Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. All participants are present in listen-only mode. Welcome to today's conference call to discuss Nano Dimension's 2021 Full Year and Fourth Quarter Results. On the call with us today are Yoav Stern, Chief Executive Officer, and Yael Sandler, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, may I remind our listeners that certain information provided on this call may contain forward-looking statements and the safe harbor statement outlined in today's earnings press release also pertains to this call. If you have not received a copy of the press release, please review it in the investor relations section of the company's website. Yoav will begin the call with a business update, followed by a question and answer session, at which time Yael will answer questions regarding the fourth quarter 2021 financial results. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. March 31st, 2022. I would now like to hand over the call to Mr. Yoav Stern. Mr. Stern, would you like to begin? Sure. Thank you very much. Thank you everyone for participating and good morning. It is a news release with a letter to the shareholders which is quite long. I'm not sure all of you or part of you had the attention span to read it, but I recommend that you will because everything I have to say is written there. I've done it before, and I found out that being all this information in front of you is very helpful when I speak with investors later because those who are seriously diving into the business of the company read it, and they are very educated. That's point number one. Just in case you don't have the time, then I'll try to just summarize really quickly and leave more time for questions. When you ask something relating to what I've either written or didn't write, I will dive into that based on your interest. In general, it's a very exciting news release obviously. If we are saying that we expect to be this year, 2022, 200% above last year, 2021, we were 209% above 2020. It's exciting. If you combine this together and multiply it properly, then in 2022 we may be 10 x over 2020. That's exciting. It's ahead of my expectations, I must admit, as much as revenue is concerned, and we'll speak about the numbers specifically in a few minutes. I'm very encouraged. I'm not, however, under the illusion to say that we now can rest on our laurels because now we have close to if you multiply Q4, $30 million of revenue or more just by multiplying Q4 by four. No. We measure our advancement not by only revenue or margins, eventually this is of course the goal, but by what is happening internally in the development and what we see in the market, and those are also very exciting news. With the new technologies that we merged from our acquisitions into our product lines and we merged the sales organizations and the leverage we get from that, and what we see out there as much as prices of M&A, and we've looked by now at 300 companies over the last 2 years. No, less than two years because I didn't have money. Probably a year and a quarter. Let's say since July, August 2020 until today. It's about a year and a quarter, a year and a half. We have a whole department, not huge by the way, not 25 people, just three, four people that are searching the market for the technologies and the companies that will be interested, and what we see is prices that's going down. That justifies our patience under pressure over the last year of not to buy neither SPACs nor things that sounds like a SPAC, but it doesn't sound so well to say it. We didn't do it, and from the companies we said no to over the last year as much as synergistic acquisitions, I think, maybe 10%-20% were sold at the prices that we didn't want to buy and 80% were not, and by now the prices are down. Do I think the prices are down and time to buy? I don't judge if the prices are down and are going to be down more. I'm not able to judge the market. Nobody actually can, and we all know that. What I'm judging is if the prices are low enough in so much as what am I buying and is it worth the money and can I make this worth more by paying $10 million or $100 million for it? Because if I pay $100, it should be worth $200 and more within a year, a year and a half. If not, then $100 is too much. That's just an example. Let's dive now that we can, and somebody asked me in last call when we're going to speak about numbers. Let's dive into numbers a little bit. I'm not going to go through the balance sheet because it speaks for itself and it's strong and the numbers are pretty much clear. Let's speak for a second about the profit and loss, the P&L. By the way, just let me tell you. Somebody asked me in the last call, or maybe somebody that called me, when are we going to publish our cash flows? Because it's important to show how strong our cash flows are, cash flow positions are. He was right, and I promised that we're going to do it. The cash flow is published today in the 20-F, not in the news release. The 20-F was published today as well. Starting from next quarter, we will also publish the cash flow on the news release itself. On a quarterly basis, you'll have also cash flow. If you need it for today, you can open it at 20-F, and it's all there. As much as the profit and loss statements, I'll just point few highlights for you. First of all, the gross margins are about 46%. Not high enough, and the reason they are lower than what I think I know they should be and what it is on our high tech machines that we're selling is because it's a mixture of gross margins between many product lines. Some of them are lower gross margins. Some of them from the acquisitions are lower gross margins, so the average is 46%. When I'm speaking about the gross margins, I'm taking out this line, the third line in P&L, it's called cost of revenue amortization of intangible. That's not part of business cost of sales because it's non-cash expense from needing to amortize all kind of things like historical capitalization of R&D, which we don't do anymore, and other things that Yael can give you details. I'm looking at the real gross margins, which are the revenue in percentages minus the real cost of goods sold. 46%, I believe, is an average. I'm quite satisfied with the gross margins on a per product line. I'm not going to disclose it because it's very competitively sensitive. Obviously, the components that we sell, or the sub-assemblies, are at lower gross margins, and the full machines that we sell are much higher gross margins than the materials that we sell are also much higher gross margins than 46%, I'm saying. Oh, and by the way, I will mention this. Important note. Don't ask me when we come to the Q&A, please, what is our revenue based on what was the revenue of what companies we acquired separate from companies we didn't acquire or product lines that we sell, or sold before. We don't have this breakdown. It's very competition sensitive because we sometimes intend to sell different machines as a package deal and combine them together for the customer, and we don't want the customer to know exactly what the machines, which they're coming from, product line, and what are we selling them in a different market with different prices when they're standalone. The company by now is so well integrated. Again, this is also ahead of my expectations. I'm not happy the integration is a fait accompli. I still think we should. We are increasing the integration, but the product lines and the sales of the acquisitions are merged. The early acquisitions are already merged in R&D as well and to operations and manufacturing. It's a real one company with a product line that is sold to different verticals, most of them overlapping, and some of them are even in package deals. That's the reason we're not going to disclose this sensitive information like this. Anyhow, moving on down the P&L, the profit and loss. Notice the research and development. Contrary to what may sound, I think I spoke about it many times in the calls before, it's a very important note that the research and development went up from $9.8 million in 2020 to $42 million. I'm rounding the figures. Because this is the manifestation that the money we raised is put to work, because this is what's going to create and is creating the value that will or is going to create the return. It's not so simple to increase $10 million - $42 million. A, because there's issues of hiring top scientists and type A researchers, both in the U.S. and Europe. Very difficult. Secondly, when you grow R&D, you can't just grow it by hiring people. You have to grow it in a way that you create the right culture, and you dive into the right research projects. The fact that our R&D is four times bigger by now is very encouraging from year to year. Sales and marketing, same thing. We declared mid-2021, actually Q2, that we are now going to start to invest in a go-to market. Cost, the expense went up from $6.6 million to $22.7 million. It's a manifestation of the go-to-market network and distribution channels that we built in North America and in Europe. We didn't invest in Far East because political risks that we find in China, and it's another subject. Most of our investments are in the United States, Europe, and now, these days, we have the first showing in Australia in a very big electronics show, so it's very, very exciting. That's on the go-to-market sales and marketing expense. The G&A numbers is high, but if you notice, it's actually similar to last year, $20 million-$19.6 million. It's because the G&A didn't change a lot and the number is high, not because we have so much expenses in G&A. We don't have $20 million paid out to either employees or rental. Is a lot of it is non-cash expenses. Yeah. Yael can speak about it if you want. The non-cash expense, including granting of stock options to new employees, which is we hired a lot of people. Remember, we hired 350 employees over the last 11 months. Actually, more than that, probably 360. This is the expense. As we hire, we try not to increase their salaries or pay them, overpay them in order to bring the Type As, but we give them stock options, and that's the non-cash expense that falls into the G&A. The number in cash is actually much, much, much lower, and if somebody's interested can ask Yael later. Overall, the operating loss is seems like big, right? $220 million. Here's another one that we were obligated to do, to write down $140 million, because of the regulation of the SEC when they compare the price of the share to the value of the non-cash, non-tangible assets that the company has. Again, if you want details about it, what is it combined from? Obviously nothing is in non-cash, so that's the write down. It happens once, not once a year. Once in many, many years, because once you write it down, you don't need to write it down anymore. We pretty much wrote down everything to whatever was non-tangible to zero. Yael can give you more details if you have questions. The net operating loss is actually $83 million, not $220 million. The net comprehensive loss after tax is actually less. It's $60 million. This $60 million, interestingly enough, if you go up and look at the research and development expense and the sales and marketing expense, combine them together, it is $63 million. $63 million of investment are showing at the total comprehensive loss of $60 million. Of course, by GAAP or IFRS, this is a loss, but it's actually an investment. $48 million investment in R&D and 20-something million dollars investment in building up the marketing and sales. I like that. I think at this point, after talking for about 15, 20 minutes, it would be much more effective for all of you for me to open it up for Q&A, and I would be happy to answer your questions. Please. Thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we'll begin the question and answer session. If you have a question, please press star one. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are using speaker equipment, kindly lift the handset before pressing the numbers. Your questions will be pulled in the order they are received. Please stand by while we pull for your questions. I repeat, if you have a question, please press star one. The first question is from Rich Brun. Please go ahead. Hello. Good morning. Yoav? Hi. Hi. It's Rich Brun. You talked a little bit about gross margin. Just hypothetically speaking, with the Type A acquisition, what profit margin would you be anticipating from such an acquisition? I don't know. It's like asking me what type acquisitions are, what do you expect to pay? It depends. The acquisitions we are buying from Type A are now changing. We are because of the prices of PCB manufacturers that by now are going down and the complexity that we found out after a lot of due diligence, the Type A that we're looking at are usually margins of high-tech equipment manufacturers and are definitely above 50%, but some of them are 55%, some of them are 80%. This is the range. It depends what's the size of the company, what's the stage of the company in its product life cycle. If it's a more mature company and higher revenue, the product life cycles are usually at a later stage, and their gross margins are usually closer to the 55%. If they are an earlier stage or certain product lines of those companies are in earlier stage, then their gross margins are usually 65%, 68%. It depends. Okay. No, I just asked because when I looked over some PCB manufacturers, you know, just assuming that a Type A acquisition will be a PCB manufacturer. A lot of the gross margins are really, really low, somewhere like under 10%. That's why I'm just asking. Yeah. PCB manufacturers' gross margins are at best 30%. I'm speaking about gross margins. Net margins are much lower. You're right, 10%. No, I'm speaking about gross margins. We are slowly shying away from this search. It's already half a year, three quarters of a year. To remind you, I spoke about it when PCB manufacturers like this, once the SPAC mania started or even before, were sold for 10x to 12x, actually more, 11x to 13x EBITDA. These businesses with 30% gross margins should not be sold for more than 6.5x EBITDA. I refuse to pay those prices. When these prices persisted, I shied away. More than just the price, we found out that the PCB that we liked, and the numbers were better, and the gross margins were 35%-40%, were all only the PCB players that had manufacturing in China. We were very close to a couple of deals, and then I decided not to do it. I felt that the Chinese situation is getting worse, and we're not going to do it. I don't expect it to happen soon. Okay. Just a follow-up question. When it comes to 'cause you know, we're focusing on complex geometries and miniaturization, have you looked into any type of advanced functional materials that deal with energy storage for those products that may have complex geometries? You mean energy storage? You mean heat dissipation? What do you mean energy storage? Energy storage as far as, I guess. Battery? Something that can be built. Yeah. Correct. Right. The battery market, which is very hot, obviously, with all what's happening with the electric vehicles and more than that, is very hot, problematic, but good. The battery printing market is embryonic and starting people. There's about three or four companies trying to get into that. We looked at them. They're still very small, with materials issues, but materials is our business. So the answer to your question is, we're looking at it carefully because it's even more premature than the general three-dimensional additive manufacturing electronics. I believe in that market, I believe the battery market will lend itself or vice versa. The additive manufacturing will lend itself to the battery market in a beautiful way, subject to materials, as you said smartly. As you know, more than a third of our research are material scientists, so we're very, very focused on that. All right. That's good to hear. As much as you can reveal, how was your trip to Austria? First of all, Vienna is a beautiful city, and we've already been there three times over the last two months. We've seen a very interesting phenomenon in the Austrian environment. I don't wanna talk about it too much because I don't want my competitors to know. The University of Vienna has developed over the last few years very, very strong research and knowledge in people in the area of materials and of actually additive manufacturing and advanced digital industry. We identify that, and we are in very, very strong contact and network. If you see my travel schedule and the reason I'm there so many times, you can guess why. All right. Thank you for your time, Yoav. Thank you. The next question is from Ram Gredi. Please go ahead. Yeah. Are you expecting any new analyst coverage in the near future? Sorry, expecting what? New analyst coverage. Any research, any brokerage firms coverage in the near future? I see. If I'm expecting, I'm not at the point of knowing to say expect, but I'm working on it. I know there's interest, and I'm talking to high-quality analysts that are starting to be interested. I guess I should say you should expect that I'll be successful or I should hope that I'll be successful. It's one of my main goals that is not involved in running the company and growing its value, is to help the share, is to expose it better with knowledge, and that those are the research analysts I'm chasing. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. If there are any additional questions, please press star one. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. Please stand by while we poll for more questions. The next question is from Steve Egli of Diligence Capital Management. Please go ahead. Morning. What's your current share count at year-end? The number of shares that we have is 300- $312, I believe. $312 million. One second. We're checking it to give you the exact number. Yes. On a not fully diluted basis, it's $267. Fully diluted? $318. Okay. $257 million. I'm sorry, the fully diluted was? Three... Three twelve. Three eighteen. $318. Thank you. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. Mr. Stern, would you like to make your concluding statement? Well, let's wait for 2, 3 more minutes. Here are more questions coming, I can see. There is a question from Byron Neal of Nano Dimension. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Looking at your most exciting areas of growth opportunity and new clients, I mean, I don't know you mentioned your clients, but, what are some of the bigger prospects you might have or the clients that you think could grow from where they are now and be substantially much larger in the next 18 months or so? We're talking about $30 million-$40 million of revenue, which grew 200%. You realize that we have by now hundreds of customers. I can. First of all, I will not be able to tell you names of customers that I said informally to people which are leading defense players in the United States and Europe, and other leading customers which are leading three-letter agencies from all the Western world, all the leading three-letter agencies in the Western world, which I can't tell you, and those are subject to buying more machines. I will try to define for you verticals. We see customers from three main verticals right now. Four. One, the defense industry, very interested. Their research departments, their high-tech, high advanced electronic groups. Looking for three-dimensional and layer printing. Aviation, aerospace. We published our work together with Harris 3D, L3 Harris and with NASA. This high interest from there, not necessarily only them, but other people who play there. The medical industry, specialized medical. A lot of interest and a lot of customers in the printed circuit board assembly, both OEM and large subcontractors in printed circuit board assembly, which are buying dozens and dozens of our machines. We have 130 customers in the general printing industry, which is both three-dimensional printing and two-dimensional printing by now, which are buying our printing engines and ink delivery systems. From these 130, you have companies that are from Fortune 50 and 100 as well, all in the 3D printing and most, and a lot in the 2D printing as well. Very advanced. We have from the automotive industry, major players are talking to us because of both 3D printing and the 2D printing for paintings. Talking about painting of automotive industry parts instead of the way they're doing now, we're wasting a lot of chemicals in closed cells of spray. They're doing it now with 3D printing, which we do, three-dimensional. Give you a few examples. Yes. Next question, please. The next question is from Joseph Howard Stern. Please go ahead. Hi. Congratulations on the progress that you've been making. I'm just wondering what your thoughts are. Why is the price per share so below cash? It just doesn't seem reasonable to me. Why aren't we at $5 or with the progress that's been made? You're sticking to your business plan, and it looks like things are working. What's the problem? Okay. Did you read the news release? Yes. Okay. On page two of the news release, on the bottom of the page, there's a paragraph that spans for about a third of a page that starts by speaking about expectations, hopes and disappointments. It behooves us to refer to the share price. While we cannot be sure, it may be affected by the following factors. What I suggest is, and I'll summarize for you in a second, of course. Read it really attentively. I wrote there, and, you know, when you need to write things, sometimes, not sometimes, always, I find out that you need to be much more accurate than just talking and waving hands. My writing there is totally and precisely what I can tell you as an answer to your question. Since you asked it, and I don't want to read the whole paragraph, which will be too long, I'll just tell you that in general, you should look at something really interesting, which I'm following. Every day, not that I have every day a time to look at the share price, but every time I look at it during the week, I'm comparing it to a list I have of all the additive manufacturing companies that are traded publicly in United States, in Europe and in Israel. There's about one or two in Israel. That including the leaders, the Stratasys and the 3Ds, which are kind of half a million dollars each. And all the others that melt with sparks and ridiculous prices like Desktop Metal and others. Our price is following their price, and their price is following our price up and down with an accuracy of 20% standard deviation, which means if we go up 5%, they go up 5%. If we go down 3%, they go down between 1% and 4%. It goes together. This is a result of behavior which is typical market trends that are created by algorithmic trading that are following market segments by name. We still didn't penetrate through that to show that we are better than the rest. Part of it is because we were small. We started very small. Just now, suddenly, we are $30 something million, and we're starting to appear on the horizon. The whole market is going down, as you know, for the last at least two quarters. The market beyond additive manufacturing into specific additive manufacturing follow-up, and you see we're going with them. We're going to penetrate that kind of a little glass ceiling by our performance, and I'm focusing on that. Second thing is our shareholders construct is unique. We have 60, 70, 80 institutional shareholders. Many of them I spoke personally, and I do speak personally as we proceed. Those are sophisticated investors. They know what we're doing. They may be trading in the market, I'm not sure, but I have a feeling that very little. Then we have 149,459. Close to 150,000 other retail shareholders. Those shareholders joined in the last year and a half. They're not... We respect them as much as we respect any shareholder, but they're not the type of investors or professional investors in general that the institutions. Their attention span and their risk return timeline and time horizon is very different. Some are day traders, some are week traders, some are five weeks. Those are waiting for announcements, and those are waiting for quarterly results. None are going to get it, not from me. I will announce only when I have something to announce. The quarterly results will proceed, but not on a quarterly basis, necessarily, but with inflection points. Sometimes they'll jump. Those people may be disappointed, I'm not sure, that their share is not going up, so they're selling. There's many of them. That may be another reason. The end result, the bottom line, and there's a gentleman from Omaha that said it starting 50 years ago all the way until today, we are a company that's building value. We're not just a regular growth company that is looking for a hyper media excitement on a quarterly basis. The value is going up, and when the value goes up, the share price eventually catches up. It's not every quarter that it catches up. That's the best I can tell you. No, I understand. I understand exactly what you're saying. I'm a frustrated shareholder because I like what you're doing. I like that you're actually stingy with the money that you have. You're not throwing it around like you explained yourself early on in the call. I own a lot of shares. I'm attracted to it because of the possibilities going forward. Also you're selling under the cash price. To me, it's ridiculous. Our stock price even now should be $5, $6, $7. I mean. First of all, I agree with you, and thank you for saying it. I'll add to what you said. I own a lot of shares, and as late as a month and a half ago, I bought half a million dollars more in shares as a private. It was $4.12, and of course, it went down. Now it goes up again. I don't worry. In a year time, it will double or more. Am I promising this? Absolutely not. Am I hoping and aiming for this? Absolutely, yes. Okay, great. Look, thank you so much. Continue with the progress in building the business. Thank you so much for your support. You're welcome. The next question is from Quinn Larson. Please go ahead. Absolutely. Yes. Could you talk just a little bit about your integration of your various products like your DeepCube as well as Fabrica? Sure. One second. I'm sorry. DeepCube by now is almost on the forefront of our leading R&D efforts of building machines and our forefront of M&A because on every M&A that we do, we use the DeepCube scientists to study and to see how fast can we apply the DeepCube engine, robotic brain into acquisition before we make decision of acquisition. As our existing machines, it's totally part of building a machine by now. The only issue I have with DeepCube is it's very difficult to double their size. If it was up to me, we bought them, they're 24 people, but I think by now we are 30. We have 10, 12 more open positions for top-notch scientists, and you can't get them for any price almost. It becomes a very... Like a building block that's the center of our attention, and it works well. We're also integrating with Fabrica, if you asked. Fabrica has sold their first machine to a three-letter agency, which you would know their name and leading in the Western world, and we're very proud of it. They are continuing on their program. They're short in what I wanted them to be on the side of the number of machines to be sold until what I see the middle to the end of this year. We're pushing them, and we're building their sales organization, which is part of our sales organization. Signs from the three beta sites that they already have in machines working are good, but there's a ways to go. Okay. As far as common products, will Fabrica and Nano Dimension ever merge into a single printer, or will they always be separated? No. The technologies are not mergeable to a single printer, absolutely. Nano Dimension have many printers by now. It is one of our printer families. It's going to become a printer family. Certain technologies we integrate, like the DeepCube into Nano Fabrica, but the printing machines are not going to merge because we have printing machines for microparts, which is Fabrica. We have printing machines for additive manufacturing electronics, and soon we'll have more, which we're announcing, and we have surface mount technology machines for printed circuit boards, which has nothing to do with Fabrica. We have printers for two-dimensional printing, which will be integrated into Fabrica, but it's a sub-assembly, not a machine. Okay. I appreciate your time. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. Mr. Stern, would you like to make your concluding statement? Sure. In conclusion, again, this was quite a long call, 45 minutes, close to that. I appreciate your patience and listening. Again, in order to be able to reflect, I think most of what we spoke here today is written in the document, the news release, and some which was not, and I added today. It's recorded, so you can always re-listen to the recording. If you have more questions, we are here to answer. Thank you very much. Thank you. This concludes the Nano Dimension 2021 Full Year and Fourth Quarter Financial Results Call. Thank you for your participation. You may go ahead and disconnect. Thank you.