Welcome to the Implantica Q3 2025 report presentation. For the first part of the presentation, the participants will be in listen-only mode. During the questions-and-answers session, participants are able to ask questions by dialing pound key five on their telephone keypad. Now I will hand the conference. Speakers: CEO Dr. Peter Forsell, Andreas Öhrnberg, and Chief Corporate Officer Nicole Pehrsson. Please go ahead. Thank you. Welcome to Implantica's Q3 investor presentation. I guess you know me by now, but I have invested lots of money and effort in this company, and this is actually the second round of implant business. I will try to give you a very quick overview of Implantica before I come to the business update for any new listener, but I will try to do it very fast. First of all, Implantica has two platform technologies. We have an eHealth platform and a wireless energizing platform. With these two, we can revolutionize healthcare and we can do many nice products, and we can control people's health from a distance, and we can also change treatment from a distance, which is a completely unique feature. Based on that, we have then gone through the whole body and tried to make patent applications, and we have many pipeline products in this company. We have enough pipeline to become a really, really large company. For example, the eHealth platform is covered by 25,000 pages of patent filing. It is an enormous work to protect this for the future. That is why we have a very shy vision in this company. We should become the world leader in smart medical implants. I just give you two products as an example. People who have stoma, they have taken away the large intestine, for example, and they have a plastic bag where they collect the fecal matter outside of their abdominal wall. The business just for plastic bags is $3 billion. People don't need plastic bags anymore. We make reservoir, open-close, artificial sphincter, everything ready to go, and people don't need anything with a plastic bag. They just need our remote control. Second, people who can't urinate. This is not so fun because they normally put in a catheter in their own bladder five times per day. Every time they should urinate, they need to introduce a catheter in their own bladder. I can tell you, when you have introduced this catheter in your bladder once, you have done a real achievement, I can tell you. These people only need a remote control after we launch our product. They could urinate without any hassle because we have an internal device to handle the problem. If we then go further on, our main product is, of course, RefluxStop. This is a device, an implant that is used in the treatment field of 1 billion sufferers. It is the largest treatment field in the world, even larger than obesity. Here you see the device at the end of our special instrument we use to introduce it into the body. The existing surgical methods today have all been focusing on compressing or closing, supporting the closing of the sphincter, a muscle-ring sphincter here who sits between the stomach and esophagus. That's, of course, because acid should not come up. It's very logical that you should support the closing. The problem is that when you do that, you get swallowing problems. You can't belch. You can't get nothing up anymore, and you get so-called gas bloating because you can press gas down with your food and saliva, but nothing comes up, and you get bloated and distended. This surgery also doesn't treat acid reflux very well because you cannot compress so much to get enough treatment overall. With RefluxStop, we realized what actually causes acid reflux, and therefore we were able to make a treatment without affecting the food passageway. We treat acid reflux much better, and we do it without all the side effects you have with existing surgery. You can see here that basically it works like this: in the chest, you are breathing, and therefore pressure is coming and going. Imagine pressure in, pressure out, pressure in, pressure out. This poor sphincter here, if this comes too close here, you can imagine how it's leaking out through the hole you have in the diaphragm here for the esophagus. It's leaking out pressure variations. This is affecting this poor sphincter, so it gets completely paralyzed. It can't work anymore, and you get acid reflux. By restoring the normal anatomy in a good position far away from the diaphragm, placing our device on the outside of the stomach in a little sutured pouch, and some other sophisticated sutures you need to treat all three components of the anti-reflux barrier, suddenly you have no reflux anymore. It's the body itself we treat. It's not the device. We are just giving the body the natural position and the right circumstances, basically, and then the body treats itself. What should you then more know about this treatment field? You should know that the drugs taken today, they are dangerous. It's a large U.S. study followed for 10 years, 157,000 U.S. veterans, and one out of 20 extra deaths due to this drug PPI. That's incredibly bad. The problem is that people die from cardiovascular disease or kidney disease or. Cancer, and no one says, "Okay, this guy died from a heart attack. Of course, it's because of his PPI." No one understands this until someone suddenly does a large study like this. They have then afterwards gone through and analyzed why are people getting heart attack because of PPI. The answer is that you take something called nitric oxide in the blood vessel, and this goes away by this treatment, and therefore you open up for atherosclerosis. Your blood vessels get older. You get like a—you can be a middle-aged man, but suddenly you have blood vessels like you are an old man. That's why you die from heart attack when you have PPI use. This was the four main reasons for death: cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease—you wipe out your kidney, cancer, infection, and parasites—because you have no protection of acid anymore. Normally, you eat food, you have acid in your stomach, and that protects you from shit you get when you eat. Not now because the acid is gone. People don't understand this. That's why I repeat it over and over again. This is not fun for the patients. We have also in this area, 48,000 people in the U.S. and Europe alone die from esophageal adenocarcinoma, also cancer in your esophagus. We know that acid that comes up in esophagus, that comes over and over and over again, it's burn. It makes ulcers. It's terrorized. It makes inflammation of your poor esophagus. This is exactly how you get precancerous changes. If I take an endoscope and put down in any patient, I just take randomly a patient with acid reflux, and I put down an endoscope and look, 10%- 20% have precancerous changes. We have a huge study where they have gone into registry in Sweden. When they look at all people who died from esophageal adenocarcinoma. What do they find? 38% take PPI. Of the people who died from this cancer, 38% was eating PPI at the time of death. That's a warning alarm bell ringing here. I will go over to the business update. First of all, of course, you are interested to find out how is it progressing with FDA. Very interesting question, well motivated. First of all, we have passed not less than four FDA pre-approval inspections. Or we hope we have passed. Anyhow, we had one team of two inspectors coming to one of our study hospitals, and they have gone through every single data point. They have turned any stone on the data. They have compared the data in the computer system with the data in the patient's journal. You can imagine two people for five days asking questions like a machine gun. It's enormous work to supply an audit and inspections like this, more inspections than audit maybe, with all the things they need. It's really a heavy, heavy burden to really handle an inspection like this. They came the week after, unannounced, to Implantica's facilities. Another two people came, and one was the same and one new inspector from FDA. They took the same study and went through every single data point, every single study detail, all the documentation, everything. Two people again asking questions for five days. We had a working hour of 120 hours that week to just supply the answers to all the questions. Both these meetings had a closing meeting where FDA, we sit together with FDA and they reported results. Both these closing meetings presented with no observations. That's good for our study and our approval process. Furthermore, we had two more inspections. One was again at Implantica's place, but this time to go through our quality system. As a medical device company, you have rigorous paperwork to control every step, everything you do, everything is controlled. It's very advanced, lots of paperwork. They ended up this inspection only with minor observation. There were a few observations, but nothing of importance, things we will answer within two weeks. Finally, the next week, they went to our production facilities, Freudenberg in Germany. They inspected all the production, how it's going, all the paperwork at this company, all their quality system. Even here were only minor observations that will be responded within a few weeks as well. This is quite promising for our hopefully upcoming FDA approval. Regarding the overall feedback from FDA, you remember we received the feedback on module three, the last and final module, and we also received feedback on our answers to module two. Basically, you can say that the answer on module two, they were focused on post-approval study. That's to say every product implant like this in the United States, when you get approval, you are forced to do a post-approval study. After you can sell your product and so on, and that's done parallel to selling the product, but you need to do a post-approval study. All things were focused on how this post-approval study should look like, what you should analyze, and so on. Then we had some other stuff regarding the module three. This application, PMA, it's called to FDA, that's a very heavy, heavy work. It's lots, lots of parameters. A normal investor doesn't understand. Why is it not a specific timeline? Can't you just say when it's ready here and then it's ready here? It's impossible. It's absolutely a huge, huge animal and parameter change. When we supplied, for example, now some test results here, suddenly FDA has decided that they want to use another way of presenting these results. It's not published by FDA. No one knows. FDA just tells us, "No, we have changed our mind. Now we want another way of presenting this, another test." Suddenly it's just a redo. This is how life is. In this particular case, we were lucky enough that this is just short-term and it will quickly be done. It's just for your understanding, it's not like you have all the rules lined up with at least this, this, this, this, and we know the timing. No, it's a very complex, very, very, very, very advanced work to handle this. The 100-day meeting we had with FDA, there we could clarify exactly what do they now want more from us to give us the approval. There was no—all requirements are for us now clear what we need to do to have the final approval. They are also all addressable as we see it. We couldn't see anything that was any hurdle for this approval. It's just a little bit more time, and soon we will now file the final response. Another good news is that actually our main device competitor is withdrawing from all markets except the U.S. This is, of course, fantastic for us. They say it's for commercial reasons. At the same time, we noticed that there are published results from the U.S. largest user. It's called Linx. It's a trademark of Torax Medical. They published results here that are not so favorable for this product. It's actually very unfavorable that it has large frequency of swallowing difficulties with up to 30% need to be dilatation, metal dilatation or balloon dilatation, and also lots of remaining swallowing dysphagia and swallowing difficulties. It's basically very unfavorable results, but we don't know if it has anything to do with this or if it has to do with that RefluxStop is superior treatment. Most likely it's simply. They say there is a commercial reason, not business enough for them to continue. That's very, very favorable, of course, for RefluxStop. Not only that, we have also suddenly compared to the existing market today. Today, it's a certain number of reflux surgeries done, and that is compressed a lot because the existing treatment has so many side effects. Therefore, the number of surgeries is absolutely to a minimum. On top of that, the whole market for RefluxStop is suddenly 10x larger than for Linx and for any other treatment available. That's because something called IEM sufferers. When people have acid reflux for a long time, the muscles and the nerve ends in the esophagus get damaged, and the food transportation gets worse. They have no strong food transportation down in the esophagus anymore. You can imagine you take the existing methods and try to close down at the esophagus. That means you have your weak food transportation, and suddenly you have a stop down, and you get unbearable swallowing difficulties. It doesn't work. RefluxStop, which doesn't affect the food passageway, could suddenly be used in these IEM patients. They are around half of all the reflux patients, but they are in a group with very severe sufferers. It's likely around 10x more candidates for surgery in that half than in the half that is operated today. This is further supported now by NICE. NHS, who stands for the healthcare in the U.K, they have an organization, NICE, to help to evaluate new technology and analyze, look at all the data, and so on. After their very thorough review of RefluxStop, they ended up to say, "Yes, we allow RefluxStop in NHS public hospitals for IEM patients." That means for half of the sufferers and the severe sufferers. NHS, NICE, they have influence all over the world. We have U.S. investors calling us and want to invest because they have read about NICE guidelines and so on. This is a very influential and very, very positive. This, of course, then opens up the possibility for the U.S. market. Suddenly, the U.S. market is tenfold larger than before. We are preparing for launch in the U.S. We are heavily preparing for launch in the U.S. One part of that is that we have built two new production tools so we can produce more units more quickly, and also we can place one tool in the U.S. so we can have production both in the U.S. and in Europe. Currently, we are building 10,000 RefluxStop units to be prepared for the U.S. launch. Also, we are doing lots of activities to strengthen our case here in the U.S. We have a fantastic market momentum among top U.S. experts for the moment. In the latest American Foregut Society, that is basically an association of all doctors who treat the patient with reflux, we had a fantastic meeting. We had our lunch symposium, and there were many different lunch symposiums, but everybody went basically to our booth. We had 120 doctors attending, and it was a fantastic event. Also, Professor Schoppmann presented new data, up to seven-year data, in mean two years. From 22 European centers, they pulled their data together, and he presented that in this American Foregut Society. He had the biggest room available there. It was really fantastic, huge interest, fantastic interest from U.S. surgeons. We are getting there. We had a fantastic reception. Lots of comments in our booth regarding the five-year data that was published in Surgical Endoscopy. Surgical Endoscopy is a magazine from SAGES. SAGES is part of the guideline society to recommend guidelines for the U.S. market. In their magazine, they published our two articles about five-year results. Exceptional reception. Previous meetings we had in the U.S., it's always some surgeons who question, "Is this really good?" This time, no question. Now it was more the question, "Why is it so good? Why is it working so much better than anything else?" We have come very, very far with the U.S. surgeons. I can just show you. It's an easy parameter to just understand how good treatment you get with RefluxStop. In this case, it's our pivotal study. You can see that everybody took, of course, drugs before surgery. They had acid reflux. They took PPI drugs. Five years after surgery, it's one patient. One single patient takes drugs after five years. This is an absolutely exceptional result. There is nowhere in the literature to find anything even close. It's totally superior. Not only that, you can take the literature. You can look everywhere on the different articles from different centers that do this in real world, real life. Here I took one example. It's an article from Germany in Friedrichshafen, 79 patients. He had 94.9% of the patients took PPI before surgery and 2.5% after surgery. The same fantastic results in just normal standard healthcare. Next step, robotic surgery with RefluxStop. This is the new trend. Maybe you are aware of it. It It becomes more and more robotic surgery, more and more advanced surgery. Here you see some pictures of a RefluxStop surgery with robotic surgery. Why is this interesting? Yes, it's interesting because in the U.S., 60% do robotic surgery. There will be lots of robotic surgery with RefluxStop in the U.S., and that is really nice because they also have a fantastic video streaming system. We can sit here in Europe even, and we can guide the surgeons and have a live streaming of the surgery. We can communicate and talk with each other. It's a fantastic way of keeping control of the training process. We are targeting, we have more than 100 centers, way more than 100 centers who want to start, but we will target 25+ 25 centers initially. We need to be very careful to train people really, really well. Why is the situation so good in the U.S.? Yes, because we have a research article that has been published that shows that RefluxStop is the most cost-effective acid reflux treatment. It's more cost-effective than any other treatment. It's an economic gain here to operate with RefluxStop compared to the other treatments. That's a really good platform for U.S. expansion. I have lots of things to say about the U.S., but I could not talk too long in this presentation here. Another advantage of the U.S. approval is that suddenly it opens up markets like Japan, Canada, Brazil, who very much look at the U.S. approval. In Canada, for example, they said U.S. approval is enough for us, and so on. This is getting further expansion. For you to see how we systematically, it's building a business like this is like building a house. You start with the ground, you make a very solid ground, and you build up from the bottom. The same with the clinical data. The clinical data is the door opener for everything. Today, we have 27 published or accepted manuscripts. It's like a snowball effect. We have 14 waiting to be sent in or be approved or reviewed. It's like you put a snowball on top of a mountain in the warm weather, and it's just expanding and expanding and expanding. We have a full team just doing this. This is really, really important for the future to handle this. I leave the word for Andreas to talk about the finance update. Many thanks, Peter. Good afternoon or good morning. Net sales for the third quarter amounted to EUR 365,000. This represented an increase of 6% compared to the same period last year. As a reminder, Implantica is currently only marketing the lead product RefluxStop to European key opinion leaders to support the ongoing reimbursement build-out. Adjusted gross margin for the third quarter amounted to 93%, down from 97% the same period last year. The business consistently achieves exceptional gross margins, underpinned by simple product design, best-in-class patient outcomes, as demonstrated by the long-term clinical data Peter presented, and a big competitive moat thanks to robust IP. Our third quarter operating loss amounted to EUR 4.4 million, a 17% year-on-year decrease. For the nine months, operating loss decreased by 28%, reflecting company-wide cost discipline and a decrease in FDA-related expenses. Let's switch slides and turn to cash. Operating cash flow decreased 32% to EUR 3.3 million compared to the same quarter last year. For the nine months, operating cash outflows decreased by 34% to EUR 11.7 million, underpinned by disciplined cost management. At the end of September, we held EUR 53.3 million cash and short-term investments. The investments on our balance sheet are simple fixed-term deposits with a leading A-plus rated Swiss bank. Therefore, we carry no direct financial market risk exposure. There is no interest-bearing debt in our capital structure. Let me sum up this slide by saying we have a solid financial position. Next slide, please. Our investor base is dominated by Swedish and Swiss high-quality institutions, and we are grateful for the trust and support we're receiving to ensure that GERD sufferers globally are getting access to the best available treatment at scale. Back to you, Peter. Thank you. I think it's time to open questions and answers. If you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad to enter the queue. If you wish to withdraw your question, please dial pound key six on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Philip Weiberg from Pareto Securities. Please go ahead. Hi, thank you. Good afternoon. My first question is just around the FDA inspections here that you said you hope to have passed. Is that based on the feedback from these closing meetings, but you have not formally passed yet? Or can you just explain how that works? The closing. They summarized in the closing meeting, and they had no major findings. That's sort of clear. All this is a synthesis from the main organization. The main organization could always say, "Okay, we want to have a little bit more inspection here or more inspection here. This is not in our hands." It is extremely unlikely. At the closing meeting, they concluded what their findings were, and there were no major findings. Okay, thanks a lot for that. You had some just minor observations on the other inspections, right? Firstly, did I hear correctly that you expect to respond to these within just two weeks or a couple of weeks? Secondly, is it possible to just briefly explain what they are about, just to get the sense of that? There is really nothing of importance. It's just a very complex quality system with lots of things involved. There is some detailed stuff they think we can improve here or there. It's nothing that we view as any problem, so to say. We will address this. We will update our system, and all this will happen within a couple of weeks. Okay, thanks for that. Just the third question on these inspections also. You have a final one remaining now. Just wondering what kind of findings, if any, could impact any such approval timeline? Or perhaps I should phrase the question like you've had several inspections now and one remaining, if I understand it correctly. Which one is the most difficult or most critical, so to say? The most critical is, of course, the study inspections. The inspection that was at the hospital site and at Implantica, when you had two people for two weeks doing nothing else than turning every stone, that was by far the most important. There we passed without any major observations, so to say, at all. The quality systems, there you always get some comment. A quality inspector, you can't find anything to improve in your paperwork, that's not a good inspector from their perspective. It will always be a few points, that's standard. In this case, this is nothing that affects the product or production or the approval process. This is just small things to be updated in our quality system that always should be improved. It always comes new inspectors, they find something could be improved. Next time comes another inspector, finds something. It's a huge paperwork with a huge description of the whole company, how it functions. It's very advanced. I would say, for example, now at Freudenberg. I think they had three small findings, two small findings, two small findings. This has nothing to do with our production or with the approval of RefluxStop. It's their quality system, their way to handle things that they found that they want them to improve. Nothing that affects the approval at all, so to say. We have one inspection left that's also a production site. It needs to be something very severe regarding the production that it could affect the timeline if it's part of their quality system and different things that need to be fixed, but it's nothing that affects the approval process. That's a very clear answer. Just another question on the actual submission then. The other part of this is you have a few remaining tests to be done as well, right? I'm just curious a little bit around the progress on that. Is there anything that has come up that has caused you to revise any sort of expected submission timeline based on either factors that have come up from your end or from the FDA? Because you like so much to question things, I can give you an example. When you test how long a product could lay on the bookshelf to wait to be used, so the lifetime a hospital could have the product before they use it, you normally, in the past, have put it in a little cabinet, like, let's say an oven, where you have warm, you have cold, you have lots of humidity, and you mix between warm, cold, humidity, and so on in a certain pattern. When you have done that for one year, you say, "Now we have terrorized this product so much, so it has actually a five-year lifetime." This is how the rules have been before. This is what we have done. This is what we have presented to FDA. Now, based on FDA's further investigation and research, they have decided that they want to change that guidelines, but it's not published yet. It's nothing we know about. We have no clue. Let's say you are playing a soccer game, and suddenly the offside rule is changed. Now it's not offside where the other player is; it's offside one meter before the other player. You are changing the rules during the process because it's such a long process. FDA always tries to update and improve and so on. Therefore, they now say, "No, five years is five years. If you should have a five-year lifetime, you need to have five-year products and make tests on five-year real-aged products." Okay? For For us, this was not a problem because we have such products already, because we have been in business so long. We had these five-year-old products, so we can easily retest these products, and we can fulfill the requirement that FDA wanted, and everything is fine. It's just that this test takes, I don't know, four weeks or whatever they take. For the listeners' understanding, we have lots of things. People complain that we don't give the right information, and we give information, so and so. They don't understand that we are sitting on a floating surface and trying to give the best answers we can all the time, but it's not in our hands. We are not the decision-maker how FDA should update their rules. We always answer honestly and to the best ability. It's just the way this worked with these very long processes for years. To answer your question, we are now doing the tests. For the moment, it's the lab who decides the timeline, the lab who does the tests. Could they now give us priority and do these weeks of tests quickly for us, or do they have other customers? They need to wait, so we need to wait three weeks before they can do the test. We don't sit on all parameters. We just do everything with maximum speed, and it's not so long time left. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Just a couple of questions left. One is in the U.K. on the NICE recommendation that you received. Are you seeing some kind of acceleration already or new interest from hospitals that you are onboarding since that recommendation came out? Yes, we are seeing that. Our main focus now has really been FDA. The whole organization nearly is involved in everything related to the U.S. launch and FDA, and this is really a priority because there you can suddenly get real business, to get real pay. It's such a big step for the company. It for sure will be an expansion in the U.K. based on these instructions. I mean, it's fantastic that NICE says that we should be used in the NHS public hospitals. I mean, that's incredible. That's a fantastic starting point. There is a little bit slow-moving everything in this field. To directly answer your question, yes, it's expanding. Good. Just last question from my end here. It's about the randomized controlled trial versus Nissen, which does not seem to be mentioned in the report here, and you haven't talked about it on this call. What's the status there? How many patients are in currently? We have decided that we can't manage everything at the same time. We need to a little bit pause this event to really now get the approval, and after the approval, we will restart this. It's just overload, basically. Okay. You will not start operating right now? No, we will not do any further. We have 10 hospitals, but some of them, quite many of them, actually 7, still need training, and we are not fully ready to get going with this. We also feel that it's just too much commitment for our organization right now. We need now to focus on the FDA approval, and then we will release this study. Okay. Quite quickly after FDA approval, you still expect to start operating, basically? Yes, that's our target for the moment. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Thank you very much. That's all from me. Thank you. Now we have some questions. As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad. Okay. Questions? Yeah. Do you have any questions? We have a few questions from people who have sent their questions in. We can start with some U.S. questions. The burning one is, what's your best guess for a U.S. approval? My best guess for a U.S. approval is second half of Q1. Okay. That's very specific. I would say we hope, but it was the best guess. Are all of the U.S. insurance companies aboard to finance RefluxStop surgeries now? After FDA approval, how fast will the U.S. hospitals start? U.S. hospitals, you need to make a contract before you can start doing surgery. That is expected to take at least three months. Some hospitals could even take six months just to make a contract because in the U.S., in the legal part, it's very important, very expanded. I would say at least three months to do these contracts. We are not allowed to contact any hospital or any insurance companies before we have the approval. That's absolutely a no-go. We have prepared dossiers and all the material, and all the good study results we have, and everything, and doing lots of preparation work, but we cannot yet contact the insurance companies. The good thing, however, is that there are codes for the procedure for both surgeons and hospitals already in place. The device is a generic code without funding. Not without funding, but the funding is not defined. It's a negotiation with the insurance company. For the hospital and the surgeon, they are already paid a good amount according to the existing system. We are in a relatively good position here in the U.S. compared to Europe, much better. Could you share if there's any requirement for the device to be exchanged after some time it stays in the body? Is there some implanted lifespan before the device wears off? The device is made of medical-grade massive silicon. It also becomes encapsulated by the body. The body's defense from foreign material is encapsulation in a thick, one-millimeter thick white fibrotic layer. If you have seen meat and you have a fascia, you have a wheat-strong layer in between different muscles, for example, that's how you encapsulate the device. The device, we say that it has a 25-year lifetime, but in reality, it could stay for the rest of your life, and it will not degenerate. We have a couple of questions on the patent portfolio. Would it not be very beneficial for both the patients and the shareholders if Implantica AG sold or at least partnered some of the patents in stock? It would generate cash flow and bring help to patients in need faster than at the current rate. This is not a bad idea that you can license patents. I can inform you that we have some larger companies infringing our patents. We have an ongoing action to see if we maybe can get really large financing based on patent infringement, which would be even better than licensing. This is an ongoing process. We have actually developed a fantastic wireless energizing and communication system. We are actually building our own chip. You burn small, miniature, really, really tiny, tiny small ASIC chips. There you can have tons of functions in a really small space. We believe that this is something that potentially could revolutionize the whole implant market and, in principle, be licensed to every single implant producer. However, this is still a way. It's not tomorrow. As I said, we are building this house from the bottom. We will build a large multi-product company. It just takes a little bit of time, but step by step. A good question. Could you comment on the launch plan roadmap for your patent portfolio for the next products? How was the question? When do you think the next products will be coming to market? Launch of the products. The answer to this is that we decided some time back to f ocus on RefluxStop and the U.S. launch and all the things we needed for RefluxStop. The The development work is on a slower pace. We are not spending, as you can see, we have cut down our cost by one-third. We have two-thirds of the cost today compared to previous. Part of that is we have reduced patent costs. We have reduced R&D costs. We actually have reduced everything. The R&D, to a large extent, is a cost issue. How much resources are we placing on the other product? If we can get going with the business of RefluxStop, if you have a product that has 94%- 97% gross margin, of course, it will be lots of funding generated. It's also a possibility, in a positive atmosphere, to maybe even get more money into the company in relation to the U.S. launch. There are many options. It all will be done in a positive atmosphere that will not negatively affect investors. Okay. Final question. Could you imagine selling shares in Implantica if a large company wanted to acquire a stake in the company? With this additional money, more products could be brought to market faster. I mean, we do not want to sell the whole company. We want to build a large company, and we want to see this project through. However, to have a minority investor who can see the advantage here and we can do, as you said, more products, and that's absolutely a possibility if that, for me and for the investors, will be favorable so we gain more and the overall outcome will be very successful. Of course, you should not say no without investigating the matter. Okay. Thank you. I think we have answered. Last time I tried to read all the questions and answer them at the same time, and that was a bit burdensome because it was so many questions of the same type. Today, Nicole helped me to take away all the duplicate questions and summarize them. I thank Nicole for that, and I thank you very much for listening. It's a pleasure. Nice weather today here, and I wish you a really nice afternoon and evening.