Strategy is for this- This meeting is being recorded. Presentation made by the management of the company represented by Stéphane Piat, CEO, Pascale d'Arbonneau, CFO, and Christian Latremouille, Director of Surgical Affairs. Then you will have the opportunity to ask your questions through the chat system that is at the bottom of your screen. I will now hand over to Stéphane. Stéphane, please go ahead. Yes. Good morning, everybody. Thanks for your time today. Today, we give you an update about half-year results and the outlook for the remaining of the year. Today with me, Pascale d'Arbonneau, CFO, and Christian Latremouille, Director of Surgical Affairs. The agenda is split in three parts: progress made by Carmat, 2021 half-year results, strategy and outlook to finish with. Progress, first so obviously we can't ignore the impact of COVID. It's been limited, but we had some impact. Beginning of the year, we had some disruption because of supply chains, it delayed the ramp-up of the manufacturing. Now we are okay. We had some issues to access the hospitals. With the change of the administration in the U.S. in March, there were more stringent rules. It's been very hard for us to move to the U.S. with our personnel until June. Now we have FDA for one year. That's the reason why we've been able to do the three patients in the last three weeks in the U.S. As well, we've been delayed for the training of German centers that could not fly to France. Now it's resumed, so it's good. We had roughly a minor impact of the quarter on the variations. We had a very strong performance to start with. It's been a very good surprise. Commercially speaking, in two months, we treated six patients in four centers. It means that two centers decided to treat two patient in a row. In the U.S., we've been able to enroll the cohort A of three patient rather quickly and in two centers, Duke and Reveal. Which is kind of revenue of EUR 2 million, roughly, which gives you a good idea about the average sales price of our device, even if you have slight differences between Europe and U.S. Overall, that was a very good surprise. We've been able to execute pretty quickly against plan. We had a very good first impression of centers. I think you had the chance to follow some of the conferences of Duke and different press release from German centers and Reveal center. Overall, I would say there are four main comments. Carmat support is best-in-class. Aeson is very easy to manage. It runs automatically by itself. Recovery of patient is very impressive. We are able to discharge them rather quickly. We confirm as well, as we used to say for the last years, that the potential patient population is very large. Carmelo Milano, to quote him, said during the call conference after the first implant at Duke, that he was assessing the market around 90,000 patients a year in the U.S. only, and it's about the same in Europe. I think we had the first good impression, which was very good. That's the reason why three centers out of seven decided to treat another patient rather quickly after first implant. I think what was very impressive, it was really the first experience. I think we've been improving case after case and, obviously, as centers, we are very happy. It worked pretty well. I think in terms of circulation, I think now we know to get organized. We are very flexible. It happened 2 times that we had an implant in the U.S. and Europe the same week, and we didn't have any problem. I will hand over right now to Christian. Christian, who's our Director of Surgical Affairs. He used to work with Alain Carpentier. Until last year, he was the head of the surgical department at Pompidou in Paris, and he joined us officially in January to take care of the expansion of the therapy and, more specifically, for the start of all the centers commercially. Christian. Thank you. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'm very proud to be here and to present you where we are in terms of clinic and Carmat support. As you can see on the slide, which is specific for the approach of our strategy for the moment in terms of clinics, is to give to all new center a real assistance. We don't just give a device and just ask them to implant it and that's it. We are complete assistance with a real team, and this assistance is used for at least three implantations and if necessary, up to five, and as requested by the centers. This assistance team is composed from a surgical proctor, for the moment, myself, but in the future, we want enlarge probably this team, this approach. A device management specifically to prepare the device before the surgical implantation, and a general clinical support. To be in contact with all the teams inside the operating room. I mean, the surgeon, then the anesthesiologist, the perfusionist, nurses, scrub nurses, and so on, and the procedure supervisor to be according to the regulatory affairs inside the OR during the procedure. That's probably something which is very uncommon for a new company to have such number of people to start the program. Clearly, our objective of provide the unique level of service, and in order to ensure optimal care for the patient, which is clearly our goal, to take the patient inside the general entity and to work with before the surgery, during the surgery, and just after the surgery, during the recovery period in the intensive care unit. That's something which is really appreciated by all the centers. Of course, with new technology and technological rupture, that is important to make the first step. That is not always easy for a team to check that. That is why we offer this complete assistance. If I come back on the device and the main properties of the device, if I want to resume the device, we have to keep in mind that first of all, that the very good hemocompatibilities, and that means the consequence of the contact between the blood and the device. In all the cardiac assist device which are on the market, the contact is between the blood and metallic portion of the device. Here in this case, there is no more contact with metallic portion. All the contact is with biological tissue, such as bovine pericardium, specifically treated to have absolutely no immunologic response. We know perfectly this material, which is used since more than 50 years with the tissue valve or bioprosthesis, and we have a huge experience with that and a very good tolerance with the patient. That's the first thing, the hemocompatibility of the device. The second one is probably something very important, is a so-called autoregulation. The autoregulation is what you are doing just for the moment with your own heart. That means that if you need to perform any exercise, jogging or other, your heart will increase the cardiac output and to assume the blood supply and the supply in energy for all your organs, and specifically for all the muscles during the exercise, leading to an improvement in term of oxygenation of the tissue. That's something quite important because in this device, that's the first time that the device is completely autoregulated. That means due to some sensor, which was implemented inside the ventricles wall and you have a transmission of the acute situation in term of volume here and pressure inside the ventricle. These data are transmitted to a software which gives the analysis and modified the cardiac output adapted to all the situations. That's very important, not only for exercise, but for example, during the everyday life, you don't have the same pulse and blood arterial pressure during the night and the day. That's the first time that we can give and show some curve of this modification of the cardiac output and the pressure and the frequency during the day and during the night. Of course, it's very interesting too during the recovery period after the surgical implantation. The surgical implantation is always a kind of trauma for the organism and for the body. Just after this step, you will have some unbalanced period during the first hours in the ICU. Here, the autoregulation of the device permit to have a perfect adaptation of any hemodynamic situation of the patient. That's probably a very important step in the new approach from the modern devices. The third property is probably the pulsatility. The pulsatility in something which is completely natural, and you can take your own pulse to see this situation. Due to mechanical consideration, all the devices used until now are more or less, not delivering a pulsatile flow, but a continuous flow. Of course, in the body, all the cells and the tissue are limited in terms of function where they have a continuous flow, give much more work with a pulsatile flow. That's something very important. To summarize these three properties, hemocompatibility, autoregulation, and pulsatility are probably the three main properties of this device. The consequences are shown here in the table. That's not a true scientific table with significant results, but that's some orientation in terms of the main concern of all these devices, in terms of cardiac assist devices. First of all, the risk of reoperation for bleeding, mainly due to the fact that in all the devices existing, actually, the contact between the metallic portion and the blood needs to use high levels of anticoagulation drugs, leading, of course, to the risk of hemorrhage after the surgery. In other period, if you're not enough efficient, the risk is to make some clots inside the vessels, and the risk is to get some stroke or a peripheral hemorrhage. Here, in this case, we reduce drastically the level of reoperation or bleeding. I want to say for the future, that probably we can decrease this 20%, because since now a couple of months, and after discussion with Francisco Arabia, who was in charge of the main program in SynCardia in Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles. We keep the patient open, the chest open during at least 24 hours, which permit to remove some clots and to reduce the risk in general bleeding and consequences in term of compression inside that chest. That's probably a very important step. As you can see, we have some 0%, which is very uncommon. In term of stroke, according to the situation of the hemocompatibility, as I mentioned previously. Due to the pulsatility, we have no more gastrointestinal bleeding in this kind of patient, because we can reduce the level of the anticoagulation. The pulsatility flow has some consequences, normal and natural consequences on the hemostatic biochemical situation. That's probably a main progress for this kind of device. The third thing is 0% with infection of drivelines. That's always a great concern for all these patients. For the moment, we don't have the exact reason why we have 0% at this level, but probably, pulsatility is still a very important point. By reducing the risk of stasis in subcutaneous tissue, and some stasis in subcutaneous tissue is always bad of the risk of infection. That's probably how it works. That's something very interesting. As you can see here, we just compare with the SynCardia, which is still used today since 1985. Of course, due to the anticoagulation therapy at a high level, we have a huge risk of reoperation for bleeding. The risk of stroke is due to the imbalance and very fragile situation between the risk of hemorrhage and the risk of thrombosis inside the device and inside some vessels. The risk of gastrointestinal bleeding too, and infection of driveline for the same reason. That's our baseline, and the data that we compare to SynCardia are probably very approach to our results. That's probably very interesting for us to see the great difference of generation between these two kind of devices. The two other lines are BiVAD, Biventricular Assist Device, and LVAD, Left Ventricular Assist Device. I just want to start with the LVAD, left ventricular assist device, because the left ventricle is always as the main area in the heart, which is important in term of functionality. Usually, all the disease which are huge consequences start with the LVAD, left ventricle failure. Usually, the right ventricle failure is in the second step and which is at first functional. Then when the patient have the two ventricles in failure of the two ventricles, you need to have two ventricular assist device, one on the left and one on the right. The LVAD is very important. That's probably the new generation since 2005, which is at the origin of the development of all the cardiac assist program everywhere in the world. You can see that we still have some consequences in term of stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding and driveline. The biventricular assist device is used when you implant a VAD on the left side and another one on the right side. That's only due to the fact that, for the moment, we don't have any device to support the biventricular failure. That's probably the reason why Carmat is clearly a new solution for this kind of patient and of course, with all the complications that you can see, that probably is a very promising device and promising technology for the future. If we look at the situation of our commercial experience now, probably that's a very positive first commercial implant. Clearly, since the beginning of the story and the first implant in 2013 in Paris, we have continuous improvement of the procedure. In terms of transferability and understanding, I want to say that after every implantation, we improve and we give more tricks to improve and reduce the morbidities or the comorbidities or complication of the procedure. That means that as a result, we obtain 100% success rate for surgical implantations. That's quite important. That's something which is very important because I always insist on that. We need at first to keep the confidence from all the teams, medical and surgical team of every center. Working in the world of heart failure and in transplant program is something very important. Very important in terms of success rate for surgical implantation, but not only. The patients who receive the device are now recovery period, which is quite impressive for the physicians working in the ICU. They are really surprised by the speed of recovery of the patients. Probably that's the original success. Some patients are now still discharged from the hospital and come back home. In all this program for the moment, we are working as implantation as a bridge to transplantation and to prepare for the future, probably, and definitive implantation therapy. That's probably something which is quite important. Actually, the feedback from all the teams, after more than nine implantation in the two last months, we give an answer to a very large clinical need, which actually is without satisfying solution. The BiVAD, as I mentioned previously, is not a satisfying solution, such as because we have nothing for the moment and p robably, Carmat could be a very good answer and solution for this kind of patient. That means we probably go on with a very rapid expansion of all inclusion parameters. That means that we have the classical inclusion indication as for cardiac transplantations. Generally, that's the cardiomyopathy, which is so-called dilated cardiomyopathy, and the other half is the ischemic disease. That means patients who have more myocardial infarction or repetitive myocardial infarction. For the moment, in term of target population, we probably improve and enlarge this target population due to enlarge the criteria of clinical anatomic fitting, and which is based on the morphology of each patient. From a CT scan, we are able to, a software in morphology, to remove the secret and to replace it by the device to be sure that there is absolutely no conflict with the ribs or with the sternum. Clearly, we improve our selection criteria, which permit us actually to enlarge all the clinical inclusion parameters. As requested by all the centers, we are working more and more, with new indication. That means, for example, the redo surgery. Redo surgery is for patient who were operated on cardiac surgery. For example, for the implantation on LVAD or, for example, for a mitral surgery. Then after the evolution, they need to have the opportunity to get a device like Carmat, and that's redo surgery. Redo surgery is always much more difficult than the primary surgery due to the fact that there is more and more adherences inside the chest with an increased risk of bleeding in the postoperative period, and sometimes with some technical difficulties. Clearly, since 2 months, we make great steps to go on and to find new indication for all these kind of patients. I will leave, and I leave to Pascale to take, to follow me. Hi, good morning, everyone. A few words about our sort of half year financial results. As Stéphane described, we had an intense first half of 2021. We were very busy on different fronts. Production ramp-up is a key one, but also continued activities to secure supplies, prepare for commercial launch, and prepare for the initiation of two key clinical studies. Including the EFS study in the U.S. and the EFICAS clinical trial in France. That led to a higher level of activity compared to last year and to a higher level of operating expenses as well, as you can see on the screen. In terms of financial results, obviously, that relates to the interest that we carry on the loans, the different loans that we have. The EIB loans of EUR 20 million and the state-guaranteed loans of EUR 10 million that we contracted last year. On the positive side of things, we got a research and recent tax credit of EUR 0.7 million, which is broadly in line with the one we had last year as well. Net-net, obviously, as we didn't generate any revenues in the first half of 2021, we recorded a loss of EUR 26 million. Obviously, for a company like ours, which is just starting marketing its product, cash is everything. It's really important. As you can see as well, the cash burn in the first half of this year was about EUR 30 million again, which is higher than what you could see last year. Obviously, this is the direct impact of the high level of activity that we had, and a direct consequence of especially building up inventory ahead of commercial launch and the initiation of the EFS and EFICAS studies. The sort of EUR 30 million-ish cash burn is a good indication of what we're going to burn in the future over the next 12 months. Obviously in the first part of this year, very importantly, we also did an equity raise of about EUR 56 million. Net-net, our cash position was strong at the end of the semester. EUR 58 million above the level of EUR 36 million that we had at the end of 2020. That leads us nicely to our cash burn rate. If you add up the cash that we had in hand at the end of June this year, and the last tranche of EUR 10 million of the EIB loan that we're going to draw down in Q4, that will be enough to finance our activities through to mid-2022. This is a confirmation that we are funded until mid-2022 without any additional resources that might come. Obviously, what that means is that by that deadline, so to speak, we'll have to raise money again or find other sources of funding. Very importantly, in terms of communication, because we had some question about that, so we'd like to confirm that we'll obviously communicate when significant milestones are reached, and obviously when we publish and comment our financial results. We will not communicate on each individual implant or sale, whether it's part of a commercial activity or part of clinical trials. In line with good practices, we will not comment on patients' health status either. All those principles are subject to regulatory requirements of special circumstances. We will comply with all regulatory requirements in terms of communication, especially applicable in France. A final point on sort of share price performance. Obviously, it's not up to us, the management team of the company, to comment on the performance. You will note that our share price increased by 62% over the last 12 months, which is higher than relevant indexes in our sector. We now have a market cap, which is usefully above EUR 450 million. Remember, we are listed on Euronext Growth in Paris. In terms of shareholders, I will just confirm that Orbis is still our main shareholder and has been supporting us for quite a few years. We also have three very loyal family offices which have been supporting us for a few years now, and which are sort of three key shareholders for the company. On that, I will hand over to Stéphane again, who will update you on our strategy and outlook. Thank you, Pascale. Back to business. The three areas of focus for the coming months will be three. Manufacturing, that's paramount for all device companies, even bigger, larger companies. That's a very critical point to move from prototyping to ramping up manufacturing. Obviously, clinical studies, the future of the therapy is really about clinical evidence, expansion of indications, and, last but not least, commercial obviously and all the subject projects here above cited are progressing well at this point. Manufacturing. As of today, we are able now to assemble 10 products a month, and the goal is to get to 20 by the end of the year and so on. We are increasing consistency, reliability. We are improving more and more processes. We are building up a real manufacturing state-of-the-art site now to allow better fluidity of manufacturing. Obviously as we said, our main area of focus may be regarding manufacturing these suppliers. Obviously, we need to work with people who are able to accompany us in a strong growth setting and to ensure production continuity. The objective is to, as I just said, assemble at least 20 products a month by year-end, and growing even more next year in order to be able to support both clinical and commercial demand in 2022. In terms of clinical programs, it's pretty rich. We have four clinical studies ongoing. We have the pivotal studies, which have been used in order to support the CE marking for tissue transplant. We had an internal target of 20. We've been stuck at 15 because obviously we got CE mark and we were prioritizing obviously commercial for the last two months. We'll get started again next week or the week after in order to get 20 as quick as we can and close the pivotal study. We will start probably next month, a very large study in France of 52 patients aimed at driving product adoption, support value proposition, and get reimbursed. That will be a very large study about health economics. The goal is really to show that using Carmat, you can make the system save money. The study will start probably next quarter. It's 52 patients for two years. Will be funded at 70% by the French government, and we already have the six centers starting very soon. Obviously, that's a commitment from our side, which is now a prerequisite when you have a CE mark. We will capture the 95 first commercial patients in the registry in order to make sure that the experience in real life is at least as good as in the clinical pivotal study. We have five patients to date. Probably some patient virtual candidates who won't be able to get, in timely manner, a human heart. We will capture, obviously, the patient that will go beyond a year. As I said earlier, and Christian Latremouille as well, the vision of Alain Carpentier 30 years ago was to get the first biotech technology for destination therapy, which is still our goal. We will, in the coming weeks, we'll work on the plan to make sure that now that we have a product which we believe is very strong, how we tackle that task of indication expansion. I don't know, not only with the PMCF, probably with a dedicated registry. As I said, well, we had patients so far that went to 25 months, but died from cancer, and we have to stop the term. On bench test, we have products that went beyond 5 years, so we are pretty confident that is the right time for starting such a study. The U.S. Obviously, for a medical device company, as of now, it may change with EFS and easier access to the U.S., but until now, the first step for a device company was to get CE mark, win in Germany, and get access to the U.S. as soon as possible. We got approved earlier this year an analytical study of 10 patients. It's a 2-step study. It's 10. We had the first cohort of 3 patients, FDA wants to see the 60-day follow-up before we can keep on going with cohort B. As we just said, we completed cohort A, we will wait for the patient to get to 60 day, we will submit the follow-up to FDA to be able to keep on going with cohort B. We are very excited to have been able to work with these two very important centers in the U.S. Duke University in Durham, which has been the first U.S. center to implant the Carmat. I guess you see very often news from the patient in the news. Louisville, which performed two implants so far with Mark Slaughter, who's one of the pioneers in MCS field. Just as a reminder, they celebrated a few weeks ago, the first implant of a AbioCor, 20 years ago. The study results will be used to support the design of a pivotal study for potential FDA approval. The goal with Carmat, as Christian said, it's really to come with a new generation device. We will move from TAH, Total Artificial Heart, to what we will call PHRT, Physiological Heart Replacement Therapy. As Christian explained very well in detail, compared to technology available today, we are adding autoregulation and higher hemocompatibility to allow better quality of life. The commercial name for the product is called Aeson. It's been disclosed earlier this year in January. In Europe, everybody's calling it Aeson. For other reason, in the U.S., when you read the press release, both Duke and Louisville are speaking about Carmat because we submitted the EFS more than two years ago, and at the time, the commercial name did not exist. I guess in the near future, that will be Aeson for everybody. The commercial plan. As we said earlier this year, we will focus mostly on Germany. We will extend as well to other countries, which has been the case in Italy, and we will open very quickly as well, the Netherlands. Just to show you the ramp-up. We train the four centers in Q2, which implanted already commercially. We train the three new centers in Q3, which should start very soon. We have a plan today to train at least six centers in Q4, and probably seven. Which will be at least an amount of 13, 14 ready to keep on going, in January next year. Obviously, we will start as well to fill the program for Q1 and Q2 of next year, to make sure that we have a large base of customers in Europe. My last slide for today. I will answer your questions. Well, Carmat has a strong growth potential. When you take a look at the analysis of Porter forces, first of all, if you take a look at the environment, it's very positive for Carmat because the demographics, while we have aging population, today, because of the difficulty to develop such a device, I would like to remind that obviously you had one competitor, SynCardia, and you had five other programs in 2008 when we started. Today, out of these five competitors that started in 2008, obviously excluding SynCardia, which has been used very largely in the last 20 years. The other competitors in development are still at bench test level or animal level, and we are the only one that managed, after 12 years, to get to a commercial and U.S. study. On top of the low rivalry, I would say, among existing competitors, you have a low threat of new entrants that will be pretty slow. You need a lot of money, and you need to do a lot of experiments. Low threat of substitute. I'm thinking about gene therapies, which will take time. I'm pretty sure it will work a day, but it's not prime time today for them. You have a low bargaining power of buyers because you don't have a lot of offering, and you have a low bargaining power of suppliers. Basically, I think Carmat is in a very good spot now. It's a technology with great potential, thanks to its unique value proposition. Thanks for your time today. We don't have a lot of questions, but I will answer the questions. I have a question from HRW. Is the pace of commercial growth in Europe meeting your expectation? Yes, it does. We are not speaking about, obviously, large numbers, but it's been quicker than expected. Hopefully it keeps on going this way. Do you expect the frequency of commercial implants to increase significantly in the coming quarters? Yes. I think, obviously, when you launch a therapy which you believe will be successful, the goal is to double volumes very quickly. Yes, we intend to, or we expect to increase the frequency very quickly. What does the FDA need to confirm from the first three patients in the U.S. EFS study? Obviously, the feasibility, it's named. They want to check if it's feasible. At that stage, they won't really check the efficacy and the secondary endpoint, that will be much more about the device behavior first. If we have technical issues, as we had in the first event in Europe in 2013, that's the first thing. The second thing as well, because we are a large startup, but we don't have a version in the U.S., and I think 1 question mark for them is: are you able to replicate what you're doing in commercial in Europe, in US hospitals? So far it's been the case. It's the same setting, but not the same people, so we don't fly everybody all the time. We have as well a U.S. surgical proctor in the U.S. Basically the last case performed a few days ago in the U.S. was not performed with Christian Latremouille, who was focusing on commercial and animal training in Europe, but by a U.S. surgical proctor. Last question from HRW. When do you expect to complete enrollment of the rest seven patient in the U.S. EFS study? Obviously now we need to wait for 60 day and submit the dossier. We hope that we can get clearance by December and restart December. I think we have the product on the shelf for the U.S. study. Hopefully if we keep on going at that pace, we should be down by the end of Q 1. That's a ballpark, would be end of Q 1, early Q 2. Another question. Does the current material shortage of components like chips impact the production of the Aeson? We are using the electronic board of Vermon. As you can imagine, that's a quite complex electronic board made of tons of components. You're right. That's a good point. Probably, you have a huge shortage of components today in the world. Very often, it ends up in auctions. Very often, the price of a component that is usually sold at 1 is sold 20x the price. It's a problem for people like Sony, which are building consumer goods such as PS5. That's the reason why you don't have any PS5 around the world for the last months, because they can't afford for a product sold for $ 250 to buy components $ 20 in terms of $ 1 or less. It's not the case for us, because as of now, the manufacturing cost for Carmat is pretty high, as you can imagine, and the cost of component is not even 0.01% of the overall cost. We don't suffer from chip impact today because we're able to pay the price. We order components. I think the only impact we use to order components 42 weeks upfront. Now we are doing it 62 weeks upfront, we need to start earlier as well. Can you tell me about the progress of new production facilities? The production facility, as I said, we moved from a few months to 10 now and hopefully 20 by the end of the year. Obviously, next year will be very important because we see if the demand takes off as per plan. If it does, we probably will need to think already about manufacturing expansion. We already have a plan and we should get started on this new plan of expansion, because it will take at least two years, as you will understand, to get a brand-new facility with a clean room. Today, our clean room is around 300 sq m, and we'll probably move to a clean room of 1,000 sq m. It's where we are today. Yes, we have a plan and we should move very fast now. How many devices do you expect to sell in 2022? Obviously it was the first year and we wanted to see how it goes. It would have been very impressive from our side to give some numbers already beginning of this year. For next year, we will give some outlook like you do usually. Obviously, the outlook, we have a range, and the range will be pretty large because we are not a mature business. We are not Abbott or J&J. You will have probably an outlook with a large range of targets. Any sales plan you can share for the next years to come? Not at that stage. Last question, when do you expect the ETUDE study to conclude? I'm not sure, ETUDE, what you mean, but let's go back to the study. I said the US study, that will be probably end of Q1, early Q2. The pivot study, obviously it's in competition with commercial, we should be able to finish first semester next year. I don't know if ETUDE was meant for EFICAS, the French study, we think it will take roughly two years to enroll the 52 patients in France, or a bit more. It will be end of 2023 or early 2024. Another question. Yes, the French study. Okay, it was EFICAS. EFICAS the plan, we will initiate centers because we are waiting for final approval. We were already approved, as I said earlier, we are changing many things on the product all the time, as you can imagine. We submitted before summer new minor changes and we got the ruling. I think we should get the ruling this week, so we should be able to disclose the approval for the latest version in the coming days hopefully. We'll initiate French centers by the end of the month, early next month. We'll start the study Q4. I think probably we are over with the study hopefully end of 2023. Another question. What's with the production capability of the new plant B? Obviously today, with the plants we have, with the processes we have today, we believe that we could reach eventually, stretching all the angles, 350- 400 a year. The new plant will be at least three times larger and, hopefully we are able to make the processes better. It will be at least, I would say 1,000 + 1,200 implant products a year, at least. I don't see additional questions, so maybe I wait. I pause for 30 seconds if somebody wants to shoot a last question. Overall I think strategically, obviously, that's a very important field. That's a very complex one. I think if you're following MCS, we used to have a lot of contenders. Barriers at entry are very high. It's a very complex business. Now in TAH, we have only one competitor for now, SynCardia, which has been doing a great job. For LVAD, we used to have two very important players, Abbott, which acquired Thoratec, and Medtronic, which acquired HeartMate. As you probably read, Medtronic earlier this year decided to discontinue HeartMate. Today you have only one LVAD and one TAH. Another question. Do you consider further share emission or can you work with short-term loans? I think we have some loans but the preferred option, not for everybody, but the safer option when you can raise money with a capital increase at good condition is always the best thing. It protects better the company. Our first preferred solution is always capital increase. That will be probably the strategy again. To finish on what I was saying, a very difficult field, but I think it's a very promising field and, we truly believe that we are a game changer. I think we have a line of zeros in stroke, in infection, in bleeding. It's been confirmed as well in commercial in the U.S. I think we are very bold on the technology that we are offering today to hospitals and patients. We truly believe that we have the right strategy on hand, that will be really about execution and to take back the last question, that will be about, as usual, money and the way you use it. I think the company has a great management, has great people. We have a very strong strategy. We have strong financial partners. We have strong industrial partners. We have strong clinical partners. I think we are set for success. Obviously, MCS is a bumpy road, so as I usually say, expect the unexpected, but I think we are equipped to succeed. I wanted to thank you all for your time today, and if you will, you will be able anyway to review that presentation, another presentation on our site that will be posted very shortly. Obviously you can, through the site, address some questions and we'll answer. Thanks for your time again, and I wish you a very good day. Thanks a lot. Bye.