How would you describe the rationale for integrating Grayshift and Magnet?

I think Magnet had its specialty with the programs they offered. However, Grayshift had many mobile capabilities that Magnet was lacking. The strategy or rationale was whether to invest heavily in R&D to catch up. Magnet and Cellebrite are quite similar in terms of competitiveness. It's not biased to say that Cellebrite was always a step ahead, especially in mobile capabilities. To reach that level, the rationale was to acquire someone already mastering it, who knows what they're doing, and has a solid customer base. Grayshift had a customer base we weren't as involved with, so cross-selling was also a strategy. By acquiring Grayshift, we could potentially upsell or cross-sell and bring them in to acquire some of Magnet's goods as well. Cellebrite excels at cross-selling to their clientele. I mention Cellebrite because it's often a topic of discussion. Looking at 2024, when AI was just starting to gain attention, we were beginning our research on sourcing and considering it. While we were still in that phase, Cellebrite had already announced their acquisitions. It's a game of timing. Even if we decided to implement something internally, the external competitor had already acquired the company or skill.

Yes, exactly.

I can be open about the tools I used because everyone has different methods. For me, PitchBook was my primary tool. For non-listed companies or talent, LinkedIn was crucial. I stayed updated with news to understand the different players. Key targets were companies that mastered their domain. We had different focuses at different times. The executive team often directed what was important. Sometimes, what seemed like the best missing piece wasn't a target for them. In terms of categorization, I documented the date we found the company, the number of employees, their strengths, location, what they offered that we lacked, and how they could integrate into our business. The number of employees.