Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Berkeley Lights first quarter 2021 earnings conference call. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one on your telephone. If you require any further assistance, please press star zero. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Carrie Mendivil. Please go ahead. Thank you. Earlier today, Berkeley Lights released financial results for the quarter ended March 31st, 2021. If you have not received this news release, or if you'd like to be added to the company's distribution list, please send an email to ir@berkeleylights.com. Joining me today from Berkeley Lights are Eric Hobbs, Chief Executive Officer, and Kurt Wood, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, I'd like to remind you that management will make statements during this call that are forward-looking statements within the meaning of federal securities laws. These statements involve material risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or events to materially differ from those anticipated. Additional information regarding these risks and uncertainties appears in the section entitled "Forward-Looking Statements" in the press release Berkeley Lights issued today. For a more complete list and description, please see the "Risk Factors" section of the company's annual report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12, 2021, and in its other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Except as required by law, Berkeley Lights disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any financial projections or forward-looking statements, whether because of new information, future events, or otherwise. This conference call contains time-sensitive information and is accurate only as of the live broadcast, May 11, 2021. With that, I'd like to turn the call over to Eric. Thanks, Carrie, and thank you everyone for joining us this morning. We started the year off strong and had solid execution across our business during the first quarter. Revenue grew 35% year-over-year to $18.6 million. I'm very pleased by the performance of our team this quarter and encouraged by the increasing demand and enthusiasm we are receiving from our customers. At Berkeley Lights, we focus on major markets that leverage cells to make products, which include antibody therapeutics, cell therapy, synthetic biology, and most recently, gene therapy. To truly enable the growth of these markets, one needs to rapidly assess the relevant functions hidden in the large numbers of sequences produced daily. Linking the genome to the desired phenotype at scale is at the heart of our technology. This is extremely important to our customers, as it increases their probability of success and leads to an accelerated time to market. These functional tests become even more essential as the complexity of the end product increases. A multidimensional test and parameter optimization. Sequences by themselves have limited value and are not actionable unless a particular sequence in a cell is shown to create a valuable product, such as a cure for a disease, an enzyme, or a food protein. At Berkeley Lights, we are bringing functionally validated sequences and cells to life at an unprecedented scale, speed and resolution. Three key tailwinds continue to drive expansion across our markets. First, demand for cell-based products is growing. Second, the complexity of cell-based products is increasing, requiring more precise multifunctional assays with the highest resolution. Third, there are new therapeutic modalities, including multispecific antibodies and cell and gene therapies using DNA or mRNA therapeutics, which require precise functional validation. To benefit from these market tailwinds, we are focused on two key areas. First, we are driving our core business in existing and adjacent markets. Second, we are leveraging our technology with partnerships to expand into new addressable markets. Starting with our core business, demand was strong from both new and existing customers in the first quarter. We grew our installed base by 10 platforms to 85 systems, of which eight were direct sales in the quarter and two were attributed to the completion of milestone programs. Five of those went to new customers and five to existing customers. Today, about one-fourth of our installed base is multiple system placements, demonstrating growing technology adoption. CDMO and CRO demand remains strong as Berkeley Lights technology becomes a key offering in this market segment. In the first quarter, approximately one-third of our revenue came from the contract research and development industry and represented the largest contribution to our revenue during the quarter. Part of our technology adoption strategy is to tailor access models to specific customer segments. We do this by offering alternative access models to accommodate customers through a subscription-based approach. Initially, this approach has been focused on financing, essentially providing customers with access to a Beacon's full capacity through fixed payments over time. After further market assessment, we're introducing a second subscription model to better meet their specific capacity needs. In this model, customers will subscribe to a given capacity inclusive of all consumables, software, service, and support for their cell line development or antibody discovery campaigns. Pricing is based on campaign capacity, so customers with fewer campaign runs can cost-effectively access our technology. We believe this will increase our served available market, broaden our customer base, and drive incremental demand. We are early in the release stage, but are encouraged by the interest we're receiving so far. Kurt will walk you through some of the financial details of our new subscription approach in his remarks. We continue to see opportunities for expansion, both in existing and new customers alike, driven by increased use cases enabled by our workflows. In Q1, we announced our next-generation antibody discovery workflow, Opto Plasma B Discovery 4.0, which will be the industry's first fully integrated antibody discovery workflow from target identification to functional molecule. The placement of our platform, in combination with Opto Plasma B Discovery 4.0, will provide customers with an instant turnkey solution. We expect to release this workflow by the end of Q2. Last month, we made another significant product announcement with the launch of Opto Assure, a series of assays that will provide yield and product quality data at an earlier stage in the cell line development process, enabling better lead candidate selection over a broad set of product and manufacturing parameters. Antibody therapeutics are becoming increasingly complex. Quality issues such as aggregation and highly engineered proteins are becoming a greater challenge, with implications for drug manufacturability and patient safety. Identifying manufacturing cell lines that secrete high titers of quality product is emerging as a critical challenge in cell line development. With Opto Assure, our customers will be able to rapidly select clonal cell lines with favorable manufacturability profiles early in cell line development, leading to faster timelines, decreased costs, and the best downstream products. Opto Assure is an example of our strategy, an inherent value proposition to move quality and yield validation to the earliest possible point in the development and manufacturing process. Most recently, at the end of April, we released Opto Cell Line Development 2.1, which significantly enhances our import capabilities by adding a proprietary on-chip enrichment sort. This allows us to screen up to 20 times more cells compared to our previous Opto Cell Line Development 2.0 workflow and up to 50 times greater throughput than traditional well plates. Broader access to relevant biodiversity further increases the probability of finding that rare or best clone that will manufacture the product at the volume and quality our customers need. We are also leveraging our technology to access new markets through business development partnerships. The truly incredible thing about our platform-based technology is its broad applicability into new markets. As we approach new attractive cell-based markets, we look for the biggest problems that our customers are having and engage in business development deals with those partners to develop a solution to the problem. We jointly develop workflows, become the solution of record, and commercialize those workflows in the broader market. We have done this in cell line development with Amgen, where Beacon has become Amgen's standard platform for cell line development. We are doing it with Ginkgo in synthetic biology. Our last earnings call, we announced a $17 million deal with a global leader in gene therapy space to adapt the Berkeley Lights platform to enable the selection and manufacturing of stable viral vector producer cell lines. Viral vector producer cell lines are used across multiple therapeutic modalities such as gene therapy, cell therapy, and really any therapy using viral transfection. Today, these therapies rely on costly and difficult-to-scale transient re-expression cell lines. This is because quickly generating stable producer lines has not been proven possible with current approaches. We believe the Berkeley Lights technology will make it possible for the first time to execute multi-parameter functional tests, including viral capsid and genomic titers, without losing the live biology. Once developed, this will allow us to select stable clones in one to two weeks that will be used to create stable master cell banks similar to what is being done in cell line development for antibody manufacturing. We believe this will become the new standard for viral vector manufacturing as it significantly reduces cost, enhances manufacturing predictability, and provides a superior approach from the regulatory perspective. This partnership has progressed into the next phase, and we expect these types of partnerships to have a meaningful impact on our growth trajectory over the coming years. Finally, before I turn the call over to Kurt Wood, I'd like to share a brief update on our Board of Directors. Today, we announced that John Chiminski, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Catalent, will be joining our Board effective May 14th. John has led Catalent into a leading CDMO that today supports the introduction of 200 new products and over 70 billion doses each year. He brings deep industry and market experience and shares our passion of continuing to accelerate the discovery and development of cell-based products. The Berkeley Lights Board and I couldn't be more thrilled to have John on Board. At the same time, Michael Marks will be retiring from our board, and Greg Lucier, who currently serves on our board as a director, will assume the role of chairman. Greg has a wealth of experience growing public companies, both organically and through high-growth acquisitions in this space. I look forward to his continued leadership and guidance as our new chairman. With that, I will now turn the call over to Kurt for more detail on our financials. Kurt? Thanks, Eric. Revenue for the three months ending March 31st, 2021 increased 35% year-over-year to $18.6 million, with $13.5 million coming from product revenue and $5.1 million from service revenue. Looking at our three revenue streams, direct platform sales totaled $11.1 million in the first quarter of 2021, increasing 18% over the prior year period. Revenue from joint development agreements and partnerships was $3.1 million in the first quarter of 2021, compared to $1.9 million in the first quarter of 2020. Recurring revenue was $4.4 million in the first quarter of 2021, up 77% over the same period in 2020. The increase is a result of our growing installed base compared to the prior year period. Regionally, the strength in APAC continued into the first quarter and accounted for 45% of our first quarter revenue, followed by North America at 40%. During the quarter, we added 10 platforms to our install base, ending with 85 total placements. As Eric mentioned, eight of these platforms were direct sales and two were placed in connection with the completion of a milestone program where title of the tool passed to the customer. Gross profit for the first quarter of 2021 was $12.5 million, compared to $10 million in the prior year. Gross margin for the first quarter of 2021 was 67%, compared to 72% in the first quarter of 2020. The decline was largely driven by the cumulative impact of the two Ginkgo workflow buy downs during 2020. By executing our buy down rights on the Ginkgo workflows, we gain full commercial rights to the workflows in all target markets, which allows us to expedite the commercialization of these workflows and leverage them into new partnerships and accelerate growth. Excluding the Ginkgo impact, gross margins for Q1 was approximately 72%. We continue to expect our long-term target for gross margins to be approximately 70%. Total operating expenses for the first quarter of 2021 were $27.6 million, inclusive of $4.5 million of stock-based compensation, compared to $18.2 million in the first quarter of 2020. The increase of $9.4 million was driven by $3.3 million of stock-based compensation, $4.1 million of G&A as we transition to a public company, $1.5 million of research and development, and a half a million dollars of sales and marketing. Net loss for Q1 was $15.4 million, compared to a loss of $8.4 million in the first quarter of 2020. All net loss numbers are inclusive of stock-based compensation. We ended the quarter with a strong balance sheet consisting of $230 million of cash and cash equivalents. Turning to our outlook for 2021, we continue to expect revenue to be in the range of $90 million-$100 million, representing growth between 40% and 56% over the prior year. As we mentioned on our year-end earnings call, we expect revenues to be more heavily weighted to the back half of the year as more business development collaborations and partnerships come online, and as a result of the seasonality we typically experience in the fourth quarter. As Eric mentioned, we're rolling out a campaign-based subscription offering. This offering will recognize revenue over the subscription term compared to the upfront recognition of a typical equipment sale. As we ramp this offering, it is possible that some previously anticipated CapEx sales may transition to a subscription offering. This could impact quarterly revenues in the near term, but in turn, would provide upside to recurring and overall revenues in future periods. The potential variability between CapEx sales and subscription mix is incorporated in our revenue guidance for 2021, and we anticipate placing at least 45 platforms during the year. We do not expect any impact to our long-term gross margin expectation of 70% from the new subscription model. With that, I would like to turn the call back over to Eric for closing comments. Thanks, Kurt. We started the year with strong platform placements, continued to expand opportunities in our existing markets, and grew our total addressable market. At Berkeley Lights, we envision a future where cells are a scalable and sustainable way to manufacture the products that we need to live a long and healthy life. The Berkeley Lights platform is key to enabling this by providing precise, rapid discovery, and functional validation of biology. As we look ahead in 2021, I'm more bullish than ever about the opportunities in front of us, and I'm confident that we are well-positioned to execute our strategy to transform the market for cell-based products this year and beyond. With that, we will now open up to questions. Operator? Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, you will need to press *1 on your telephone. To withdraw your question, press the # key. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question comes from Doug Schenkel with Cowen. Your line is now open. Hey, good morning, everybody. Just a couple of financial questions. Of the 10 placements in the quarter, how many were Beacon versus Lightning, and what was the mix of subscription placements in the quarter? Hey, thanks for the question. Appreciate it. We don't disclose the breakout between Beacon and Lightning. Obviously, it was majority of Beacon. From the subscription standpoint, we had one subscription in the quarter. Okay. I guess a couple questions building off of the subscriptions. I'm doing some quick math here, so that's always a little bit dangerous, but I think it's simple enough where it does look like the ASP on Beacons, assuming if I just say, hey, nine of the 10 or vast majority were Beacon, and just divide that into your instrument revenue, it does seem like ASPs were down. If I have that right, why is that? More generally, going back to when you started the subscription program, I think we had collectively, meaning the company and the investment community, higher aspirations for the impact of the existing subscription program. What do you think hasn't worked there as well? Maybe in a little bit more detail, why does the new program put you in a better position to essentially lower the bar to adoption here and hopefully get you to that 45 placements this year? Doug, this is Eric. I'll answer the second question first, and then Kurt can come in on the other one. We look at the overall market for the Berkeley Lights platform, and one of the things that we found when we rolled out the first subscription is that although it provided our customers with the full access to the Beacon, that there was still a larger subset of customers which could leverage a different level of capacity on the Berkeley Lights Beacon. What we wanted to do was to make it as easy as possible for our customers to access our technology. By offering this newer subscription, an alternative access model, it accommodates our customers through this approach. As I mentioned, initially, their approach was focused on financing, which essentially provided customers, again, to the full access. The new subscription model better meets their specific capacity needs. In this model, our customers are going to subscribe to a given capacity, and it's all inclusive of consumable software service and support for their cell line development or antibody discovery campaigns. I think when you place yourself in the shoes of our customers in this space, they're really thinking about how do they execute their campaigns to serve their customers. This newer subscription offering does exactly that. Does that help, Doug, answer that question on the newer model? It does, and I guess, my only follow-up, Eric, would be, this seems like a smart way of essentially getting more people to use the platform with maybe less of a commitment, and I guess the hope would ultimately be that after more experience with Beacon, they would potentially use this more or make a more long-term commitment. I want to make sure I'm thinking about that right. Then, kind of building off of that before I know Kurt answers the other question on ASPs. I am curious if any of this is in part motivated by competitive dynamics with folks who are not selling instruments, but instead are offering somewhat similar services. Yeah, it's not a competitive offering. It is, in fact, we do see Our customers are doing incredible things with our platform, Doug, and it's really exciting for me to see. The more people who have access to our technology, the more innovation, not only from Berkeley Lights, but from our customers into some of these new markets that will gain traction. I think as we continue to deploy and ramp our technology, that customer-based innovation is really important, and it makes them part of the story as well. For me, it's important to see our technologies continue to roll out and ramp in the market. Okay. Doug, this new subscription is really tailored to the folks with a lower capacity need, so it's a sweet spot with what we're offering, and we do believe that it accelerates the access of that SAM, the serviceable available market for that. What we saw already is we've got good traction. After that initial subscription, we took feedback from our customers, came up with this program, and already in the pilot, we've gotten really strong interest in this. We feel good about that. Okay. That's great. Kurt, on ASP, anything interesting there? Yeah, I think what you might be missing is while we placed 10, what we mentioned in the call is two of those were essentially title transfers at $0 from the completion of a milestone agreement that we did. They'll bear the pull-through on those tools going forward. Really from a revenue-generating aspect, there was eight tools in the quarter that were direct placements. Okay. Very last one, and then I'll let others jump in here. Just looking at the funding environment in terms of company access to capital, there certainly seems like there's been no slowdown in the pace of investment, and for that matter, innovation in the field of cell therapy. Is that changing the mix of demand that you're seeing? I'm not necessarily saying that this is a huge change from trend, but I am curious if there's a pickup in interest from emerging players or, on the flip side, maybe CDMO interest is as strong as ever. I guess at a high level, what I'm asking is, where are you seeing the most interest over the last three months, and is the mix of backlog in terms of customer profile evolving at all relative to where we were last year? Yeah, Doug, in the cell therapy space, we continue to see demand for functional validation of the therapeutic entities that customers are creating, and whether that's cell therapies or mRNA therapies, right? Understanding that those therapeutics are having the function which is intended by the designer to cure the diseases that they want to cure is really important for them. To be able to see that function on patient samples in a Berkeley Lights platform with just thousands of cells is fairly interesting to our customers. We'll continue to learn more about that particular market space and support those customers as we continue to evolve the capability of these different therapeutics. Okay. Sounds good. All right. Thanks, guys. Thanks, Doug. Thank you. Our next question comes from Tycho Peterson with J.P. Morgan. Your line is now open. Hey, thanks. Eric, maybe I'll start with the cell therapy manufacturing. I know you placed your first Alpha unit in the fourth quarter. Can you just talk a little bit about discussions with clinical customers, how we think about workflow development, and just next steps? Yeah, absolutely, Tycho. Morning. Our team continues internally to make really good progress on the CTMS system. We've got our Alpha units now up and running, doing process optimization on culture, integrating different assays. That's great to see the internal team continue to make great progress on the CTMS. The discussions in the market are how do we integrate those next generation assays, and what are the critical assays that our customers are looking for in this space? Certainly, of course, the cytotoxicity assay that we have, Tycho, has certainly gained interest for our customers. We'll continue to move that forward. Again, I just want to remind everyone that in the cell therapy space, although it's a wonderfully exciting space, it also is one that has a longer burn as we get into the market and on the timeline for that to start to generate revenue. Certainly progress is being made, and I'm very excited about what the team is doing inside the company right now. Great. On the CDMO front, I know you talked about, I think, a third of the placements were either CROs or CDMOs. On the back of your viral vector deal last quarter, which was an interesting one. I think you started out trying to sell a system and it turned into a $17 million deal. Can you just talk about whether there's been follow-on interest from others around viral vector production, similar type arrangements? Yeah, absolutely, Tycho. In this particular market, Berkeley Lights enabling rapid generation of stable cell lines would be a game changer in the market. We have had additional discussions, is about as far as I think I can disclose anything on the call. We do have interest. Of course, people would love to do this. The potential opportunity is if we could make stable cell lines very rapidly, which we believe we can do, then that would change the way that this particular market operates. For us, it's very exciting because, Tycho, in antibody therapeutics, Berkeley Lights has a wonderful solution for antibody discovery and cell line development. Make no mistake, we are better than. It's a me better kind of a market. We're better than the competition in that space. In some of these other spaces, we may be the only solution in those spaces. Of course, for obvious commercial reasons, that has great interest to us. We're excited about some of these new markets that we're seeing as we continue to evolve our capabilities from our foundational markets into adjacent markets and future markets. Okay. That's helpful. Then just a follow-up on Doug's question on the new subscription model. Can you give us a sense of the types of customers you're targeting with this all-in approach? Is there a particular customer class you're going after here? Certainly the customers who are using a lower capacity, smaller CROs, CDMOs are of particular interest. It can also be large pharma companies who want to dip their toe in the water and try something first before they move on to a full purchase. We do see a large market contingent in that customer base, as Kurt mentioned, with a larger servable available market to us. I think, Tycho, oh, go ahead. No, go ahead. You're seeing a lot of companies get funding that are starting out with their own biology, want to run it but can't utilize the full capacity of a Beacon, hard to get that CapEx sale through. This provides an easy way for them to get in, and in some cases allows them to bypass an initial feasibility study because the hurdle's smaller and they go right into being able to run campaigns very quickly in a cost-effective, differentiated way. Okay. That's helpful. Last one on Ginkgo. You talked about the workflows that you've built out. Can you just talk about timelines to commercialize those workflows? Yeah. We're still on track to deliver workflows to Ginkgo this year, per our previous discussions that we had, Tycho. Collectively, these two teams are working together fantastically well. There's new innovations, there's new capabilities in the space that I'm extremely happy to see. I continue to be happy about that particular relationship and partnership between the two companies. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Tycho. Thank you. Our next question comes from Brian Weinstein with William Blair. Your line is now open. Hey, guys. Good early morning to you out on the West Coast. I guess, of the 45 placements that are in your guide, excuse me, what is the mix that you guys are thinking between the different commercial models that you're expecting? In longer term, can you talk about what your expectations are as we think about revenue longer term as to how these different commercial models will play in? I understand your gross margins are not changing, but how should we think about the way that you're planning around these subscription models longer term? Yeah. Appreciate the question. I think when we guided at least 45 placements, and in this year, the lower number of placements would correlate to the higher end of the guidance, because that would mean we're doing more CapEx sales. What we believe is the new subscription model increases the SAM and increases the unit placements. You would have a higher incremental units, but there could be, in the short term, some cannibalization rate for those customers that are on the fence of the capacity need that would trade off some of the revenue in the short term for a longer-term recurring aspect. A couple ways to look at this. If you think about the subscription model of how we're pricing it, over the five-year useful life of the tool, it's slightly accretive on a subscription on an absolute dollar basis. Obviously, though, we expect not just to break even, we drive that incremental demand that we're doing. The real driver will be as the success of that is can we drive the incremental demand in units, and we feel we can under the subscription model for that. I think as you look out in time, as we place that more and more subscriptions, you're going to see more recurring revenue come off of that. Plus you obviously have off of the existing install base on the CapEx sale, a growing consumable run rate. You saw the jump in recurring year-over-year this year as well. We would expect that to continue. It's obviously way too early for us to guide for 2022 and beyond. We do anticipate that recurring base from both subscription and the growing installed base to be strong drivers of growth in the future. I will point out, though, this new subscription plan, unlike the old one, it's all inclusive. It includes the consumables, it includes the tool, it includes the service and everything on that. This really is an all-in very simple sale process for us that allows them to run it on a per campaign basis, all included. Got it. Thank you for that. Eric, a high-level question for you. You guys have announced a lot of stuff from a technology standpoint to business model standpoint. If you take a step back, what are the key drivers, the key two or three drivers that you're looking at when you think about how this business is progressing? What are you looking at internally here to monitor all this? Yeah. Thanks, Brian. There are really three main drivers or catalysts for our business. The first is to grow the opportunity in. We talked about that through business models such as subscription, also with business development in regards to viral vectors. The second thing we're doing is expanding our biology and technology offerings. These are the new workflows, the new capabilities that we talk about, CTMS and Opto Plasma B Discovery 4.0. The third thing we're really working on is building our corporate capabilities. In addition to sales and marketing and business development, which we talked about, also building biology, our apps dev, and even into infrastructure such as our finance organization team. Those are really the three things that are driving overall, that are the three drivers for our business as we move forward. Got it. Thanks for that. If I can squeeze one more in here. We get a lot of questions about competitive dynamics and whatnot, and I know that you just addressed that the change in the commercial model was not related to competitive dynamics, and I appreciate that. What are you seeing competitively at this point in terms of other systems that are out there? Obviously, there's some that are more high profile than others, but can you just give us an update on the competitive landscape and what you see relative to how your technology is stacking up against others at this point? Thank you. absolutely, Brian. The thing that we see in the market is that we're learning is that, Berkeley Lights does functional validation or tests better than anybody else. The relevance of that is that each and every biologic modality, whether it's antibody cell therapies, gene therapies, and every gene sequence that's discovered or cell line that's engineered, each requires functional validation. I believe it can be optimally performed on the Berkeley Lights platform. For customers who are looking to accelerate their business to discover development, to manufacture whether any cell-based products, all roads ultimately lead to Berkeley Lights. I feel very strong about how we're positioned in the market right now. We'll continue to release capabilities to build our capabilities so that our customers are able to do the job that they need to do with their products. Thank you. Thanks, Brian. Thank you. Our next question comes from Tejas Sawant with Morgan Stanley. Your line is now open. Hey, guys. Good morning. Eric and Kurt, just one question on the service revenue. Looks like you came in decently higher than our model. I was just curious as to what drove the uplift there. Obviously, you have the CDMO contract sort of working its way through the model. In terms of how you're thinking about amortizing that $17 million contribution over the remainder of this year and into 2022, is there any sort of shift in revenue recognition thinking on that front? I'd have to dig into your model a little bit more specifically to answer unique on your model. From the partnership, we're not seeing a change in the revenue recognition that we outlined earlier from the viral vector deal. We obviously announced that it's going into the next phase. We obviously had some revenue recognition for that in the first quarter, which is positive. That arrangement's going extremely well. Eric mentioned the demand we're getting from others inbound coming in, obviously nothing formalized to announce, but we are seeing a fair amount of traffic come in from that. We feel good about that. Consumable recurring run rate's up, the service type specifically line within the recurring, I would say, was a normal seasonal pattern for us. Got it. Kurt, I want to go back to that comment you had made earlier in the prepared remarks around there's a certain degree to which you're expecting some of the direct installs to shift to the new subscription model here. Given your sort of subsequent remarks that the offering is essentially tailored at folks with a lower capacity need, it allows them to bypass initial sort of feasibility studies and so on, can you just walk us through why a customer who was potentially going to buy a $1.5 million-$2 million Beacon would now pivot to this model. I can understand why the old subscription model might result in some of those customers switching to a more flexible offering. From a direct install perspective, can you just walk us through the dynamics there, please? Yeah. If you look at the lower capacities, obviously the more campaigns you're going to run on a tool, the more apt you are to purchase that tool and get the economies of scale there. For some customers that have lower, let's say, 10 or less type campaigns, they're probably going to consider and say, "Look, do I want to spend the cash on that right now, and can I get the return of doing that on it? Or am I better off entering into an all-in exclusive relationship that doesn't have that same long-term commitment on there?" That's what we're seeing, is a few folks that really see the value of it, but have that lower campaign capacity need that puts them on the cusp. It's actually those customers that generally have a longer sales cycle to begin with. This alleviates that constraint of a longer sales cycle, allows them to have a way to access the technology all in, and there's likely going to be some cannibalization. I think it's a very low percentage of cannibalization, but you'll likely see some of that. The majority of the sales will be new incremental growth that we have. Did that answer your question? Got it. Yes. Super helpful, Kurt. Then a couple for you, Eric. Just on time, I think Tycho asked us around timelines for the Ginkgo workflow commercialization. I know you mentioned the partnership is on track and is working well, over what timeframe should we expect the workflow that you talked about to be commercialized across a broader customer set? Then any updates you can share on the expansion of the foundry that you have completed in the U.K. and Asia, just how that's translating into customer inbounds and pipelines in those geographies would be very helpful. Yeah. Let's answer the workflow question first, right? The workflow question, we will release those later this year, as we release those later this year in late Q4, you'll start to see us commercialize these through 2022. Okay? On the biofoundries of the labs, the labs in Asia Pacific and in the European Union, it's great to see the pictures coming back from the team, the labs being built, the systems installed, working, running with customers in the market. In the Asia Pacific area, we have an upcoming, well, have our second user group meeting this summer, looking forward to bringing customers together in APAC. As things begin to open up in APAC, we see, again, recurring and strong interest in that space. The demo lab in the European Union, the tools were just installed, I think, two weeks ago. Saw some pictures coming from Garrett over in Europe. Those are moving forward, again, running customer demos. Customers love to see their biology operating on our system, so certainly I do believe that's a great sales tool for our team members in these regions. Got it. Super helpful. Thanks, guys. Thank you. Our next question comes from Daniel Arias with Stifel. Your line is now open. Morning, guys. Thank you. Eric, can you just expand a bit about how the Lightning figures into the equation going forward? You've got the Beacon outright purchase and the Beacon subscription uptake. I'm just sort of curious where the sweet spot is for that system at this point. Yeah. As everybody is aware, Lightning's our lower capacity, less automated way to access our technology, and we continue to place Lightnings in the quarter as well. It's very interesting, we see some very interesting demand in the Lightning space, in particular, back to the question I believe was asked by Tycho, which is in the cell therapy space and understanding taking samples from patients before infusion of the cell therapy and of course, after infusion of the cell therapy. I think there's a very good fit there for Lightning in the cell therapy space. We continue to release our cell therapy workflows in that space. As we continue to move into the future, right, is there another access model for Lightning? To be determined. Right now, we continue to see, like I said, in the academic space, some pretty strong and building interest on using the Lightning in the cell therapy space. Okay. Just maybe on the Beacon and the placements that you're making today versus, say, a year ago, are you seeing the validation and the ramp-up period get shorter these days as labs get smarter and you guys sort of get smarter at bringing customers up to speed? Do you think that that's something that can positively impact the pull-through rate that you might see in, say, the first 12 months of ownership for a customer? Well, I think the key thing is Berkeley Lights continues to improve these workflows, and I do believe as we continue to develop and improve the workflows, we are going to see increase in recurring revenue. For example, Opto Plasma B Discovery 4.0 is great because not only do we have the upfront sorting capability as we come into the microfluidic environment, but we're also enabling our customers to rapidly re-express their proteins as they've discovered, and all this can be done in less than one week. As we continue to turn the crank and improve these protocols, improve these workflows, they are coming up faster than for our customers. I think that as our customers see the system, they see computer-controlled biology in action, right, they tell their friends about it, "Hey, these tools come in," right? They wheel them in, they plug in a couple gas lines, power, and the internet, and all of a sudden we're up and running Antibody Discovery workflows faster than we could ever run. That's very positive for our customers. I think it's also positive for the market. As we continue to add capabilities, we'll continue to take more upstream and downstream capability into the Berkeley Lights workflow, which will drive recurring revenues up. Okay, one more for you and then I'll hop off. On consumables utilization, how would you compare the increase in pull-through when you just look at your anchor users, Amgen, Abveris, et cetera, to some of the new buyers? Obviously, the dollar amount is higher for the big-time customers, but I'm sort of just curious whether you're seeing a steady progression towards higher utilization across the board here when you look at the various types of customers. You hit the nail on the head there. It kind of varies by segment that you go for. Obviously, part of the subscription offering we're doing is for some of those customers that have lower campaign and consumable requirements. When we look at a like-for-like basis, we actually saw a little bit of an uptick year-over-year Q1 to Q1 on the customers that were in service. Similar to a same-store sale type metric, we saw a slight uptick. Okay. Thanks a bunch. Mm-hmm. Thanks, Daniel. Thank you. Our next question comes from Paul Knight with KeyBanc. Your line is now open. Hi, Eric. Are the academic customers more oriented to the second subscription model, or are they more of a Lightning customer in your opinion? Yeah, certainly. The academics love to play, and they love to invent, and they're coming up with great stuff, Paul. They're more on the side of buying consumables. They'll buy their consumables, their reagents, and they'll play into a new space. The new subscription offering is a turnkey solution, right? Customers, I think as Kurt had mentioned, smaller startups, a certain amount of money in the bank, they need to run a number of campaigns. They know they need to execute those things in a timely manner to drive the value of their organization. Really, because the new subscription includes the consumables, the service support, the software, et cetera, for running a given number of campaigns, I think that's excellent in the commercial area. The academics love to play and tinker so much that it wouldn't suit their needs. Certainly not targeting them at this point in time with that subscription model. The success you're seeing in Asia with 45% of sales in that market, what's driving that? Yes, sure, Paul. Certainly, we saw Asia-Pacific come out of COVID earlier than the rest. Strong growth in the Asia-Pacific region is, one, due to their response to COVID. Additionally, the Asia-Pacific market is an emerging market. In an emerging market, they don't have installed infrastructure in place that they have to forego to move to a new technology. They're rapidly adopting the Berkeley Lights technology as it's the fastest and most efficient way to get to these solutions and build their pipelines. New technology can make the biggest impact in emerging markets, and so I believe that's another reason why we're seeing the rapid adoption of our platform in that space. Is Opto Assure a contract manufacturing purchase or a contract research purchase? Opto Assure, you'll see it used more in the CDMOs in our cell line development workflow. Opto Assure, the first that we've released with Opto Assure is the aggregation assay. Our customers need to know and understand whether the antibodies that they've engineered or discovered have this aggregation potential because these drugs just operate differently inside of patients. It's very valuable for our customers to know that at the point of cell line development, rather than learning that downstream while they're trying to scale things up. That would, of course, there's a lot of waste in terms of processing time and dollars spent for our customers. What we're doing is part of our strategy that has always been to take these downstream quality checks and move them as early in the process as possible so that our customers have a better product, have the best product as they move into scaling up their solution. Lastly, your sales headcount and sales headcount goal for the year-end? Yeah, we continue to drive our sales headcount up, and we had previously mentioned that we're looking to push up from 2020 through a factor of two into 2021, and we'll continue to drive sales heads and sales headcount as we move. Simultaneously, Paul, in addition to headcount, it's all about also getting efficient with our sales headcount, ensuring that we have the right marketing materials and these things and sales tools for our sales lead members to our sales leads to be able to effectively do their job. It's a balance of both headcount and process. Thanks. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.