We knew that the nation, NASA, the CLPS program, the commercial industry needed this landing, this win. And so it wasn't just about Firefly. It was about the whole program and the community. The bar was high. We wanted to stick the landing. And when the chief engineer said, 'Y'all stuck the landing,' everybody just got up out of their seats for the first time in 45 days since we launched. It was like disbelief because everybody had confidence, but it was like, 'Oh my gosh, it actually did it.'
So I want you to, for a second, take off your Firefly hat and maybe put on your Jason Kim, you know, US citizen hat on. Why does the moon matter?
Jason, welcome to the very first live episode of Valley of Depth.
Thank you. Thanks for coming out to visit with us in our historic mission operations center where Blue Ghost landed successfully last year.
No, it's an honor to be here. Yet somehow you put me in the chief engineer seat and you're in the driver's seat.
You're second fiddle in this situation.
I'm here to support you. Well, Blue Ghost was, I mean, pretty historic. First US private company to land successfully on the moon, and we have the image of the shadow of the lander here behind us. Where were you, like here?
I was during the landing, like five to the right and in front of us.
Towards the back of the mission operations center. Yeah.
So I got the bird's eye view of the entire team, all 60 individuals. Every single discipline was here, and I was standing next to now our new VP of spacecraft, Ray Ellsworth, at the time. She was the director, and you know, she made the program decisions. But where you're sitting, the chief engineer gives me goosebumps because the chief engineer said, 'We see lunar gravity. It's stable. Congratulations, you all stuck the landing.' So I relive that a lot whenever I come to the mission operations center. It was just surreal.
Well, walk me through the last kind of 30 seconds right as you're making the approach or the lander landing. Walk me through what it was like, what was going through your head, and then also what was it like in the room? Was it quiet? Was everyone like, just what was the atmosphere like?
Well, it was very tense. I mean, everybody's eyes were on the screen and you could see every single telemetry data point coming in, whether it was altitude or acceleration, you know, propulsion, thermal, power, all the above. And it's kind of like the matrix. You see all these ones and zeros come down. But what I noticed was everything was within the trajectory and the plans that we had already rehearsed for. I mean, the team had over 500 hours of rehearsal time. So I had confidence in the team's ability. They were well prepared. Now in spaceflight, you know, things can go out of control sometimes, but I had full confidence in the team. That's why I was just bouncing back and forth on the walls the morning of because I knew that we were going to stick it because of the team's preparation. So I was just watching the team. They were disciplined, they were well rehearsed, and you know, at that point the spacecraft was fully autonomous. The last 60 minutes, you know, the spacecraft takes over, it does all the avoidance of all the obstacles and craters and boulders, and it did that. And when I started to see, you know, the telemetry say 1 m/s, I mean, that's pretty slow.
And then, so that's when you knew, you knew.
That's when I kind of got an idea that everything was going to be fine. But when the chief engineer said, 'Y'all stuck the landing,' everybody just got up out of their seats for the first time in 45 days since we launched and just erupted, hugs and high fives and just a lot of, it was like disbelief because everybody had confidence, but it was like, 'Oh my gosh, it actually did it.' And a lot of pride, a lot of excitement.
So there had been other American commercial attempts to land on the moon that were, I would argue, semi-successful, and some that weren't, or I should say most that weren't. What, you know, as you guys were approaching this mission, did you think, or maybe not you because it sounds like you were very confident, but how did the team think about the failure rate leading up to a mission like this? Like, you know, because I remember during the Alpha launch, I remember talking to a number of engineers here. They're like, 'Look, we're happy if we, you know, get off the pad,' right? The very first Alpha launch. What was the bar for this mission? Like what was the bar of success? Because like, you know, for the bar of success for the Alpha launches it was like, yeah, I hope we clear the tower, like that would be, that's great. I mean people have said that to me and obviously like, you know, it was more successful than that, but what was the bar for this?
Well, we knew the gravity of the situation, no pun intended. We knew that, you know, the nation, NASA, the CLPS program, commercial industry needed this landing, this win. And so it wasn't just about Firefly. It was about the whole program and the community, and all eyes were on this mission. And so the bar was high. We wanted to stick the landing. And the team nailed it. And it wasn't just about landing though, right? Because this is a 14-day surface operation. So we never thought it was just about the landing. He said it's about the landing, then stabilizing everything, turning on all the payloads, and then doing the 14 days of surface operations, which is the longest of any commercial mission to date.
And so, actually, our bar was even higher. We had to finish the whole mission. And then on top of that, we extended five hours into the lunar night using our own batteries. And so we kind of exceeded that bar.
Yeah. Did you, I'm sure when you landed you had a lot of congratulatory remarks and calls. Anyone that stands out where you're like, 'Oh, wow. I didn't expect to get a congrats from this person.'
I think if you point to what's publicly out there on Twitter, I think every single space CEO congratulated the Firefly team because everybody knows how hard it is to not only get yourself around the moon, but land and stick that landing. I think the whole world, you know, gave recognition to our team.
Right. Well, you have another mission coming up, right? Blue Ghost 2. That's later this year, I believe.
What is that? How is that tracking and what is going to be different about that mission versus the first one?
Well, we're on track to deliver. We're targeting no earlier than December of this year. The hard part about this mission is I thought the team could not top themselves from the Blue Ghost Mission One. I mean, Blue Ghost Mission One got the Collier Trophy, which I still, again, that's surreal to me as well. It helped the CLPS program, and now the CLPS program went from in the two billion-ish to four billion-ish for CLPS 1.0, and then CLPS 2.0 will be around $6 billion in budget. And then you got the whole Moon to Mars initiative. And so we did our part with Blue Ghost Mission One, but Blue Ghost Mission Two is even more complex.
It's going to go to the far side of the moon, first time for the US, and then it's got 22 feet of a lunar lander on top, a European Space Agency satellite in the middle sandwiched with one of our Elytra Dark spacecraft at the very bottom. And so we're going to have a stack of three spacecraft. And the lunar lander is going to have some game-changing science on it. It's going to go to the far side of the moon to use the moon as a shield from the noise of the Earth and the sun sometimes to go sense radio frequency signals 50 MHz and below from the Dark Ages, right? And so I think it'll be up for a Nobel Prize if it starts seeing the things that it's supposed to see. And there's also two other NASA payloads, a JPL user terminal, and there's another payload on there. There's three commercial payloads on there as well. So the total number of payloads represents five different countries: the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, and UAE. UAE has a Rashid rover too on there. So that's going to be cool. So we're really excited about this mission. And then one thing we added to our Elytra Dark spacecraft that's going to orbit and provide long-haul communications relay to and from the far side of the moon to the Earth. That's another reason that Blue Ghost Mission Two is a little more challenging than Blue Ghost Mission One is because of the comms.
Just like Artemis II, there was a comm outage for a period of time when the astronauts went around the moon. We don't have that because we're going to have this orbiter that's going to provide the communications relay. But we put a camera, a high-resolution camera, on that Elytra Dark spacecraft. So we're going to be able to image the moon's surface, look for minerals and resources, survey the geographic features, also look out into space and do space domain awareness. So really excited about the full stack of missions on this vehicle, and you know, I'm really looking forward to, you know, the team rehearsing and getting ready for this mission as well.
Is the biggest technical challenge for two versus one the comms piece?
You know, I think it starts with, you know, there's one week out of each month, you know, if we target December, there's a week late in December where we can launch to give ourselves the positioning to be there when we need to for the lighting conditions and, you know, the science mission that we're going to do. We have backup months in January, February, March as well, each time there's a week there. So really the timing and the precision of the launch is important. The comms is certainly something that we added the relay capability to mitigate that risk. But you know, the terrain and the lighting conditions, landing right on time is going to be important just like it was on Mission One. But that's the kind of thing that our employees love is these hard challenges. Each time it's a different challenge, and the team's up for it.
So, I want to switch gears for a second and we're going to talk more about the moon and the future of Blue Ghost, but I want to talk about you and you taking on this role. So, it's 2024, I believe, when you took the job.
At the time or leading up to that point, Firefly has had a number of successes, but it's been through a roller coaster of challenges since the inception of the business. Everything from foreign ownership issues to, you know, issues with capital and leadership changes, and you know, you get the call, 'Hey, we want you to take on this role.' What's going through your mind at the time? Is it like an obvious yes or is it like a, you know, 'I got to think about this'?
You know, it wasn't something that I was looking for. I was running another company at the time, Millennium, and the company was doing great. But I had such a great experience working with Firefly. I was a customer on Victus Knox, and I saw the people in action, the can-do spirit. You know, 'Give me one way to make it happen versus the 99 it can't happen.' That's every individual at Firefly was that way. So it was intoxicating. And then the culture of collaboration and, you know, 'let's get it done' attitude was also contagious. And then the capabilities. I mean, they nailed that Victus Knox mission in front of my eyes. I was in the mission operations center for that Vandenberg mission, and second stage, all the way to second stage was just flawless.
And so that's another thing that will be, you know, branded in my brain to this day is that experience. And so it made me pause and say, 'You know what? I wasn't looking, but I had such a great experience with Firefly. Let's go. Let's interview.' And so, many interviews later, got the offer and was just super excited. Even strategically brought my family out, looked at the Austin area, and they were all thumbs up. And you know, I think it's been a great return to Texas because I grew up in Dallas, and I think Austin is just a cool town as well.
Well, what, you know, I think back to that time because, and I have a funny story for you, which is I remember texting with Kirk at AE Industrial. And we were just messaging, and I think he had mentioned something like, or I don't actually, I think I just texted him and I said, 'Hey, I don't know where you guys are at with the CEO search, but you should talk to Jason Kim.' And he just responded back like, 'Oh, like, great idea.' Little did I know, like, the decision had been made by then.
Yeah. And I know you and I were sitting coincidentally in your Cybertruck in LA, and we were just coming out of a happy hour, and you thought I knew, but I had no idea.
So I kind of think back to that memory and just how it all kind of came together that you're kind of now sitting in the seat.
Yeah. It's wild to think that it was about two years ago.
Yeah. And lots happened since then. So when you told your wife and family, they were all kind of thumbs up like, 'No, we're game for this adventure.'
Yeah. You know, I really think it's important to have your support system, your family, your friends, you know, supporting you. And you know, my family is very important to me, and I strategically brought them to Austin and took them to Terry Black's barbecue and other barbecue places as well, and they really enjoyed their time here. And you know, I think they're doing great. It's a great place to raise a family. It's a great place for live music outdoors. There's F1 racing and a lot of different celebrities that walk around. So if you think about it, it's got a little bit of everything for everybody. And then of course they've always been just so supportive of, you know, the mission that Dad's part of. Yeah. And you know, nowadays when I ask my kids, 'Do you want to go to the moon?' And so that's kind of cool to be part of making that future happen.
So, day one as CEO, so obviously you had very good feelings about the company just as a customer and as just an industry participant seeing what the company was doing. But, you know, day one CEO, you're in the job. What did you maybe see or experience that you didn't expect?
I think the scale of Firefly. The 200 acres of Rocket Ranch up in Briggs, Texas, it's just eye-watering. And you don't know about it because it's not something you can really, you know, do justice by talking about it. But once you go there, you've got six buildings, 217,000 square feet of engineering, manufacturing, test facilities. You've got six test stands and counting. You got engine hot fire tests of 45,000 lb of thrust or 230,000 lbs of thrust that you could just feel rumble in your heart. That I think is just, you know, what surprised me the most. And it's all co-located within 30 miles. We're sitting in our spacecraft campus, which is in Cedar Park, and that's 144,000 square feet of spacecraft engineering manufacturing space. But then just, you know, down the road on 183, you go up north, and within 30 minutes you're at our Rocket Ranch facility and you're able to do, you know, co-located testing. So you can literally design a part, build the part, go test it on a test stand, and then rinse, repeat. That's really game-changing.
Do you think you'll ever launch from Texas?
You know, I think anything's possible. I think if you talk to folks like the Texas Space Commission and I would love to talk to the Space Force and others about it, it's feasible. And we have a deployable Alpha system that we announced recently, and that's something you could deploy to places like Texas, right? And so that would be a phenomenal day to be able to launch from our home state.
So AE Industrial is a majority owner in the business. They were obviously there when you took the job. How did that sort of play into maybe your decision or your thinking, which is like, you know, a private equity firm owns this company. You know, what are their goals? What are their needs? What are they looking to get out of this? Obviously they want to generate a return. And then when you think about, you know, you as CEO, like what did they expect from you and what did you expect from them?
I came in with all the context from, you know, the team and AE, and with conviction because of what I said about the company that I saw and felt about the company before from Victus Knox. And so I knew that this was about stabilizing the business, about scaling it, about putting a team in place, building up that team, and then executing. And AE is one of the prominent PE firms out there, and they know space really well. They know Aerojet, but they know space really well. And so being able to work closely with our board and AE has been fantastic, just because of their knowledge and, you know, the network. So it's a great team.
Yeah. And in those kind of first few, and now kind of expand from the first day into like maybe the first month, you know, you're walking around the floor, you're talking to engineers, you know, what did you hear from them? What do they need, or I should say differently, what do they need from you?
I think we have a lot of smart people, a lot of bold people here. So obviously a lot of the conversations were technical. And I think that they had no expectations of my background. And so when they figured out that I have an electrical engineering background and I understand the details they're talking about, it helps make better decisions. It helps understand the problem set and invest in the right things. And so I think that was most of the conversations, very deep technical conversations. And because that's my background, I've lived it for 25 plus years. I think they were excited to have someone that understood and recognized and appreciated what they do.
Yeah. All right, let's talk about the product stack. So, you know, Alpha, Blue Ghost, Elytra, Eclipse, how can I forget Eclipse? But so let's start in Spacecraft, of course. But let's talk, let's start with Alpha. So that's your small launch vehicle here in 2026. Now that vehicle was designed and built over the course of many, many years. Now 2026, the launch landscape has changed completely. How does Alpha fit into the market today?
Well, it's the only one-ton rocket that has orbital flight heritage and it's on the market. We're steadily increasing the launch cadence. We have three more launches that we're targeting this year. We already launched successfully our Flight 7, Stairway to 7 mission on March 11th, and that was flawless. We're also accelerating our transition to Block Two, and with Block Two, the length of our Alpha rocket is going to increase slightly. We also brought in our own in-house avionics and batteries, which all proved itself out on the successful Flight 7. So we're really excited because some of those changes, those updates allow us to be more responsive, to be more global, to do more hypersonic missions, to do more TACRS missions. And so we're really excited about what Block Two upgrades are going to do for us, and that's going to launch on our Flight 8, which is targeting late summer.
And you mentioned the word responsive right now. That typically, especially in launch, is very much associated with the government and military. Tell me a little bit about that demand signal. How real is this? Obviously you guys have had a few, you have a couple different missions on responsive launch. Tell me how real that demand signal is.
Well, it became more real when we launched Victus Knox and broke the previous record of 21 days and we launched in 24 hours. We just finished Victus DM, which was two exercises with our partner Lockheed Martin and the Space Force and SLD 30 at Vandenberg Space Force Base. And so that really proved out the preparation you need and the execution you need to do more of these responsive launches for more operational missions. And so what we are doing in the future are things like Victus Haste and Victus Soul and more. But if you look at the budgets, they're increasing by quadruple.
And you know what tactically responsive space does? It really deters US adversaries in space because if they do something nefarious in space within 24 hours or less, we can put something out there that deters that capability. And so it's something that is critical for the future of the Space Force and national security. But also, I think for commercial purposes, it's helpful too because that kind of cadence and that responsiveness and the global footprint is going to be able to serve even commercial business models as well.
Yeah. Let's talk economics of launch of Alpha. Rocket Lab has said pretty openly that small launch economics are not great. How do you think about how Alpha fits into the Firefly portfolio? Obviously, there's many different, you know, elements here. How does Alpha fit into the portfolio from an economics perspective? Or do you view it more just as a strategic asset to the business?
It's actually both. It's strategic and it's a profit center in that it's the only one-ton rocket with orbital flight heritage that's active today. And so if you look at the trend of smallsats, it's actually growing towards 500 kilograms on average and above. And so a one-ton rocket really meets that demand. In addition to that, you know, we're scaling up. I brought on a new chief operating officer, Ramon Sanchez. He's got experience setting up and, you know, making production lines more efficient for heavy launch vehicles and space planes and large and small satellites as well as missiles. And so he's bringing in all those best practices here and deploying them. I'll give you an example. We have an automated fiber placement machine. It's four stories high. It's at our Rocket Ranch, and it's literally printing all the layup of our carbon composite tanks for Alpha. What Ramon did was he printed four tanks at one time using our AFP machine. It's techniques like that that's really just increasing our capacity, and as we are able to deliver more Alpha rockets and launch more, that's the path to profitability. And so when done right, this scaling is going to make us a profit center that's profitable.
So, Alpha, I mean, when do you expect Alpha to be a profitable business unit for you guys?
As we get more and more launches, which we're doing, we're steadily increasing year to year, we're going to hit that profitability.
Okay. Well, let's talk about Eclipse. So that's the medium lift vehicle, and there's two phases to it, right? So you have a partnership with Northrop Grumman, and also I believe Northrop invested in the company, a strategic investment. So, you know, Northrop has their Antares launch vehicle that, you know, during the Russia-Ukraine war, they lost one of their key engine suppliers, right, which was they were buying engines from Russia. No longer the case. They launched a partnership with you guys to be able to build that first stage, and then eventually the whole launch vehicle. So where does all of that stand right now? So the sort of the phased approach and then also the eventual kind of Eclipse vehicle.
Yeah, we're testing every piece of hardware element of the first stage, and either it's already built or it's in test. That includes the tanks of the first stage, but also the Miranda engines. The hardest part of any rocket development are the engines. And we were able to scale up our tap-off cycle engine technology from our Reaver and Lightning capability up to the size of the Miranda engines and the Vera engines. And so we've had over 100 hot fire tests. We invested in a second engine bay for our test and five so we can up the number of Miranda testing we can do. And we're also in parallel building the flight engines for the first stage. So we're focused on delivering the tanks, the fluid systems, the engines. Northrop is doing a great job focused on the avionics, the software, the payload fairing, and then Wallops expansion. So we're really dividing and conquering and headed towards our first launch.
How do you think, to kind of address the elephant in the room, how do you think Starship is going to impact the launch market and particularly like the medium lift launch market?
I don't think there's going to be just one solution for launch for every need. Starship is going to be an incredible capability that's going to launch plenty of V3 Starlinks and human lander systems and missions to moon and Mars. But there's also a need for the rest of the world. And so we're seeing a lot of demand. We're going towards that demand. And a lot of commercial companies, constellation companies, the US government, international companies, they're wanting capabilities that are flexible for their manifest. Sometimes they have to wait, you know, two years for a launch on a heavy or super heavy. They'll have more flexibility with their manifesting schedules with more medium lift capabilities like Eclipse. And, you know, I think we even have our own missions that we want to launch as well. So there is a robust demand for medium lift in addition to the heavies and super heavies. And just like the air and the sea and the land transportation world, there's not just a single capability that services all different missions. We really want resiliency through multiple providers, multiple sizes, multiple capabilities.
Yeah. I think, I mean, one of the biggest things that we hear from operators, especially satellite operators, is the lack of ability to get on a rocket, and it's a pretty big challenge and friction point in the industry. And then on top of that, you know, we have, you know, our own thesis I'd be curious to get your thoughts on, which is that, you know, Starship is, I mean, it's not functional and operational today. Hopefully it will be soon, but the question becomes when it is operational, what is Elon going to be launching on it? And it's hard to think, especially now that they'll be a public company soon, it's hard to think that they're going to be prioritizing other people's assets versus Starlink and versus their orbital compute satellites now, which, you know, they filed an application with the FCC for about a million. So that alone plus the missions that they have with the moon and then eventually Mars begs the question like when will or how much capacity will the commercial market have access to? And if you also look at the data, I think last year they launched about 160, 165 times. Of that total number of launches, I think it was only like 13 that were fully commercial. So, you know, if you're Elon, I would imagine at least the question is being asked. Like, you know, you're looking at the data and you're asking yourself like, why are we launching commercial launches? I'm not saying that they're not going to in the future, but I have to imagine that that question was asked in a boardroom, like, hey, why are we spending our time doing this market? Not that it's not a good market, but we have bigger fish to fry. Curious what your thoughts are on that.
You know, I'm just glad that SpaceX is on our side. And we're very complementary and synergistic with them. We launched Blue Ghost Mission One on a Falcon 9. Blue Ghost Mission Two will also be on a Falcon 9. And so we work closely with SpaceX. I think that Starship is going to be an incredible capability for the nation and for space exploration and other. We'd want to hitch a ride with them with some of our Elytra constellations as well. So, you know, I think the future is going to be interoperable. There's not going to be one company that does everything. It's going to be all of us working together to expand our capacity, and everybody's going to have to work together. And we already have those good relationships.
Yeah. When will Eclipse fly?
Okay. Have you mentioned when in 2027?
We'll be able to share more as we get past all these milestones.
And then will Blue Ghost eventually fly on Eclipse once Eclipse is operational? Is that part of the plan?
You know, it just depends. If you look at the roadmap that Administrator Jared Isaacman put out there at the Moon to Mars ignition event, if you look at 30 landers in the next three years, and you look past 2030, three of those are 500-kilogram landers, so, you know, normal-size landers. 12 of them are three-ton landers, so much larger landers, which we have designs for. And that's where we're headed. And then 15 of them are eight-ton landers. And so there's some that could fit on a Falcon 9, but there's some that need heavier launch vehicles. And so for the moon missions, if you're going to keep up with that cadence of one a month, you're going to need a variety of medium and heavy and super heavy launch vehicles to get there. It's going to look like a junkyard, like the administrator said, the first several years because we're just going to be launching as many tech missions and exploration missions and science missions as possible to get to that permanent presence with the moon base. But we're designing, you know, larger landers that can meet the three-ton scalable to eight-ton kind of requirements, and that's going to enable us to launch things like cargo and light support systems and light terrain vehicles and more rovers, more landers. And so we're really excited about that future.
So I want you to, for a second, take off your Firefly hat off and maybe put on your Jason Kim, you know, US citizen hat on and maybe your kind of military hat on.
I've always got both hats on.
Okay, well, there you go. But why does the moon matter?
The moon matters so much. And we've been saying this for, you know, ever since I got here and even before. It just took a while for everyone to kind of understand the importance, but you know, there's a lot of, you know, capability that the moon can offer in terms of resources. There's minerals, there's hydrogen, water, a lot of that could be used to set up propulsion and manufacturing on the moon for increasing the lunar ecosystem. There's things like helium-3 as well. In addition to that, you can get a lot of science and exploration information, just like on Blue Ghost Mission One we got so much data, 120 gigabytes of data just from that 14 days. Imagine what you can do with the frequent launches every month.
So that's just a greater understanding of the universe and our solar system and our sun, Earth, moon interactions. And then beyond that, it's the ultimate high ground for national security purposes. It's a vantage point that gives you a strategic advantage to defend our nation. And so if you're able to operate these moon systems that have to thrust all the way to get to the moon orbit through trans-lunar injection precisely, and then you actually circle the moon and orbit it, or you even land and rendezvous with it, those are all the same types of technologies you need to defend yourself in space and do space warfighting. And so I call it dual use. When you're doing moon missions, you're actually also, you know, basically reducing risk for the national security missions at the same time. But having that, you know, command of the ultimate high ground, that's strategically important for the US.
Yeah. So Jason, everything you've mentioned so far points to sort of the government customer and the NASA customer. How much of the moon economy, as you look out the next five years, 10 years, 20 years, do you think is going to actually come from commercial and commercial end users?
Well, we're seeing the demand already. Blue Ghost Mission Two has some commercial payloads on there. Half of them, all the payloads on there, half of them are commercial.
And then we're seeing demand on Blue Ghost Mission Three and Blue Ghost Mission Four for hosting. But even beyond that, there's demand for dedicated lunar landers for different missions that are commercial only, and then there's also international demand and universities and research demand as well. So we're already seeing, I think it's a crawl, walk, run approach. Right now, it's the crawl, but as you know, the lunar economy continues to grow and there's more human presence there, it's going to grow. And I could see it growing to be a fraction like 25% of what NASA is funding already, and then just continue to grow, you know, as the economy gets set up on the moon.
So, so you're saying, I mean, maybe thinking about it a slightly different way. So like over the next 10 years, you think about 20, 25% of, and I know it's like hard to predict this number, but like 20, 25% of like those dollars associated with the moon economy is going to be from commercial.
I think that's a conservative perspective. And you look at what NASA's looking at funding just for robotic lunar landers, a $20 billion budget for 30 landers in the next three years and missions like that, 25% and growing of that being commercial is a substantial number.
What about, okay, so the next few Blue Ghosts, you know, you have Blue Ghost basically contracted out to 2028, I believe. Like what do those next missions look like? So far, next one is far side of the moon, Blue Ghost 2. What do the next missions look like as far as maybe the eye can see for now?
