your value proposition to the OEMs, and competitive differentiation versus digital-only competitors who are increasingly focused on the commercial segment.

Thanks, Ali. I appreciate the question. I guess as a founder of OPENLANE, I'll comment. I don't recall making the arguments that the sense of OPENLANE was physical assets, frankly. But I would say, if I look at the vehicles that actually sell on OPENLANE or sold them OPENLANE last year, close to 0% of them sold from our physical property or some other auctions physical property. So I don't know the exact percent. 98%, 99% plus of them sold from dealership lots. So I don't think the physical assets are a necessity there. And frankly, when we looked at cars that don't sell on OPENLANE, where do they go to? They get distributed to a wide range of auctions. We never had the ability to say, well, lets direct all those to ADESA auctions. So the customer makes that choice as they should. I don't think that the physical asset are a necessity or a mode on OPENLANE. I think the mode on OPENLANE is, build great digital products that work for the seller and worked for the dealer, and provide a very effective digital marketplace that transact a high percentage of their cars quickly and at low cost. And I think that's what OPENLANE has focused for 20 years. I think our customers are very pleased with the service we offer. And I think this acquisition enables us to redouble our focus. And frankly, I hope, bring a whole lot more innovations to that channel than perhaps we have done past just by being more focused on it. So I don't see the dependency and I see a lot of opportunity with OPENLANE. I think it's an area where we're clearly differentiated vis -a - vis all our competitors. And where we've got unrivaled set of customers and a compelling and strong value proposition.

Thank you.

You're welcome, Ali. So, hey, I appreciate I know we're a little over, I'm just going to conclude with a few closing remarks. Again, the ADESA transaction is expected to close within the next week. I believe the transaction will be transformative for KAR and for our customers, and for our stockholders. And I remain very optimistic for the future of our company. With a smaller nimbler and more asset-like company, we intend to accelerate a more focused digital strategy to capture what we believe to be the considerable opportunities for growth, both in and beyond our current market. The first quarter was challenging. There's no question about that. When [Indiscernible] where facing a 61% decline in off-lease supply relative to the same quarter last year, that's a significant headwind. That said, I believe we made meaningful progress in many areas of our business, particularly in our Dealer-to-Dealer Business and in AFC. We have guidance delivered $265 million in adjusted EBITDA this year, that represents 11% growth on a like-for-like basis. And that'll be accomplished in spite -- what I'd characterize as a very adverse environment that affects our industry and our business. So I don't love the number, but I'm pleased with the performance in the face of the headwinds we have. As I look past this year, I'm very excited and I think the team is very excited about the opportunities that lie ahead for our business. We intend to capitalize on what is a secular shift towards digital marketplaces by both Commercial and Dealer customers. And both on the Seller and Buyer-side of our industry. And in addition, we expect to see a recovery in commercial seller volumes that will play out in the years to come. So I believe we had a significant opportunity for growth. We have differentiated platforms, a strong customer base, and a large market space in which to innovate and invest. So I'm looking forward to providing more details on that and our future plans. In an Analyst Day update, we intend to send out a save-the-date after we close the transaction and we're targeting sometime in June. And with that, we'll end today's call. I look forward to reconnecting on our next conversation. And thank you all for attending and thank you all for your questions this morning.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.