Bobby Healy, founder & CEO of Manna, on drone delivery for the suburbs

In August, we chatted with Zach Rash & Daniel Singer, the CEO & CBO at Coco Robotics, about the emerging trend of sidewalk & bike lane robots and their partnerships with on-demand companies like DoorDash.

To learn more about the aerial drone side of delivery, we chatted with Bobby Healy, founder & CEO of Irish drone delivery company Manna ($25M Series A, Draper Esprit) which has completed 200K+ autonomous flights across Dublin & Helsinki.

Key points via Sacra AI:

What was the core insight that led you to start Manna, and how has that insight borne out?

Very simple. Living in a pretty dense suburb in Dublin, which has a strong delivery economy—Ireland has a strong delivery economy—it's nearly impossible to get reliable road-based delivery from a restaurant. Seeing all my friends using pizza delivery constantly, getting orders but waiting an hour, hour and a half to get their food on a weekend. And Irish weather being Irish weather, when it rains, forget about it. Delivery just doesn't work well in the suburbs.

So the initial insight was: here's a market that clearly has demand, but the product and experience being delivered is awful. And it's nobody's fault that it's awful. The delivery companies are well-managed businesses. Restaurants are just trying to get and fulfill extra demand and please their customers, and consumers just want to eat or get stuff. Essentially, there's clearly demand for a service that's very difficult to fulfill for everybody. That was the personal perspective.

Can you give us an idea of what scale you're at today, and what have been the biggest barriers to reaching that scale?

The real way to think about it is: don't look at any drone delivery company in terms of overall scale. Think more about what's the most complex operation, the highest-throughput operation that they're doing, because you can just cookie-cutter that. Beyond that, the reason you wouldn't be scaled, the reason anybody would fail to be scaled, is primarily regulatory, which comes to be the choke point.

Scale-wise, if you look at one of our locations in Dublin—we're really only in Dublin now, though we're also in Helsinki and Texas,—our main scaling is in Dublin. Dublin's very much like a US suburb. Well it's actually more dense. Dublin City is actually very densely populated, and we're operating in the densest suburb in the country. We’ve done about 45,000 deliveries in this one small location in 18 months, serving about 150,000 people, and peak delivery throughput is just over 50 deliveries per hour.

Manna has an advantage being in the EU. We have very strong regulations here, very well-baked. Usually regulation's a bad word, but in drone delivery, it's essential to actually scaling. Looking at the US market, we have an operation in Texas, but it's small compared to what we have in Europe. And we wouldn't scale it yet because the regulations in the USA are around beyond visual line of sight [BVLOS], long range flights, all that stuff—they're not ready yet. They're coming, but they're not ready.

If you did scale a drone delivery business in the USA right now, you'd be losing a lot of money because of that, whereas we're profitable in our operation in Ireland on a standalone basis, at the location we operate in. And it's a big, meaty business that we're doing. It's profitable.

You can only be profitable in drone delivery of food if you have volume, and volume drives utilization, and utilization drives down your margin—higher utilization drives higher margin.

Don't think about us, or any drone delivery business, as food delivery. Our plans are to power every movement of goods from A to B. It's not just food, but food is the clear, easy initial use case because it's a $300 billion industry. It's an industry that suffers from awful unit economics and is difficult to scale because of bad NPS and the gig economy cost and the labor problems that come with that.

Food is an industry that happens to be the one that needs to be solved urgently, and that's why ourselves, or competitors like Wing [Alphabet subsidiary], anybody else—that’s why we're delivering pizzas and burritos. It's not because we think that's the only use case. It's just a very valuable short-term use case.

But between us and scale in the United States is regulations, and in Europe, really nothing. We're starting to grow now. We'll be doing somewhere between 2 and 4 million annual deliveries next year, which in the context of food delivery globally doing nearly 6 billion deliveries a year, it's tiny, but we're on the growth trajectory now.

The industry would all agree that 2026 in the USA is when the real ramp will start. You're going to see ourselves, Google [with Wing], probably leading the way there on just ultra-high growth in the United States from 2026 onwards.

Is that because of the anticipated change with the beyond visual line of sight rules expected early 2026?

Correct. They're called Part 108 regulations. It's the first time the US has actually introduced regulations that are fit for purpose for what we do. There have been regulations like Part 135 and Part 107 from the FAA that are fine. They let everybody fly. We fly under that now in Texas. Wing flies under that, everyone flies under that, but you couldn't run a profitable business with those regulations.

Part 108's been in process for five years in the USA, maybe more, but there was an executive order about 3 months ago which really lit the fuse, and it basically mandated or enabled the FAA to really push these regulations and go fast. And it's what was needed. The USA needed a bit of a jolt to unblock this overly consensus-driven approach.

The industry knows how to do this. We've flown together with Google and Wing in Dallas. We've flown into each other's airspace. We've solved all the difficult orchestration problems—things that a regulator would find very difficult to crystallize in the form of regulations. The industry has solved and demonstrated that to the FAA and Department of Transportation. The Part 108 regulations essentially encapsulate what the industry together has built. It just needed a bit of political will to get over the line, and that's what's there now.

I'm very bullish on the US market. If you'd asked me six months ago, I would have said I don't know if it's going to be a year away or 5 years away because the industry has been in regulatory purgatory for over ten years in the United States because of this uncertainty. But it is true now, and I'd be very surprised if those Part 108 regs didn't become law sometime in 2026. Operators like ourselves are ready and really excited about the potential that's going to open up with that.

You mentioned Irish weather, which is not known to be super dry and sunny. We were told that drone deliveries in the US are not really done in rain, windy weather, or nighttime. How do you handle that in Ireland?

That's not hard. I'm surprised you've heard that, and I can't speak for others. But we fly—in the last 365 days, because we measure our availability performance—we've flown 97.5% of the time measured on an hourly basis in Irish weather. You couldn't pick a better, more difficult climate to start this thing off in.

When we say weather, the challenge with weather—rain is easy, actually. Snow, we fly in snow. No problem. We fly in Helsinki. It has loads of snow. Snow and rain are easy. Very cold temperatures for us are easy because our batteries are temperature controlled indoors before they fly, things like that. So we fly down to minus 20 degrees Celsius—don't ask me what that is in Fahrenheit—and in high heat.

A strong wind, say a 20, 30 mile an hour sustained wind—that's also easy to fly in. With our aircraft, you wouldn't even know it was windy. It's just stable as hell, and it just flies. The negative about high winds is energy. You're using more battery to fly the same distance, but that’s also fine. That's easy to model, easy to fly in, easy to control the aircraft.

We deliver from a relatively low altitude, about 50 feet off the ground, and we have a very fast delivery system. When we open the doors and drop the product, it's on the ground in less than about 4 to 5 seconds. So the bag doesn't have time to blow away in the wind. These are very Irish problems, but when you're running at scale even in the US, even in a benign climate, you could be in Florida, you still need to handle the edge cases or you're not competing with road-based delivery. You have to handle the edge cases. There's no point thinking about drone delivery as some exotic thing that'll work *nearly* all the time. It has to work all the time to replace road-based delivery, which is the way we've always engineered for it.

The hard part of weather is actually a couple of things. One, which is unsolvable, and that's icing conditions where you just have a particular kind of environment where ice can build up on your rotors, and it's just unsafe to fly in icing weather. There are solutions around heated rotors, things like that, but they're incredibly complex, incredibly heavy, and it's only maybe 1 percent of the time in certain climates. So we don't need to fly in icing weather.

The real challenge with weather is around gusting. Gusting is when you might have strong winds, but the gusting factor, which is the spikiness of the wind, that's the challenge. It's not a challenge for flying or energy or anything like that. It's a challenge around the control of the aircraft in tight spaces. If you need to land in a tight space as we do, that’s where the problems come in. We pack a lot of aircraft into one small place, in order to get a lot of throughput per meter of retail space or the roof of somewhere. With gusting no aircraft in the world, even a big 737 or something like that, will avoid flying because of gusting, And that is a current limit to our industry.

But as I said, we live on an island on the West Coast of Europe. It is the worst possible place for weather, and we handle it just fine.

What about nighttime?

No problem. We fly in heavy rain. We fly at nighttime, fly in snow, strong winds, all easy. But don't forget, it's BVLOS. We're flying BVLOS in Ireland, so there's no dedicated pilot for our aircraft, so we don't need to see it. All our aircraft are tracked with two LTE comms connections. So we have a remote pilot that can manage up to 20 aircraft or observe 20 aircraft at once, but they have no active role per se. They don't fly it per se. They don't need to actually see it. In fact, our remote pilots are all in Ireland, and they're managing aircraft around the world. If one of our aircraft takes off in Helsinki—it's a remote pilot in Ireland observing that aircraft.

If we could dig into unit economics, success rate is really important with margins because if you have to refund an order, your margins disappear. Is that important in your model as well?

Success rate doesn't factor into our equation at all actually. We don't fail. I can't think of a time when we would fail. It's the restaurants that we power that will often drive refunds, but they're not us refunding the customer. That's a restaurant doing a remake. Restaurants are a highly fragmented industry. It's a long tail of small players, and they'll have staffing issues. They'll have kitchen issues. It's impossible to make that hugely reliable unless you're talking about the big brands, the McDonald's or whatever. Smaller restaurants will always make mistakes with prep. They'll get the orders wrong. They'll forget the sauce. They'll forget whatever, and that's fine. That doesn't affect our business model because our product is flying. Our product isn't hamburgers. It's flying.

We're charging our partners a fee for a flight, and we don't fail. We have an on-time performance of 99% on time. We don't oversell the flights, so we don't need to queue things. We're on demand. If we have 6 aircraft on the ground in a particular location, if one of our bases has five aircraft on the ground, we have capacity for about between 35 and 40 flights an hour with those 5 aircraft. We don't sell more than that.

When we think about unit economics, we think about our cost per delivery. We think about our unit costs, all of the things like battery depreciation, motor, staffing, remote pilot, proportion between pilots and aircraft, whatever. We think about all of that as a cost, but then there's a lot of the labor cost around the flight, which might be a person that loads the cargo onto the aircraft. It might be the remote pilot and whatever labor is associated with an aircraft. You need all that cost to be highly utilized. You need a combination: a lot of volume to make sure that demand is filling the capacity, and then you need a very seamless transition for the aircraft or a fast turnaround time as a low-cost airline would call it.

If you ever hear me talking about the business at length, you will hear the same words that any CEO of a low-cost airline would be uttering. We don't see ourselves as this SpaceX super cool thing. Even though we are super cool and it is very interesting technology, we run the business like a low-cost airline.

We've architected a system to have a fast turnaround time. Our turnaround time is less than 60 seconds, meaning that when the aircraft lands on the ground, it's back up in the air with new cargo in less than 60 seconds when we're really pushed. That means we get 8 deliveries per hour per aircraft, which means our throughput is very high in any small location, which means any staff that might be at that location are highly utilized staff. That pushes down our unit cost, which obviously increases our margin.

That's why we're probably the only drone delivery company on the planet that has profitable location economics. I don't think anyone is near us on that. I don't want to be disparaging to anyone because I don't know of any bad players in this space. They're all awesome. But for various reasons, they haven't needed or wanted to focus on operational efficiencies. They're more thinking about clearing regulatory barriers or growing volume, getting loads of volume, all that stuff. But we don't care about that. We care about making money.

The way you make money in this space is you have a relentless focus on operational efficiency and cost before you scale, and that's us. We've achieved that by powering very high-density locations, high throughput—52 deliveries an hour from one small location—and that's what drives our cost down.

Now we're in a position where we have a license for 31 countries, 500 million people in Europe that we're going to start scaling into now. It’s still a nascent stage for the industry, but it is now finally the time where you're going to see a lot of growth in the space.

We’ve heard ground autonomy, ground delivery robots, face fewer regulatory barriers and see higher success rates. Can you talk about ground versus air and why air is superior, or do you believe there's going to be a multimodal future?

There is going to be a multimodal future. Both modes have strengths and weaknesses. Ground-based robots are essential, for example, for urban areas because drones need a garden to deliver into. We need flat space. It needs to be clear, all that stuff. And that doesn't work in the middle of Manhattan or downtown San Francisco. Even in Helsinki, it's all very dense. It's all apartments downtown. Helsinki and Espoo are both Finnish metros where we operate. They’re incredibly dense, but we don't have a deliverability problem there because we only go for the suburbs.

So ground robots can access places the drones can't. There's this natural Venn diagram where they're on one side and we're on the other side, and a bit in the middle, we might fight over, but good luck to them because physics is on our side. We fly at 60 miles an hour in a straight line. Our average flight time is 2 minutes, 50 seconds in Dublin. 22% of our orders are hot coffee. I would challenge any ground-based robots to either get a hot coffee there on time or get french fries there on time. And fun fact: in takeaway food, french fries are the flagship product, and they don't travel well.

I love ground robots. And we will integrate ground robots into our system. And why would we do that? Because the other problem drone delivery has, but in a sense ground robots do as well, but less so—is that drone delivery is always going to be hub-based. It's always going to be centralized. Because of the unit economics I spoke about earlier, you need a lot of volume for your drone delivery operation to be profitable. That volume will come from certain high-throughput restaurants like the big brands that we all know that can do easily 50, 100 deliveries an hour.

And the aggregators, the DoorDashes, the Ubers, and so on in this world—we've signed DoorDash, we're live with DoorDash already. When you think about them, their value prop to the consumer is choice, among other things. It's also delivery and logistics, all that stuff, but they focus strongly on providing choice to the consumer. Consumers open the app, they're seeing a couple hundred choices. Drone delivery couldn't do that on its own. Drone delivery has to be, by its nature, centralized around a hub, a busy, dense hub of supply, and that's not the way supply works in suburbs. Supply tends to be pushed around and moved around in the suburbs.

Our view is that ground robots will play this last 100 meters role or maybe 200 meters where the ground robot's waiting outside the restaurant for the product and then brings it to a drone hub, which actually then flies it for three or four miles the rest of the way. Ground robots aren't valid or viable in any way for takeaway food or perishable products for a distance of 3 or 4 miles. It just takes too long, and the food degrades as well. It's a bad use of capital. It's a crappy customer experience. But they'll kick our asses all day long with groceries and things like that where time isn't a factor, perishability isn't a factor, and weight and volume is greater.

We're constrained by the weight and volume we can fly. I would invest in a ground robot company, no problem, because there are use cases there that they're very valid, and it's going to be a high-growth industry. But they have not got a chance in hell of competing with us in the suburbs for perishable products.

Can we talk about that ground infrastructure a little bit more? Is it solely hub-based where the restaurants have to get it to a hub location?

It depends on the partner. We have different models. But if I talk about Helsinki, we operate right between a dark store and a dark kitchen, so it's got Wolt—that's DoorDash's brand in Europe. And there, they have a Wolt market, which is a convenience store essentially with a couple thousand different products, and we fly right from there. An order comes into them. They pick it, they put it in a bag, they hand it to our team outside the door. Our job is to scan it, weigh it, fly it, and that takes us about 60 seconds per order, maybe a couple of minutes if it's a brand new customer—there's some upfront agreement with the customer around where we're going to deliver to for the first time.

But generally, we're flying from a dense supply area where there's enough volume to make us viable. We also fly from a dark kitchen there. Think a food factory, a dark factory in an industrial place with loads of food in one place. Those things are easy for us where the vendor just hands us a bag and we fly, sometimes from their roof, sometimes from their car park.

And then if I look at one of our operations in Dublin, it's in the middle of a shopping mall, and the shopping mall has about 70 or 80 different restaurants and different brands including burgers, burritos, whatever. And we try to fly everything from that mall. We try to say, "Look, here's the couple hundred retail stores. You can all participate in drone delivery. You can all suddenly get access to 200,000 customers with a 3-minute flight. We only ask that you bring us the product."

Most of them will actually say no to that because restaurants don't have the staff to do that. It's not enough business for them to hire an extra staff member to be running 100 meters every now and then, so they won't do it. But the high-throughput ones will, and the high-throughput ones really are what drone delivery cares about.

For them, it's justified on their side or on our side to use runners. Runners being somebody that can maybe do about 10 to 15 deliveries an hour by walking to a restaurant within 100 meters, picking the bag up, and bringing it to us. That works financially, but it's ugly as hell, and we don't like it. But we will scale that, and you can scale it profitably. It's just inefficient. And that's where I start to talk about ground robots—that's what we will solve with ground robots.

The other thing for us is we have our own footprint. Our unit of work is four aircraft in quite a tight space, roughly around six parking spaces. We take four aircraft and put them in that spot, and those aircraft have capacity for just over 30 deliveries per hour. We can put that down on the roof of a restaurant or small car park space and build quite a significant business from that. And because we already have a base there, we'll put coffee in. We'll find a coffee vendor, and they will make the coffee and the pastries right there where the aircraft are. One in 5 of our orders is a hot coffee.

And then there's other staples like ice cream and donuts. All these staples are actually a very big business. Think about drone delivery as serving very nearby vendors and supply chain, but also being a store in itself and having the staples. One of our investors is Coca Cola, and we have a deal with them. We've got a Coca Cola shop, all their beverages, by our base. You order from Coca Cola now, and you're getting it in about five minutes in your back garden. So those types of direct-to-consumer staples deals, as we would call them, underpin every drone delivery location.

Do you see food tech trends like dark kitchens and robotic food prep as very important to the ongoing scaling and success of Manna's model?

I'm incredibly excited about what I'm seeing in both consumer behavior and new demographics of people growing up who are far more inclined to use delivery than they are to prepare or buy themselves, which is good and bad. I miss the old world where everyone just went out to eat or cooked at home. But that world is gone. 70-plus percent of restaurant produce now leaves the restaurant and goes to a house. So being realistic about it, delivery has to scale and is going to scale and is going to be meaningful, if not the majority of consumption.

Within that then, the organization of supply is what you're referring to, and that's dark stores, dark kitchens, robotic stuff. 100% it has a future in it, but it has to go hand in hand with more efficient delivery. We both support each other. We can make a dark kitchen far more efficient, but on our side we don't have a business without a dark kitchen or a density of supply. So they both need each other.

You'll see our rollout in the Middle East, for example, is all dark kitchens. Our rollout in most of Europe will be dark stores, dark kitchens together, and we'll try to have a long tail or a medium tail of choice and supply, but we won't be able to go too far in that direction because of that fragmentation problem.

And within their operations, particularly dark kitchens, I've been surprised at how slow that automation has been in evolving. Particularly, something as basic as making french fries and pizzas reliably, I still haven't seen it done well enough that it can replace high-quality products that are being made by human beings. I'm surprised at that, but that will be solved ultimately.

The staples like donuts, coffee, pizzas, all those typical high-volume drivers will likely be, for a certain tier of consumer, automated products, almost like vending machines that put out finished products that are then flown. But most of the growth for the next five-plus years will just be our infrastructure overlaid on existing physical footprints. We don't need something to change to be viable.

Over time, say 5 years, 10 years, when we're ubiquitous and people only use drone delivery, then supply can reorganize itself to be more efficient in terms of real estate. Your big brand name burgers and fries restaurant that's on a premium location on the high street, or a premium location wherever it is, which is relying on footfall and had a traditional business of people eating in the restaurant or people driving to the restaurant, so therefore they needed a strong retail footprint? That goes away.

We know this already. A lot of big brands in the United States, as I said, more than 70% of their product is delivered out now. So the concentration of business for them is moving away from that branded store, branded restaurant into just the product that people are consuming. When that iteration happens, then suddenly the eating-in part of the business does not become the growth driver. What becomes the growth driver is logistics and possibly automation on the production of the food. If you have 150,000 people like we do in one suburb: If they can get something delivered into their back or front garden in 5 or 10 minutes after it's been prepared, that's a far better product for consumers than having to get in their car and sit somewhere that maybe they don't want to be, or drive somewhere they don't want to drive.

The first decade of this industry is just going to be about powering and making more efficient use of existing footprints. And thereafter, we enable that new modality where restaurants in some conditions won't even need to exist. It'll be purely: everyone knows my brand already. They already know what they want to order from the menu, so I'm just going to make it in this dark store. I'm even going to outsource it to a robot or to a dark kitchen to make it. Consumers don't care. They just care about whatever the brand is that they're used to and they want to consume. So it'll be a generational change that’s just great for business and so good for the consumer.

You mentioned having been cleared to fly in 31 EU countries. How much of a hard nut to crack is that local regulatory layer in the US and in Europe?

That's very interesting. That particular barrier hasn't been a real challenge yet. I don't think that it's going to be much of a barrier, possibly it is. It's all very different wherever you go. It's not going to be standard.

Right now, the whole industry is powered by aviation regulations, which are purely safety focused. Safety and environmental, but also noise levels and things like wildlife. But there's a part of this which is around public acceptance of this new disruptive technology. Flying robots: there was a PAW Patrol episode about this seven or eight years ago about some dystopian future of drone delivery, and it was rooted in fear. Fear is a product after all, if you're selling media.

We see the start of this with autonomous driving, all these philosophical questions about how we feel about robots driving us around. And drones will be interpreted by certain sections of society in an even more negative way just because of the connotations of the word drone and how they've been used in the past.

That debate hasn't really happened yet, and it's going to happen. Some markets will be easier. For example, if I look at Wing, Google's drone delivery program in Australia, they're doing massive volumes of drone delivery, and it's just hugely accepted. No complaints. It's just beautiful down there, and Aussies love it. Wing does a great job, so why wouldn't they? The United States will be like that too. They won't be able to get enough drone delivery. It's going to be well accepted.

But in Europe and other markets, there'll be tough regulatory challenges and questions to answer. Germany, we all know about German privacy laws. We all know about the French, what they think of technology. And Italians just love to make their own food and their own coffee. You've got a big diversity of cultures that will embrace and adopt this disruptive technology in different ways.

Ireland's a good example. Ireland's a little bit of a petri dish here where the majority of Ireland embraces technology, and we're really tech-oriented and very pro-business, with a very pro-tech government as well, despite what a lot of people think. We are very pro-tech, but there's an element of very far left influence in Ireland that sometimes gets in the way of progress. We love to ban wind farms, forget about nuclear, and there's certain things that the tinfoil hat brigade just latch onto and will object to, and that's 100% going to be the case for what we do, ground robots too. I could point to any technology and say, the tinfoil hat people will be out in arms with their pitchforks and looking to stop it, but I don't think that will translate into city-based regulations that prevent it or even curtail it.

If I were to talk about an industry where that did happen, it's with the electric scooter industry where VC-backed firms just grew, blitzscaling all over Europe and didn't do a great job of bringing the community along. There was scooter litter everywhere. You were tripping over electric scooters in the street. They didn't handle bad weather. They ended up throwing them in the river, and it just went too fast without due consideration for communities.

But we don't really have that issue because people don't see us. They don't look up when we fly overhead. It's more about perceptions around privacy, noise, job destruction, whatever you want to call it—things that aren't real. We're a net job creator. Nobody looks up. They don't really hear us when we're at cruising altitude, and privacy is easy to respect. You just don't abuse people's rights in terms of privacy.

It's an unanswered question, but I don't think there's reason to be concerned that the industry will have problems as it scales.

What kind of future are we thinking about, especially if you bring in multimodal autonomous delivery into urban areas? Is it a future where we have ultra-dense drone flights crisscrossing the sky?

I do hear frequently enough, what's the future going to look like? Is the sky going to be littered with drones? I'm not going to be able to see the birds anymore. Not the case for drones. Drones will only really ever be workable in what we call high-density suburbs and on to less dense areas from there. There's 92 million detached single-family homes in the United States. They all have lawns front and back, and that's the target market for drones. It isn't in the middle of the cities. It'll just never be viable there because there's no way to get the product to customers unless you look at the Chinese model where there are some drone delivery companies in China where they have kiosks around the city, and you go to the kiosk and you order, and the drone lands on the kiosk. You pick your food up and go back to your apartment.

Most western residents or most western buildings and residential areas aren't shaped like Chinese cities, so I don't see that there'll ever be a business in dense urban areas that could be serviceable by drones. I'd even struggle to see how ground robots can do it because there's just not enough space on the road. There's not enough bandwidth there to support consumption.

Other than human-based delivery in dense cities, there’s no other feasible mode that I know of yet. Or there's a company called Pipe Dream Labs in Austin, Texas, that is building underground tunnel-based delivery, which I love, by the way. It might work. But otherwise, we're just in high-density suburbs. But that's 60-plus percent of the population, so it's a big prize.

Going back to the PAW Patrol episode, and I highly recommend watching this episode, they had this picture of just drones everywhere and the birds attacking the drones, the drones dropping out of the sky. It’s not going to be like that. Think about the density, the housing density of your typical suburb in the United States. It's really not very dense. And then think about the frequency of ordering. Your typical household might order once a week, it might even be less than that in the United States.

If you overlay that frequency with the housing density, you actually get a very sparse airspace. There's not a lot. Where we operate, we operate 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. You're always going to see our drones in the air, always. And particularly at nighttime, when you see their little flashing lights going along, it's just an absolutely beautiful thing. But there's not many of them. You're seeing a lot more birds up there than you're seeing drones. We operate for 150,000 people with nine aircraft, and that's about a 30 square mile operational area, a little bit more. And it's a big area to have only nine drones in the air.

So I don't think it's ever going to be an issue.

Just a quick follow-up. What is this suburb that we're talking about with 150,000 people that you’ve fully scaled in?

It's Blanchardstown. Dublin.

It's the biggest, densest suburb we could find in Ireland. If you go to Google Maps, put in Blanchardstown, look at the satellite view, zoom in, you're going to see something that looks more like The Bronx than Boca Country Club in Florida. It's dense. The typical garden size might be 20, 30 yards each way. It's not big. But yeah, that makes sense for drone delivery. Lots of houses very close to each other, if not stuck to each other with little yards.

This transcript is for information purposes only and does not constitute advice of any type or trade recommendation and should not form the basis of any investment decision. Sacra accepts no liability for the transcript or for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies in respect of it. The views of the experts expressed in the transcript are those of the experts and they are not endorsed by, nor do they represent the opinion of Sacra. Sacra reserves all copyright, intellectual property rights in the transcript. Any modification, copying, displaying, distributing, transmitting, publishing, licensing, creating derivative works from, or selling any transcript is strictly prohibited.