Hand it over to Bruker's CEO, Frank Laukien. All right, thank you. I'd like to draw your attention to our forward-looking statements, please. If you could go to the next slide. Or to the agenda. Why don't we start with the agenda? Okay, I'll start with the agenda. All right. Yeah, thank you very much. I'm joined by several colleagues here today. Obviously, doing this investor webinar so soon after our May 2nd earnings call is triggered by the number of exciting acquisitions that we have done lately, and we had committed to you that we would have and hold an investor event shortly after the closing of the NanoString acquisition, and here we are today. So, you'll meet the leaders of Chemspeed, of ELITechGroup, and of course, you all know Mark Munch, who acquired NanoString and is running the Bruker Spatial Biology business, as well as the NanoString group. Of course, we will give you an updated financial outlook, a medium-term financial outlook for 2027. It's an additional year. We'll comment, of course, on guidance and on other items. I'll kick things off with an overview, an update on our strategy and opportunities, and if you could go briefly to the forward-looking statements, I'd like to draw your attention to that, and I think you're familiar with that. And so any expectations are, of course, as of today, and should not be relied on at subsequent dates. So let me start my kickoff presentation here. For those of you who have not met me before, I'm Frank H. Laukien. I'm the president and CEO of the company. I'd like to give you an update about the acquisitions and some of the other acquisitions we've done, and then really also focus on our further evolution of our strategy as an emerging leader of the post-genomic era. Next slide, please. So again, this is more for those of you, there might be some new investors or potential investors who are doing work on Bruker. This is Bruker Corporation at a glance, sort of as of 2023, at nearly $3 billion in revenue. Very significant R&D investment because of the sizable opportunities we have in our portfolio transformation, in our Project Accelerate initiatives, and particularly in proteomics and spatial biology. We are a leading provider of high-value life science tools and solutions, as well as diagnostic solutions. In many of the areas where we are or have been active, we tend to have number one or number two market positions. We're very often the innovation and performance and perhaps technology leader. We really have deep expertise, not only in physics, engineering, chemistry, our roots, but we've become very much a biology company with a particular focus on this post-genomic biology and its implications of many areas of disease biology, and I will explain that later. We have transformed ourselves into a fast growth company with fast organic growth, continued rapid innovation, and profound innovation. And another one of the perhaps differentiating features of our disciplined entrepreneurial model is that we are also aiming for high return on invested capital. We think that's a sign of, of health of a company and, of course, of that your capital is deployed well. We're proud to report we're coming out of three years of consecutive double-digit organic revenue growth, including over 14% organic revenue growth last year in 2023, which we think was industry-leading, at least for larger peer companies. And even this year, obviously under more, under tougher markets, we're continue to forecast, and Gerald will speak to that, organic growth of 5%-7%, which is well above the typical market. I won't really go through our markets, but 90% of our revenues are in our scientific instruments and solutions markets, so so-called BSI. We are very much plugged into academic and government and academic medical school research. We think that's one of the big innovation and growth drivers of our ecosystem, but we're also all the way in biopharma, applied microbiology. We have a significant exposure to rapidly growing AI markets via our the green semiconductor metrology, and our industrial, which is primarily industrial research area, also has a very nice exposure to very good secular trends in green tech. We're not gonna talk about those elements very much today, but we have repositioned our company for strong secular growth trends, for very healthy markets, and we have also diversified our market risks by not having a concentration. Project Accelerate, which in its initial form started in 2017, over recent years, has become tremendously successful, accelerating our growth, accelerating margin expansion. Today, it is already over 50% of our revenue. And then in recent years, we've also achieved pretty nice geographical balance, with about one-third of our revenues coming out of the three major geographies of the world that you can see here. Next slide, please. Right, so our dual strategy has been the same, essentially, at least for the last seven years, and I'm very happy to report it's really working. We have transformed our portfolio, we have continuously expanded our margins organically, we have accelerated our growth, and we are now very much exposed to some of the very large TAMs that we wanted to grow in or expand into in proteomics and other multi-omics types. But also now, especially with the NanoString acquisition, very much and in a significant way in spatial biology. Spatial context is very important in the post-genomic era. Both areas are, in a way, central to the post-genomic era, along with interaction and structural biology, and I'll talk about that later. With that, I think we have among the most, the strongest or perhaps the strongest secular market tailwinds from the post-genomic era that I expect in the next 20 years. And so the company is now really, really well positioned. If you look at that hexagon, the yellow part, the spatial biology and single-cell biology, that we have been involved there, but it was partially aspirational. And with the PhenomeX acquisition in the Q4, and now the NanoString acquisition that marked it in Q2, that has now become a not only aspirational, but really a major part of our strategy. Again, I'll come back to that, as well as to molecular diagnostics. Our Bruker management process is really very good at integrating acquisitions. We have many successful acquisitions. The acquisition workload that some of you have asked us about, it's nicely distributed over our different divisions and different groups. We're just very, very pleased that at this point in time, with disciplined valuations, we've been able to do such very strategic acquisitions, some of them filling gaps, some of them getting us into adjacent markets, all of them repositioning our portfolio for fast growth and more margin potential. With that, again, if you could go to the next slide. As I mentioned earlier, while there are larger companies out there, we, in our markets and in our fields, very often are not only the technology, but often the market leader or a market leader. Very often, in all of the fields that you're here, that you're seeing here, we are either the number one or perhaps the number two company in our space. Certainly more than with the right to exist, but also with very good pricing power and margin potential. And it's quite diverse. Of course, it is proteomics, spatial biology, it's magnetic resonance, NMR, a lot of that goes into structural biology, also metabolism research, but also fields like atomic force microscopy, optical IR, NIR, IR, Raman spectroscopy and microscopy, X-ray diffraction. Probably fields that many of you are not that familiar with. We have a very healthy core. Our core, which we're strengthening, is as competitive as any. It has very good growth rates last year as well. It is certainly very different from the legacy cores that some other companies then have. So we have exciting Project Accelerate initiative and a very healthy core that we advance in terms of margins, in terms of market potential, in terms of market share, via our operational excellence initiatives. And yes, we do actually have an opportunities in clean tech and in AI that are unusual for a pure life science company, but our technology portfolio has also very nicely been deployed to some of these other interesting growth markets. Next slide, please. Right, here's the proof in the pudding. What have we done for you so far? We've certainly been delivering very good organic revenue CAGR from 2018 to 2023, with COVID somewhere, a slight dip in the middle, and then, as I said, three years of double-digit organic growth. The overall CAGR over that period for revenue was 8%. That's the organic CAGR. We have accelerated our EPS CAGR in recent years over that same time period to 13%. And as you will see, as a result of the acquisitions we're doing right now, and the faster organic growth will even further accelerate our EPS CAGR, but that's forward-looking, and Gerald will explain that. And last but not least, we think it's important we've all done it with excellent ROIC. That is important to us. Now, I'll give you a little bit of the teaser of what Gerald will talk about when he gives the 2027 forecast. We are on our path to we expect to exceed revenue of $4 billion and non-GAAP EPS of $4 by fiscal year 2027. But of course, that's really the wrap-up by Gerald, who will then give you greater details. So our dual strategy has been delivering, and we expect it to continue to deliver. Next slide, please. Right, this is what I mentioned earlier. Our M&A, oh, there's been quite a bit of it recently, is strategic. It's very focused. We're not a core consolidator. I really don't like that term, at least not for Bruker. It may be good for others. We're very strategic and focused, and we are disciplined. I, I call it disciplined. You may have sometimes called it opportunistic. Disciplined is when you do acquisitions at attractive valuations that allow you to have a good return on invested capital over time. Sometimes we pay full value, as we did with ELITechGroup, and others, we've been extremely fortunate, and I'm really very proud of the acquisitions that we've been able to do for PhenomeX, which we got at an excellent valuation, and in an accounting sense, it's even a bargain price. So in other words, we got it for free in some ways. NanoString, we paid a certain amount, but we certainly didn't pay $3 billion for it. So we paid for it about $400 million in something that will again lead to excellent ROIC, as Mark fixes up that business. And Chemspeed, we paid a decent valuation to add much more vendor-agnostic automation to our aftermarket assays and software business. So we're expanding in the post-genomic era, we're entering adjacent growth markets, and importantly, we have entered now some very large TAMs in diagnostics, in post-genomics, proteomics, -ology. Next slide, please. Here, I won't spend time, very much time on that. We are also strengthening the core. These recent smaller businesses or technology bolt-ons all seem very scalable under our ownership. They are distributed over various groups, from biopharma, process analytical technology, to very advanced high-end, STEM and Raman microscopy instrumentation, to clean tech markets, as in the case of MIRO or preclinical imaging, as in the case of spectral instruments. It is unusual, and don't expect that we will continue at this pace. Many of these discussions we've literally had for years. We've known these companies, and by late 2023 or early 2024, a lot of these deals came together in a way that we were pleased and could justify in thinking that we will eventually have accelerate our growth potential, accelerate our market potential, and do it with a good ROIC. Next slide. I will now move beyond the acquisitions, and on two or three slides, just outline a little bit what we mean by post-genomic era, and what it means to be well-positioned or perhaps uniquely positioned for that. That has a lot to do with the complexity in biology, which is now finally being better and better understood. It is not just that the genome is not the blueprint for life. It's a completely inaccurate metaphor that has actually been quite misleading. Of course, genomics, including epigenetics and transcriptomics, have been very, very powerful over the last 20 years. They've taken us in for a non-invasive prenatal screening to monogenic diseases, to infection disease diagnostics. Many positive things have come out of it, but at the end of the day, it's in some ways not the central molecular science that drives life and that really gets close to function, and ultimately, the phenome of a cell, or of a patient, or of a human being, for that matter. Not only are there very important other omics, proteomics, perhaps the most central, of course, lipidomics, metabolomics, looking at post-translational modifications. I don't wanna get too deep into it, but in addition, structure and interactions are very important. Spatial context is very important, studying things at the single cell level. So it becomes a very daunting complexity, but quite honestly, that always tends to be additional funding opportunity and business opportunity for Bruker. Next slide, please. This is, in some ways, another graphic that also reminds you that beyond DNA and RNA and gene expression profiling, proteomics and the many proteoforms are far more complex, are very central, and inherently are almost always heterogeneous, i.e., you need the spatial tools. Go to the next slide, and I'll wrap things up on the last slide. Actually, two more slides. Here are some of our key tools, some of them that you know on the left, the timsTOF, which is absolutely central as a platform for proteomics, lipidomics, metabolomics, for more and more post-translational modifications, but also for the interactome, protein-protein interactions, protein-drug interactions, new synthetic fields like chemical proteomics to target previously undruggable targets using targeted protein degrader proteomics. By the way, these are all mass spec fields. None of this can be done with a SomaLogic or Olink. I mean, the plasma proteomics can. All these other things are inherently things that you have to do with mass spectrometry or with our targeted microscopy and microfluidic solutions on the right. So many, many opportunities. timsTOF, very central for looking at dynamics, for looking at structure, for looking at binding, for at interactions. NMR is incredibly powerful. Our MALDI Biotyper is the first applied proteomics technology with a $300 million business in clinical microbiology using proteomic barcodes. We have been doing crystallography for a long time, also for structural biology, and of course, you may have heard from Marc previously that we had, in a small way, entered the spatial proteomics field with an excellent product called the CellScape, that will greatly benefit from the larger commercial footprint of NanoString. The major events on the right are, of course, that we acquired the single-cell biology business of PhenomeX, today, Bruker Cellular Analysis, and most recently, the NanoString spatial transcriptomics business. By the way, they also have a very nice gene expression business, their nCounter, which we really also very much like. It gets us into gene expression, into transcriptomics, without having to be an NGS company. Marc will explain further. And now I'll really wrap things up on the last slide, my last slide. This, in a way, summarizes things that I've said already. The very vast complexity of the post-genomic biology that is now really at least we understand the complexity, and we begin to understand how little we know and how important, but really only the beginning of understanding a cell or a disease, in most cases, the genomic information is. The punchline, if you take anything away from today, is that creates enormous opportunities for our industry, but probably not more than any other company for Bruker, because we are very exposed, and we've really just greatly increased our involvement in this, with this major investments in single cell and now in spatial biology. I would argue that proteomics is central. I'm getting away from saying it's as important as, as genomics. I think over time it is central 'cause it is closer to function, it is closer to the phenome of a cell or of a disease. Spatial context, spatial biology is a must to understand biology. And finally, interactome and function is the holy grail, and from SPR to NMR to other mass spec techniques that actually look at interactions or protein-protein interactions, it's still early days, but again, we're extremely well positioned. So with that, thank you very much for the opportunity for an introduction and an update, and it's now my great pleasure to introduce my colleague, Bernd Gleixner. Most of you have not met Bernd before. He's a very accomplished operations executive who joined us a number of years ago as an executive vice president of operations. But he really also, in his prior career, had a lot of background in MedTech and, would you believe it, in automation and also the commercial side of the automation business. So of course, he makes an excellent new managing director for Chemspeed. Bernd, take it from here, please. Yep. Thank you, Frank. And next slide, please. Hello from my side, and I start with a short overview. So, the closing was on the seventh of March this year. So what is Chemspeed? It was a privately held Swiss company. So, what is behind that? 25 years of R&D lab automation. So there is a modular robotic automation solution that will help or that is already helping in terms of automating complex workflows in R&D environments. That means, for example, in chemical research, pharma drug formulation or discovery, material science, clean tech, and more. On the financial side, we expect for quarter two to quarter four for this year at around $30 million, with break-even profitability, and going forward a nice growth rate and margin expansion. So as mentioned by Frank, that's kind of an adjacent market and a new term that when you add the hardware and the software, where we end up about $7 billion for lab automation and lab software market. So on the right side, you see it's about automation, digitalization. We have a mix of standardized systems and multiple interfaces to connect to third party and so on. And for sure, everything is driven by software. And on the next slide, we dive a little bit deeper into the modular assembly system. So next slide, please. Yeah, here we are. So we start in the upper left corner, dimension one. So, as you see in the middle, these are standardized formats. So dimension one is the deck setup, so kind of the base plate, so to speak, as you see there, with various pictures. You can add that, say, various racks, vials, plates, and so on, and do a kind of a Lego system and build your base plate. When we move clockwise, we come to dimension two. So next to the base plate, we always have various robots included, and we have a variety of exchangeable robotic tools. So over the last 25 years, we ended up with more than 70 proprietary robotic tools, like, for example, overhead gravimetric dispensing unit, which makes certain chemical workflows or enables certain chemical workflows. Then we move further to dimension three, third-party modularity, modularity. So Chemspeed, to a certain extent, is also an integrator. So that means we have more than 150 third-party instruments already integrated, established interfaces, and that means that we are always able to provide best-in-class technologies from third-party manufacturers as a complete solution to the customers. We move forward to dimension four. That's a software solution. So there's one software part that is focusing on the chemical workflows. So there's a lot of experience in there to have that very easy or to make it very easy to set up chemical workflows for the systems. And then for the more complex systems, we have a workflow management on the on top that the connection between different workstations can also be handled. That leads us to dimension 5, that means modular combination of the various workflow platforms to create unique solutions depending on the customer needs and scientific questions. To the next slide, please. So you see here from the left to the right raising complexity. So we start on the left with standardized solid dispensing units, for 1 example, benchtop systems, and then we move on to the right, to 1 meter by 1 meter, we call them workstations. And then you see in the middle, say, the bigger versions of that. As you can imagine, that means more functionality on the base plates, more robotic tools, bigger and more workflows. And we end up on the right side in very complex systems, where up to 50 of these work cells can be combined. And I think what is very important as we are talking about R&D labs, so you see there some rail system, so there are also gates for loopbacks included. So it's not just going from A to B, but we can also go back and forth, depending on the workflow requirements of the customer. And then we have a few arguments about why do you need automation next to the mega trends like demographics or the overall trend of digitalization. We see things like, for example, solvent-free paint in the topic of sustainability. We have batteries and photovoltaic research. Often with the regionalization, it's also a discussion about substitute materials, for example, lithium, and also compliance-driven, the workflows, for example, things like PFOS and so on. So there are a lot of reasons, and a lot of these mega trends play in our hands, that lab automation will increase in the future, and we can play a very nice role into that. So next slide, please. And here, we see that next to Chemspeed, but it is focusing on the hardware. We already have our lab software solutions, our platform called SciY. And we are talking about enabling the digital lab of the future or self-driving labs. So as I've spoken beforehand, on the Chemspeed side, you have the automation, you have the ability to build real-world workflows, to have a certain modularity, to be able to build up these complex multi-workflows in the chemical research environment. And then on the right-hand side, we have our software platform. So that's also vendor-agnostic solutions for accessing analytical data. It's a universal viewer for scientific and lab data. It's compliant solutions, which, for example, in the pharma market for sure, is absolutely necessary. That's also connected with search platform for IP and regulatory affairs, so also they're focused on pharma and other compliant markets. And then single AI-ready lab data platform, because that's often what we see as a challenge from our customers. So, everyone has tons of data, but they have to be ready to go forward and play around with AI. And then, that's also R&D lab to production, QC path environment, and leads to a lab digitalization platform. And when you have the software abilities, clean data, ready-to-use data, and you have the other hand side, the hardware, then you can support closed-loop high-throughput experimentation. So the design of experiments that can be run with AI and ML algorithms and move forward there. And with all the big questions around in this world, I think there are tons of scientific questions to be answered, and we are happy to support our customers there on their journey to their self-driving labs. And with that, thank you very much, and we can jump to the next slide, and I have the pleasure to introduce you to Christoph. Christoph is head of our new Bruker Molecular Diagnostics business. He's the CEO of ELITechGroup, and beforehand, he worked in different positions with Siemens Healthcare. He also worked with Olympus Life Science Europe, was the CEO and founder of Advalytix, and head of strategy at Infineon Technologies. He has a PhD in physics from Munich, and with that, I hand it over to Christoph, and thank you very much for your attention. Thank you so much for the introduction, Bernd. Yeah, I've been in the life sciences, and particularly in vitro diagnostics and molecular diagnostics, for a little bit more than 20 years. Let me just take you through the latest acquisitions, the latest acquisition of Bruker. I joined Bruker as of May first. Let's just look at what we do at ELITechGroup. So that next slide was actually the right one. Very good. So in the end, when you think about molecular diagnostics, it's a razor, razor blade business, and right now we have 2 razors on the market. One is called InGenius, the other one is called BeGenius. They are mid-throughput, fully automated sample-to-answer molecular systems. And to be launched in 2025, we have the larger brother of the two, which is gonna be way higher in throughput and way more automated than the current systems on the market. The installed base, as you can see, is pretty significant, about 1,300 systems in total. Just as a reference, you know, the market leaders have about 3,000 in the high-throughput segment, like Roche or also Hologic. Okay, so what is special? What's the segment that we are addressing? That's what you will learn on the next slide. One way to address and segment the market is by throughput. Fortunately, because of COVID, everybody now knows about molecular diagnostics, knows about PCR. So if you went, let's say, during the pandemic, to, through an airport, and you had to get a test done, and your result was back within an hour or so, then those tests would be run on these low-throughput point-of-care systems on the left-hand side. Market leaders are Roche, there's Cepheid, there's QIAGEN, but most importantly, there's also BioFire. On the other end of the spectrum, high throughput, you have large systems. They, you know, do probably 100,000 tests per year, sometimes even more. Very few players. The big ones are Roche, Abbott, QIAGEN, and Hologic. And then in the middle, you have systems that are way smaller. You know, Beckman Dickinson is there, and we are there as well. So what's so special about this mid-throughput segment? In this mid-throughput segments, you basically deal with parameters or with assays that are too small in volume to be high throughput and are, in a certain way, too complex to be dealt with on, in a point-of-care system. They also tend to be not time critical. Again, very much unlike what we would do in point of care. Now, when you go to the next slide, you'll sort of see what that means from a lab perspective. There's typically, you know, depending on how you count, 15-20 high-throughput parameters, sexually transmitted diseases, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, HIV, hepatitis, herpes viruses. And that's really the bulk of the test volume, and that's what the big market leaders are focusing on. On the low end of the tail, you have a large number of what we call esoteric tests. That's a total of about 50-150 parameters. To just give you a number, that's about a couple of hundreds to maybe a couple of thousands tests per annum per laboratory. And that's a very, very long list of assays. Bordetella, you know, whooping cough, various herpes viruses, meningitis, things like that. Those assays are not available from the large players, and they are also not available on point-of-care systems, yet they need to be done. And that's exactly what we do, and this is exactly the solutions that we provide. Can you go to the next one? Now, you'll see an illustration of what that really means. That's our menu that we have as CE-IVD assays here in Europe. Everything in, yeah, I would say that's orange or orange-brown, are assays that are also available by either Roche, Abbott, or both, and everything in, in blue is an assay that only we have. You can see just by the number, there's about, you know, the famous 15-20 assays that the market leaders have, and then there's a lot of stuff that only we have. So in that respect, in that sense, we don't compete with the market leaders. We are complementary to their offering. There's also another dimension to that problem, which is not assay or not parameter, but sample type, and that's something that I will explain on the next slide. Many of the viruses can, you know, be found in blood, but others can be found in spinal fluid, still others can be found, let's say, in the mouth. As you know it from COVID, there are nasal swabs, there are throat swabs, you know. You know, that's a little piece of cotton that will basically collect a sample from your nose or throat. But then, of course, there's blood. Everybody knows that, and that can be whole blood, it can be plasma, it can be serum. But then there is sort of more esoteric sample types, like spinal fluid, like stool, like sputum, like aspirates, you know, deep down from the lung. And again, the same idea here, everything in light blue are assays validated by either Roche, Abbott, or both, and everything in green are assays or matrices validated only by ELITechGroup. And again, that's another differentiator. So it's not only the much, much larger set of parameters that we offer for the assays, but it's also the much, much broader range of sample matrices that we offer. And that basically, again, defines our segment. It is everything that the big guys don't do, and the point-of-care systems, because of the complexity of the assays and because of the fact that they may be, let's say, quantitative, which is typically something that point-of-care systems don't do, and that's basically our focus. Okay, next one, please. Yeah, and that's a little bit of the history. Bruker paid about $870 million for the company. Our molecular focus really is on sample to answer systems, again, on esoteric parameters, and I hope you understand what that means. But we also have other products. Again, they are, I would say, well-targeted. They address certain, let's say, questions in the clinical setting that are not addressed by the large players like Roche, Abbott, or Siemens, or Beckman Coulter. So they would be stainers, osmometers, sweat testing, and all these products we have combined in a business unit that we call Biomedical Systems. Now, when you look at the revenue mix, about 55% of what we do, we meaning ELITechGroup, is molecular, about 45% is others and EBS. It's razor, razor blade, so most of what we sell are the razors. So our consumables fraction is 84% versus 16% for the instruments, and right now it's heavily focused on Europe. That's about 60% of the revenue to do with the regulatory landscape. But with the changes in the US that are coming up, we believe that there's also an opportunity for us potentially going forward. Okay, that was, you know, ELITechGroup in a nutshell. With that, I would like to turn to Mark Munch. I think most of you know him, and he will take you from PCR over expression profiling to spatial biology. Yeah, thank you. We'll go through the overview of NanoString, which was an asset purchase for Bruker that we closed on May sixth. If you go to the next slide, please. So many of you who follow Bruker also may follow NanoString, or some of you may not. In the lower part of the diagram is the product platform basis of NanoString. On the left is the nCounter. That's the gene expression analysis system that is not spatial, but a very valuable very precise system for targeted gene expression profiling. On the right, the GeoMx and CosMx platform, that's what comprises the spatial piece. Spatial is a very large market, a fast-growing market. I think many of you heard large TAMs over the years. I think rather than quote a TAM, just say what they have in common is the market space is large and expected to grow. We're really pleased with the NanoString asset purchase in that we. It's a company that's had a number of publications, good KOL and reference paper base that will continue to grow and that we can continue to leverage. Also has a very large install base and customer base, and that's important because there's a large consumable fraction of revenue stream that comes through these product lines, and that's very attractive for us. Next slide, please. So first, before I talk about spatial, I want to just highlight the nCounter gene expression business, as shown here. The nCounter platform touches a number of applications across oncology, neuroscience, immunology, immuno-oncology, and so it really fits our end markets really well that we are focused on. It does serve the targeted RNA-seq sequencing type market in the mid-low plex area. That's still quite a large TAM. And wanted to highlight this because we see an opportunity for some renewed growth here. Just before acquisition, NanoString had already formed a dedicated nCounter sales team to bring commercial focus to the platform. But we see the opportunity to add kind of new segments to this by adding new applications and, and new assays. So we're really excited to have this part of the portfolio. Next slide, please. Shifting over to the spatial part, there are two platforms within the NanoString portfolio. On the left, you'll see the GeoMx platform, and as NanoString has always described it, it's a great platform for tissue exploration. It operates on the kind of tens of microns level for exploring tissues, where you can move fast over a tissue survey, survey the whole transcriptome, so over 18,000 genes, but also a very high number of protein profiling, 570 proteins. This allows you to really look at tissue structures, and do great discovery work. On the right side, is then once you kind of figure out where you wanna what looks interesting in your tissue sample, you can go and look at the cellular communication networks, and this is what's required when you have to, you need- what's required is you have to go to single cell and subcellular to really understand what's happening, say, in the tumor microenvironment and what's happening on a cellular communication level, and that's the CosMx platform. Which in Q1 of this year announced the 6,000-plex RNA, also have showcased whole transcriptome there as well of, over 18,000 genes, and you can also do some, some protein work on it. So these two platforms really go nicely together and, and, and was a major strategic rationale for the acquisition. If you go to the next slide. Wanted to talk a little about what excites us technically about the platform. On the left, in the white, just talking about the CosMx, is we're really, really bought into and we think is the stronger approach, which is the hybridization-based approach for doing spatial biology, of which both the GeoMx platforms and CosMx platforms are based on. The merits of hybridization-based approaches is it's very straightforward and robust. You're not subject to the nuances of enzymatic-based protocols, which we have, at Bruker, a lot of experience with and understand those nuances. And because of this and the hybridization-based approach, it makes it very scalable and plex. As you see, the NanoString's always led in plex, and is one of the reasons why, you know, CosMx 6,000 plex now, but also showcasing, you know, whole transcriptome work. On the right, is some recent work by Professor Dulai, and I'm highlighting this because there were some work that was put out there in Q4, in December and in January, that were some uncontrolled studies, non-peer-reviewed publications of comparing the different platforms in the space of the Xenium platform, the Vizgen MERSCOPE. This study was a controlled study by Dr. Dulai, with a high number of replicates and with very controlled processing of tissue sections. No long delays between examining those sections or no, no long variable delays, and each block quality was examined for the quality by H&E stains. I really encourage you, there's a QR code down at the bottom to watch this webinar. Some of the key findings out of this webinar is you know, more transcripts detected, more genes detected. Some of you might attribute that to, well, yeah, it's a higher plex panel. And that's useful, as I'll talk about in a second. But when you look at also just the overlapping genes, and there are 119 of them, the CosMx showed higher detection efficiency, and so it's a very important aspect of the study when you have a controlled head-to-head comparison. Also, though, what comes through is plex matters. When you have the higher plex, it gives you more consistent cell typing, a better, robust cell typing, and then you'll see the robustness of the cell segmentation, and that's a very important advantage that the CosMx has. So again, I encourage you to look at this controlled-based study, and it shows a very powerful comparison. If you go to the next slide, I want to remind you all Next slide, please. That pre-existing to the NanoString acquisition, you know, Bruker, we had developed the CellScape product, which is a great platform for precise spatial proteomics. And this is a platform that has very differentiated quantitative performance that's based on the best-in-class resolution and our proprietary high dynamic range detection. Those things combine to give a best-in-class ability to see the continuum of expression in protein profiles and protein expression. And we can handle data very uniquely that others can't because of this. It's also a very straightforward technique. They're very robust. Once you start to do an experiment, you don't have any, you know, stops and starts. The technique just works on a number of tissue samples and works like a charm every time. And also, we're leveraging off a large ecosystem that comes from IHC and from flow cytometry, so the assays are very flexible. In the video they showed there, we also launched some new things, some new panels, and also a new whole slide imaging chamber, and that's world-class. That is the best, the highest field of view imaging in the industry, where you basically have unlimited edge-to-edge performance. And this slide now combines them all together and just on some positioning. And so we have the GeoMx, as I mentioned, for regional examination at the tissue level, and then going to the cell communication, cell network communication level of single-cell and subcellular systems of the GeoMx and the CellScape. These platforms are addressing different segments and are highly complementary, and I'm gonna explain it on the next slide about why this is and why they work well together. Next slide, please. So these platforms are oriented across discovery research and translational research, and they have very distinct need-based positioning across those, those research segments. One thing to keep in mind, remind you of, is the dominant, overarching need across these segments is to use pathology-compatible tissue slices. So working off pathology slides. And that, in spatial biology, puts you into a 5-7-micron world of FFPE or fresh frozen or TMA, and that's the world of spatial biology. So keep that in mind as we talk about, for example, the GeoMx. So the GeoMx gives you this region of interest or area of interest investigation, and since you are working in a 5- to 7-micron world, and cells are typically a 10- to 15-micron world, people are so happy to work in spatial because you get so much information, but they know you're slicing through structures and through some cells. So besides the strong point of, you know, fast scanning, partition engineering, the, the GeoMx is a great platform and still has a lot of legs because it gives you this averaging and robustness across the region of interest, because you can average in the tens of microns. And so, you're not actually throwing away transcript signals or protein signals. So it's a really, really robust technical approach to looking at spatial biology. Like I mentioned before, the ability to do the whole transcriptome with over 18,000 genes and also simultaneously do over 570 proteins in fast, fast scanning type ability. So that's one segment. Now, once I've discovered the interesting things I want to look at, then I want to understand what's happening, say, at a tumor microenvironment, what's happening at a cellular communication level in these cell-to-cell communication networks. And there, you need fidelity. You need fidelity, those who are gene expression oriented need fidelity in genomic expression. This is a segment where you're really focused on genomic phenotyping, and that's where the CosMx is our strong platform, leading platform for that, where, as mentioned, already launched 6,000 plex in RNA, but showcase 19,000. Yes, you can do some protein work on it, and it's very robust across all the sample types of FFPE and fresh frozen, and very accurate cell segmentation. So high fidelity for the gene expression segment, where the main buying decisions are on gene expression. This fits nicely then with the other segment at the cellular communication level, which is where you want fidelity for proteomics expression, and this is where the CellScape shines. The CellScape, as mentioned, is a best-in-class performance in terms of best-in-class resolution, and this unique proprietary high dynamic range allows you to see the continuum in protein expression, and also very flexible in assays. So we see all these platforms fitting together nicely and serving the needs for spatial biology. So we're very excited to have now this complete portfolio for spatial. Thank you. That's, that's what I want to talk about with the NanoString overview, and now I'll hand over to Gerald Herman, our CFO. Thank you very much, Mark. I'm glad to be here. Thanks for joining us today. I'm going to provide an overview of our 2024 guidance and a new medium-term outlook. So let's jump right in. If you change the slide, please. I'd like to start today with a review of the fiscal year 2024 base business guidance, which is unchanged from the guide we provided on May 2 in our Q1 2024 earnings call. As you may recall, at the time of that call, we'd already closed the Chemspeed and ELITech acquisitions and included them in our fiscal year 2024 guidance, which is reflected here on the left of the slide. Just to recall, its revenue range of $3.29 billion-$3.35 billion for the year, or organic revenue growth of 5%-7% year-over-year, with constant exchange rate revenue growth for 2024 in a range of 12%-14%. A non-GAAP EPS of $2.79-$2.84 or 8%-10% year-over-year growth. For Q2 color for the 2024 period, now, looking further into this quarter, we see strength in several of our divisions and now expect organic revenue growth in the high single digits for the second quarter of 2024 on a year-over-year basis. We continue to expect sequential improvement in non-GAAP operating margin performance in our base business in the second quarter of 2024, with significant improvement in the second half of 2024. Now, you've already heard from Frank and Mark about the exciting opportunities associated with our strategic acquisition of NanoString. As you also know, NanoString recently emerged from Chapter 11 reorganization and faces ongoing litigation. As a result, we're unable to predict their future performance in 2024 with the same degree of precision as our established businesses. Under this uncertainty, we're unable to give guidance for NanoString for fiscal year 2024, but we do offer some estimates of the likely ramp in revenue, a new cost base following its reorganization, and cost estimates associated with ongoing legal matters. These initial modeling suggestions suggest revenue greater than $80 million and non-GAAP EPS dilution of 15-20 cents over the eight-month period from May to December of 2024. You see the implied fiscal year 2024 Bruker non-GAAP EPS range with these modeling suggestions, which inherently is relatively broad. Even with our initially dilutive and strategic single-cell and spatial biology acquisitions of PhenomeX in the fourth quarter of 2023 and NanoString earlier this month, we still expect about 2% non-GAAP EPS growth in fiscal year 2024, compared to our fiscal year 2023 EPS of $2.58. Until we have further confidence in the predictability of this business, likely not throughout 2024, we will not include NanoString into our formal guidance. We hope to add NanoString to our fiscal year 2025 guidance, which we'll communicate in early February of 2025, with just some outlook implications for twenty twenty-five today. Now, on to our expectations for the medium term. Next slide, please. Before jumping into the updated, medium-term outlook for Bruker, I want to remind you about the, fiscal year 2026 financial targets we presented at our Investor Day on June 15, 2023, and those are revenue in the range of $3.4 billion-$3.6 billion, operating margin of 21%-22%, and non-GAAP EPS of $3.40-$3.70. Since that time, our business teams executed extremely well, finishing fiscal year 2023 with 14.5% organic revenue growth. As Frank noted, the third consecutive year of double-digit organic revenue growth, which far outpaces the market and our peers. We completed a number of bolt-on technology acquisitions to strengthen our core business and closed on four strategic acquisitions, namely PhenomeX, Chemspeed, ELITechGroup, and now NanoString. These acquisitions in fast-growing new end markets position us well for strong revenue and fast EPS growth in the 2025 through 2027 new medium-term outlook timeframe. Next slide, please. Turning now to our growth outlook for the next few years to fiscal year 2027. We expect to drive strong Bruker revenue growth in the 2025 through 2027 period, with fiscal year 2025 still including about $100 million in inorganic growth from our acquisitions that closed in the March-May period of 2024. You heard today from our leadership on the momentum we're building in lab automation and software, esoteric molecular diagnostics, proteomics, single-cell biology, and spatial biology. But we also expect to see healthy organic revenue growth off a well-managed core business. For our updated medium-term outlook, we expect Bruker organic revenue growth to outgrow the life science tools market, which we estimate at 4%-6% growth by 200-300 basis points annually. Accordingly, we're projecting that we will generate $4.2 billion-$4.4 billion of revenue in fiscal year 2027. Given that fiscal year 2024 has projected revenue of about $3.4 billion, this implies a three-year organic revenue CAGR of 6%-8% over the 2025-2027 outlook period. At the midpoint, we expect to add about $900 million in revenue between fiscal year 2024 and 2027. Moreover, with applying our successful and proven Bruker management process to the newly acquired businesses, improving operating leverage, increasing Project Accelerate 2.0 mix, and our continuous operational excellence drive, we expect to deliver rapid operating margin expansion even after continuing a 10% R&D investment annually over the outlook period. Our model implies a total of 280 basis points of operating margin expansion over the 3-year period, and that's after the recent single-cell and spatial biology acquisitions initially dilute our operating margins by about 300 basis points. On non-GAAP EPS, we forecast double-digit EPS CAGR in a mid-teens range, as reflected on the right side of this chart, to a level of $4-$4.30 per share in 2027. This level of approximately $1.50 EPS growth over the 3-year period is impressive after our initially dilutive single-cell biology and spatial biology acquisitions achieve near breakeven and then turn accretive to EPS by fiscal year 2027. Our forecast also projects EBITDA approaching $1 billion in fiscal year 2027, and given that we closed the PhenomeX and NanoString acquisitions at very attractive valuations, we also expect a continuation of Bruker's strong ROIC performance over this period. Keep in mind that the PhenomeX acquisition, we recorded a bargain purchase accounting gain and paid about $400 million for the strategic NanoString spatial biology business, a company with about $168 million in revenue in fiscal year 2023. We think this compares very favorable to another presently pending $3 billion proteomics acquisition in the life science tool space for a target with nearly the same amount of revenue. Next slide, please. With that overview of fiscal year 2027 outlook, I wanted to walk you through some interesting trending data for revenue and non-GAAP EPS. These charts reflect our three-year revenue and non-GAAP EPS trends in the 2021-2024 period and in the 2024-2027 period. You see that for the three-year period, 2021-2024, using the estimated midpoint for 2024, we deliver 9% three-year organic revenue CAGR and an 8% three-year non-GAAP EPS CAGR. These CAGRs demonstrate sustained high growth rates under varying market conditions and really confirm the impressive success of our Project Accelerate 2.0 initiatives and of our continuous, operational excellence drive over the period of 2021-2024. Looking forward to the new medium-term outlook period of 2024-2027, we forecast an organic revenue CAGR of 6%-8% or 7% at the midpoint, assuming that life science tools markets resume 4%-5% organic revenue growth. We also anticipate a non-GAAP EPS CAGR of 16%-17% over that 2024-2027 period, as we rapidly improve the profitability of our acquired businesses. We expect to continue to invest 10% of revenues annually in R&D to fuel our emerging leadership in the post-genomic era life science tools, and continue to deliver well above market organic revenue growth and strong non-GAAP EPS growth over the outlook period to fiscal year 2027. Next slide, please. Just to double-click for a moment on the three-year outlook period, you can see the estimated implied revenue and non-GAAP EPS growth progression across the years. While we're not guiding to 2025 or 2026 today, it's clear that we do expect to considerably exceed our prior fiscal year 2026 low end of the revenue range target of $3.4 billion already a year earlier in 2025. Also notable is that we do add about $900 million of revenue over the new medium-term outlook period. On the EPS side, on the right, our initially dilutive acquisitions closed in the fourth quarter and in the first half of 2024, along with associated financing costs, now reset our ability to hit or exceed the prior fiscal year 2026 lower EPS target of $3.40 in 2026 after all. Thereafter, as these acquisitions turn accretive, we see continued strong growth in EPS. Over the 2024-2027 outlook period, we expect to add about $1.50 in non-GAAP EPS and an EPS CAGR of 16%-17%. Next slide, please. A few additional comments on our longer-term financial goals for 2028 and beyond. We expect to continue to deliver 200-300 basis points above market organic revenue growth, as well as greater than 50 basis points of organic operating margin expansion annually, with a goal of leading us over time into the low to mid-20% range for non-GAAP operating margins. Accordingly, we have a goal to deliver 13%-15% non-GAAP EPS growth also in 2028 and for several years thereafter. Next slide, please. So just to recap and wrap up, we expect to deliver north of $4 billion in revenue and north of $4 in non-GAAP EPS in fiscal year 2027. Our medium-term outlook for 2027 is now summarized as revenue in a range of $4.2 billion-$4.4 billion, non-GAAP operating margins in a range of 19%-20%, non-GAAP EPS in a range of $4-$4.30 per share, with fiscal year 2027 EBITDA approaching $1 billion. And that concludes my remarks. Thanks very much for your continued interest in Bruker. Justin, back to you for a five-minute break and then- Yeah. Starting the Q&A. Yeah. Thank you, Gerald, and thank you to all of our panelists for those very informative presentations. So as Gerald mentioned, we'll now take about a five-minute break. During that break, if you'd like to ask a question during Q&A, we suggest that you either type your question into the Q&A box or raise your hand, and then when we return, we will start the Q&A session in about five minutes. See you soon. Thank you. All right. If our panelists are ready? We are. Go ahead. We will set up our virtual stage here. Excellent. All right, so we have several hands raised, so we'll go through those questions first. Without further ado, we have a question from Puneet. Puneet, I've unmuted your line if you'd like to ask your question. Great, thank you. Can you hear me? Great. So Frank, first of all, thanks for hosting this day and, giving us insights into, these businesses, that you acquired. Maybe first one, good to hear about the high single-digit growth in, in 2Q, but I think the key question here is about, you know, 2025 expectations. It appears that you're returning back to 2026 estimates after pulling them forward. I mean, you're ending up lower versus the prior guidance you had for EPS for 2025. So maybe could you talk about what are some considerations that you thought through that could, you know, push that higher, closer to $3.40 that you initially had, or any considerations that could pose a risk to that $3.10 number that you've highlighted here? Yeah. So we never, we never said we would have $3.40 in 2025. We had said that we would get close to the lower range of a number of the financial metrics for 2025, and as you can see, we're obviously greatly, greatly exceeding on the revenue line. In fact, even the high end of the revenue line, I think we're exceeding by the lower range, I think we're exceeding by $300 million, and we're exceeding the upper range as well. We are, we thought we would, on the EPS side, we've made sure that we are obviously now have put all the moving pieces together. So the base business, there's no change in the outlook for the base business. That continues to be very solid. We made sure that we all include all financing costs, obviously, including the slightly higher interest rate that we're paying on the line of credit for the NanoString acquisition. And then we've also hopefully built in some conservatism for we're in an ongoing IP litigation side. We've had some nice successes there recently in Europe, and we just want to make sure that we're hopefully are prepared for any type of further rulings or any appeals that may become actionable and that may result in any further U.S. litigation outcomes. We hope they'll be favorable. We're optimistic, but we also want to be prepared. Got it. That's helpful. And, on, I mean, a bigger question, Frank, as these acquisitions are integrated, again, maybe can you talk a little bit about what have you learned so far in terms of where you need to take a sort of more aggressive action integration, wher e it's gonna be sort of more moderated? But I think a bigger question that I would like to ask about sort of the longer term is, now with the number of the products that you have The lines between spatial proteomics and other technologies are mixing in this, yeah, multi-omics world. Are you thinking about any different approach to commercial and how you approach this market in a more solutions-based approaches versus simply product-based approaches that you have, you know, taken in the past? Just wondering how, if you're thinking about, you know, offering these products in a more comprehensive way, to the, you know, broader customers? Well, so quite a few questions, I get it. I think, on some of your questions, I'll turn things over to Mark pretty soon. But let me just make the general observation that, of course, the automation business, Chemspeed, is all about solutions. There are some modules, for sure, there are some individual workstations, but very often it's automation and lab scientific software, and notebook, and lab digitalization solutions. So that's a poster child of modular integrated solutions. I would maybe observe that with Christoph's ELITech business, now Bruker Molecular Diagnostics, that's not one where we intend to take cost out or take cost synergies. That's a great business with beautiful growth rate and, you know, high single digit to low double digit anticipated organic revenue growth and pretty good margins. I'm sure they can expand over time as well, as Christoph manages that. And I think Christoph will mostly We can bring quite a few additional growth synergies to his business in markets like Germany, Austria, Switzerland, or Scandinavia, a few other markets where they have not been quite as strong, and we're really quite strong with our MALDI Biotyper. But after those introductory remarks, maybe I'll turn things over to Mark on maybe both the PhenomeX and the NanoString. Of course, we're selling solutions. These boxes aren't selling them each themselves. And then Mark had maybe two very different cases of what he had to do about cost and restructuring, and what he's going to do about integration. Maybe he can give you some comments. Yeah. Hi, Puneet. How are you doing? Yeah, just to maybe clarify your question a little bit, I think if you're asking, like, interoperable workflows amongst the different solutions across Bruker, yeah, I don't see that as a primary focus of the buying decision for these tools. You know, these workflows do sometimes sit, say, in oncology or immunology, even oncology, neuroscience with the same customer sets, and they want to form and perform a number of tasks. And so, you know, we do now have a lot of very complementary workflows that a particular core lab or a customer set can, you know, problem solve and do discovery together. But I think if you're actually getting to interoperable workflows, I think that's somewhat of a path to mediocrity, and not necessary. It's not really a major, major buyer decision. But these platforms across Bruker in the fields I mentioned are quite complementary, and you'll find labs using many of these techniques. Does that, Puneet, explain your question? That's kind of how I interpreted it. Yeah. Yeah. That's helpful. And Okay Mark, before you turn to Christoph, please, to Christoph, I mean, anything on, on NanoString, can you provide when can we get back to pre-bankruptcy revenue run rate? That's a question we've been getting from investors, too. Appreciate it. Yeah. Yeah. And then, you know, so sorry, real quick, but we do want to limit each question asker to one and one follow-up. So after that one, we'll move on to the next question asker. Thank you. Go ahead, Mark. Yeah, I'll pick that one up. I mean, clearly, you know, business going into Chapter 11, it is, you know, creates some skittishness in customers, and that's gone, you know, clearly, with our asset purchase. So, and I think that's really was the major factor, right? You want, customers want to know, is it, you know, is the company going to survive? And, yeah, clearly, we've rectified that by providing a really innovative, entrepreneurial home. You know, as you know, we're very innovative, very entrepreneurial, and so is NanoString. So I think, you know, we certainly expect to see continued climb out of some of that suppression, for sure. Yeah. Then, Christoph Thank you Did you want to touch on the ELITech opportunity for leveraging some of the commercial synergies with Bruker? So sorry, I didn't get that. Just the other part of Puneet's question around, and Frank referenced it, around ELITech potentially having some commercial synergy opportunities with Bruker, the Bruker brand. Okay. Yeah. Absolutely. So first of all, as Frank mentioned, there's a geographic complementarity. We tended to be strong in Southern Europe. ELITechGroup - Bruker is stronger in Central and Northern Europe, so that would be one. The other one, of course, is the brand. Bruker has an excellent brand name, and people do buy brand in IVD, because essentially, if you make an investment decision in a laboratory, you're in for 10, 15, sometimes 20 years. So you want to make sure that you are partnered with a respectable company that's financially sound. That's, of course, always helpful. Excellent. Thank you. And thank you, Puneet. So we'll move on to the next question asked or here, Patrick Donnelly. I've unmuted your line. Yes. Thanks, guys. Maybe just a quick one to follow up on some of Puneet's questions there on 2025, in particular on NanoString. I think it'd be for Frank and Gerald. I guess, how do you think about the visibility into the cost savings on that one? Just given a I assume there's some level of investment needed to re-accelerate the growth but at the same time, you're taking out costs. So Frank, can you talk a little bit about the near-term opportunity there and how you're thinking about that piece? Again, obviously, the visibility seems a little bit limited. But again, on the cost-out piece, how do you balance the two in terms of getting back the growth and also pulling out the cost, so it's not too dilutive in the near term? Yeah, I'll pass that on to Mark, but keep in mind that even just before they went into Chapter 11, they actually finally took a lot of cost out. Yeah, twice actually, in Q4 and then in Q1, before they went into Chapter 11. But Mark, I'll let you take that further. Yeah, just to emphasize that, there were those two cost actions that NanoString took on their own. One was in October, substantial, and then another one in the beginning of January, substantial. Now, you know, we took some more actions in the G&A functions. There's a lot of, you know, public company costs, a lot of overlapping costs that we're able to take a little bit more. So those three combined for pretty. We're pretty comfortable. I'd say we're very comfortable with our cost modeling and our cost position on that. To your other part of your question, you know, there's still substantial commercial infrastructure in place, and we already have substantial commercial infrastructure in place. You know, NanoString one is larger than what you have at CellScape. But those two combined also for now, a lot of opportunities in co-selling, co-marketing. So we're pretty comfortable with our position. Okay. It's helpful. And then maybe on the near term, you know, it sounds like 2Q, you know, is coming in a little bit better. Can you guys just talk about what you're seeing? And obviously, you had that $15 million push-out from 1Q. Is it just, you know, that that's been captured and you're feeling a little bit better about the outlook? It'll be helpful just to kind of talk through what you're seeing in the near-term environment. And then visibility, you know, obviously 2Q coming in a little bit better, the second half looks pretty conservative, so we'd love to just talk through that as well. Thank you. Yeah, Patrick, I'll take that one. And forgive us, we're not gonna do a regular quarterly earnings call. We just did one two weeks ago. Of course, we anticipate doing one, I guess, in early August for Q2. Yeah, we're, as Gerald said earlier, we're a little deeper into the quarter, and of course, now have more complete information on the first month of April than we had on May 2nd when we reported Q1. So we have a little bit better visibility. We're still only in the middle of the quarter. But yeah, we are, we are more confident in that we would have not just mid single—that was perhaps a bit conservative, and with our April data looking good in many areas, we feel, we felt we'd give some color update, 'cause I know many of you care about the quarters as well. Of course, we do, too. So we think we can grow in the high single digits organically year-over-year. An d yes, that indeed includes that, that push out from Q1 into Q2. Nonetheless, that's a good number, and I think relatively in our industry, it's a very good number. I don't want to t here's not there's nothing new that we would have to report or have great new insights into the second half of the year compared what we discussed on our quarterly earnings call a couple of weeks ago. So, more focusing on the longer-term picture today, and then, of course, update you again on the quarter when we report Q2. Great. Thanks, Frank. I'll keep to those soon. Yep. Thank you, Patrick. So we'll move on to our next question asker. Doug Schenkel, I'll unmute your line here. Okay. Thanks, Justin. Thanks, Team Bruker. Appreciate you doing this this morning and taking the questions. I have two topics. One is on margin trajectory, and then the second is just a follow-up on Chemspeed. So on margin trajectory, I believe you, and I think you have a slide on this, you previously indicated that you would be generating 21%-22% operating margin in 2026. When I look at Street consensus, you know, they reflect that assumption, and I believe, you know, most Street models included at least, you know, at most recent update, all deals other than NanoString. Today, you have a slide in there in your presentation where you're, I think, targeting at an operating margin of 19%-20% in 2027. So that's a year later. I may be missing something, but does that fact pattern lead to a fair conclusion that NanoString is expected to depress operating margin that far out by about 300 basis points, or are there other factors? Again, just tell me if I'm messing something up. But I just wanna, I wanna clarify that, because I think there's a little confusion around that. So that's the first- Very, very- And I wanna pause there, and then I'll come back to Chemspeed. Yeah, very good question. The 300 basis points is about right, but it's not all NanoString. NanoString is a significant part of that, but we also today have really pulled up everything, right? Including some of those smaller acquisitions. Almost all of these smaller sub-scale businesses that we've acquired are at lower margins than our average margin today, so they all need multiple years of good Bruker management process and, you know, growth and cost efficiencies and some synergies. So it's primarily NanoString as an initial dilution, and still some dilution into 2025 as well. But it is not only, it is also many of these other smaller businesses. Even a break-even business, Bernd's business at Chemspeed at breakeven, of course, that implies near zero operating profit margin. So even a business of that size, you know, we all need to bring these operating margins, you know, into the teens, and then eventually many of them will move into the twenties. So there's a lot of work to be done on multiple of these acquisitions. But what it means is that we, you know, Gerald cited about 280 basis points of operating margin expansion that we're anticipating with that new set, you know, deck of cards, so to speak. So that implies nearly about 100 basis points of expansion per year in 2025, 2026, and 2027 again And then we think that'll become a little bit more moderate. In our longer-term goals are sort of 50 basis points of operating margin expansion into, you know, the low into the mid-twenties. So that's the cadence. But the, I mean, the, you're fundamentally, the short answer would've been, the 300 basis points is about right. It's a little bit more than 300 basis points of the, of operating margin dilution from the, from the various acquisitions in, in at least initially in 2024. Okay. And I know I want to get to Chemspeed, but presumably, Frank, if you're gonna do this the way you did it, you're skewing the error bars where, you know, if IP spend is less, if some of these other deals accelerate, you know, a little quicker, I would assume that the bias is to the upside on these targets? You know, one would hope, of course, right? On the other hand, you know, by definition, these are all businesses that we acquired, so we have done our due diligence, we've done our work, but it's not that we have the experience of running them for two or three years. Yeah. So inherently, you have less confidence when you have existing businesses, but that you're running with your management process, with your financial analytics and goals for the first time. So it's completely prudent for us, I think, to just say, "Well, you know, we have to " We may be more conservative, but, you know, it, I think it's also totally appropriate 'cause these businesses are new to us, even though we've studied them extensively. Okay. Gerald, feel free to jump in if you have a- Sure further observation on that, but that's sort of my high-level comment. Okay. And Justin, if and you can totally cut me off, and I know, I know you would, but, Yeah, why don't you, why don't you squeeze one more in, Doug? Okay. Bernd, and again, this may take too long for the forum we're in, but I really enjoyed yours and the other presentations. They were very informative. I guess some of the follow-ups I would have would be about, you know, customer mix. You know, how much is y ou talked about some of the applied applications, some of the biotech and academic applications. So I'd love to just get a little more on, you know, mix of customer, how you think that's gonna evolve. Who are the key competitors that we should be looking at as we're learning more about this business? And then, you know, after you place- you know, make the initial placements, what's the opportunity to really drive recurring revenue over time? Yeah. Thanks for the compliments, and yeah, I think, as Frank said, it's kind of early stage, but when we talk about material science, you can imagine that also, when we talk about synergies, for example, with the nano groups, there are a lot of touch points. We also had, or before the acquisition, we already had joint projects where certain Bruker divisions plus ChemSpeed came together. And as I said, we have these general mega trends, like sustainability, clean tech, and so on. And I think, yeah, just take the field of batteries, I think, as mentioned before, and Bruker is very well positioned, and we are looking into that, to see yeah, how big the opportunity is there. I would, I would add to that, I think that was also part of your question. This is almost none of that is academic. These type of automation solutions, that tends to be biopharma, pharma, industrial industrial clean tech research, industrial battery research. So that's applied markets research. You will see some of that, but so there's very little, if any, academic or medical school funding here. So that's why the customer mix for Chemspeed will be fairly different and give us a lot of exposure into good clean tech and biopharma, specialty chemicals, but by small molecule precursors, formulation in various industries, including biopharma. Those are the type of customers. Chemspeed doesn't have that many competitors, quite honestly. If you look at the liquid handling markets, you know, there's Beckman, Tecan, Hamilton, Agilent, and the list goes on, and on, and on. When you go to powders, to solids, to automating all of that, it's actually an underserved area, and Chemspeed built out a rather unique position there. It is a vendor agnostic. This isn't just, "Oh, my God, what a great way to sell Bruker FTIR as a little benchtop NMRs." This is, sure, there'll be some Bruker detectors, but this is vendor agnostic, so there'll be many different detectors by other companies at the end of the day. But it's a pretty unique positioning for Chemspeed, and I think, but everybody else looking at liquid handling only or primarily, they're actually in a very favorable position to also have good, you know, pricing power and gross margins over time. But again, that was a little undermanaged, and Bernd is very, very experienced, and of course, also driving much better gross margin profiles, which will lead to bigger, to higher operating margins. All right. Well, thank you, Doug, for your questions. We'll move on next to Rachel, Rachel Vatnsdal. Perfect! Good afternoon, you guys. Thanks so much for taking the questions. So first up, I wanted to ask on market growth. It looks like the updated medium-term guidance assumes 4%-5% for market growth. I know that the prior guidance assumed 4%-6% market growth. So just given the environment that we're in, can you walk us through how did you arrive at those updated market growth assumptions, and really, what drove that updated view relative to the update you guys gave us in June last year? I'd have to concede that you got us- Yeah There. We use those numbers interchangeably. Yeah. We really don't know where the market will go back after this 2023-2024 dip. Before that, of course, we had market hyper growth with post-COVID, and then the biotech boom, that's also not gonna come back, at least not in, in that boom scenario. What the future market growth will be, the, the, the short answer is, please don't read anything into that. Sometimes we say 4%-5%, sometimes 4%-6%. It, it literally is don't read anything into it, would be the short answer. We, we, we're just not sure that things will look exactly as they did before COVID, after things normalize, perhaps by 2025. We just hope that we can continue to outgrow the market by 200-300 basis points. That's the thing, that's the takeaway message, rather than the absolute number. Okay, fair enough. Yeah. Then maybe- I might just add a quick point there. When we say that market growth, that's really intended to be a long-term growth, kind of cycle to cycle, not necessarily, you know, a two or three-year growth projection there. So you can kind of take that as more of a longer-term trendline growth expectation. Correct. Yeah. Okay, that's helpful. Then, maybe just on the other side of it, looking at your top-line assumptions, you're assuming 6%-8% organic, you know, the same 200-300 basis points about performance relative to the market. If we look at the updates that you guys provided today, it's layering in some of these very high growth, you know, attractive assets. So I guess, how do we think about the conservatism that's embedded in that top-line assumptions? You know, is it skewed more to the upside at this point here, or where could we see that come from? Thanks. Another fair question. You know, I think, I hope that's somewhat realistic. I mean, you know, hopefully it ends up being somewhat conservative, you know, by 2026, 2027, and so on. But I think us outgrowing the market at 200-300 basis points, I mean, I know we've been outgrowing it by quite a bit more. Well, looks like we're outgrowing it by quite a bit more organically this year, and certainly last year. So we think maybe the 200-300 basis points hopefully will end up being a little conservative in terms of relative performance. And, and that's really probably the, the number to focus on. At the end, we're giving numbers, right? We're giving, an, a mid-point, $4.3 billion, of revenue in 2027. But, you know, if the markets only went back to an anemic 2%-3% growth, or went back into a very high growth mode, 6%-8%, those absolute numbers could change more than hopefully our relative outperformance would change. So given these new businesses, many of them have this high can keep up with our growth profile. We didn't buy anything that we think will be slow-growing and a drag on growth. If anything, it could accelerate our relative growth differential even further. But, you know, the 200-300 basis points seems reasonable, and, you know, that's not a bad number if you can do it year after year and keep it up for a very long period of time. Hopefully, we can keep it up for much longer than just the next three years, for which we're giving this medium-term outlook now. Great. Thanks, guys. Well, yeah, thank you, Rachel. So next, we'll move on to Mike Ryskin. Mike, I'll unmute your line here. Thanks. Can you guys hear me? Yep. Great. Great. Thanks for the presentation, guys. That was really informative. Frank, Gerald, I wanna go back to the 2025 EPS number. I just wanna clarify some things, the $3.10 you have on the slide. I realize it's sort of preliminary and kind of grayed out, you know, you've got a lot of moving pieces, but, you know, you specifically say it, you know, includes the NanoString impact, all the other deals, but at the same time, when you were talking about 2024 and the guide, you know, you were really clear that, you know, you can't really give 2024 guidance for NanoString, you know, due to the Chapter 11, due to the ongoing litigation. There's just a lot of uncertainty there. So I really just want to, you know, make it clear for that 2025, you know, roughly $310, what are you assuming for incremental cost out? You know, you—in an earlier question, you talked about how NanoString already took some cost out, but how are you thinking about the business going forward, you know, once it's integrated, once it becomes part of Bruker? Is there opportunity for, for more? All fair questions, but all kind of more, you know, forgive me, more, more something we could give you more detail once we give 25 guidance, and that's in early February 2025. So right now, it is true because we feel we cannot reasonably give guidance for NanoString for 2024, and in a way, there could still be some, you know, more - there'll be more uncertainty in NanoString in 2025 than for the other businesses. On the other hand, we also realize at some point we've got to give some guidance, right? And so we intend to do that in February, and we then intend to include NanoString in our 25 guidance, and yeah, we'll have less confidence in that than we have in our, you know, NMR or X-ray business or whatever it may be. Okay. I don't mean to be less than constructive, but there isn't really all that much more we can say, Mike, other than indeed among the, you know, we almost feel more we have a higher confidence probably in our 2027 number, and that we'll get there, but exactly the path through 2024, 2025, that's why Gerald gave some approximate numbers there. But, you know, again, this is not 2025, and certainly not 2026 guidance. Okay. 2025 has bigger error bars than 2026 and probably 2027. Normally, you'd expect the other way, 'cause one's further out, but 2025 we could still have, you know, there, there'll still be things that are uncertain about NanoString as. But we endeavor to include it in guidance next year. That's our goal. And I think after eight months of owning it, we'll feel obviously much more comfortable than today. Okay. No, that's, that actually is We'll have learned a lot more about the business. Mark will have learned a lot more about the business, and, yeah, that's- Okay. That's it. That actually is helpful, Frank. So it is just sort of a preliminary bridge to the out years, but- Yeah you know, caveating that, there's, like you said, wide error bars because there's still so much uncertainty. For 2025, I wouldn't hang my hat on those numbers, the 310 and whatever the revenue midpoint was, for 2025. Okay. Yeah, yeah. That's a helpful distinction. Okay, and then the other question I want to hit on, hopefully this is more straightforward, is, you know, I think in the presentation, you kind of, you really emphasized the transformation of the business, and you talked about Project Accelerate, how that's, you know, over half of your, of your business now is these new growth areas. You know, as you're in these new deals, the portfolio mix continues to evolve, and you continue to shift to these higher growth areas. I mean, are there other, other, markets you're considering? Are there other opportunities? You know, you spent a lot of time talking about the spatial evolution between CosMx and GeoMx Canopy. Just how do we think about that evolution going forward, and some of the other businesses there? Thanks. Yeah, thank you. That actually triggers a remark that we hadn't stressed today. It kind of permeates the discussion. We're obviously gonna have a much, a more significant, more and more significant contribution from aftermarket, from consumables, sometimes it's software service, and so on. Take Christoph's business, the molecular diagnostics, ELITechGroup is more than 80%. I think it may be more than around 85% or so. Yeah Consumables and aftermarket business. Then Mark's NanoString, now Bruker Spatial Biology, initially there's a land grab, and it tends to be, you know, lower gross margins because there's a lot of instruments. But over time, if you look at the NanoString nCounter business, well over 50%, consumables with pretty good margins. And inherently, and you hear that from, of course, a 10x and now also from us, spatial biology, very much over time will become more than 50% a consumables business with, of course, a, you know, a tends to have a more attractive gross margin profile. And that's why we think fixing up these businesses is so much worth it, 'cause that eventually also should translate into very attract Over quite a bit of time, but, you know, even beyond the 27 period, into very attractive operating margins for these businesses. Mark, do you want to drill any deeper with that, or you want to give an example or I think the only thing I'd add is, you know, in spatial, for example, it's still relatively early innings, so you know, this high-growth segment. But, you know, as a market, that market's pretty early still. So there's like a fair amount of runway in that. Yeah, right. Mike, Mike, Mike, my only addition is that proteomics is becoming. I think proteomics is becoming the central science, targeted. You know, I think it's even more predictive in many ways than gene expression. One has to do gene expression, but proteomics is more meaningful. Proteomics, you know, it's no longer one field, it's now 10 fields as you peel the onion. There is the bulk proteomics, there's plasma proteomics, there is single-cell proteomics, there are these synthetic chemical proteomics, where we modify something, targeted protein degraders. We're getting into intact, and native, and proteoforms. So proteomics, glycoproteomics, so we have now a vice president of glycobiology solutions. Most of that is glycoproteomics. So there are so many subfields that exist or that are emerging, and some of them may enhance the overall size of proteomics even greater. So that doesn't necessarily imply additional acquisitions, but deploying and refining our tools, adding the consumables, adding the software, adding the workflows, and we've done a lot of that. For instance, US HUPO in March, there was no new instrument, but there were considerably improved solutions for immunopeptidomics, which is a close relative technologically to proteomics, and it's very important in immuno-oncology research. We also had some glycoproteomics and glycopeptide workflows, for which you need different consumables, different automation, different chromatography, and then very much different software, our new GlycoScape software. So a lot of the pieces we have now, yet it is still. The opportunity isn't just there to harvest. I mean, it's gonna be very, very steeply uphill for the next 20 years, which is why we continue to invest in, you know, very significantly in R&D. But the opportunities are, if anything, they're just getting more and more exciting than the proteomics that I may have looked at four or five years ago. Proteomics is huge and central, is sort of my additional message here. Thank you, Frank. Thanks. Thank you, Mike. Next up, we'll move on to Dan Brennan. Dan, I'll unmute your line here. Go ahead. Great, thank you. Can you hear me? Yep. Terrific. Thank you. Thanks for doing this. Maybe first, just on NanoString, if you could I have trouble with your microphone. Obviously, could you give us some color just on spatial pat- Oh, sorry, you can't hear me? Can you hear me? We can hear you now, yeah. No? Go ahead. Okay. You can start answering your question. Yeah. Sure, yeah. I was just wondering on the, you know. It sounds like we'll get a lot more color when you guide for 2025 on NanoString, but just could you give us some thought on how you consider the patent outlook there? You know, obviously, they had a couple of wins in Europe on CosMx, but, you know, we have the US CosMx case coming up in the fall, and I know the patents that they cited in Europe, I think, were different than the US case, and also, you have the 10x Genomics patent lawsuit. So just how you got comfort with it, and just any thoughts around, like, the scenario analysis if, you know, the, you know, these US cases go against them? Yeah, I'll take that. So, clearly, I'd just say we understand the business of spatial pretty well, and we're very not only business savvy, but pretty technical savvy, so we That formed a really good basis. We did, yeah, we did significant legal due diligence, obviously, before, you know, making an offer and completing the asset purchase. And, there's always some legal risk, but as you note, you know, in terms of the patents being asserted in those cases, there's been a couple of favorable, you know, outcomes there, both in the chronological order, the UPC statement and ruling, and then recently in the German patent court. So, you know, we're not gonna talk about, it's probably pretty obvious we can't talk about any open cases and, and, you know, comments on our legal strategy or probabilities of outcomes. That's never gonna be in a position to do that for open cases. But, you know, if you just looked at the momentum that occurred there in, in Q1, you know, I think that would give you an idea. I mean, this is all attorney-client privileged, so, you know, we're not gonna. We obviously couldn't discuss it and, you know, because of that. So it's just one of these things that we cannot really delve into any more deeply. Got it. Okay. And then maybe Frank, just on the, you know, the pace of M&A, obviously, you've picked up material here. You know, you've always been, you know, acquisitive with some tuck-in deals, but, you know, the size of the deals and the pace seem like they've picked up. You know, Accelerate seems to be moving along quite well. You've got all this favorable proteomics long-term funding, you know, kind of at your back. But I'm just wondering, like, was there a proactive move here to kind of step up the pace here because you felt, you know, either the base business opportunity or just you know, you felt that you were capable now, having added maybe to the team? I'm just, I'm just wondering, 'cause it doesn't, you know, it does introduce some more uncertainty, obviously provide some nice upside as well, but just- Yeah Anything you could speak to about the strategy here? Yeah, no, I mean, Mark and I, and, you know, with support from Gerald and occasionally the board, have very much been looking into how can we greatly accelerate our entry and get, you know, much more critical mass in single cell biology, and then in spatial biology, in spatial single cell biology. Yes, we had a play there, but it was rather small and, you know, this gives us a chance to not spend 10 years catching up, but being one of the, you know, one of, one of the top three significant players in, in the spatial biology or top, top two in the spatial transcriptomics here, and that, of course, was very attractive. I mean, we're, you know. So that we've been very clearly searching, of course, quietly, searching for an opportunity to greatly accelerate by, you know, by a decade, essentially, that very important field of spatial biology, where we had a technical foothold, but not enough presence and not the market presence either. We were a totally different story, but we were very, very pleased. You know, as you know, we've built up a very nice franchise with a MALDI Biotyper and clinical microbiology, but it doesn't do virology at all. It does fungi, and it does bacteria and some parasites. We had a rather small footprint, you know, again, in molecular diagnostics with the Hain acquisition, which has some, you know, specialization in tuberculosis and non-tuberculosis mycobacteria, and fungi. Anyway, and then we were so impressed with this, you know, very clever tier two strategy that Christoph and ELITechGroup have been pursuing, where many others have failed or have tried to go, you know, full frontal assault against Roche, Abbott, and Hologic, and that didn't seem like a good idea. But if you can complement it and find niches with that esoteric testing, with throughput testing, and so on, they really built a very nice business with a good margin profile, good growth rates, clearly a right to exist, very complementary. Sometimes the big, the big boys, so to speak, they bid their high-throughput systems, and then they also specify an esoteric system for one of the big labs. So it's, that, that's just As much as we love the MALDI Biotyper, we're having two legs on the ground in infectious disease diagnostics was just a huge acceleration to what we could do ourselves organically in molecular diagnostics. We didn't have a sample to answer system, and we hadn't figured out that nice niche that Christoph had not only figured out, but then developed so beautifully with a nice installed base. So there we were, we observed and we learned, and this business had been shopped around during COVID, but nobody knew how to value it, and during COVID, it spiked. And now it's just now it's post-COVID times, and it's a very nice business. So, and some good management talent and a nice team. So that was just a very good. You know, not everything is post-genomic grand strategy, but it's just, that's just really good business, and it just really greatly stabilizes our diagnostics business. And in the aggregate, just makes, you know, makes diagnostics at least, I mean, just about 15, maybe eventually going towards 20% of our business. That's, that's really healthy for a company that really hadn't been in diagnostics, well, 10, 15 years ago, and so that's a nice acceleration of that. And yes, we do like that vendor-agnostic automation, vendor-agnostic lab digitalization and scientific software. That's an emerging strategy. It's not even very specifically yet been mentioned, but as we, as we saw those opportunities with the smaller software businesses, and then the larger, very differentiated Chemspeed, that isn't like all the other liquid handling companies who have good markets and bigger markets, but it has a very, very nice niche. So it's, it's, it's all good. Yeah. Perfect. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you, Dan, very much for your question. Next, we'll move on to Jack Meehan. Jack, if you're ready, we'll unmute you here. Thank you. Good morning, guys. Wanted to ask a little bit more about ELITech. So this was the largest of the deals you guys announced, just bringing the InGenius system to launch. So I think maybe this is either for Christoph or for Frank. One of the slides talks about the consumables not being backwards compatible. Can you talk about how long it takes to bring a full menu to market and, you know, like, how that cadence looks like? And then kind of understand, like, you want to be positioned as a tier two player here, you know, but obviously the big guys are trying to push that direction as well with some of the esoteric tests. And I just look, you know, the footprint's a little bit bigger than Panther, the throughput's about half. I guess, like, how, you know, how do you you know, as the big guys move your direction, how are you going to, you know, is that the best strategy, I guess? Okay. Yeah, sure. I can answer that. Let's maybe start with the second part. Of course, it's, you know, the boundary is moving, but it's moving very, very slowly. I mean, when you look at the track record of big guys, they typically add 1, maybe 2 parameters a year. And think about the fact that there's probably 100 parameters out there, and all of them have an inherent growth rate, plus there's always new bugs coming, new viruses. So that's one. The other one is technical capability. Very often, these large systems just do not lend themselves to certain sample types, for example. It's just impossible to run them on the systems without clogging and other problems. A third one is, let's say, the increasing inefficiency of large systems when you run infrequent samples, because very often you have to flush, you have to run controls, you have to run calibrators. And then the whole system wasn't designed for that. It was designed for high throughput, very few parameters. It's a little bit like, can you pull a trailer with a Porsche? Yes, you can, but that may not be the smartest move. So that's one. The other thing is, when it comes to the compatibility of InGenius, BeGenius, and then the new system, InGenius 3.0 So first of all, the reagents are always the same, so there's no difference. And that will allow us to be very, very fast in adding menu to new systems, and it has actually done so already for the transition from InGenius to BeGenius. And the reason is that technologically, the inside of the system is more or less always the same. It's just rearranged and reconfigured differently. And that allows you to only do a bridging study. You don't have to go all the way back and do everything. You just need a subset of the tests and validations that you typically do in order to validate an assay. And that, of course, accelerates the development process tremendously. So what typically takes, you know, five, six years, we can probably do within one to three years, depending on how many parameters we want to do. So when and when we say consumables, that is true. The consumables are the same between InGenius and BeGenius. The higher throughput system will have slightly different consumables. The way to think of that is, whatever you had as consumables for InGenius and BeGenius. InGenius are sort of glued together so that you have fewer handling steps in the robotics. I hope that answers the question. Yeah, great answer. Jack, do you have a follow-up? I'll leave it there. I'll let others pop in. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, Jack. So next up, we'll have Dan, Dan Arias. Good morning, guys. Thanks. Maybe, Mark, a question on NanoString nCounter, specifically. It sounds like you see some application expansion that can help you sort of reinvigorate the growth profile there. I mean, NanoString had that asset for a long time, I think 15 years or so. So is it really just a function of increased investment that you think is needed? What is, what is the initial view on what you think you can do there that NanoString wasn't able to? Yeah. Yeah, it's a good question. We're not gonna tip our hand on market roadmap ideas, but generally, I can say, you know, it didn't get a lot of focus, and the product has existed. But, you know, then when spatial was evolving and coming along in the 2018-2019 period with the GeoMx and then onto the CosMx, you're given the attractiveness of the spatial markets and the growth and the size. That took basically all, a lot of the company, vast majority of the company focus. And so, didn't have a separate sales team for nCounter, you know, so you take the path of least resistance, and you sell into the more kind of sexy spatial markets. You know, especially also in R&D area as well. All we need to do there is bring back some focus to that business, and with that, we'll be able to develop some new assays. It's a great platform, by the way, as Frank mentioned, highly profitable, you know, margin profile, gross margin profile. We just need to bring some focus back into it, and we can get some growth out of it. Okay. And then maybe, Frank, if I stick on NanoString, but go back to spatial. As a follow-up to Dan's question there, are you able— Do you have a sense for at least the timing related to some of the legal events, specifically the U.S. case? I mean, I think it was mentioned there was a September timeframe that was thrown out there pre-bankruptcy. It seems like that's pretty destined to be pushed off. Is there anything that you're kind of circling on the calendar as a likely period of time for which we should think about that stuff starting back up? Thanks. Yeah, there's some delays there, and some things have been delayed because of the Chapter 11. I'll turn this one also over to Mark. I just also looked at the chat function, and there are some questions for NanoString Technologies. Remember, we didn't buy NanoString Technologies; we bought their business in an asset deal. So some of you may have been NanoString debt holders or shareholders. We cannot answer any of these questions. Some of them are in the chat, they're just not for us. But Mark, do you already have new dates for U.S., for U.S., or is that just to be determined by the courts? Yeah. No, there's no date set in the U.S. piece there, but it indeed will push back, and, you know, and will likely push outside of 2024, so. No visibility yet, but clearly delays. The courts took notice Yeah Of the Chapter 11 and kind of, I don't know, either delayed or slow-walked or took a wait and see approach. That's for the U.S. But you know, there's the UPC that case is in the fall for the U.S. So just, Frank, when you guide, when you guide to 2025, presuming it does get pushed off, the idea is that you have to include NanoString because it's been cl- you've, you've had enough time with it to where you feel like you had to do so. But the error bars around what could happen there will still be wide enough to where you'd have to, you know, account for that in some way or form. Yeah. When you know, we'll. I assume that by February 25, exactly, we'll probably include it and say, "Hey, that part, not only revenue, but also in terms of litigation or appeals outcomes," you know? I mean, whenever you have litigations or an appeal, then, you know, then there is uncertainty. But yeah, still, we try to. You know, we'll know more, and we'll try to include it in guidance, but with bigger error bars, for sure, probably in the next couple of years, right? So that's correct. Okay. Thank you. Well, I do, I do want to note that we are at 12:00 P.M. here. So I think with that, we probably will end the webinar. We want to thank everyone for joining us today. Hopefully, you found this very informative. If you do have any follow-ups, please feel free to reach out to me anytime, and we look forward to seeing all of you sometime soon. Thank you for participating. Thank you all very much, and thank you to my colleagues.