All right. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to day one of the Stephens Investment Conference. I'm Jacob Johnson, a life science tools and diagnostics analyst here at Stephens. Not sure there's a better way to kick it off than with the team from Catalent today. We have CFO Tom Castellano and Paul Surdez from Investor Relations. Tom, Paul, thank you for joining. I'll let you kick it off with some opening comments, and then we'll launch into Q&A. Yeah, great, Jacob. Thanks. Happy to be here. Appreciate the opportunity, as always, here. Just a couple of quick comments on Catalent. We're coming off of a really strong start to our fiscal 2022 with our strongest first quarter we've ever had here, which, by the way, is our seasonally lightest quarter. We saw 23% revenue growth organically, 52% adjusted EBITDA growth. And Biologics continues to be the main contributor, but we are seeing a recovery within our SOT and OSD businesses as well. We closed the acquisition of Bettera, a $1 billion acquisition, to get into the gummy nutraceutical space here that closed during our first quarter. That's an accelerator of growth for our SOT business and takes the growth rate of that business up from 3%- 5%- 6% to 8%. So very pleased with how that business is performing out of the gate here. The integration, I would say, of that business is progressing according to our expectations there. On the heels of both the Bettera acquisition and the strong Q1, we've also raised our fiscal 2022 guidance, looking at revenue growth of 16%-21% and EBITDA growth of 20%-27% in the new guidance here that takes into consideration the Bettera acquisition, but really continued strong organic growth across SOT, OSD business units, as well as our Biologics business as well. Next, I would just say our response to COVID-19 continues to be an accelerator for our growth plans. We've brought on additional capacity over the course of fiscal 2021 that we're now putting into play and additional capacity that's coming online in fiscal 2022 on the heels of the significant, I would say, tailwinds we've seen as a result of the role that Catalent has played from a pandemic perspective. And lastly, I would say we have the strongest balance sheet we've ever had with over $1 billion of cash available, levered it three times after the Bettera acquisition, which is right in line with our long-term target and gives us significant firepower to continue to invest in the business both organically and inorganically. So with that, Jacob, as an opener, I'll turn it over to you for questions. All right. Perfect. So maybe as a starting point, I think probably the last time you did an in-person conference in San Francisco a couple of years ago, you made the case for 50% of your revenues to come from the Biologics segment by 2024. And Tom, I think coincidentally at that time, you stepped into the lead finance role in the Biologics franchise. Fast forward to where we are today, at the end of 2021, I think you've already accomplished this. Tom, you're CFO. Perhaps these are all related, but can you just talk about the evolution of your Biologics business over the last several years and kind of how that positioned you to benefit from COVID and a number of other interesting trends? Yeah. So look, I think it's a great question and a great observation. It's not related to me being in Biologics and ultimately moving into the CFO role, but I'd like to take the credit anyway. But regardless, I would say Biologics has always been an area of focus for the company pre-pandemic. I mean, we went public in 2014. We had about 10% of our business tied to Biologics. We knew that was underrepresented in terms of the pipeline of programs that were in development really across the industry. I would say as we look across the industry today, it's probably maybe 50/50 or approaching 50/50 in terms of programs that are in development being large molecule focused. And we knew we needed to make investments, and we did that both organically and inorganically. I mean, the inorganic investments that we've made in terms of adding the Cook Pharmica acquisition, which is now known as our Bloomington site, which has been the real beneficiary through the COVID pandemic, and what that business has been able to deliver has just been astounding for us as a company. But also the decisions to get into cell and gene therapy through the acquisition of the Paragon business, which is now our Baltimore gene therapy business, as well as MaSTherCell, which was our entrance into cell therapy, as well as, I would say, just organic investments that we continue to make across those areas. The typical Catalent play, Jacob, is to acquire into technologies that we don't have in the portfolio that help, I would say, fill strategic gaps, but then be able to invest organically to scale those businesses up to the status in which they are within the business, and they need to be to operate at the level we are as a CDMO. I would say that's success we've been able to generate, as well as significant value we've been able to create for the company, for our customers, for patients, for investors as a result of further organic investments. During the COVID pandemic, we brought online two dedicated vial lines within our Bloomington facility. We were able to then shift programs that we were working on out of capacity that we had online within Bloomington over to dedicated space to give us the ability to continue to grow with our non-COVID-related programs. We've also announced prior to COVID an investment we were making for a prefilled syringe line that's set to come online over the next month or so here. That was, again, an investment we announced prior to COVID because of the demand profile that we saw in programs that we had in the portfolio here, so now being able to potentially use that for COVID demand, but again, having a strong pipeline of non-COVID work to be able to fill into that as well. I didn't mention the inorganic investment that we made in terms of bringing on drug product capability within Europe through the acquisition of the Anagni facility that we have. We've also announced that we've made continued organic investments in drug product capability within Anagni, again, on the tailwind of COVID-related demand, but also now bringing on drug substance capacity within that business as well with organic investments that are underway that should start to materialize in our fiscal 2023. The last thing I'd say here in terms of investments around Biologics is on the drug substance side. We have a facility in Madison, which I would say is really our flagship drug substance facility. We brought on a third line several years ago. We've now since brought on a fourth and fifth train within that business that is starting to, I would say, ramp up and contribute to the growth profile. I would say we are focused, though, in the smaller scale side of drug substance manufacturing, some 5,000 liters single-use bioreactors primarily, so focusing on smaller, more targeted molecules and drugs that have smaller patient populations, but an area of the market that we think is growing substantially and the role that we play in that part of the business, I would say, has been a nice addition to the Biologics portfolio. So again, a lot of great inorganic investments we've made, but then really scaled those up and taking them to the next level with further organic CapEx investments that we've strategically made across the business. Yeah, a lot to unpack there. And I think I have 10 follow-ups, but maybe first just one big picture question. I think John has said the pandemic has brought you closer to some customers and allowed you to have some more strategic conversations. I think some of that's maybe with big pharma. When he talks about that, are those conversations largely on the Biologics side and focus on kind of all the capabilities you just talked about, or is it broader than that kind of across the portfolio? Yeah, I would say it's broader than that. I mean, obviously, I think a lot of the conversations we're having today are more around COVID-related work, the role we've played there, and ultimately biologics and what we've transformed that business into. But we've talked about over 100 different COVID-related programs at one time or another over the last year and a half that we were working on. Some of those were outside of the biologics business, including our SOT and OSD businesses as well, more therapeutics than I would say vaccines, but certainly COVID-related programs that we've worked with. And I would say the role that we've played in the pandemic and what you've seen Catalent be able to deliver for our customers, for patients, for the world, quite frankly, has been a business development tool in itself for us. Our brand has never been stronger. The partnerships that we have today, I would say, are more strategic partnerships with a lot of the major players than they are just supplier-customer type relationships. And I think that goes a long way here. To be able to operate in this environment with a strong operational and quality track record in the way that Catalent has, I would say, really brings upon more strategic type discussions with customers than it is in terms of Catalent working with procurement groups that are customers that are looking to find a way to find someone to do the work they needed at the least possible cost to them. That's typically not the types of relationships that we have with customers in which we're doing business with across Biologics, but really across the other dosage forms or offerings that we have in the portfolio. Got it. And then I guess Biologics is now 50% of your business, which is one segment, but it's one segment, but it's a big catch-all for a lot of things. As we think about the key offerings in Biologics in terms of traditional biologic drug product, drug substance, you've got viral vectors, you have cell therapy, and a lot of other stuff in cell and gene therapy that maybe we don't talk about as much. But is there any way to think about the relative size of those franchises? I mean, what's the largest today in terms of revenue contribution, and what could maybe be the largest kind of incremental contributor over the next 12-24 months? Certainly like Madison, which you mentioned, cell therapy you mentioned. Those come to mind for me. I'd be curious your thoughts there. Yeah. So I can give you some directional indicators around those businesses in terms of size. So our drug product business is the largest contributor within Biologics. That's our sterile fill-finish where we do vials, we do syringes, we do lyophilized cartridges, etc. That's an area that's been, I would say, the largest beneficiary from the COVID pandemic with the work that we've been doing with major customers around vaccine, sterile fill-finish manufacturing. What we've said next is our gene therapy business, which I'll unpack from cell therapy, would be the second contributor in terms of revenue contribution. We continue to invest in that business as well. That's the business that we brought online through the Paragon acquisition. And we continue to invest in terms of bringing on additional suites in our Baltimore facility. It's going to continue to grow at rates that are within our Biologics growth rate, which is that 10%-15% range, and I don't think it grows fast enough to essentially become the number one contributor of drug product. We'll continue to be the largest contributor of our Biologics business. I think the investments that we're making, though, within gene therapy have the ability to create that white space between the number two, which was gene therapy, and the number three, which I would say is our drug substance business, a little bit wider, but our drug substance business then, I would say, is the number three contributor in terms of our revenue for our Biologics segment, and then I would say our cell therapy business is a distant fourth. We're getting into cell therapy much earlier than we got into gene therapy. So it's an immature business from that perspective, but I would say an area that has a lot of growth potential and an area where we're running typical Catalent play and investing organically to scale that business up as well. And then I would say after that, we have a plasmid business, which we've taken a shot at building out organically, but have also done a small inorganic acquisition to add to that business as well. And I would say that's another potential growth area for us and contributor to the biologics revenue. Got it. That's really helpful for those of us trying to model the Biologics business. In terms of capacity additions, I think you already mentioned them, but can you just maybe unpack a little bit more? I think the big ones in Biologics right now, Anagni, drug substance, BWI buildout, maybe plasmids too, but how do you frame up capacity additions? Yeah. I would say those three are all contributors from a CapEx perspective. Right now, we're investing at higher levels of CapEx than we normally would. We're spending about 15%-16% of our revenue, a lot of that being tied to growth. I would say a normal rate for us would be somewhere in that 8%-10%, but because of the acceleration of growth, but then also, I would say, needs to continue to see that level of growth across the business. We're spending higher levels of capital, and we're seeing, I would say, pretty significant returns above what the normal sort of hurdle rates that we typically look at for this business have been also. The areas that I'd focus on from an investment perspective, the prefilled syringe business or line that we're bringing online within Bloomington, that'll be on by the end of the calendar year here. That can be especially helpful if we see a shift from vials to prefilled syringes around COVID-related vaccines, which is certainly, I would say, within the realm of possibility. I mean, think about flu vaccines. Those are typically administered through a prefilled syringe, so we can certainly see COVID move in that direction, and we have the capability and capacity to be able to continue to be a player if that's a decision that our customers decide to move towards. You mentioned the drug substance capacity that we're bringing online within Anagni. European market is an area where we're underrepresented from a DS standpoint today. The other thing I would say just in terms of a blanket statement, Catalent does not typically make, I would say, speculative investments. And we're not, if we build it, they will come type of approach. When we're deploying significant levels of capital to build out capacity or scale up capacity, we're doing it as a result of the pipeline and customer relationships that we have today. And we're staying ahead of what could be potential capacity constraints in the future as a result of programs that we have that are moving through their life cycle, ultimately getting closer to commercialization and then being able to provide the levels of product that's going to be necessary as those products make a shift from phase three development, ultimately to commercialization. So that's another area where we're seeing that type of dynamic, which is in the drug substance business within Europe. The other piece of it is we continue to invest within gene therapy, as you mentioned. We're bringing online another five suites. We've added another three to that, so eight more suites in addition to the 10 that we already have online. Again, this is a result of the pipeline we have, new programs that are coming in the back end, but also the progression of products or programs that we have in the pipeline today as they move further and further towards commercialization. So just a great demand environment. I think one of the things that Catalent has been able to do really well is take advantage of the supply-demand dynamics in the industry and stay ahead of potential capacity constraints that we could see within our network of facilities. And that has given customers more and more confidence in being able to give new programs to us, knowing that we'll be able to essentially scale up with them as needed as their programs move towards commercialization. So again, really a great demand profile that's helping us justify investments that have been seeing really high levels of return across drug product, drug substance, and gene therapy or viral vector manufacturing. Yeah. So on the last point, Tom, on BWI, I think the viral vector supply-demand mismatch kind of in terms of demand way outstripping supply. I think it's been pretty well documented, but I don't know if we've talked a lot in recent quarters just in terms of what you're seeing at the 10 suites you currently have at BWI. What's going on with the five you're building right now that kind of necessitated tacking on another three? Is there any kind of color you can give us in terms of how many suites are reserved? Like you said, you don't build at risk, right? So there's clearly something you're seeing. So what are you seeing in this is the question. Yeah. No, you're absolutely right. We're not building at risk. I mean, we certainly don't have every single suite and every single line that we have that's coming online spoken for at this point in time. But we certainly have programs based on the speed in which we're seeing things move through progression, the need to stay ahead of potential capacity constraints, and I think if there's been one negative that we've seen is we would have expected to potentially see more gene therapy products move through to commercialization than we've seen. Only a handful of products are commercially approved from gene therapy. Catalent happens to be the one CDMO that's tied to a commercially approved product. I would say that's been a differentiator for us versus the competition and one that's really helped, I would say, accelerate the pipeline as well and hence created the need to continue to invest and stay ahead of that. I think we're starting to see some really good traction across the programs we have in development in terms of moving to later stage. The increase in probability of a drug being commercially approved once it moves up to phase three is significantly higher than it is in phase one or phase two, obviously. I think the investments we're making speaks to the maturity of the pipeline we have and the advancement that we're seeing across many of the programs. So, again, I can't comment on exactly what's spoken for, where do we have reservation fees, but I would say Catalent continues to run the play of staying ahead of potential capacity constraints, but only doing that with visibility to being able to continue to grow the pipeline and essentially utilize that capacity versus building it and hoping that they will come as a result of it. One thing that kind of popped in my head when you were talking about that, so you're supporting one commercial therapy. I think that's been pretty well documented who that is. But in terms of the rest of the suites you have and the number of customers or programs you have, I can't remember you quantifying that, but is there any kind of color you can give in terms of how many kind of shots on goal are there? Yeah. No, good question, Jacob. We have somewhere north of 100 programs that we're working on today. I think it's actually probably getting closer to 150. In terms of the number of customers that make up that, I don't know that we've disclosed that, but I would say it's less than 100. It's somewhere in that 50-75 range, most likely. So significant number of programs. This is a gene therapy business, I would say, is one that really lends itself well to outsourcing. These are curative molecules or drugs. So you'll see a significant increase upon commercialization of volume. But as you cure those patients out there, it's not a drug that would need to be taken over the continued life. So you could see a winding down of volumes, but you really only need to see one or two of those hit in order to justify the investments that we've made in the portfolio just given the initial bolus of volumes that you'd see here. But it's exactly the reason why this business lends itself so well to CDMOs and why you're not seeing, I would say, a lot of innovators, especially the smaller innovators investing in significant gene therapy or viral vector manufacturing to support the pipeline. It's a lot easier to partner with someone that does this well and is known around the industry, especially one that's already navigated the potential regulatory challenges that you see in terms of getting products commercially approved, given, as you said, that we're working with one already. So I think that's been a big differentiator for us and a little bit of a tailwind that's helped further the development pipeline that we have across the business. And then back on the plasmid side, I think Delphi was the deal that brought you some plasmid capabilities in Europe, if I'm not mistaken, maybe. And then you're building out manufacturing in the U.S. Can you just talk about, one, the decision to enter the plasmid market, and two, kind of the synergies between viral vectors and plasmids? No. Yeah. Certainly, you're spot on. This is a business that we've been. I'd say your order of operations is a little off. We started with organic investments in the U.S. and then acquired into the Delphi acquisition in Europe. But this is an area that I would say is pretty fragmented outside of one significantly large player in this space. It's a key input into the viral vector manufacturing process, and we thought it made a lot of sense to be able to offer that for our customers. And we've seen some really great traction around plasmid manufacturing today and having that technology offering to our customers. And I think there's two ways we can look at this business. We're going to be able to provide for our customers as necessary, but I think there's also customers that come with the Delphi acquisition that we'll be able to continue to scale up those relationships with where we're not necessarily working on viral vector manufacturing today. So we can also look at plasmids as a separate standalone offering in terms of what we can offer. So certainly synergistic to what we do today from a viral vector, and we think there's revenue synergies we can extract from customers we're working with within viral vector. But this could also be a standalone offering that we can provide customers both in the U.S. and in Europe. Early innings right now in terms of this business as a contributor to our overall portfolio, but just another example of us getting, I would say, into things a little bit earlier here where we think we can scale up and really start to create some value. Just kind of one last question on the viral vector side. I mean, you're adding supply, but you're not alone in that. Other people are building new viral vector facilities, right? And it's for good reason because there's a bunch of demand. But I think it's one thing to build a facility. It's another to have people to staff it and actually do the manufacturing. Can you just talk about the labor perspective? I think, at least from my interest or my standpoint, just on the viral vector side and kind of Catalent's ability to find people and how is that a competitive advantage? It's certainly, I would say, a challenge that we're facing in terms of the growth that we've seen. I mean, over the last 12 months, we've hired over 5,000 people across our biologics business, including our cell and gene therapy business, but also the growth we've seen in Madison and in Bloomington and in Europe as well. We have, I would say, a very targeted talent and acquisition team that's focused on the biologics part of the market and extracting talent. Just as the COVID pandemic for us has accelerated our brand and put Catalent on the map in many ways, it's also done that from a talent perspective. Now, reaching out to people or having people reach out to us that want to work at a company like Catalent that know what we do and know the difference we've made over the last year has really been, I would say, a differentiator in us being able to hire as quickly as we've been able to. So we have, as I said, a team that's focused on this. It's a significant area for us to pay attention to because, as you said, you can bring on all the capacity you need, but if you don't have the right scientists and employee personnel to be able to run the equipment, it's useless. So big area of focus, a lot of challenges around this part of the market, but I think we have the right level of attention we're paying to this and the right process in place. As I said, what we've been able to do as a company over the last 18 months has, I think, helped really put Catalent on the map from a talent and labor perspective as well. Got it. And then I guess last question on kind of the cell and gene therapy and on the cell therapy side of things. You mentioned you bought MaSTherCell kind of earlier in the cycle than Paragon, I guess, right? But I think they were tied to a number of programs, if I'm not mistaken, and I think some of those are allogeneic. And I think if you look out the next couple of years, there's expectations we'll start to see some allogeneic therapies be approved. So can you just talk about maybe the pipeline there and how long until maybe MaSTherCell could be supporting commercial therapy? Yeah. No, it's hard to say, Jacob. I agree with everything you said there, and it's certainly been an area that we've gotten into earlier than where we had before, and I think with the growth that we've seen, the acceleration of returns we've seen on other investments, we've had the ability to get in on this a little bit earlier on, which we think is going to be a real differentiator for us, and I would say MaSTherCell had a very well-established reputation across the industry with some really great customer relationships, and I would say those customers feel even more strong about being part of MaSTherCell, being part of Catalent than they did with MaSTherCell being standalone, so I think that's been something we've certainly heeded. We've We've heard from clients. I would say in terms of how long before this adds significantly. I feel a little bit like this is similar to gene therapy in that it's only going to take one or two to really be the accelerator here to turn this into a more meaningful contributor. I can tell you we're pretty conservative in terms of what this business is contributing as part of our Fiscal 2022 guidance. We're not banking on anything big here materializing in '22 to deliver the 8%-10% long-term growth outlook we've had that we've talked about over the next couple of years here. So I think this could be a potential growth accelerator for us down the road. It's just hard for me to put a time horizon on how quickly that could be, Jacob, other than to just tell you that we're certainly not banking on any material contribution over the next sort of 12-24 months. Just to be clear, does that kind of accelerator comment, does that only pertain to MaSTherCell or is that true for BWI too? I would say BWI, we've not talked about the growth rates of this business, but this is one that's already, I would say, scaled up and contributing meaningfully to our financials as we stand today. And this is a business that we've said should be growing pretty much aligned with what our biologics business is growing at, which is that 10%-15% range overall and haven't dissected drug product, drug substance, viral vector into what the growth rates are for those individual offerings. But I would say it was certainly a reason why we were comfortable increasing our long-term outlook from 6%-8% to 8%-10%, is what we're seeing across biologics overall, including cell and gene therapy. Got it. So half hour in, we haven't really covered COVID too much. And given what happened, the news over the last couple of days, I guess I'll start off asking this. Just Omicron variant, can you just talk about your thoughts on what that is? Is Is that potentially an opportunity for Catalent? Does it not really change things? Just additional thoughts there. I think it gives us more confidence around the comments we've made and hopefully helps the street understand that we've believed from the beginning here. We're going back to our comments from my first quarter as CFO that we did, which was our year-end earnings results or release in the late August timeframe where we said we don't see a COVID cliff onsite. We're not going to talk about COVID as an individual contributor getting into our Fiscal 2022 year as a result of this being part of the base for us and having a multi-year duration in our view and variants and additional age populations. I would say the lack of progress that's really been made around vaccination rates outside the U.S. and Western Europe. I mean, I think I read over the weekend in response to the new variant from South Africa, the population that's fully vaccinated in South Africa is something like 6%. So we're still talking about single digits. So there's so much to still accomplish here from a vaccine perspective. We're contractually committed out to the end of calendar 2022 with many of the major players. We've talked about that. That gets us out of Fiscal 2022 and halfway into our Fiscal 2023. We have dedicated space for many of the major providers in our facilities. And I think just the latest news here around the variant just really plays in nicely to what our thought process is and gives us and hopefully the street even more confidence that there's no end in sight here around the need for vaccines in our view. And this is going to continue to be a multi-year duration revenue stream for us. And exactly the reason why we're not going to disclose that, just as we don't talk about any other therapeutic areas or individual customer product relationships across the rest of our $4.5 billion of revenue that we do as a company. I guess one follow-up there. You mentioned or alluded to the prefilled syringe line at Bloomington. You're building that pre-COVID. Obviously, it's coming online soon. Again, probably opportune timing. Just what are your latest thoughts or what are you hearing from customers related to maybe changes in configurations for these vaccines? Yeah. I think it's inevitable. Not necessarily that we see a shift to prefilled syringe, but that we see a shift to smaller or lower numbers of doses per vial. I think the days of mass vaccination sites are probably behind us. I think more likely now to get vaccines at local pharmacies or ultimately in general practitioner offices, etc., and I think the way that those are typically administered are through single or double-dose vials or individual prefilled syringes, so there's certainly nothing I can talk to here specifically, Jacob, around decisions that have been reached with individual customers on this other than the fact that I do think this is where the industry is headed, and I think prefilled syringes, if that's an area that our customers decide to pursue, is not a new capability for Catalent. Although we're bringing on additional capacity, this is capacity or capability that we've had in the portfolio from the start, not only within our Bloomington facility, but also within Europe as well. So we're a known provider in terms of sterile fill-finish, prefilled syringe. And it would be great if we can fill some of that new capacity with some COVID-related demand. But the reason why we made the investment was not because of COVID, as you mentioned, is because of the pipeline we had of potential programs behind the additional prefilled syringe capacity that was going to be needed in the U.S. So either way, we're happy to be bringing on that capacity and expect to see strong levels of utilization and returns on that investment as we did in the vial line investments we've made across Bloomington as well. Just one quick one. Just in terms of if we do see vaccine vial configurations change, that's maybe neutral to maybe a positive for you guys? Yeah, absolutely. I think just as a reminder, we're not paid on a dose. When we see Moderna or Pfizer or any of the vaccine providers talk about a decline in number of doses that they could see in future years, that doesn't necessarily impact a CDMO provider like Catalent on the sterile fill-finish side where we're paid on a unit basis, whether that's a syringe or a vial and whether there's 14 doses in it or there's two doses in it. So I think we could see a significant decrease in the number of doses, but still see a flat to increase in the number of units that a company like Catalent could produce here. So exactly in terms of what that means, I think there's still a lot that needs to be ironed out in terms of the specifics with our customers. But as you highlighted, I would say at a worst case, a change like that is economically neutral for the company. And I think there's certainly a chance it could be a tailwind as well. But again, there's a lot to be ironed out in terms of what that looks like going forward. But we have the capacity and the capability to be able to work with our customers and shift to lower dose per units as necessary, but then also prefilled syringes as we've talked about. One more on Bloomington. Significant amount of capacity brought online there already. But could we see you expand capacity here further at some point? I think there's a headline that you bought some land in Bloomington. So I'm just curious about that. Yeah. I mean, what Bloomington has become, I know there's several investors that have, when I was in my role leading IR for the company shortly after we did the Bloomington acquisition, we took some investors out to see that facility. And I can only tell you it showed extremely well then. But what that business has grown into and become now is incredible. It's an area where we continue to invest. The investments we've made, we've seen accelerated returns on those investments. And as a result of those accelerated returns, we've been able to put more capital to work to add further capacity across our biologics network. Bloomington is certainly an area that's become, I would say, really an industry-leading, if not the leader, in terms of sterile fill-finish capability and expertise, especially in the U.S., and an area that we'll continue to invest in provided we see the growth potential opportunity. As I said, those returns that meet the financial hurdles that we need them to be in order to justify making them. There's certainly, I would say, good line of sight. Nothing to talk about today specifically, Jacob, on that front. This is a business that I can't go through a CapEx review where we're not internally, where we're not considering further investments within Bloomington given what that business has been able to do for the company. Got it. One last COVID question. You mentioned 100-something programs that you guys have worked on. I think everybody, myself included, has been focused on the biologics side. But in SOT and OSD, can you just highlight kind of what the COVID work you've done there? I think there's more and more interest around small molecule solutions for COVID. So I'm just curious. Yeah. They've been more on the therapeutic side, and I would say treating particular symptoms or lessening symptoms related to COVID. I don't think there's anything that's moved to EUA or ultimately commercialization around that today, but it is a development revenue contributor for us across both of those businesses. I don't have anything to announce here in terms of it being a significant, meaningful contributor in the future. It certainly wasn't necessarily a driver of the decision we made to increase our Fiscal 2022 guidance, which, as I said, was partly attributable to the strength that we continue to see in the second half of the year or expect to see in the second half of the year around the further recovery of SOT and OSD. It's not really driven by COVID-related therapeutics, but it's an area that we continue to focus and just talks to the breadth of the services or offerings that we have across the portfolio, as well as the diversification of the portfolio, which I think is a continued strength as well. Maybe the follow-up there, just on SOT and kind of the increase in guidance this year, it seems, at least from my perspective, that you have some visibility into some green shoots or something there that maybe myself and my peers maybe don't have as good a visibility into. So can you just talk about what you're seeing in SOT? Is it cold cough coming back? Just anything like that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. There's an element of that for sure. I mean, we get the benefit of seeing how the cold flu season's playing out in the southern hemisphere before it hits the northern hemisphere, and I would say it's not back to normal, but it's certainly trending to be a more robust cold cough season and flu season than what we saw in the middle of the heart of the pandemic when lockdowns were underway and whatnot. We've had two consecutive quarters of strong recovery growth within our SOT business. We intentionally talked about the business has been recovering nicely, but it's still below the levels it was pre-pandemic, which shows that there's even further growth on the horizon around this business in our view. And I would say we have a great pipeline as well as some potential new product introductions that are on the horizon here that I think are expected to do pretty well here in terms of their second-half contribution. So the SOT business has seen a great recovery. And when I was asked a question on our last earnings call around the drivers of our Fiscal 2022 guidance increase in the second half of the year, I think everyone expected me to talk about biologics, biologics, biologics, and the continued tailwind from COVID. And that was really, I would say, the third item I talked through, which is more around the recovery of our SOT and OSD businesses and what we're seeing firm up there. And then obviously the COVID-related tailwinds continue to be a great contributor to growth there as well. But we're just really pleased with what we've seen from a recovery perspective. And there's also revenue synergies within SOT now that we've brought online nutraceutical capability through the Terra acquisition and entering gummies, soft chews, lozenges, etc., that I think can exist as well that could be a contributor down the road for us here. So really feel good about the recovery of this business as we continue into Fiscal 2022. Got it. We just have a couple of minutes left. And so I'll ask the one last question, which kind of dovetails with what you just mentioned. I don't think many people expected you to get into the gummy market. And I'm not sure anybody expected it to have 20% plus growth and 30% plus EBITDA margins. So clearly attractive from a financial perspective. But maybe from a strategic point of view, can you just talk about the interest in gummies and maybe expand on your comment about the synergies between gummies and SOT? Yeah. So this is an area that may have taken some investors and analysts by surprise when we announced this acquisition. But I can tell you it certainly wasn't a surprise to anyone within the four walls of Catalent. Gummies has been something that we've always been interested in. We gave it a shot to build that capability organically. And we had challenges. We weren't able to do it despite all the scientific expertise we have and technical know-how within softgel and oral technologies. We weren't able to master two things. One, the taste and flavor profile. And two, the texture and consistency profile of these. And both of those are obviously necessary to have a good experience for the consumer in terms of having or taking a gummy. So an area we've always tried to get into. We knew who the players were out there. And we knew which of the players we were interested in and ran the typical Catalent play of cultivating a relationship with the owners of that business and try to find ways to turn a deal that wasn't necessarily transactable into something that's transactable. And we were able to do that. And it took us several years to get to that point. But it adds a capability, as you said, a nutraceutical market that's growing at 20% plus EBITDA margins that rival our biologics business today within this capacity-constrained environment, one that we've stayed ahead of the capacity constraints in terms of investments that Terra has made and what we continue to do with that business now that we've owned it. And I would say there's some low-hanging fruit here in terms of how that business is run as well versus how Catalent would typically run one of our sites. And I think we can extract some value out of it as a result of that as well. Lastly, in terms of revenue synergies, look, there are customers that have been asking for gummy capability that we weren't able to offer them. We now are able to offer them that. I think that's been really well received with existing customers within SOT. And then there's customers on the consumer side that Terra is working with that may not have been working with Catalent prior to this that we think can open up a relationship there as well and look to provide other expertise there within our SOT segment. So just a really great addition, a strong-growing market, capacity-constrained, and one that we're really happy to have as part of the portfolio. And as you said, the financial profile of the business speaks for itself. Perfect. Well, we started with biologics. We'll end on gummies. Tom, Paul, thank you so much for joining us on day one of the Stephens Conference. And thanks for everybody who listened in. Thanks, Jacob. Appreciate the time. It's great.