Good morning, everybody. I'm Aaron Kimson, a VP on the Software Equity Research Team here at Citizens JMP. With me on stage today we've got Augmedix CEO Manny Krakaris, and CFO Paul Ginocchio. How are you guys doing today? Doing great, Aaron. Yeah, thank you guys for being here. So I'll go ahead and turn it over to you, Manny, to run us through some slides, and then afterwards I have some questions. We'll do a little Q&A and open it up to the audience. Fantastic, thank you. Can people hear me? Great. I can't hear myself. It's great to be here. I think this is – we're trying to remember if this is our second or third time presenting at this conference. Time really flies, I guess. So for those of you who are not familiar with our company, we'll just go through a few background slides, bring you up to date on where we are, and then we'll just dive into some Q&A with Aaron. Some highlights of the company. At the end of the third quarter, we had an ARR of $48 million. Net revenue retention rate stood at 157%, which is an indication of how quickly you grow with your existing customers. We have more than 20 healthcare systems under contract, and we were generating more than 70,000 notes every week. So what is it that we do? We're addressing a significant and acute problem in healthcare, which is the growing gap between healthcare providers' capacity to provide care and the demand for care from a growing and aging patient population. Healthcare providers are unable to shrink that gap simply by recruiting more people. There just aren't people to recruit. In fact, the rate of exit from the profession, healthcare profession, is greater than the entry. The gap, the shortage of physicians is expected to reach, I think, over 120,000 by the year 2027 is the latest that I've read, from the AMA. So what can healthcare providers do to try to address that gap? Well, the simple thing is to strip out everything that has nothing to do or little to do with delivery of care, which is what they are supposed to be doing. We are focused on helping them with that specialization where they, their, their resources are focused on delivering care and everything else gets outsourced. We take care of the documentation burden that currently encumbers most of the healthcare providers. Some of the benefits we provide, we save them up to three hours a day in both time that they spend during the clinic and what they call pajama time, where after hours they're focused on completing medical documentation, which is necessary. It's a legal requirement. After every encounter with a patient, they must document it extensively. It takes up a lot of time. In fact, for many physicians, they spend more time documenting than they actually do delivering care. When we do the work for them, they. We've got data to support this large studies that show that their productivity goes up by 20%. The solutions that we offer, and we will talk about them, it's a portfolio of solutions, are designed to be easily scalable within large enterprises. Most of our clinicians are with large enterprises. About a little over 85% of all of our clinicians are with the major healthcare enterprises. Just an overview of how the system works. We equip our physicians with smartphones. The smartphone is there to listen and watch an encounter with a patient. That gets streamed to our platform. Depending on what product the clinician subscribes to, whether it's a synchronous real-time solution or an asynchronous solution, it'll either get recorded or it'll get streamed directly to a medical documentation specialist who is observing the interaction and using the various tools that are available to them to generate the medical note on behalf of the physician. When it's completed, it's uploaded to the electronic health record for the physician's later review, and sign-off. When the clinician subscribes to an asynchronous solution, that encounter is recorded. It goes through automatic speech recognition, which converts the recording into a written transcript. The written transcript then goes through natural language processing, which includes large language models, to generate automatically a comprehensive, structured, problem-based medical note, which is then uploaded to the electronic health record for the doctor's review and sign-off. The TAM is significant. We estimate it to be $6 billion. If you listen to some of the press releases of some of our competitors, they estimate it to be a little bit bigger than that, anywhere from $10 billion-$14 billion. We highlight here some of the big logos that we have under contract. In aggregate, they represent a TAM for us of about 1.2 billion, just those customers that are under contract. We have operations in four countries around the world today. Our product portfolio. I'll start from the far right-hand side. That's our legacy product, Live. It's a synchronous solution, where we match up a medical documentation specialist one-to-one with a clinician, during that clinician's shift, and they're there to observe the interaction and use the tools that are available to them within our note-builder platform to generate the medical note. It is priced at roughly $2,400 per month per physician, and it is significantly more expensive than the other products. The reason for that is because we deliver ancillary services in addition to the medical note, such as pre-orders, sorry, orders, referrals, clinician nudges, in the form of clinical decision support, and other types of services. And in addition to that, because it's synchronous and bidirectional, if there's any kind of ambiguity in the encounter, during the encounter, that they observe, they can message the doctor and ask for clarification. Was that the right or the left elbow? So the quality of the note is really, really high when the doctor sees it. And for that, they pay a significant premium. The next product is Notes. That's an asynchronous product, where there is no matching. The recording, the encounter is recorded. It goes through our technology stack. But then it's reviewed by one of our people before it's uploaded to the EHR. So much less effort on the part of the clinician to complete that process, the documentation process. The review happens very quickly 'cause the quality's still very good. And then the doctor signs off on it. That product is priced at roughly $1,100 per doctor per month. As we go one over to the left, Augmedix Go is our newest product. It's an autonomous, self-serve product. It's a piece of software, where the doctor has instantaneous access to a draft of the medical note. And it's up to the clinician to complete what we call the last mile of that note. So anything that the technology does not get, doesn't, it misses something, or if it's not quite right, the doctor is responsible for cleaning it up, making any edits, and signing off on it. And that's priced at roughly $300 per clinician per month. So a significant reduction in price between that product and Notes. And then Augmedix Prep is our pre-chart solution that some of our customers have asked for, which basically takes information out of the electronic health record of the patient, historical information, and pre-populates the medical chart, so that the burden on the clinician or medical assistant is much lower when they, if they choose to do the medical chart themselves. Some financial highlights, Paul? Sure. We last reported third quarter growth at 50%. We'll be reporting fourth quarter in roughly the middle of March. You know, what drives that 50% growth is that 157% N RR. It's great when your largest and existing customers are driving all the growth. It just proves out the ROI of your product. Our gross margin is expanding. And so our gross profit growth in the third quarter was 62%. And our LTV to CAC is a sort of, you know, above the benchmark, which typically is 3x. We're nicely at 5x with a relatively short payback period. So great unit economics. We did just give some color in early January. We stated we exited the year at roughly $51 million of ARR, up from $48 million at 930 clinicians in service up 41%. coming slightly, revenue expected to be at $12.5 million, just to just above our guidance of $12.3 million. And we did go live with the product that Manny was talking about, Augmedix Go, for the ambulatory setting in the middle of December. Okay. So we, we did another financing in November, just under $29 million. We netted a little over $26 million after cost of issuance. The motivation behind it was to accelerate our sales and marketing activities based on the opportunities we saw in front of us. We wanted to beef up our direct sales team, which we've done. It's not complete yet, but we're very far along in that process. And also to beef up our research and development team, to accelerate some of the things that are on our product roadmap to bring them to market faster, at the request of some of our biggest customers, including HCA. HCA participated in this round. And so, the whole rationale here is it's this was not a defensive financing. This was very offensive-oriented, intended to help us capture more of the market faster. Okay. So what we consider to be the most important differentiators between us and what seems to be a growing list of competitors is the user interface that we provide in our product that are exposed to our customers, provides for a lot of transparency in how the note is created. It's not a black box that we deliver. It is, there's several panels that the user can go through to see exactly what happens with the ASR and then with the large language models, etc., to get a better sense of what the technology's doing to the encounter. There's also user controls that are built into the user interface that allows for a, an adjustment to the look and feel of the finished medical note. There are templates that the clinician can use, based on their preferences. Importantly, we, as a byproduct of how we generate medical notes, we, in a separate file, deliver structured data, which is really important because if you think about the medical note, it's just a flat file. It's just a bunch of words that are organized around a story, the encounter. And that's very difficult to mine if you're trying to understand certain things about population health or some of your operational efficiencies if you're a healthcare provider. So having that structured data is really important. In the case of HCA, we've built APIs that go into their data lake that was built by Google, a common partner of ours, that allows HCA to mine that data for a variety of purposes. Without that structured data, they could do nothing with the, as has been the case historically with the flat files, the finished note. Product fungibility. We have a portfolio of products, as you saw, and we allow our customers the freedom to toggle across that portfolio based on their specific needs. That is unique in the industry. So it doesn't lock them into a particular product, for the term of a contract that they sign. They can go across those products based on the specific needs that they have. We are not just in the ambulatory care setting, as is most of the competitive field out there. We are also in the emergency department, and other care settings. That is also unique in the industry. It's very difficult to get into the emergency department because of the nonlinear workflow of clinicians there. We figured out how to make the technology work in that kind of an environment, and that, I think, gives us a significant time-to-market advantage. We also, as I mentioned earlier, have a bidirectional communication channel, which is really critical, not just in delivering high-quality notes, but also in our ability to deliver curated information from third parties. In October, we announced the launch of what we call our Open Network Platform, where we are gonna be delivering third-party applications through our platform to the point of care at the right moment. And that's really important because there's a lot of very important content, information that sits out there that has a very hard time figuring out how to get to the point of care during an encounter. It was our view, and HCA agrees, and I'm sure others will as well, that not requiring the clinician to proactively, you know, launch a new application, get onto a website, or dive into the bowels of an EHR to access some of this information would be a great thing if you can avoid that. So the belief was, is, that it would be better to basically wrap all of these applications into your ambient front end, where you're using the ambient conversation between the clinician and the patient, and use that as a driver for delivering passively to the point of care the important information, that the clinician needs or the patient needs, to make that encounter more effective. One example of that is, one of the partners that we signed up with is called the Sullivan Group. They've been delivering emergency department clinician, physician protocols. They've been doing this for 24 years at HCA. And they consult with most of the major healthcare enterprises in the U.S. But the way they deliver it is either through these seminars that they have with doctors that go through basically a series of decision trees of what the doctor should do in terms of ordering a lab or a test, when they encounter a particular condition. It's a very proactive requirement on the part of the doctor to go log onto a website when they're encountering a patient in the emergency room of what to do next. And so we felt, and HCA agreed, that it would be better if we could deliver that prompt passively to the point of care during the encounter. So if someone comes in with a high fever, and, you know, they've exhausted the first order of questions, the question they may have missed is, do they have lower back pain, which is really important, when someone comes in with a fever? And so that prompt would be delivered to the emergency room doctor based on the ambient conversation. It just gets fed against this database, and the appropriate notification is sent to the doctor, "Ask about lower back pain." Those are the kinds of things that we think will improve healthcare that leverage this bidirectional communication channel that we have that no one else has. And it's a legacy of how we started in this business, which was through basically a person somewhere remotely located from the clinician listening into the conversation. So we had to be able to communicate. We had to be able to pull information from that encounter but also be able to push information there. So we built an architecture around that capability. None of our competitors have that. That, I think, concludes the presentation. Can you guys ask a quick question? Where does Epic fit into that? Does Epic fit into that landscape? Is that competitive? And And where? There, there. They're about to compete. I remember. So, yeah. Well, they're the repository of the information. So we are at the point of care. We originate the data, and then it has to go somewhere, and then they house it. That's their role. Then they share it. They've got interoperability requirements with other EHRs, in theory. The bidirectional communication channel, they don't play in that space, or they don't offer that? Oh, I'm sure they do offer it, but not with respect to medical note documentation. And so if you're if you're thinking about, for example, the Sullivan Group, okay, they don't have a means of taking prompts within the EHR, you know, applying them against a database, and then delivering that back to the clinician. That doesn't exist today. But maybe they'll decide to do that, perhaps. I think it's a it's an important question you raise, and it I think it has to do with, what is the strategy of the EHRs? They're these massive players, Epic in particular. What is their philosophy of how they're gonna compete? Well, we know from Cerner that they've decided to vertically integrate and incorporate this documentation capability directly into their application. Well, that's an interesting approach, but Cerner has roughly, what, 28% market share, and it's decreasing at the expense, you know, for the benefit of Epic. Epic is winning a lot of that business. And so it's gonna be constrained by the footprint that Cerner has, which is shrinking. Epic, on the other hand, is growing, and they have a very different philosophy. And their philosophy is basically an open marketplace. They want, and I don't know what the motivation is. Maybe it's antitrust fears. I'm not sure. But they want several players to come in, either be embedded within Haiku, Haiku's version of Epic, or as a standalone, integrated through their latest APIs, which we have access to, their FHIR APIs. So we will approach we will approach Epic with both solutions, an embedded solution in Haiku, as well as an integrated solution, standalone solution, so that they they can take full advantage. The customer will take full advantage of whatever we have to offer. 'Cause you gotta remember, the the front end, the ambient front end for Haiku has a very narrow aperture in terms of what features are enabled. It's very tight. So for a big healthcare enterprise like HCA, for example, it's not an Epic customer, but a large healthcare enterprise, what we're hearing is they're gonna want the full features, for many of their physicians. In fact, probably most of their physicians. But they will offer the embedded version to the mobile version of Epic on Haiku. So we will follow both strategies. We will embed in Epic, but we will also integrate, so that we can offer our customers both. Epic. Thank you. Sure. Thanks, Steve. I've got a few questions as well. In December, you announced the launch of Augmedix Go for the ambulatory setting. How's that going? And can you talk maybe, Paul, to the gross margin potential for Go relative to the rest of the business? Sure. So, we launched, we GA'd Go for the ambulatory setting. I think it was the third week of December. We've taken orders. We're seeing, you know, good uptake of it. I think in 2024, what we're gonna experience, not just us but the whole industry, is a lot of pilots for the autonomous solution, and evaluations of those pilots. And at some point, probably towards the latter part of this year, so you know, some of these big enterprises are gonna make big commitments. But so far, the commitments are pretty, pretty small in terms of the size of pilots, 50, 100 clinicians at a time. So, on the gross margin, you know, Go's are, you know, a SaaS fully AI product. We'll have gross margins north of 60%. You know, we, we have some LLM costs and some automatic speech recognition costs in our cost of goods sold. That's why it's, it's not higher. But, you know, over time, and those the pricing of both of those is coming in. So, you know, we could see gross margins expand, you know, well beyond, you know, 60%, north of 60%. Historically, you know, our, our Live product is we've talked about having a gross margin of 50%-55%. We're already within that range. And our Notes product would have 55%-60%, maybe even higher than that, gross margins. And as that product continues to scale, we're getting closer to that range. And so with Go, and depending on the mix of our product mix, you know, we can definitely foresee a gross margin of the company overall, again, depending on mix, north of 60%. Yeah, that's great. And then maybe one more quick one for me here. So you've had a couple competitors raise during February. Abridge raised $150 million Series C value on the company at $850 million. Ambience raised $70 million at an undisclosed valuation earlier in February. Can you talk about maybe competition with each, and then what the capital flows into the space say about the opportunity here? Sure, sure. So let's keep in mind that these are relatively young companies. We've been at this longer than anybody, 12 years. We invented virtual, ambient-based medical documentation. In the case of Abridge, they have 65 people, even though they got an $850 million valuation. So they're gonna have to build a lot of infrastructure to be able to deliver the kinds of solutions at scale that big enterprises are gonna need. They also are both companies are a one-size-fits-all. So they have one product that addresses multiple specialties, but they can't provide that last mile of support that many of our customers demand that we do with our hybrid approach, where you can, on demand, if you need it, whenever you need it, swipe right and get medical documentation support for a particular encounter. They can't do that. They are a fully autonomous product. That's all they offer. We think we believe that the industry is going to, until technology becomes so great that you don't need any kind of human intervention, that human intervention will be required, and we're just letting the market decide, do you want your own resources to do it, or do you want our resources to do it? Giving them the choice, I think, is the way you're gonna win most of the business. Awesome. Well, Manny and Paul, thank you guys so much for the time. Yeah. Thanks for your time. Great. Thank you, people. Great. Thank you, people. Great. Thank you, people.