Good morning, everyone, thanks for joining us. This morning we're joined by James Fitter, CEO of Oneview Healthcare. Oneview is a stock couple within our access research team here at MST, we recently published a note following the announcement of the Baxter Value-Added Reseller Agreement. We can see it in our published research that the scale, reach, and quality of this agreement was much than we could have guessed following the teaser from Oneview following that ASX share price inquiry. Just before we start, just to point out, I mean, if you do have questions for James after his presentation, please feel free to put them into the chat below, or if you prefer, please email them to me at dan.hurren@mstmarquee.com.au. With limited time available, let's get on with it. James, congratulations on the agreement, and we're keen to learn to learn more. Welcome. Thanks very much, Dan. Much appreciated. Good morning, everyone in Sydney. Thanks for joining on a Friday morning. I'm just gonna just let me get the right share, which is this one, and we'll get going. That looks more like it. Terrific. Everyone can see that now, I hope? Yep, we have you, James. That's great. Great. Fantastic. Just the first thing, obviously, legal disclaimer around forward-looking statements. We obviously won't be making any, anything we're talking about will be in the public domain, and as Dan mentioned, this call is being recorded and will be available on our website later today. We are still domiciled in euros unless otherwise specified, and we are a calendar year-end. Just a reminder, any references to year-end refer to calendar 2023. I'm cognizant that some people on the call are not overly familiar with what we do. If you'll allow me, I'm just gonna do a quick refresher on what the key value drivers of the business are. Talk about how we navigated the pandemic. Obviously, an update on the Baxter VAR, to the extent we can. I wanna talk a lot about BYOD proposition and also some developments on the competitive landscape in Australia, which some of you may already be aware of. I'll try to get through these slides pretty quickly and hopefully leave a bit of time for questions. At the heart of it, Oneview is really bringing together these three critical members of any hospital admission, which is, of course, the patient themselves, their family, and their care team. I guess if there's one thing the pandemic taught us, it's just how hard it is to bring all these disparate stakeholders together. It's a single, a unified platform on typically on hospital-owned devices, and this is why BYOD is such an important driver for us. 'Cause up until now, all of our hospitals are buying hardware to support the deployment of the Oneview platform. We'll have a quick look at what that looks like in a second. We refer to the product as the Care Experience Platform. The reason for that is exactly that. It's, as the name suggests, we're trying to provide one view into a whole bunch of disparate systems that typically don't talk to each other. It's a unified technology platform that provides a visualization layer into a series of very deep integrations. Really, this is the mode of the business. The business was founded here in Dublin in 2008, so we've been going for 15 years now. I joined the company in January 2013. At the time, we were a 10-person startup with no revenue, so we've gone from a very humble beginnings to something that now includes three of the top 20 hospitals in the United States as customers. It is our breadth of content and our platform and analytics that really drive value for our customers. We have a very sophisticated data platform that allows us to understand exactly how the patients are interacting with the technology platform while they're hospitalized, and able to share that information with our customers on a real-time basis to help them change the product offering, which includes both content that we build ourselves, but increasingly content coming from other providers. At the heart of it is an open architecture. We need to be Switzerland. We need to accommodate different hospitals' requirements. The integrations, for example, with electronic health records, we obviously cater to Epic, to Cerner, to Allscripts, to MEDITECH. The good news is that MEDITECH in the United States is fairly oligopolistic, so once you've built the four or five integrations, you tend to cover around 80% of the addressable market. It's very impactful from that point of view. I want to talk a bit about navigating the pandemic because, I mean, so many industries and so many of us were touched in different ways by the pandemic, but I don't think it's an understatement to say that no industry was more affected by the pandemic than the hospital industry, which obviously represents 100% of our customer base. We only focus on on hospital clients today, and obviously, they were focused primarily on saving people's lives. It's been quite a journey, which we're gonna have a look at in a second. Our first response was to ask our customers: What can we do to help? Almost all of them said it would be super helpful if we could use the technology that we already have at the bedside to enable some form of video communication, whether that was through things like Zoom that we're using today, Teams, Cisco Jabber, Facebook Messenger. It didn't matter. We just wanted to get some form of two-way communication between the Care team and the patient. That was primarily to save on PPE and prevent the Care team from having to go into acute hospital rooms unnecessarily. That led to the inspiration to develop our Cloud Start program with NYU Langone as our first customer. That was a huge success at a time when New York was very much in the epicenter of the pandemic, where we deployed 400 tablets to four new hospitals for them. As we sort of look back on it, the pandemic really has validated the value proposition of bedside technology in a hugely meaningful way, and we'll talk a bit about that in a second, but really around new hybrid models of care. We're all obviously coming from different corners of the world this morning, and that is true in, across every industry and something that's really starting to have a huge impact on nursing. Our core hypothesis, the pandemic obviously has had a terrible impact on our top line growth. Notwithstanding, we grew our contracted book of business by 50%. During the pandemic, we haven't necessarily been able to convert all those beds because we had restricted access to hospital rooms. We've been hearing for the last 12 months that patient experience was gonna be a big priority for hospitals in 2023, that they had set aside budget for bedside technology, and that was validated by our Q1, where we had a record net new customer acquisition with three new logos. What's interesting about these three new logos is that all three of them, the executive sponsor that is buying Oneview, is someone who has come from an organization previously that also deployed Oneview, which is the ultimate validation that they have gone to a new health system, and one of the first things they've chosen to do is to deploy Oneview. This is a pretty busy slide from a pretty forgettable period of time, which, of course, was the three years that we were effectively locked out of the market. The slide is designed so that below the line, we are showing what we were doing during the pandemic to try and make sure we had a business that was better, more scalable, coming out of the pandemic. On the top line are the commercial milestones we were able to achieve, despite the fact that we were in a pretty challenging period. As I mentioned, the first thing we did was launch our Cloud Start program, and when we say Cloud Start, that was simply the ability to deliver a solution which brought both entertainment and video communication to the patient bedside. We didn't have the context of the patient, so all we knew is what room the tablet was in, and we had the ability for that tablet to auto answer from a call from the care team outside the room. That was the genesis for our team to say, "Look, we need to try and lift our entire product to the cloud." Healthcare has been a very slow adopter of cloud technology, but the pandemic has been the catalyst to change that. It took us just over 12 months to migrate our entire product to the cloud, and the important part of that, of course, is the ISO certification, which is the security framework, which gives us the confidence and gives our customers the confidence that we can manage their private data in a positive way. That was a huge lift for the organization. Then we also went through the process of validating new set-top boxes and all-in-one devices, which again provide a range of different deployment models. We launched the first version of our Digital Door Sign. On the top line, you can see we signed a number of new logos, but we also managed to renew a very large portion of our business, including Epworth in Australia, and two of our largest customers, BJC in St. Louis. We went from a 1,000-bed deployment to an additional 2,500-bed expansion in the middle of the pandemic, the largest contract the company's ever signed. NYU and Langone doubled their deployment from 1,000 beds to 2,000 beds. The fact that customers are both expanding and extending contracts, I think points to the stickiness of the business. As I said, despite the challenges, I think we achieved a lot. We also managed to keep together our entire leadership team throughout the pandemic and to this day, which in the face of the great resignation, it was a really important achievement. This is just quickly update on our logos. I think that these kind of speak for themselves. Looking at this slide, you could be excused for thinking that the business was evenly balanced. It's not. Over 70% of our business is now in the United States. That number is gonna continue to grow as we continue to move forward, particularly with the Baxter agreement. Also helps when we're seeing continued consolidation in the United States. As I mentioned, BJC is already our largest customer, with 3,500 contracted beds. BJC formed a group called the BJC Collaborative back in 2012, which is a group of health systems in the states of Missouri and Illinois. Originally four systems, of which Saint Luke's was one of the founding partners with BJC. A further four systems joined, so there's now eight systems representing nearly 50 hospitals. BJC and Saint Luke's have announced this intention to merge. We don't want to be presumptuous, but we do know from all of our customers that they want to have, including BJC, they want to have an equitable experience. They don't want a patient turning up at one facility, having this very modern, sophisticated experience on Oneview, and then going to an older facility where it's back to the 1970s and TV only. Again, absolutely no guarantee that this merger will go through, firstly, but secondly, not necessarily that they'll standardize on us, but I think there's a very high probability that they will in the fullness of time. A quick reminder of the four kind of places we're really focused. The genesis of the business was the tablet and the television, which you see in this picture, but the pandemic has exposed two new business opportunities for us. One is the MyStay Overview Board. You think of this as being the digital whiteboard. If you turn up at any hospital room in Australia or the United States today, you undoubtedly see a white manual marker board, which during the pandemic was tended to be overlooked because nurses were too busy to update the board, and therefore didn't feel they could rely upon it. The increasing trend is to either have a separate digital board, separate monitor, adjacent to the TV, which surfaces all the precautions for the care team when they walk in, or alternatively, our preferred mode is to actually launch that whiteboard as a separate tile on the Oneview platform. In a similar vein, the Digital Door Sign outside the room is almost always now included in RFPs, where, again, we're providing visual cues for the care team through our integration with the electronic medical record that are providing precautions around the patient's condition, before the Care team enters the room. This is perhaps the most important slide in sense of what the pandemic did, which was, first of all, our patients asked to bring that video onto the tablet in the room. That was a quick fix, a band-aid kind of solution, because the tablet is not the most stable device. It might be facing away from the patient. Almost every conversation we're in now is in this immersion category, where the hospital is looking to deploy a camera with a speaker and a microphone on top of the television that is connected to the Oneview set-top box, and allows us to interchange between the patient experience. A patient might be watching the cricket or the footy, but the care team want to remote into the room. We get a message from the telehealth provider. It could be any one of people like Caregility, Amwell, Teladoc. There's a whole host of players in this space that we build integrations with. We pass control of the television to the telehealth provider. The provider conducts the call with the patient and also allows for things like virtual nursing and virtual patient observation. This is a huge driver. I've just got back from Washington this morning, where we've been in another very large health system. What we're hearing pretty much across the U.S. now is that health systems want to get eyes and ears in every room in order to enable remote patient monitoring. That's something that has really changed the value proposition of what we do. The future state of that is that we may not even need a human to be monitoring that patient. It could be done through computer vision. We're working with a partner in that space as well, that is gonna allow high-risk patients to be monitored by technology rather than a human, which is obviously a huge driver of workforce efficiency going forward. Let's talk about the Baxter VAR, which is hot off the press, and I think Dan's done a very good job of articulating the significance of this in his research. Suffice to say, we are beyond thrilled to be partnering with Baxter. This has been a competitive process that began in October 2022, so it's been going on now for nearly nine months. They went out to market following Baxter's acquisition of Hill-Rom. As often happens with these large mergers, there was a review of their portfolio. They made some portfolio decisions around their connected care platform, where they decided to end of life certain product offerings, and as often happens, the market changes. The pandemic has perhaps changed the emphasis on some of those requirements. Baxter went out to market in search of a partner that could provide the Care Experience capabilities which we have to help broaden their portfolio. Obviously, Baxter doesn't need too much introduction. They are a super impressive organization, have been an absolute pleasure to deal with. That project is literally kicking off this week. We've already had a number of calls with their teams, and we will be in next quarter, going through the collaborative marketing and development of this product. Suffice to say, their reach in the United States is pretty much unprecedented, and if we wanted to go out and handpick a partner to help us broaden our access in the United States market, I'd be hard-pressed to think of someone who would be more suitable. Hill-Rom Holdings was formerly a New York Stock Exchange-listed company, which was acquired by Baxter in December 2021. They are the dominant provider of hospital beds in the United States, with a market share, depending on who you which out of you read, is somewhere between 50% and 70% of the hospital bed market. More importantly, they have this connected care division, which brings nurse call and unified communications to a very large sector of the market as well. It is that portion of the market that will be the key focus for us initially. That business has around about a 25% market share of US hospital beds. As we mentioned in the release, Baxter are confident they can bring between 3,000 and 5,000 additional beds to us on a go-forward basis. That would represent a very small portion of their installed base in the United States, and I think this is a classic case where 1 + 1 is gonna equal meaningfully more than 3. We also have incentives in the agreement for them to take on more of the professional services piece as the partnership grows, which will free us up to run capital light and really focus on building great software and pass some of the implementation burden across to Hill-Rom, which is gonna be pretty exciting for us as a business going forward. Very early days, but as I said, we couldn't be more excited about the impact we think this is gonna have on our business. The second thing that we've spent a huge amount of time on in recent months has been the idea of a bring your own device product. Suffice to say, this is something that the market has been asking for literally for as long as I've been with the company, because there's been a sense of why can't patients use their own mobile phone to access the offering? For hospitals, obviously, we know budgets remained under intense pressure, particularly on the CapEx side. Deploying custom hardware in hospital rooms is particularly disruptive. Not only in order to house the tablet, you either have to put in an articulated arm or you have to install the device on the meal tray on the table. It is disruptive, it's time-consuming, as we discovered during the pandemic. If hospitals are closed to vendors, we can't actually deploy our hardware. Then supporting OEM hardware at the bedside adds real complexity for both ourselves and our customers. Supporting multiple hardware formats and multiple Android versions, for example, is something that is time-consuming and puts a further burden on our engineering teams. The real key here is reducing that hardware installation cost. It's not just the physical cost of buying the arm, installing the arm. You know, in a unionized labor market like Chicago, to install an arm or a television in a patient room can cost upwards of $1,000 a room, that's after you've bought the hardware. Most importantly, in order to install the hardware, you have to shut the room for at least 24 hours and potentially 48 hours. It has a hugely disruptive impact on the ability to deliver care at a time when census is running very high in the United States. The vision here is that we can take that off the table, allow the patient to deploy on their own solution. We spent the first four months of this year validating this approach. We developed a product which we then went and tested with both existing and potential customers and with user groups both in the United States, Australia and Europe, and the feedback has been unanimously positive. We had two of the top three hospitals in the United States offer to be co-design partners for this product, which I think tells you how much they appreciate the direction we're going. We plan to bring this product to market initially in Q4 of this year, so before the end of the year. The benefits, I think, are fairly obvious for the patient. Obviously, there is, we live in a world now where obviously everyone is driven by their own device, and particularly amongst the younger generation of patients, it was unanimous that they wanna much prefer to use their own device than use a hospital-supplied device. To give you a sense of the reduced hardware costs, if we take a typical 250-bed hospital, if they were deploying Oneview, they would need to incur a capital expenditure somewhere between $750,000 and $1 million, and then be paying us a license fee for a five-year period. That obviously makes much more complex to get through capital budgets. By moving to a BYOD solution, we think we can dramatically shorten the sales cycle. It's gonna lower procurement barriers. It won't need, for example, a decision like this probably won't need to go to the board. It's something that could be handled at a lower level of procurement, that's super important for us. The implementation and the reason we haven't done this before, I should have stressed, is that until we got in the cloud, we weren't really in a position to develop this capability. It's the fact we've moved to the cloud, we have got ourselves ISO certified that allows us to bring this. This will be across platforms, so it won't matter whether the patient is iOS or Android. They won't be native apps, they will be micro apps, so it'll be much easier to deploy and maintain from our perspective. It also opens us up to the full continuum of care around pre-admission and post-discharge, which is something that is again, a global trend that I'm sure Dan and Andrew are hearing as they travel around the world, but hospital in the home is where most major health systems are trying to drive their business. This gives us that mobility, it gives us an omni-channel de-delivery methodology, and it should have a material impact on our sales cycle, which really, if we're being honest, is the hardest thing about this business. It's super hard to get in is the bad news. The good news is once you're in, it's very, very sticky. This, I think, will complement existing customers. All of our existing customers see this as an add-on rather than an alternative. If we think about customers like NYU Langone and BJC, they see the in-room experience as being part of their competitive differentiation. They simply see this as an additional modality that will drive value for existing customers. We engaged some outside consultants to look at the market and try and assess what that market opportunity looks like and which markets would make sense for us. We see the BYOD market as a billion dollar addressable market for Oneview. We've looked at five specific markets: United States, Australia, and Canada, all obviously markets we're very familiar with, so that work was fairly easy. This is a really interesting opportunity for the U.K., which is obviously, a neighboring geography for us here in Ireland, a market that is really struggling from a capital availability point of view. We think this is a solution that will resonate very well with the most innovative of the NHS trusts. We also, as we previously announced, we did a market analysis of the German market with Enterprise Ireland, where we scoped a market entry scenario there and looked at that market. We have identified a segment of the market, including university, pediatric, and private operators in Germany, where we think this product will resonate. We already have a customer here in Ireland who is keen to be the pilot customer here. Similarly in Australia and the United States, we feel this is something that's gonna get very rapid adoption amongst our existing pipeline of opportunities. Very important development for us as a business and I think something that's really gonna change our growth trajectory in a meaningful way. As I mentioned earlier, we plan to bring the MVP of this to market in the Q4 of this year, and we'd expect to have full functionality or as close to full functionality as we can by Q2 of next year. Importantly, as with all agile development, we wanna get the product into the hands of real customers, get their feedback, and iterate on the development from that point on. This is my final slide, which, for those of you in Australia, I'm sure you're aware that the sad story around the demise of Hills. The reason this is important for us is that Hills has a very large business in the Australian hospital market for what we call patient pay entertainment solutions. This is a scenario where the Australian public sector in particular provide RFPs, where they ask for vendors to provide hardware to the hospital in return for the right to charge the patients for free-to-air television. That ranges from between AUD 10 and AUD 12 per day. It's a terrible business model, in our opinion, we're not at all surprised by this development, because I don't think too many people are excited about the value proposition of paying AUD 10 a day for free-to-air television. My kids don't know what free-to-air television is, I think this is a very, very old business model. It does create real opportunity for us because they have 17,000 beds in their portfolio where this is currently deployed. We have been in touch with the administrator, as you would expect. We have no idea how this is gonna play out, but we see it as a potential opportunity that might open up a very large segment of the market that was previously blocked for us. Every time, one of these hospital systems goes out to procurement, we respond with a non-conforming bid, saying we think the business model is outdated. We've been trying to encourage Australian hospitals to use that television in the room as a, an innovation device to provide, meal ordering, education assignment, Telehealth that we looked at earlier, and I think this might be an opportunity that suddenly brings that into reality. As I say, we'll know more. We're still waiting for the administrator to provide some information and access to the data room, but we expect that to happen, perhaps as soon as next week. That's the conclusion of my prepared remarks. I thought we'd leave a few minutes if we have time for a couple of questions, Dan. Thanks, James. We actually do have. I think we're booked through till 9:45 A.M. Sydney time. Oh, perfect. People may have to leave, but let's just carry on and keep asking questions until everyone has something better to do, I guess. James, thanks very much for that. Just a reminder to everyone, if you do have questions, please feel free to add them to the chat at the bottom of the screen. Alternately, email them to me, and I can ask them on your behalf. James, just starting from me, look, I guess we're fascinated about the, we will get onto BYOD, but for now, we're fascinated about the agreement with Baxter. Yeah. Can you give us any background there? You told us that Baxter came to the market looking for a solution. Do you have any feeling for what features of CXP prevailed? Why did Baxter go with Oneview? I think one of the reasons, Dan, is that our set-top box is something that we have invested very heavily in because it allows us to standardize the delivery of the software across large enterprises, regardless of what type of television you have in the room. If you turn up at any health system in the United States today that has more than 1,000 beds, they're probably gonna have three or four different types of television. Most of our competitors are focused on a smart television, where they're insisting that the hospital go and buy a smart TV, which is both expensive and puts pressure on the capital budget. Our philosophy has always been, we don't want to have to mop to deal with deploying even if, let's say, we went out and bought a bunch of LG TVs today, and then the next hospital is opening in six months' time or taking the product in six months' time, there's a very high probability that the firmware on that TV is different from the one we're buying today. It gets increasingly difficult for us as a software provider to manage the solution on different hardware configurations and different firmware within those organizations. Us, our approach for the last 10 years has been, we are much better putting a compute device behind the television, which is standardized and allows us to deliver our software seamlessly, regardless of what the TV is. Obviously, it's got to be an HDMI-compatible TV, but most TVs that are deployed in health systems today. Baxter shared with us, that was a really important differentiator for them, that they saw that as something that as we scale this across large organizations, it's a simple exercise to deploy that set-top box, which is dramatically cheaper than a smart TV and allows us to utilize the existing infrastructure in the building. The other thing that we've spoken about in the past is that that device is also capable of deploying both IPTV and coax. Again, the vast majority of hospitals, both in the United States and Australia, any new hospital that's being built today will obviously be built with Cat6 or Cat7 cabling, but a lot of legacy hospitals are still running coax. Very difficult to deploy seamlessly across coax, but our OEM partner that builds the set-top boxes is a very impressive organization. The way we found them is they have the contract to supply Hilton hotels with set-top boxes, globally, and have delivered, over 100,000 of these devices to Hilton. We have very strong references on the OEM, and we're very happy with the choice we've made, and I think that's a key driver of the decision. Thanks, James. Just continuing on the same theme. Mm-hmm. I think you mentioned it. We know that Hill-Rom shut down some parts of their product range. Yeah ... since the acquisition by Baxter. Can you give us any insight, into what they shut down and what the crossover was between your offering and those discontinued products? The one that we, that they've publicly announced, they've sunsetted was their Digital Door Sign. The one we looked at before, which is the device outside the patient. This is the information about the patient, the medical precautions. If a patient has an allergy or is NPO, those kind of precautions would be presented outside the room. Part of that was they had made a technology choice to build that on iOS, which is kind of the antithesis of open architecture. I think with hindsight, they recognized that might have been not the best decision. Android is obviously open and scalable, we know that there's a huge opportunity there. They had, I think like all the bed manufacturers have had a little bit of a dalliance with patient experience, but we did not come up against any of the bed manufacturers in competitive RFPs. I think this is a natural extension of their business. It's something that makes perfect sense given their, they're obviously so closely integrated with the patient. We see, for example, one of the use cases we've talked about, not necessarily with them, but with other bed manufacturers, is that if the guardrail on the hospital bed is down, the smart bed would send that alert typically to the nurse's station, which is very helpful. We think it's also helpful to send that alert to the patient themselves so that they're aware that the device is putting them at risk. If they're at fall risk, we know the guardrail's down, well, let's put a message on the tablet or on the television in the room to serve as a reminder. Again, I think that's an example of where there's leverage between their technology and our technology. Which leads to the question, James: Are there any costs associated for Oneview, integration costs? Have Baxter put any stipulations, things that must be delivered outside of your current offering? No, no. I think in the fullness of time, they have a very impressive real-time location system software, which we think is a natural evolution. In a number of our customer sites, for example, at BJC, every time the care team enters the room, we have an integration into their RTLS system, which is not Hill-Rom, where it identifies the care team as they walk into the room. If I'm the attending physician, as I walk into the room, my photograph appears for 30 seconds on the television. It explains who I am and what my role is in the patient's care. It's a huge satisfier both for patients and families, but also for the Care team. One of the use cases we think is really interesting, and this is not yet built, is that we would use that event as the Care team walks into the room to bring that digital whiteboard that we looked at earlier. Rather than having static information where the digital whiteboard is always on in the room, as the Care team comes into the room, we would use that as the trigger to surface the whiteboard on the television as they come in and out of the room. The feedback from patients has been, they really want the TV to be for their entertainment purposes. They don't necessarily wanna be staring at their precautions or their allergies all day. Obviously, when the care team come into the room, they want to see that information. I think that might be an example of an integration that would make a ton of sense for us down the road. Thanks, James. Look, this, I think this question, I'm aware that I'm at risk of trying to put words in your mouth, but, you know, when we looked at this, after the announcement the other day, we looked at the crossover between the current product offerings from Hill-Rom and CXP, and it does appear that you are filling a lot of gaps in the Baxter offerings. I guess we know that, you know, these big conglomerates like to be a one-stop shop. They like to be everything for their customers. To what degree is that true? Is that, do you think, is that an important factor for Baxter's decision to go looking for a partner here? Look, I think it's a great fit, I think as with all these things, in the same way in our own business, you know, we have to make decisions. Do we build, do we buy, do we partner? I think, you know, in this case, Baxter made a very clear decision that they want to partner, and we're obviously thrilled that they've chosen us. They have an unbelievable level of knowledge of the U.S. healthcare market. They know how hard it is to be successful. They have a customer base that would be the envy of any company our size. Look, it's obviously very, very early days, but as I said, we are really excited about this impact it could have on our business. We think it is incredibly synergistic and really excited to get going. Perhaps some upside, downside questions. You know, has the cancellation of those Hill-Rom products created a liability for Baxter? This is a question that was put to me yesterday by an investor. You know, had Baxter been promising things that have now, they've been unable to deliver via that Hill-Rom cancellation of products? I don't think so. I don't think so. They certainly haven't suggested that's the case. As with anything, if you're a company of that size that has a product in the market and you make a decision to sunset, you really have a kind of, at least a moral obligation to make sure you can continue to deliver that functionality either yourselves or through partnerships. I suspect that is an element in their thinking, but we certainly don't have any evidence that they're committed to stuff that they can't deliver. Understood. I guess looking at it from the flip side, look, this, Baxter is a monster in the market, obviously, with huge market share and exposure to somewhere around, we've found 60%-70% bed, 60%-70% of med surgical beds in the U.S. Yeah. On the other side of that, does this cut you out of the other 30%-40% of the market? Mm-hmm. Yeah, well, I guess by definition, it may. I mean, that segment of the market may go to RFP, where we could be successful independently. I think that's, you know, there is a large portion of the market that tends to go to RFP. Yeah, look, I think there's always pros and cons with any transaction, but I think the pros far outweigh the cons in this scenario. Okay, similar theme, whilst I think, you know, I think we're pretty clear that we think this is an exciting development. In context, 45,000 beds per annum versus perhaps 550,000-600,000 beds that Baxter have exposure to. That's actually a fairly modest target in perspective. It's a great outcome, but it's a fairly modest target. What's the limitation there? Yeah. Is the limitation how fast you can roll out, or how fast that Baxter is gonna introduce you to those customers? What's the thinking there? Well, look, I think in my experience, large companies tend to be pretty conservative, and I think they wanted to give a sense of what they thought was achievable and in the hope that they would, they wouldn't, underdeliver. I, look, I think we all know what the potential of this is, but I think we also have to start, we have to get to know them, they need to get to know us. I think as with any burgeoning partnership, there's a, there's a bedding-in time that will really define the ultimate success of the partnership. Okay. Just in terms of, you know, I guess staying on the glass half-empty track for a second, James, Yeah. You know, small cap healthcare in Australia is littered with the carcasses of companies that have had great agreements up front, but there's been some misalignment. Yeah Or the royalty agreement hasn't quite worked out. What sort of confidence can you give us that there is gonna be the right alignment of financial incentive for the sales force, for Baxter, Oneview? Well, I think we put a lot of thought into that, and I think they have obviously put a lot of thought into it. I mean, I think with all these things, when you're starting out a new relationship, you obviously get a pretty strong vibe from both sides as to how this is gonna work out. I just think the confidence level is very high on both sides of the table. It's gonna be up to us to deliver it. I think ultimately, you know, they have been very clear in saying that, you know, their expectations are gonna be high. Our own expectations for ourselves are obviously very high. They did point out they've had, you know, they've had experiences in the past where they've had resellers that weren't able to deliver their needs, and they made it pretty clear that they're expecting a very high standard, and we intend to deliver to that high standard. I think there's a lot of mutual understanding around the transaction we've entered into, a lot of time and thought has gone into trying to make it make sure the alignment's right. We've had experience before. I mean, for example, you know, if we think back to the partnership we have with Samsung, it's a fantastic partnership, but we're sort of one step removed because that partnership is with the Samsung reselling community. It's the CDW and the Connection of the world who are one step removed. Samsung themselves don't have particularly strong direct relationships with hospital systems in the United States. This is very different. This is where Baxter's sales organization, direct sales organization, will directly be selling the Oneview product. I think it's a, in terms of potential impact, I think there's a meaningful difference there. Look, James, I've got to ask this question. I'll tread carefully and, but I'll be a bit impertinent. I mean, why don't Baxter buy the technology? I mean, it's, for a company of that size, it must be an option for them. Do you get a feel for why they've chosen to partner rather than acquire? Well, firstly, the company is not for sale. We have a, you know, we have a strategic shareholder who's made it very clear that he's not a seller of the business. I think ultimately, that's the key issue right now. Okay, great. Look, just moving on, I do want to spend a little bit of time on BYOD. BYOD, something that we've had- Yeah ... feedback on, that is a game changer. Sure. The tech people are all, as you say, been asking for it for some time. Just the exact a little bit of specifics around the timeline for when we can see that basically in the market on trial and then available to the broader customer base? We expect to have it in the hands of pilot customers in the Q4 of this year, so before Christmas. As I mentioned, that'll give us a chance to iterate, to get customer feedback. As I mentioned, we've got a design partner who's actually coming to Dublin in September from the States to help work on the project, so they're very motivated. They want to see it in the market quickly. As I said, we hope to have what we would describe as kind of core functionality well and truly available by middle of 2023, middle of 2024, I should say. James, Thinking about your P&L, your current cost structure, I mean, how will BYOD change the marginal, the top line and the margins of the business? Yeah. It'll change it at the margin, but not materially. We think the cost is, we haven't yet shared the development across the market, so I don't want to share any information that we haven't shared publicly. Suffice to say, it really is leveraging the back-end integrations that are already built, so it's about building the front end. It's a React project, which shouldn't be a particularly heavy lift. The fact we think we can get it to market so quickly, I think, speaks to that. That is, again, the barrier to entry, is that we're really leveraging these back-end integrations that we spent the last 15 years building in order to deliver a different user interface. We think it's fairly seamless, and we think the revenue impact is gonna be almost immediate for the reasons we talked about, that it's not gonna get stuck in this pure procurement bureaucracy, which can take literally months and years to work its way through the system because there's no capital involved. Understood. We're tight for time here. With a couple minutes left, we do have a couple of questions that have come in, via email and the chat. Yeah. First one, James, what can you tell us about the financial metrics, the payment model between Baxter and Oneview? I can't say anything because they're commercially sensitive, other than to say that it would be that the terms are what would typically be expected in the United States for a revenue share. I think, Dan, you've made some assumptions in your report, and I think those assumptions seem pretty reasonable from our perspective. Okay. Just for background, for anyone listening in, we've based our numbers on other value-added reseller agreements we've seen, and we've suggested that there is somewhere between a scaling 20%-30% pay away to Baxter on behalf of this. Moving on, I think it's gonna be the last question we can fit in. It's a question regarding Hill. Did Hill have any market share in their new technology that they were trying to roll out aside from their TV rental model? They do. They have a nurse call business in Australia, which, from what we understand, is pretty well thought of. They bought a business called Merlon, some years ago, I want to say probably four or five years ago. I think that's a pretty good business. I hear from customers we know that deploy Merlon, that they're very pleased with it. I think there will certainly be interest in the nurse call side of the house. I think it's difficult for us to envisage, you know, having looked at it ourselves, previously, it's very hard to come to terms with this patient entertainment model because it just, I mean, just from a PR perspective, the fact you're asking patients to pay AUD 10 a day for free to air TV just doesn't pass the smell test as a sustainable business model. For us, the best possible outcome is that that market dies, and it is proven to be unsustainable, and that opens up the opportunity for us to bring our Care Experience Platform to that 20% of the market that they currently have tied up. James, I know we are at time. There has been one follow-up come in. I'll just squeeze it in. It's basically asking, you mentioned that you've been in contact with the, I shouldn't say liquidators, what they are, administrators? Administrator, yeah. For Hill, are you implying there are assets there that Oneview would be interested in? Well, I we don't know, is the answer. That's why we put the expression of interest in. I think it just allows us to understand what do those contracts look like? what are the fundamentals of that business? We've made some assumptions ourselves from outside the business and from market intelligence, but I think if we were invited to the data room, I think that could be an interesting opportunity for us. We don't know yet. Understood. Look, we are over time. I think people need to get away. James, thank you very much for joining us. Congratulations on the developments. Congratulations, everything that Oneview has done to date, we look forward to hearing more. Thanks, Dan. Appreciate your time, everyone. Have a good day. Thank you.