Thank you, good morning, everyone. Great to be with you today. I'm John Lofton Holt, Co-Founder and Executive Chairman of the company. We're pleased to announce our first half 2021 results for Alphawave IP Group Plc. We're very excited today because this is our first time announcing our results after our successful IPO on the London Stock Exchange earlier this year. Joining me today, we have Tony Pialis, my Co-Founder, our President and CEO, and Daniel Aharoni, our CFO. In today's briefing, we're going to cover three sections. The first section, Tony and I are going to discuss really the highlights of the results, which I think you've already seen this morning, great results, something we're very proud of. The second part of the briefing, Dan will cover the financial details and go into some analysis. Tony and I will wrap up with an outlook and an update on our strategic progress. Our first half was a great first half, and as a Co-Founder of the company, and I know Tony will join me in saying this, we are thrilled to be able to say to our investors that have done this to the IPO that we have delivered the first half. We've had record-breaking bookings, revenue, and EBITDA. Here are the numbers. Our bookings are up almost 500% year-over-year, from $33.1 million in the first half of 2020 to almost $200 million in the first half of 2021. Revenue was also up over 140%, $11.5 million in the first half of 2020 to $27.6 million in the first half of 2021. Adjusted EBITDA is at 50%, which, considering that we have invested significantly beyond our expectations in the business, we're thrilled to be able to maintain that very high level, almost historic level of profitability for the company. A few other key highlights. As you know, land and expand, and expanding within our existing customer base is something very important to us. Our expectation was that most of our wins in the first half were going to be existing customers. I'm happy to tell you we've done that, and we've added six new customers in the first half of 2021. Now we have five of the eight top semiconductor companies in the world in our customer base, something we're very proud of. As I mentioned earlier, we've also expanded very rapidly. We've almost doubled our R&D headcount since December of 2020. That investment is ahead of what we expected, but that's in reflection of this demand from those top customers I told you about, our new customers and our existing customers. On the Silicon side, you all know we were first at 7 nm in 2017. We followed with 6 nm and 5 nm in 2019. I'm happy to say again, we are the first, this time at 4 nm. As we look beyond 4 nm to 3 nm and beyond with TSMC and Samsung, we're very excited to maintain and expand that technical leadership. In terms of bookings, we're very excited about the bookings also. We've now booked over $308 million and have 22 design wins across a wide range of global customers, covering really every major geography and every major end market where we do business today and who need high-speed connectivity. As a result of all this progress, not just the first half, but also the pipeline we see, the conversion of pipeline, and the leadership we have, we're increasing our full-year revenue and EBITDA guidance. Now I'll hand it over to Tony to talk about the details. Thanks, John. It has been a great first half of 2021 for us. I'm proud to say that we completed one of the largest IPOs in the history of semiconductors. Like we typically do here at Alphawave, we executed it ahead of schedule. We were also the largest North American company to have listed on the LSE. Amidst the IPO, our team also continued to execute. People are our most valuable resource, so we doubled our headcount over the first six months of this year. We brought on teams in both Canada and the U.K. We also executed on growing our customer base in North America and globally. We expanded our business in Asia with strategic deals in both Korea and China. We executed on our subscription license deals in China, generating over $250 million of EBITDA for the company. These deals set the foundation for our future growth and expansion. In our business, you win new customers with technology leadership. I was very pleased with our execution in the first half of the year. We added new IPs and taped out our most advanced IP on the world's leading 4 nm silicon, again, making Alphawave first to the market. This quarter, IPnest, the leading market research report, acknowledged our number one position in the high-speed IP space. We also designed on 3 nm nodes and helped new customers ramp to volume production, all incorporating Alphawave technology. Our sales team also contributed to our first half growth by increasing our customer base by almost 50%. We accomplished this via a combination of new design wins with global hyperscalers, as well as with international semi companies. All worldwide hyperscalers are in our pipeline today, and we continue to convert more each and every quarter. We ended the quarter with five out of the top eight global semi companies, all being Alphawave customers. Overall, it was an extremely exciting first half for us and one that we're building on for the remaining half of the year. I'll pass it back to John to provide an update on our guidance for the second half. Thanks, Tony. Thanks for that overview. As many of you know, when we completed our IPO back in May, we guided to 100% year-over-year revenue growth. I've got to be honest with you, a lot of investors found that guidance a bit bombastic and were probably skeptical that we'd be able to deliver. I'm happy to say we have delivered on that. Actually, based on the execution, but also more importantly, the pipeline that we see ahead of us, we're actually upgrading that guidance for the end of the year. We're upgrading that guidance from 100% year-over-year growth to 125% year-over-year growth. We'll get into what that means in terms of real numbers a bit later. We're also upgrading our EBITDA margin guidance. At the time of the IPO, we had completed our VeriSilicon subscription license deal, but our China product partnership subscription license deal was just a term sheet. We had not completed that. As you know, we announced in June, we did complete that deal, and now we have much better visibility into the timing and revenue recognition of that deal. As a result, we're upgrading our EBITDA margin guidance to be over 55% by the end of the year, even as we continue to accelerate and expand beyond our original expectations. Dan will talk through that in some detail. In terms of change in networking capital, near-term corporate tax rate, CapEx as a percentage of revenue, D&A, and interest, there's really no change to what we discussed at the IPO. That part of the business we expect to perform the same as we anticipated at the beginning of the year. We are just upgrading the revenue guidance and the EBITDA. With that, I will hand over to Dan, so he can dive into the details. Dan? Thank you very much, John, and hello, everybody. This first page summarizes our financial performance. We do have a deeper dive on these line items on the pages that follow. Firstly, bookings, as John mentioned, we saw nearly 500% increase in bookings over the period to reach $196 million. This was driven really by three things, more transactions, more customers, and larger orders from those customers. Just a reminder, a booking is a contracted, almost without exception, non-cancelable contract. We do know that bookings will translate to revenue. Revenue recognition under IFRS 15 is simply determining the timing of that. As we did at the IPO, we split out the royalties here. That does require some estimation of customer volumes on our part, but it does show we're building a stored value. We expect to see that start to come through in 2024 onwards. Revenue, 140% growth, so almost as much in the first half of the year as we did in the whole of last year. Critically, this does not include any contribution from the extremely high-margin subscription license deals we signed in the first half. We do expect to see those revenues start to come through in the second half. For adjusted EBITDA, the bridge from EBITDA to adjusted EBITDA, it's primarily around $5.5 million of IPO-related expenses that go through the P&L, together with a few non-cash items, stock-based comp, depreciation, FX conversion. Pre-tax operating cash flow, also very strong, more than 100% EBITDA to cash conversion, and this is after cash outflow from IPO costs that we paid during the period. Net cash balance reflects the primary proceeds of the IPO and positions us extremely strongly to drive our growth in the years to come. On the following slide, we do a little bit of a deeper dive into the bookings, and particularly the bookings track record and how we segment those bookings. A large part of H1, $148 million, that was our multi-year recurring revenue subscription license deal. The remaining $48 million, and those are the two bottom segments on the right of the chart, represent one-off pay-per-use licenses. Up to now, it's really been those sorts of licenses that have been the mainstay of our business. Going forward, what we're really trying to do is drive our customers to these multiple license subscription deals. That transition should take our average deal value from $5 million to $7 million into double-digit millions and provide us with greater revenue visibility going forward. The corollary of that is that these larger multi-license deals are more complex. Typically, you need a lot more alignment across the customer's organization. Often, you need CEO sign-off. They do take longer to negotiate and close. We've got a number of these in our pipeline, the team working very hard on converting them. I'm hoping that we'll have some news on this front in the coming quarters. The estimated royalty component, $15 million. As with our 2020 booking, this is mainly based on some very large strategic product IP deals. The next page provides a little bit more color on where our new bookings have come from and also demonstrates execution against our Land and Expand strategy. As previously mentioned, we ended 2020 with 11 customers. We've added six new customers to that. If we take out the large subscription license deals and we look at the breakdown of that $48 million of pay-per-use or one-off license fees, there's a fairly even split between bookings from new customers and bookings from existing customers. Also importantly, the vast majority of those other bookings are from the U.S., about 90%, and that's historically been and will continue to be the largest geography for us. The following page has a little bit of a deeper dive on revenue segmentation. The theme here is diversification by geography, by end market, and also by customer. By geography, we've started to see some China revenues come through in the first half of this year. That's primarily one of our 5G wins. Long term, we target China really being no more than 30% of our sales. By end market, we continue to strengthen networking and compute, including AI, but we've added more in optical, more in solid state storage, and more in 5G. Critically, when we look at revenues by customer, back in the first half of 2020, just over around 3/4 of our revenue was in three customers. That's now 43%, but critically, the top three were not the same between those periods. These top customers are typically going to shift around every period. If we look at those percentages by design win rather than by customer, they are materially less. Critically, in this half, we recognized revenues from 16 different customers, and that compares to six different customers that we recognized revenue from in the first half of 2020. The next page shows how we get from our statutory EBITDA to our adjusted EBITDA. As mentioned, the largest component here is IPO cost. Just a little bit of color. Expenses that relate to new share issuance are offset against equity in our balance sheet, but expenses that relate to the listing itself go through the P&L. That's roughly about $5.5 million. On top of that, we've got another $2 million or so share-based payments, and we do expect that to be an ongoing charge, as we'll see on the following pages. We have been expanding headcount pretty rapidly. We also have FX movements. We have functional currencies in US dollars, Canadian dollars and sterling. I could talk more about that a little bit later for those who are interested. The upshot of all this is we maintain that 50% margin in line with our IPO guidance, and this is despite the accelerated hiring and the costs associated with being a listed company. Let's go into the operating expenses in a little bit more detail on the next page. When we IPO'd, the prospectus split out costs by nature rather than by function, and that was legacy as part of our reporting as a private Canadian company. We've now moved over to a functional split. Going forward, we're going to disclose R&D engineering, sales and marketing, and G&A as separate lines. In the notes to the account, there's also a little bit more color on how some of the non-cash items, depreciation, stock-based comp, break out across those lines. These numbers should reconcile against the notes that you'll have in the back end of the accounts. G&A, about 90% of sales. As you can see here, this has gone up a little bit. This is really reflecting the increased costs we saw in May and June, really from being a listed company, board costs, accounting advisory, audit fees, and building the finance and legal team. Sales and marketing, we keep a very lean sales team. We'll come on to talk about headcount in a little bit. That's really, we have a direct and indirect sales model, but there's actually not many customers that can afford to spend north of half a billion dollars on a chip. We don't need a lot of salespeople, we just need the right salespeople. In R&D, 35% of sales, and we doubled R&D headcount. We did a team hire that we'll come up to talk about, where we hired about 24 people starting in May. If we move on to the next page, we just break down that headcount in a little bit more detail. The primary growth has been in R&D engineering. You can see that we had 61 people in total at the end of June last year. That moved to 72 at the end of the year, and we've now hit 132 at the end of June, the bulk of that in R&D. Look, the more R&D and engineering we have, the more business we can take on, the faster we can execute, the more we can maintain and expand our competitive lead, and the more revenue we can recognize. Slight increase in G&A heads. That really reflects the build-out of the finance and legal teams as we build our operational infrastructure as a listed company. Now I'll hand back to Tony to talk about our outlook and our strategic progress. Thanks, Dan. Land and Expand is our key sales strategy. Here we demonstrate two examples. On the left side, you have Samsung. Over the last three years, we've landed numerous design wins porting our technology to their leading-edge processes. In the first half of this year, we secured multiple design wins for Samsung Foundry customers, generating 100% EBITDA for our pre-developed technology. On the right side of this chart, you see how we're expanding our design wins into the 5G market. Last year, we secured our first three design wins in 5G. This year, we've expanded with additional wins in new base station suppliers, both in the U.S. and Asia. We've also secured a new master license agreement with a leading hyperscaler, as well as a top three semiconductor company in the world. As I look towards the future and I see the pace of new product development with our customer base and pipeline, high-performance compute is growing rapidly, and Alphawave is well leveraged to benefit from this growth. This chart illustrates our long-term vision for growth here at Alphawave, all built on our leadership implementing connectivity technology. Today, our business has been built on a very profitable core and product IP licensing business. We're expected to grow at around 100% per year, and we expect royalties to meaningfully contribute to our EBITDA in the next four years- five years. Where are we going? Well, to maintain and accelerate our growth, we're leveraging our connectivity technology to build a family of silicon chiplets. These chiplets are targeted to provide connectivity for both servers as well as network devices. Chiplets enable us to continue to scale our revenue and EBITDA, all built on the foundation of our core Silicon IP business and our technology leadership in connectivity. John? Thanks. We made a lot of commitments at our IPO back in May. We wanted to report to you on the progress against those key priorities and those commitments that we made. If you look at what we talked about back when we IPO'd, we had several key priorities. The first one was to scale our team globally and also in the U.K. to maintain our technology leadership at 112, really expand that technology leadership to 224 and beyond. I'm happy to say we've done that. We've more than doubled our headcount, as I mentioned before, ahead of what we even expected we could do. We've once again proven our leadership by being, again, first now at 4 nm. We're very happy to deliver on that commitment. Land and Expand, Tony's covered this, but just to reiterate, we continue to win new customers, but we also continue to win within existing customers. Back in June, we announced a repeat win at one of the world's biggest chip companies, in the U.S., and we continue to land and expand. As we have signed our new framework agreement, which we talked about in the press release today with one of the biggest chipmaker in the world. That is a very important moment for us because we know that once we sign that strategic agreement, that framework agreement provides the basis for us to win and continue to win and land and expand within customers. We're happy to deliver on that commitment. We've also continued to expand globally. As you know, we first IPO'd our China product partnership. That was a term sheet, and we committed we were going to get that deal done. I'm happy to tell you that in June, and we announced this, we did complete all the definitive agreements for that deal, and now we're in the implementation phase of that. That's going to be a very important growth catalyst for us outside of the U.S. Having said that, the U.S. and North America is still the lion's share of our biggest market, about 70% of our long-term revenue. We are expanding globally. Tony and I both talked a bit about subscription offerings and royalty revenue streams. This is something that is critical to our long-term success, and we've delivered that actually ahead of expectation also. You think about the two large subscription deals we did in the first half of the year. Those types of deals are continuing as we go into the second half and into 2022. We have more and more customers. Because of the Land and Expand nature of our business, we have more and more customers, they don't want to just do one-off license deals with us. They view us as a strategic platform for their chip design, they wanted these subscription deals. We are expanding that. As those customers go to production, that's when the royalties start to build, which is something we're very excited about. The final piece we talked about, and which Tony just talked about a few minutes ago, was the emerging chiplet market. Look, chiplets are the single biggest tectonic shift I've seen in my 20+ years in semiconductors. Everyone is going to be using chiplets moving forward to build the most advanced chips with the most advanced technology. We are on the forefront of providing connectivity for those chiplets and to provide the chiplet as a licensable IP or also as a silicon device that can be purchased. We're on track to deliver that as a very strategic effort for us. In summary, as a Co-Founder of the company, I have to tell you, I'm proud to be talking to you today and giving these results. I'm proud that we've delivered for the people that bet on us at the IPO and the investors that have invested in the company since the IPO. To reiterate the results, again, on a year-over-year basis, we've grown bookings almost 500% year-over-year. Revenue has grown about 140% year-over-year from $11.5 million to $27.6 million. We've maintained very high EBITDA margins of 50%, even while accelerating our investment into the business. What that means by the end of the year is we expect revenue to exceed $75 million. That exceeds the consensus. If you look at the company consensus of all the analysts we've met with, so about $72 million, we expect to exceed that. We also expect EBITDA margins to continue to accelerate for 50% now. We expect to exceed 55% by the end of the year. Really preserving and maintaining and extending that almost unprecedented profitability that we have in the business. We also expect bookings to continue to significantly exceed $230 million. We had a very good first half. Clearly, you shouldn't annualize that first half because it included two very large subscription deals. We believe we'll significantly exceed $230 million in bookings at the end of the year. That obviously produces a lot of revenue backlog that underpins our growth going into 2022 and 2023 from a revenue perspective. Having said that, on the booking side, we do expect non-China bookings to dominate our second half. We have a lot of China bookings in the first half. As we look at our pipeline, we see a lot of business in North America, a lot of business in Korea, and some business in Europe. We expect those to really dominate our bookings. However, we will recognize our first revenues from VeriSilicon and the CPP deal in the second half of 2021, as expected, we talked about at the IPO. Look, just to wrap up, again, on behalf of all the founders of the company, the management team, the Board of Directors, I'll tell you, we're very happy with the performance, but we're holding the bar very high for ourselves, and we're going to continue delivering. Thanks for joining the briefing today. At that point, we'll stop, and we'll take any questions that you have. If you'd like to ask a question please press star one on your telephone keypad. Please ensure your line is unmuted locally as you will be advised when to ask your question. Once again star one if you'd like to ask a question. And the first question comes from the line of Keagan Bryce from Barclays. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the question and congratulations on the first half. Just a couple from my side. The first being on your customer wins. You are clearly winning new customers at a greater rate than I think we had anticipated. What do you think that is coming down to? Is it your leadership in 6 nm and 5 nm, better customization options, more scalable IP, reducing time to market, or sort of all the above factors? A second question is on your bookings. It feels like your guidance for 2021, and really in particular for the implied second half of the year at around mid- $230 million is sort of fairly conservative, given some of the new expected customer announcements you talked about, the industry's move to 4 nm, this master license and frame agreement you have now signed. Is that a fair assessment? What would we have to see for you to meaningfully exceed that sort of $230 million number for 2021? Hi, Keagan. This is Tony. I'll take the first part of your question, and then I'm sure John will have some comments on the second. My view in terms of what's contributed to our stellar bookings and growth in the first half of this year has been an acknowledgment from the industry in terms of our technology leadership, not only being first in the most advanced nodes, but also successfully getting our early customers into production and having leading performance, power consumption, as well as low cost area, has all contributed in terms of establishing us as the reference for all high-speed connectivity solutions. With that establishment and with reaffirmation from the IPnest report that ranked us number one in the industry in terms of providing high performance connectivity solutions, our pipeline has increased materially, and that increase is driving the number of design wins. John? Thanks, Tony. Appreciate that color on the customer side. Keagan, look, nice to hear from you again. On the issue of how's our guidance, I think what we talked about at the IPO, we're a very conservative company. This is the first time Tony and I are IPO-ing a company, and Dan also, the management team together, and also the first time in London. We don't want to come out and make bombastic guidance or estimates and miss them. That's why when we guided to 100% year-over-year gross the IPO, I pretty much knew we'd be sitting here beating those estimates. If you think about how we're guiding for the end of the year, from where we sit today, we view the upgrade in the guidance as quite conservative, and there are a few things that play into that. First of all, the strength of the pipeline outside of China, which Tony talked about a bit, and which just now, and which I mentioned, it is very, very strong. There is some potential upside, particularly from a bookings point of view, going into the second half of the year. The other piece is we are implementing the China product partnership now. Depending on the exact timing of when that gets stood up, that will have a revenue recognition component, which has some upside also. The guidance we've set today is guidance we believe we will meet if you look at the complete business with all those other factors factored in. That's very clear. Thank you both. Then maybe just a sort of a quick follow-up. It would be great to get an update on your China business, I guess both for VeriSilicon in terms of sort of the IP uptake you're seeing, then also secondly on the CPP side, where are you today in terms of hiring out the new team and build on that new company? Keagan, in terms of China, we're seeing a remarkable increase in terms of the number of opportunities there. I'd say they're in the multiple 10s, okay? We've ramped the opportunity. VeriSilicon has done an excellent job in terms of cultivating design win opportunities for us that we're both executing on. I look forward to announcing even more growth moving forward. As John mentioned at the beginning of the call, I do expect the latter half of this year, our bookings to be dominated by North American customers. Because as fast as China's growing, North America is growing even more quickly. Yeah. Keagan, on the CPP, yeah, thanks, Tony. On the CPP, when we signed the deal back in June, we basically went straight into implementation mode. As you know, we don't wait around. We started recruiting the team. As I talked to many of you on the call before, we looked at a couple options. We've looked at possibly purchasing a small Chinese company so we can buy a team. Given where valuations are in China with basically four guys and a business plan getting billion-dollar valuations, that would not have been a very responsible or efficient use of capital. We've gone down the other path in parallel, which is to recruit key people, key executives out of some of the top chip designers in China, and we've been very successful doing that so far. We've already recruited our CEO, we've recruited the VP of Marketing, VP of Sales, and VP of Engineering. There'll be some further announcements about that once we're ready to announce all that progress. We're in the process of that team out. Our expectation is we will have that entity stood up and operational in the fourth quarter, is what we said back at the IPO. Optimistically, we're hoping to have actual products out in the Chinese market that use Alphawave IP by the end of next year. Perfect. Thank you, guys. The next question. Thank you. comes from the line of Patrick Basiewicz from finnCap. Please go ahead. Hello, gentlemen. Congratulations on your fantastic results. Just a few questions from me. The first one I think I have to ask is about sort of the ongoing chip shortage in the industry. At the time of the IPO, you said that this will not matter for you because the design process implies that the actual products come out much, much later. Now we've seen sort of much more protracted, much more severe delays, and which I expect it to last well in the future. Are you seeing any sort of delays? Are you planning any delays in terms of royalty revenues or sort of delay in subscriptions being signed? That's the first question. The second question is on the book-to-bill ratio when I strip out the sort of the Chinese partnerships. For the first half, I have it at around 1.7, which is pretty healthy. For the second half, it seems like it is going to be about 1.9. Is that more or less correct? The third question I have, which is sort of more, let's say high level. I kind of calculated that you have about a technological leadership of conservatively speaking, six to 12 months versus Cadence and Synopsys. Given sort of the 4 nm announcement that you made today, is this still a conservative estimate or are you seeing some sort of catch up from the competitors? Patrick, thanks for those questions. Appreciate it. We'll actually split that up amongst the team, but it's really good to hear your voice. Again, thanks for joining the call today. Yes. Same for you. On the chip shortage. We are humble and fortunate that this does not affect us. I know CEOs of and Chair of other chip companies where this is destroying their business. We are lucky in that we are one of the first decisions a customer makes when they are building a next generation chip. The customers we licensed to back in 2017 and 2018, they just started sampling their products this past quarter. We don't expect high volume production until 2024, as we talked about during the IPO. It's the thing we love and hate about our business. We love that royalty eventually happens. We hate we have to wait so long, but we have no control over that. Look, if the chip shortage somehow lasted until 2024. Yes, it would affect us. We don't see that happening. Right now we see no impact on our business or the royalty bills. A bigger point on the chip shortage. This actually has produced an opportunity for us, which we didn't expect. If you think about all the investment, the tens or even, if I may be so bold, hundreds of billions of dollars that governments, that organizations, that companies are investing in building out additional foundry capacity, people like Intel that have entered the foundry business, this is a huge opportunity for us. Now it's another foundry with another set of captive customers that need high-speed connectivity IP and doesn't have it themselves. I'd say that actually has been a collateral benefit to us, one I wouldn't have anticipated a year ago. With that, I'll turn it over to Dan maybe to talk on the book-to-bill question. Yeah, sure. Patrick, great to hear from you. We don't specifically disclose our billings. You could probably figure it out from some of the working capital movements, but suffice it to say, it's not a million miles away from our revenue. On that basis, I would agree with your figures. Okay, perfect. Patrick, this is Tony. I'll take your third question on competition. Let me describe a conversation I had with the CEO of a leading AI company a month ago, to help you understand how we're positioned in the market. He told me he was building the world's most advanced AI product. It would change the world, and he said he needed the world's most advanced connectivity IP, which is why he had selected us. Okay. That design win we'll announce as part of our Q3. We have established ourselves in the leadership space. That story just illustrates it. IPnest reaffirmed it, with their announcement, ranking us number one in terms of silicon IP suppliers in this space. We'll continue to build on that. We lead in terms of technology. That's how you get design wins in this space, and that's what's allowed us to be so successful. Thank you. That is all for me. The next question comes from the line of Sandeep Deshpande from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks, guys, for letting me on. I have a few questions. Firstly, regarding your different kinds of IP you sell into the market, core IP, product IP, and you plan to have chiplet IP. Is there a time that you have said that you will have this chiplet IP into the market, given that this market seems to be on the verge of taking off at this point? That's my first question. Secondly, you just talked, John, about this new platform that you are on, in terms of a foundry platform. Have you already started signing up or talking to customers who are on that platform to sign them up as licensees so that they can use your IP on their chips? Thirdly, I just want to touch base on the growth prospects from here. You've talked about having two of the four hyperscalers, and this is a roadmap you said. Do you expect to sign up more of these hyperscalers and are there more semiconductor companies in the pipeline that remain to be signed up, given that there was one apprehension that yours is a fairly niche technology and thus there are not that many companies out there to sign up? Of course, the same companies could reuse your IP in multiple products. Thanks. Thank you very much, Sandeep, for those questions. This is Tony. I'll take the first one. In regards to timing of deploying our chiplet IP and chiplet IP portfolio, we're already in the market today. We've already licensed our die-to-die interfaces for customers that are moving to chiplet IPs. We're seeing a lot of movement to chiplet, as you also mentioned. In terms of deploying our chiplet IPs themselves, so the entire chiplet database, we're also in the market today. We have multiple customers in the pipeline that we are in advanced discussions with in terms of being able to deploy our solutions to them. Look, customers aside, this is a fast-growing market. We expect to be a leader in this space as we are with our core IP offerings. John, I'll pass it to you to talk about our growth in- Yeah, that sounds good. Yeah, definitely. Sandeep, just to be clear, because I want to make sure we're completely clear. We have not signed an agreement with Intel Foundry Services. I mentioned Intel Foundry Services as a very interesting development for the industry. They will need connectivity IP. Watch this space. We would love to work with Intel. That's one piece. With respect to foundries generally, okay, we work with as many foundries as we can where we see customer pull, okay? Right now, that's TSMC and Samsung. You think about 7 nm, 6 nm, 5 nm, 4 nm, now moving to 3 nm, and now moving our portfolio to 200 gig. That is all completely customer driven. As customers drive us to new foundries, to new platforms, to new technologies, we will always support those. Speaking of customers, because you brought up the growth, and this is a question we get a lot from investors frequently, because, look, this is not the kind of company where you're going to have thousands of customers or maybe even hundreds of customers, because how many customers are there in the world that can afford to invest a billion and a half dollars or $2 billion in a custom chip project at 3 nm? There are just not that many. There are dozens of customers. Those dozens of customers are taking over the world of custom silicon. These are the world's biggest hyperscalers, the world's biggest chip companies. That's why Land and Expand is such an important component for us. What Tony mentioned in his commentary before, we have every major global hyperscaler in our pipeline now. That was not true two years ago. We have five of the eight top semi companies as customers today, buying our technology to put into their chips. I want to have all eight. I want to have 10 of the top 10. As you think about how we're expanding, we're expanding with new customers, but we're also expanding within existing customers, and that's what's fueling our growth. The other piece that's very interesting is we're really evolving our pricing and our business model, recognizing that Land and Expand is so important. As you, again, showed you, one-off license fees, okay, is not where we're really building the majority of our growth now. Now it's more subscription licenses. People that are buying our technology over and over again, they really want surety and they want security, that they can have access to our whole portfolio no matter what technology they're in. Those subscription deals are what you're going to see moving forward. Tony, I think probably add some more context here from a customer perspective. Sure. Sandeep, I think you specifically mentioned hyperscalers, and as John commented on, they're all in our pipeline. You should be looking forward to the second half of this year, and looking forward to seeing more conversions there. Understood. Thanks, Tony. One follow-up on the financial side. You've signed these two big China deals in the first half, VeriSilicon and the CPP. How should we be looking? You did not recognize any revenue associated with that in the first half, and you had given some indications on VeriSilicon revenue recognition at the time of the IPO, but we don't really have an idea of CPP. Should we be expecting some revenue recognition associated with both into the second half of the year? If that is the case, following up from the first question, your guidance seems not very aggressive at this point. Why don't I take the first one there? Just to give you a little bit more color, between CPP and VeriSilicon, we are going to be expect invoicing. We're going to be expecting to bill somewhere between $20 million and $40 million. It's really a timing issue with regards to CPP. VeriSilicon, we know exactly what we're going to bill. The question becomes around revenue recognition. That is purely a question of timing. John gave a great update in terms of where we are. Everything is on track. We've had confirmation of the accounting treatment, what we really need, and certainly as CFO, what I need, is certainty before I can give more clarity on that guidance, which is why we've guided to where we have today. John, maybe you could tackle the guidance question. Yeah. Sandeep, I appreciate the question. It's a good one. It's one that I think we're going to get over the coming days as we go through our roadshow. If you think about what I said before about how conservative we are, okay? If we had 100% certainty in exactly how we could recognize CPP revenue and VeriSilicon revenue, we would likely be guiding higher than we're guiding now. More conservative. Acknowledging that we don't have certainty on the timing of revenue, we have guided to end-of-year performance that we know we can hit in the total business, and that includes some China business, as you know. Not very much of our business is China right now. Most of it's in North America, and other places in Asia. That's where the majority of that's going to be. I'd say watch this space. It's going to be a very interesting Q3. Q3 is almost over. It's been a very interesting Q3. It's going to be a great Q4, and we'll be happy to come out and give you some more updates as the timing evolves on that deal. Thanks all. The next question comes from the line of Ambrish Srivastava from BMO. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you very much for taking my question. I had a question on the master framework agreement that you announced. Is that with a brand-new customer? The other one kind of related to that is are there any bookings associated with that? I had a couple of follow-ups after that, please. Hi, Ambrish. Tony here. I'll handle your first question. That master license agreement was with a new customer. Typically, the way it works with large semiconductor companies is the master license agreement sets the framework for all future engagements. It has all the legal and major commercial terms associated with any opportunity. Once that is in place, then it's relatively straightforward to implement technical statements of work, which are for specific design wins. I'll give you an example. With Samsung, we secured our initial master framework agreement going back to late 2017, and then every win that we've accumulated there since has just been implemented through a statement of work. In the first half of this year, we did not execute any statements of work associated with that master license agreement. You should expect that with that deal in place, the intent, and the opportunities are to put in place multiple design wins and multiple statements of work in the following quarters. Got it. Currently, there are no bookings attributed to this agreement yet. That's the right way to think about it, right? At the end of the first half of this year. There were no bookings associated with it. Got it. Then I had a couple of questions on the pipeline. You mentioned a few times on the confidence on the pipeline. Can you give us some metrics similar to the IPO roadshow that you shared with us on the strength of the pipeline, whether it's by end markets or by offerings, core IP, what have you? Then I have one final after that. Sure. Yeah. Sure. Go ahead, John. Yeah. Sure, Ambrish. No problem. As we talked about during the roadshow, we're not going to report quantitatively on pipeline on a moving forward basis, purely because I find that's not a very useful metric for investors. I've been an investor longer than I've been an operator. I found those things relatively unuseful. I think from a qualitative perspective, it is important to understand a few things, and Dan really highlighted this in his slides when he talked about diversification of the business. That diversification of our business is reflective of diversification we've seen in the pipeline. You look across geographic end markets, you look at vertical markets, you look at the kinds of products we're selling. A year ago, it was all North America, it was all core IPs, and it was all basically in servers and switches. Now it's in five vertical markets. It's diversified globally. We're seeing a stronger business in Asia, and not just China, by the way. China's about only half of our Asian business. Korea is very strong for us. I'd say we definitely see customers now moving up the stack. We see them moving up the stack, not just to product IPs, but really moving into deploy IP and pushing us to develop roadmap further, looking at 3 nm and beyond, looking at 200 gig and beyond. Qualitatively, that's how the pipeline's evolved and that's reflected in the way the bookings have been diversified over the last nine months. Tony, anything to add there? Got it, John. Yeah, absolutely. Ambrish, here's another useful fact. Last year in the first half, we had just about $1 million of royalty booked as part of our deals. This year it's over $15 million. That's due to us winning two additional design wins with our product IPs. The formation of our deals is also evolving to more lucrative reuse deals as well as subscription licensing deals. This just leads to the diversification that John's speaking to. It's a diversification of products, it's a diversification of business models, and it's a diversification of geographies. Got it. That's very helpful. The final really quick one, you mentioned a design win with a leading AI company. Is this a company that has connectivity IP and you were able to penetrate that with your solution, or this is somebody who doesn't have an established connectivity IP in their portfolio? Thank you. Great question. I do not believe this company has internal connectivity IP. Got it. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ambrish. The next question comes from the line of Nay Soe Naing from Berenberg. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning, guys. Good morning. First, congratulations on a great set of numbers. If I could start with a question on pipeline, please. You mentioned a few times that you're seeing a significant increase in the pipeline. I was wondering if you're able to share where we are today as opposed to, I believe it was about $170 million back at the end of February, disclosing the prospectus. What does the dynamic look like for that pipeline? Back then it was 50% of it about was in the cloud computing data centers. Sure. Nay, good to hear your voice. Glad you could join the call. Welcome. I'll cover that high level and then maybe pass to Tony if he has any other comments. As I just mentioned to Ambrish, we reported during our IPO, we provided some color on our pipeline, really to give a sense for what the forward business was going to look like as a snapshot. As I mentioned to Ambrish a couple of minutes ago when I answered his question, reporting on pipeline on a quantitative basis, I don't find very helpful. In fact, you can draw the wrong conclusions from that. As you look at how our bookings in particular have diversified heavily over the last year, and really even over the last six months, that is a good indication of how the pipeline's diversified. Again, a year ago, if we were talking about pipeline, it was all North American business. It was all core IPs. There were no product IPs in the pipeline. There were no chiplet IPs being contemplated. It was all 7 nm, 5 nm, 100 gig. If you look at where we are, it's very much a global customer base, about 70% in the U.S., about 15% in Korea, about 15%± in China. More importantly, we're now penetrating servers, switches, storage, which are our three big markets. We do have, as Tony mentioned, some very important strategic design wins at AI companies. We have multiple of these now. We have autonomous vehicle design wins in our pipeline, potentially. We have a lot of sort of diversification from that perspective, but it really is still servers, switches, and storage. Those define fundamentally our biggest end market. We're happy with that because look at what's growing faster than any other part of the end markets we play into. It's servers, switches, and storage. It's cloud computing. It's data center. I think as you look at how our pipeline is evolving, it's very much evolving in line with those three key markets. Tony, anything to add there? Sure. Some useful information I think you might benefit from is, look, the vast majority of our opportunities are with large semiconductor companies, the established companies that we all know. It's with hyperscalers as well. They're investing heavily into next generation data centers, increasing bandwidth, building their own server chips. The other item that frankly surprised me in the first half of this year is also the growth in new startups. For a long time, over the last 20 years in our industry, there's not been a lot of startup opportunity. Definitely not like the software space. We are seeing a resurgence of that. It's reflected in our pipeline. Semiconductor is back. It's hot. There's clearly a lot of investment happening in semis. What we're seeing a lot of it is in the high end, not so much in the consumer space. That is also helping grow our customer base, delivering solutions to these new emerging semiconductor startups. That's incredibly helpful. Thank you very much. I've got two more questions, if I may. This one is on, well, trying to connect the number of contracts and the customers and design wins you've disclosed in the statement. If my math is correct, we've got accumulated design wins of about 23 now, but accumulated contracts of 36. Am I right in saying that the design wins number will catch up and at least be minimum one? Because typically you would have more than one design win per contract, and then the fact that bookings is derived from design wins as opposed to contracts. Okay, why don't I take that? It's not straightforward to connect the dots, and I'll explain why. I'll just give a couple of examples. For instance, there are three different things we can track here, the number of design wins, the number of licenses, and the number of contracts. Those don't necessarily marry up, and I'll explain why. For instance, when we sign a reseller deal, that's not a license and that's not a design win, but it's contract. The design wins and the licenses follow that. In some instances, we may have an amendment, as Tony was referring to, an additional statement of work. That would be a new contract. It might be adding an existing piece of IP, a new piece of IP to a customer product. That would be a design win, it would be a license. It's not that straightforward to connect the dots. For instance, our CPP deal, recurring revenue subscription, we would count that as a contract, obviously. At the moment, it's not tied to any specific licenses until those licenses get deployed. I appreciate you're trying to connect the dots, but I think the nature of the contracts that we have makes that a little bit difficult, I'd say. Gotcha. Okay, that's clear. Thank you. One last question from me. Usually impressive deals with CPP and VeriSilicon, multi-year deal for SerDes, so you've got recurring revenue, which is great. It gives you visibility for the future revenue. Now that those two deals are completed, have you got more aspirations to go into more multi-year deals, subscription revenue? Definitely. Look, this is the model we're evolving to. Not really just because we want to go there. Look, investors want that. We want that, but most importantly, our customers want this. Our customers, the more we let expanding customers use us over and over again for their products in multiple technologies, multiple foundries, multiple generations of products, they would rather have the security of supply and have access to our whole portfolio that can enable those products. We have customers pulling us towards subscription deals. We have potential sales channels, just like VeriSilicon, pulling us towards subscription deals. You will for sure see more and more of these moving forward, and we all like that. We like that because of all the things you said. There's better visibility, it's recurring revenue, it's not lumpy business, it's not one-off license fees, and frankly, it's an easier sales process for us. We sell one big deal and we can add on to it, which Tony's done very successfully ever since I've known him. Yeah. There's one key point John mentioned I'd really like to reiterate. The same concerns around semiconductor supply chain and having assurance of your supply chain is also being reflected in the IP space. Customers, semi companies, hyperscalers want assurances in terms of IP suppliers for their next generation products. It's that assurance that is encouraging them to commit to subscriptions in order for them to have known access and known cost for their next generation products. Great. Super thank you. Very helpful. Again, thank you very much, guys, and congrats on the great results. Thanks. The next question comes from the line of Jan Menon from Liberum. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question. I think most of this has been answered already. I was going to be a bit more blunt, actually. It's great to see that we have a third party recognizing that you are the leading IP company. I was just going to ask, has anyone like a Cadence or a Synopsys had any design wins in 100 gigs at 7 nm, for example? Thanks for that. I'll cover that initially, and then Tony can talk about this because Tony and I have worked together since basically the early 2000s. We've seen Cadence and Synopsys for a really long time. In fact, I joke often that I've been a customer of Cadence or Synopsys since 1998. If you're in semiconductors, you have to use one of those great companies as your tool provider. That's fundamentally what they are, Jan. They're tool providers, and they do offer IP, as you know, as part of their portfolio because it makes their tools more competitive against each other. They usually offer those IPs sometimes at no cost, sometimes at very low cost. They don't really focus on high-end IPs. If you ask Cadence and Synopsys, they'll probably tell you that I think as you look at it, the question you asked is actually also an interesting one. Are we aware of design wins for Cadence and Synopsys at 7 nm, 100 gig? 7 nm, 100 gig was four years ago for us. We don't really keep track of 7 nm, 100 gig anymore. In fact, 5 nm is in our rearview mirror two years ago. We're at 4 nm, we're at 3 nm, we're going to 200 gig, 400 gig, 800 gig. We're working with the world's leading semiconductors and hyperscalers on the most advanced technology. I have no doubt that eventually Cadence and Synopsys will get some design wins at 7 nm and 100 gig because that's a commodity technology now. Tony, I was going to add some more context there. Sure. Jan, I can't say for sure, but, obviously, you know that rumors abound in the industry. I would expect probably a handful of smaller players had selected either of the two EDA guys for 100 gig and 7 nm. What I can also tell you is that on next-generation products, those customers are now talking to us and have selected us, just because of frustrating experiences working with the other guys. We continue to establish ourselves and reinforce ourselves as leaders in the market. If folks sometimes make the wrong decision for a product and go another path, we'll gladly work with them on their next product to rectify the situation. Thank you. As you noticed, I did ask a question on an old technology just to demonstrate maybe how far ahead you are. The other question I had for you, which has also been answered, I think, but I was looking for some more subscription agreements outside of China. You mentioned it, that you were in discussions, but is there a time frame on that? Also, I had one question on CPP. When could we see the first sort of silicon come out of that company? Sure. Yeah, I'll cover that one first, and then we'll talk about subscription. Look, the CPP was quite complex to get done. Happy we got it done. We're in the implementation phase now. We're building that team as fast as we can. Look, if you think about that deal, it's very interesting for us because we're enabling a chip company to build products, but not starting from scratch. They're starting with our complete IP portfolio that have already been proven, certainly proven in silicon. Some of these chips, some of these IPs, have already been seen now in production in chips. We're giving them a huge head start. As long as they're successful getting the team stood up quickly, we are optimistic, and it's a stretch goal, that we could potentially have products sampled into the market in China by the end of next year. If it takes a little bit longer, that's fine. If you think about if they were starting from scratch, it would be a three-year endeavor. That's when I think the earliest we would see silicon in the market, and that'll be sample silicon. It takes a while to get to production. We understand that. That's what I expect we would see. On the subscriptions, look, we're reporting on the first half right now, we have to cane our comments the first half. We're reporting on first half with only a few days left in Q3, though. I will tell you, watch this space because we are evolving our customers and our key suppliers, sorry, our key channel partners to subscription deals. Not because that's what we want, it's because it's what they want. Stay tuned. Second half, as we get into 2022, there'll be more subscription deals announced. Okay, great. Thanks, guys. Thanks, Sam. Before we go to the next question, as another reminder, please press star one if you would like to ask a question. The next question comes from the line of Harvey Robinson from Panmure Gordon. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question. I've got two or three questions. The first one I think is fairly straightforward. You've given us the direction of travel in the license mix, but could you just give us a feel for the percentage of licenses by type and whether you would bring more types of license agreement into your portfolio, as it were, as Arm did? Related to that is could you just give a feel for the medium-term royalty rates you may see? I'm clear there'll be a range there depending on license fees. I've got a couple questions on chiplets. Sure. Yeah. Dan, do you want to take the. Types of licenses. What we disclosed in the numbers is that we signed five core IP licenses and two product IP licenses. What we don't do is provide the split between R&D, migration, and derivative. We may do that at year-end. It's just simply because the lines between some of them become a little bit blurred. By that I mean we're starting to see some really interesting new types of license deals, specifically what we would call a reuse license. That is to a customer where we are already working closely with it. They've already licensed our IP, but they turn around and say, "We want exactly the same IP for a second product. In that sort of case, we can deliver that straight away. We can recognize it very quickly. We might be introducing some new license types, specifically the reuse license. As the business grows, as we get more customers who are into production, we would expect to see more of these reuse licenses. Here, let me jump in on the product base, because I think you asked a excellent question in terms of would we be expected to be offering more IPs moving forward? The answer to that is absolutely, okay? That is one of the main reasons why we went public on the London Stock Exchange. It was to accelerate our R&D. It was to accelerate our expansion of offerings. You should stay tuned through the second half of this year and early next year in terms of the aggressive expansion of our portfolio. To transition to your question about royalties and trying to provide some guidance in terms of what we're able to extract from our customers, look, it really ranges on the types of products that we deliver to them. For our Core IPs, typical royalties can range anywhere upwards of 150 basis points all the way up to 300 basis points. Our CPP deal, as we announced, we secure 300 basis points for every product that's sold. For our product IPs, royalties are significantly higher. They can range anywhere from 5% to 10% of the product or a fixed dollar price per product. That fixed dollar price can be north of $10 per part, which obviously delivers a lot more lucrative upside for us, gaining that much revenue and EBITDA for every product sold. On that, are you talking about 5%-10% of the chip price or of the product? Yeah, it's always ASP. Okay. The selling price for the product. Okay, thank you. Hey, Harvey, one thing on that, and look, sorry we couldn't meet last week, by the way. It would've been great to meet you before we announced. Yeah, it's okay. It was a busy week. Look forward to talking later. The other piece on some of the customers we sell to that pay royalty, they don't actually sell their chip. If you think about big hyperscalers that go into an infrastructure. We always make sure if we get a royalty with them, we agree on a price per chip. Tony, I like to call him our chief pricing officer. He knows how to drive a hard bargain. I've been on the receiving end of that earlier in my career, and Tony always gets a good royalty. It's not strictly always an ASP, but it's always a price per chip, if that helps. Yeah. Okay, just on chiplets, just a sort of technical question. Could you just help me understand how chiplets sit with SoCs? It's obviously something people have been driving for many years. Could you just give me a bit of a technical understanding there? Finally, just on that chiplet comment, and maybe I was reading too much into your comments, but it seemed to suggest to me that you might be moving towards a fabless strategy for the chiplet business, or that may just misunderstanding your comments. Sure. This is Tony. I'll try to answer those. On the chiplet side, last 40+ years, everyone's been trying to build a single IC that includes all functionality. In leading-edge nodes, yields coming out of manufacturers like TSMC and Intel are not great when you're trying to build one very large chip. What's happening now is the functionality is getting spread across multiple smaller chips because those smaller chips yield better and deliver better economics. That's the evolution that's happening into the industry. As a result, connectivity, which was previously integrated, and that's where we deliver our core IP, is now also moving onto a separate chiplet. What we're doing is we're reacting to these industry trends, and we are building and delivering our connectivity via a new form factor, which is a chiplet form factor. We're delivering it as either a database that the customer can manufacture directly. We'll also be delivering it as a piece of silicon that a customer can co-package with the rest of their functionality. For us, it's just an evolution in terms of how we deploy our technology, and it's in reaction to trends and demands that our customers are making in order for them to deliver leading-edge connectivity with their leading-edge compute. Okay, just to clarify, the loss in connectivity driven by SoCs moving to chiplets creates a huge opportunity for your connectivity. Is that basically the point? That's exactly the point, just said much more eloquently and concisely than I did. Are you going to be fabless or those? That's the next question. Yeah, of course. We have no desire to try to build our own leading edge. I mean, are you going to sort of sell them via a fabless strategy rather than a licensing and IP model? Because you seem to say you'd be selling bits. Harvey, we are, but it's not a rather than. That's the beautiful thing about our business model. We're going to provide our technology in whatever form factor our customers want. We're very customer-driven. We started core IPs. We started developing product IPs, which are more complex. We've developed chiplet IPs. We're selling all three of those as licensing. Now we have some customers that have actually come to us and said, "We would like to actually purchase chiplet silicon from you." We'll support either business model. If they want to license from us- Yeah gladly, we'll license it to them. If they want to buy chiplets from us strategically, we'll do that. That's not something for the year. That's something maybe for next year or the year after. We're not going to become a chip company. I've run a chip company. I know what that looks like. You're a hero if you deliver 70 points a quarter. Okay. We're not going to do that. That's where we draw the line. Go ahead, Tony. Yeah. Look, the big guys all want customization and all want to own manufacturing themselves. You should expect that we'll license to them. The mid guys and the new emerging players all would prefer to buy direct silicon from us. Okay, thanks. Thanks for your answers. Thank you. Thanks. There are no further questions in the queue, so I'll hand the call back to your host for some closing comments. Great. Look, first of all, we appreciate everyone dialing in today and going a little bit over. I think, on behalf of the whole management team, the cofounders of the company, and the board of directors, we're humbled and thrilled to be able to come out as a first-time reporting as a public company after such a high-profile IPO and deliver, and you can count on us to keep delivering. As I mentioned, we're pretty far into Q3, so we know what that looks like. It's been a great year so far, so it can keep being a great year. That pipeline, the execution against the pipeline, the execution against these subscription deals is going to continue, not just for this year, but well into next year and the year after that. The book of business we're building, the revenue backlog we have, the bookings that are continuing are really building a fantastic base of business that we're going to use as our platform for growth for numerous years. Thanks again for joining today and for all the great questions, and we'll look forward to seeing you on the road.