Hello, Andrew. Thank you for that series of questions. And I'll start and then pass it on to Dan afterwards. So, let me start with the simple question first on margins. So, we had guided for the year at 29%. And we said, because of all the reasons that I said in my script, but let me reiterate very simply, we're not dependent on China, we have a multi-country strategy, but predominantly we are a U.S. manufacturer with our two factories here in the U.S., Made in America products. For all those reasons, we can mitigate the impact of tariffs, if they continue the way it is today, to the 100 basis points. However, I'm still reiterating the 29% because, as you know, over 15 years, cost reduction is in our DNA. We have a culture of pushing ourselves hard and finding ways to optimize and reduce cost. So, we are going to take this externality and make it a challenge to find that 100 basis points and other activities we do and speed it up and not use tariff as an excuse to not meet our guidance. This is our culture of being able to get to that point. We're not going to pass it on to customers. We are not going to take it on ourselves. We're going to find ways to solve it. So, net-net, we would still reiterate the 29% guidance. So that's the first answer. Hopefully that's clear. Now, on your question on where the macros are with respect to guidance, you're asking the right question. We have to book, build, ship and recognize revenue for a portion of our second half revenue in order to meet the guidance. Now, if we didn't have confidence in that entire process, including the bookings, and also timing, because timing means revenue recognition, we wouldn't be making this. So, very strong confidence based on everything that we see. And let me explain a couple things here. The big shift, Andrew, that's happened in our business and I think it's worth taking the two extra minutes to explain this to you. It is -- no longer do we see our customers, whether it is data centers or large factories, asking if on-site power is needed. That debate is over. The grid can only do so much in the short term, and without on-site power, people are not going to have power. That is no longer a question to us. Then, it becomes a question of, are we a viable on-site power solution for people? That's what we built the company for. We have a record of doing this more so than any other technology. However, the easy button is to go to combustion turbines, and I know combustion reciprocating engines, because they've been around a lot longer than we have. Not too many people know us. However, the people that know us are expanding with us and every time that we succeed, people are wanting our solutions. We can compete both economically and from a technical performance and from an environmental perspective. It's a check, check, check. So, we're super excited about this cycle. Extreme confidence in being able to meet those demands. And will certain projects shift in the short term? Maybe they will, but the amount of projects that get executed is plenty and enough given where we are for us to be able to meet the guidance. That's how we see it. I'll pass it on to Dan now to answer your question.