Good afternoon. My name is Krista, and I'll be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the NanoString Q3 Operating Results. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press Star followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If you'd like to withdraw your question, again, press Star one. Thank you. I will now turn the conference over to Doug Farrell, Investor Relations. Doug, you may begin. Thank you, operator. Joining me on the call today is Brad Gray, our President and CEO, as well as our CFO, Tom Bailey. Earlier today, we released our financial results for the Q3, ending September 30, 2023. During this call, we may make statements that are forward-looking, including statements about financial and operating projections, future business growth, trends and related factors, expectations regarding future operating results, future cash flows, current and future instrument orders, as well as our manufacturing capacity, prospects for expanding and penetrating our addressable markets, our strategic focus and objectives, and the development status and anticipated success of recent product offerings, as well as investor expectations regarding the impact of our convertible note exchange and the impact of macroeconomic factors. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including those described in our SEC filings. Our results may differ materially from those projected, and we undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking statements. Later in the call, Tom will be discussing our Q3 financial results and guidance for the balance of 2023. We have prepared, as a supplement to GAAP financial measures, selected non-GAAP adjusted measures, the calculation of which are described in detail in our press release. Throughout the call, all financial measures will be GAAP unless otherwise noted. You can also find reconciliations of GAAP to non-GAAP measures, as well as the description, limitations, and rationale for using such measures in this afternoon's press release. To aid analysts and investors in building their models, we have posted exhibits under the Financial Information tab of our Investor Relations homepage that include a presentation of non-GAAP or adjusted measures and other selected financial data. I'd also like to remind everyone that next week we'll be participating in the Stifel Healthcare Conference in New York, as well as the Jefferies Healthcare Conference in London. We look forward to having the opportunity to speak with many of you there. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Brad. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us today. The past several months have been incredibly productive for NanoString. I'm happy to have this opportunity to expand on the strong operating results that we pre-announced on October 10 and to update you on some key developments in more recent weeks. Our Q3 revenue of more than $48 million was a record high and an increase of more than 60% over the prior year. We reduced our cash burn by about 50% sequentially in the Q3, and the reorganization that we announced last month is expected to reduce our operating expenses by more than $15 million annually. With our solid revenue growth and leaner operating model, we believe we are putting the company on track to become profitable in 2025. Just as importantly, we worked with the major holders of our convertible debt to exchange approximately $216 million of our convertible notes for new senior secured notes with an extended maturity to September of 2026. This pushes the maturity to a point in time at which we expect to be profitable, which we believe will give us a broader menu of options to retire the debt, while also removing a near-term financial overhang that may have kept some investors on the sidelines. We have also strengthened our leadership team. In August, we welcomed Todd Garland as our Chief Commercial Officer. Todd joins us with 25 years of experience in life sciences, spanning the full spectrum from discovery to clinical markets. Todd has been traveling in the field extensively for a couple of months now and has been impressed with the passion and the talent of our commercial team. He has some great ideas on how to continue to improve our performance, and I have the utmost confidence that Todd will drive the effectiveness of our commercial organization and our future growth. I'd now like to provide an update on our progress towards our strategic objectives for the year. Our first objective for 2023 is to increase our penetration of the spatial biology market. During the Q3, spatial biology demand was healthy across both instruments and consumables. We exited Q3 with an installed base of more than 500 spatial biology systems, an increase of more than 50% over the prior year. Our CosMx Spatial Molecular Imager remains the primary growth driver of the business, accounting for most of our spatial instrument orders, as the single-cell resolution of the platform attracts discovery researchers who are expanding from droplet-based single-cell research into spatial biology. Demand is especially strong from new to NanoString customers, who accounted for more than 90% of CosMx orders during the Q3. Academic and government-funded researchers continue to account for about 65% of new CosMx orders, with biopharma companies and the CROs who serve them growing to account for about 35% of new orders in the Q3. While ongoing litigation slowed the pace of orders in Europe, strong demand in North America drove overall CosMx momentum. Despite what we believe are our competitors' efforts to misuse preliminary court rulings to create anxiety for customers and eliminate competition, we have successfully defended our sizable CosMx instrument order book, fulfilling or retaining approximately 95% of cumulative orders. CosMx has now been used to generate approximately 20 peer-reviewed publications and 25 preprints across multiple applications. Our AtoMx Spatial Informatics Platform provides telemetry that allows us to monitor customer success, and we can see that researchers have collectively created more than 1,000 studies across more than 100 customer sites. We are continuing to enhance our AtoMx platform's features, functionality, and usability by listening to customers and implementing a series of software upgrades, and we are excited about AtoMx's continued evolution. One of the biggest advantages of CosMx over competing spatial imagers comes from its higher plex, which we are convinced is the single most important product attribute for imagers. Scientists have a huge fear of missing out that drives them to seek the broadest content panels available. We have seen time and again that as we add plex, customer demand goes up. This is the same characteristic we saw in the next-generation sequencing market as it moved from focus panels to whole genome sequencing. Our competitors are offering targeted RNA panels of just a few hundred plex. The CosMx 1,000-plex RNA assay that we offer today provides twice the plex of competing assays, and our CosMx assay roadmap is designed to push plex to the limit. In September, we released our first public 6,000-plex data set, which was generated from human brain tissue. The data set nicely demonstrates the value of maximizing plex, as CosMx was able to detect over 3,000 unique genes in the sample, with an average of over 500 unique genes in each individual cell. We remain on track to begin shipping our 6,000-plex RNA assay kits during the Q1 of 2024, and we'll provide customers a sneak peek of this new assay when we begin offering it via our Technology Access Program service later this quarter. Plex is not the only advantage of CosMx relative to competitors. CosMx also provides highly accurate cell segmentation, which allows the instrument to find the boundaries between cells and properly assign the RNA or the protein molecule detected to the correct cell. A failure to properly segment cells in a tissue causes molecules to be assigned to the wrong cells, making the data generated useless, or even worse, misleading. Next week, we'll be highlighting the CosMx roadmap at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, where our scientists and customers will present more than 20 studies showcasing our spatial platforms. Some studies will include the new 6,000-plex RNA data sets generated on human brain samples, while other studies will demonstrate the power of using both our new 1,000-plex Mouse RNA panel and our 64-plex CosMx Mouse Neuroscience protein panel on the same slide. While GeoMx continues to account for a minority of our new spatial system orders, it drives most of our spatial consumable revenue. Our installed base of GeoMx systems remains highly productive, generating more than 320 peer-reviewed publications today. This body of research nearly doubled in the last 12 months, showcasing many exciting applications for spatial biology, and the investors may not appreciate the importance of proteomic applications in driving GeoMx utilization. Protein applications account for about half of the GeoMx sample volume and half of its peer-reviewed papers. Protein applications have remained a focus for our GeoMx roadmap. In September, we announced a groundbreaking new assay for GeoMx, called the IO Proteome Atlas, or IPA. While many spatial biology systems provide protein applications of modest plex, the GeoMx IPA represents something completely new. At 570 plex, the IPA covers virtually every target in oncology and immunology for which an IHC antibody has ever been developed. IPA offers more than five times the spatial protein content of any competing platform, and its comprehensive coverage makes it ideal for screening clinical trial samples for new drug targets and biomarkers. The unveiling of IPA has already resulted in a surge of new interest in GeoMx. Last week, we highlighted the GeoMx IPA during the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, or SITC, conference, as two early access customers presented data that they had generated with the new assay. Researchers from the Mayo Clinic demonstrated how the IPA provides a simple way to explore the long tail of potential protein biomarkers, discovering targets in breast cancer tissue that would have been missed in smaller panels. Researchers from Mass General Hospital combined the GeoMx IPA with the RNA Whole Transcriptome Atlas into a single multi-omic assay that was more effective than RNA-seq at finding patterns that predict drug response in pancreatic cancer. Customer feedback on these presentations was extremely positive, with many customers in awe of the enormous increase in protein plex that we have delivered, calling it a game changer. Many are looking forward to giving the IPA a try after we begin shipping the IPA to customers later this quarter. Our second objective is to deliver predictable revenue growth. So far this year, we have beat our revenue guidance in every quarter. In Q3, we exceeded the upper end of our revenue guidance by about $1 million as we successfully scaled up instrument manufacturing and continued to work through our substantial CosMx backlog. The team is working hard in the Q4 to install as many CosMx systems as possible, but we still expect to carry a backlog into 2024. We've also seen improvement in nCounter instrument sales throughout the year, and we're implementing initiatives to keep this foundational business a steady contributor. In an effort to ensure investor expectations remain in line with our revenue outlook during the Q4, we're today narrowing our guidance range. The updated guidance reflects the impact of the preliminary injunction that prevents us from delivering CosMx units to customers in some European countries. The top end of the range represents healthier year-end spending by our customers, while the bottom end of the range keeps revenue approximately flat from Q3 to Q4 and reflects uncertain macroeconomic factors and the potential elongation of capital equipment sales cycles. Our third strategic objective is to demonstrate progress towards cash breakeven. As we shared with many investors during September, our company operates two franchises with very different profitability profiles. Our nCounter business, the leader in the midplex gene expression market, already provides an estimated 30+% EBITDA margin based on its consumable, heavy revenue mix and minimal R&D. Our spatial biology franchise is rapidly growing, but not yet profitable based on the instrument-heavy revenue mix and ongoing investments in product innovation. The team remains laser-focused on our path to profitability. During Q3, increased operational discipline helped cut our cash burn by about 50% sequentially. Early last month, we reorganized our research and development and manufacturing operations, eliminating over 100 positions. The impact of this expense reduction is not yet reflected in street models, which we believe overestimate our operating loss in the coming years. Importantly, despite this reduction in force, we remain in a position to deliver the product roadmap that we have described publicly. To conclude my remarks, I'll provide an update on our ongoing IP litigation. In September, our competitor, 10x Genomics, was granted a preliminary injunction in the new European Unified Patent Court, or UPC, that prevents us from selling our RNA detection assays for CosMX across the 17 European Union countries based on what is referred to as the 782 patent. We have appealed this decision to the UPC Court of Appeals in Luxembourg and expect this appeal will be heard in December. The full UPC proceedings on the merits of 10x claims are expected to take place in the second half of 2024. On October 10, the UPC ruled in our favor in a second case related to what is referred to as the 928 patent. The court denied 10x's request for a preliminary injunction and raised questions on both the validity and infringement of this patent. In issuing this ruling, the UPC considered elements of our arguments that were not addressed by the German court when it evaluated the same 928 patent in May, giving us another path forward in our appeal in Germany next year. Next week, we'll be in the U.S. District Court in Delaware for another IP lawsuit filed against us by 10x that alleges that GeoMx infringes patents that they acquired from a company called Prognosys. The trial is expected to begin on November 13 and last for 5 days. We're confident in the merits of our arguments that we intend to present and on the lack of infringement, as well as the invalidity of the patents asserted by 10x. We will, of course, update you as soon as we know more about the outcome of this hearing. Now, I'd like Tom to take us through the details of our Q3 operating results. Thanks, Brad, and thanks all for joining us today. For the Q3 of 2023, total revenue was $48.1 million, representing 63% year-over-year growth. For our spatial biology business, Q3 revenue was $28.9 million, representing growth of more than 200% year-over-year. Spatial biology instrument revenue was $21.1 million, approximately 350% year-over-year growth. We shipped about 90 and installed about 65 spatial instruments during Q3, growing our spatial instrument installed base to approximately 510 instruments. As a reminder for those updating their models, the number of instruments we install during a quarter can differ as compared to the number of instruments we ship. Revenue recognition is based on instruments we ship during the quarter as opposed to installations. Q3 spatial biology consumables revenue is $7.8 million, representing 70% year-over-year growth and reflecting typical GeoMx consumables pull-through Q3 seasonality and continued stocking orders of CosMx consumables. Q3 nCounter revenue, which includes all service and other revenue, was $19.2 million, reflecting the continued stability and durability of the nCounter platform. nCounter instrument revenue was $2.5 million, consumables revenue was $10.5 million, and service revenue was $6.2 million. At the end of Q3, our nCounter installed base was approximately 1,140 instruments. Turning to margins and expenses, I'll provide results on a non-GAAP or adjusted basis, which removes the impact of stock-based compensation, depreciation, amortization, and certain other items with no correlation to continuing operations. Please refer to our press release as well as the exhibits we have posted on to our investor relations webpage for detailed information on how our non-GAAP or adjusted measures are prepared. Q3 adjusted gross margin was 41%, impacted by a revenue mix heavily weighted to spatial instruments, which are currently selling at lower than planned gross margins, due primarily to higher unit production costs occurred than expected. For the full year, we now expect gross margins will be the low- to mid-40% range, with a higher than planned instrument production cost, partially offset in Q4 by the cost benefits of the reorganization announced on October 10. Adjusted R&D expense was $13.4 million, a decrease of 8% year-over-year, with lower personnel-related costs partially offset by software development consulting costs. We expect R&D expenses to be lower sequentially in the Q4, primarily as a result of the reorganization. Adjusted SG&A expense was $26.7 million, a decrease of 6% year-over-year, reflecting lower personnel costs and lower trade show and other marketing-related expenses. We expect SG&A expenses to be modestly lower in the Q4 as a result of the same factors. Q3 adjusted EBITDA loss was $20.2 million. Adjusted EBITDA loss is expected to decrease by about 50% or more in the Q4 as compared to the Q3, driven primarily by operating expense savings from the reorganization. Our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments were approximately $97 million as of September 30, 2023. Turning to guidance, for the Q4, we expect revenue to be in the range of $47-$52 million, representing about 45% year-over-year growth. This range includes $27-$31 million of spatial biology revenue and $20-$21 million of nCounter and service revenue. With that Q4 range, we are updating our 2023 annual revenue guidance range to $175-$180 million. Our updated annual range includes spatial biology revenue of $96-$100 million and nCounter revenue of $79-$80 million. Given the lower expected gross margin range and the partially offsetting reduction in Q4 operating expenses, we now expect full year 2023 adjusted EBITDA loss of approximately $80-$85 million. Heading into 2024, we expect gross margins to improve, driven by increasing consumable sales as a percentage of our total revenue and improved instrument production costs. We also expect, with the reorganization, that operating expenses will be sequentially lower in 2024 as compared to 2023, at least $15 million lower than what Street models currently reflect, which should support a significantly improved profitability profile in 2024 and put us on track for a full year of profitability expected in 2025. We will offer more details when we provide our annual guidance for 2024 early in the new year. Finally, I'd like to comment on the exchange we've concluded for our convertible notes, a transaction we consummated with two large holders, representing approximately 94% of the total principal amount. The old notes were exchanged for new senior secured notes, with amounts due in September 2026, or about 3 years from today. The new notes bear interest at 6.95% and will occupy a senior secured position in our capital structure. As part of this transaction, we granted 16 million common stock warrants to the noteholders, replacing about 4.5 million shares potentially issuable under the old convertible notes. During the first year, interest may be paid in kind at our option, saving the company about $15 million in cash expense as we take further steps to improve profitability in 2024. We want to thank these investors for their strong support of the company. Their enthusiasm for NanoString's future is aligned with ours, and we appreciate their partnership. These new longer-dated notes provide the window needed for us to achieve profitability prior to maturity, which we believe will support improved terms and availability of any new financing required by that time. Now I'll turn the call over to Brad for our closing comments. Thanks, Tom. In closing, the spatial biology market is experiencing explosive growth, and our innovative technologies and compelling roadmap puts us at the forefront of this exciting field. We are running the company in a disciplined manner and have taken a series of steps to rapidly improve the financial profile of the company, which may have in the past clouded investor interest. These steps include consistently exceeding our revenue guidance, substantially reducing our cash burn, adjusting our operating expenses, addressing our convertible debt, and seeking to achieve profitability in 2025. With these improvements, we hope investors will take a fresh look at NanoString as we refocus attention on the strong fundamentals of our business. Now we'd like to open the line for your questions. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. Your first question comes from the line of Institution JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hi, this is Martha Nazha with on for Rachel Vatnsdal from JP Morgan. Thank you for taking the question. I just wanted to ask quickly on the guidance. You know, so far this year, consistently beat the street on the top line, but you modestly lowered the 2023 guide. You touched on this a little bit during the call, but can you unpack for us the updated guidance? How much of the guide down is macro related versus perhaps related to the injunction in Europe? Thank you. Yeah, thank you. I'd say you highlighted the two primary reasons that we narrowed the end of our guidance range towards the more cautious end of our previous full year range. ... I mean, the first fact that's changed is, of course, that we are now enjoined from selling our number one selling product into 17 European countries, which, you know, slows down the revenue recognition of CosMx overall. And then second, you know, we have begun to see some elongations in the sales cycles of our higher-priced equipment. And, you know, we're hearing a number of our peer companies express some caution as we head into the Q4. You know, I'd say the cautionary notes include things such as the possibility of a government shutdown and sort of caution that could emerge in the markets for academic researchers, as well as, you know, just more cautious outlooks for biopharma companies. In general, though, I mean, I think we feel really good about the long-term fundamentals of our marketplace. We, we feel that we're very fortunate to be at the forefront of this ongoing spatial biology revolution, and, you know, in any case, our full-year revenue growth is going to be outstanding. Thank you, and just a clarification. Are you assuming some sort of modest 4Q budget flush at the midpoint of the guide? Yes. One of the differences between the bottom and the top of the guide is, at the bottom of the guide, we would expect, you know, a more modest budget flush, and at the top of the guide, in the middle and top of the guide, more, you know, a larger Q4 budget flush. Great. Thank you. Your next question comes from TD Cowen. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey, good afternoon. This is Kyle on for Dan. Thanks for taking the questions. I just had a quick one on the gross margin profile here, exiting 2024. You said in the prepared remarks that we should see, you know, some gross margin benefit next year as consumables become a bigger portion of overall revenue. How should we think about that relative to, you know, pre-2023, where you were sort of in the low 50s% range? Is it possible we can get back to that range in 2024? Yeah, I think most, most of the street models, Kyle, are in that range, and we'll guide early in the year and give more explicit commentary. But I think with the consumables mix improving and our production costs improving, that we would hope to track back towards where the company has been historically, which is kind of in that low fifties range for next year and beyond. That's a good way to think about 2024 for now. Got it. Thank you. Then just on the burn and cash needs, how should we be thinking about your, you know, cash position as you move closer towards profitability in 2025? Will there need to be any raises between now and then, or are you confident that you can get to that position? Our objective and is still to get to cash break even on our existing resources, and nothing around that thought process or approach has changed. You can see both the actions that we've taken with the business to reduce costs. We expect we'll support that next year. As we mentioned, we think the street models in general are about $15 million high relative to where operating expenses will be before we get started next year. In addition to that, the transaction we just did with the note holders offers us the opportunity to PIK interest next year, which gives us a really great support from the note holders next year as we make some additional changes to the business to get ourselves on that path to profitability. So all of those factors combined together to, on top of what Brad mentioned, is what we feel is a really robust long-term opportunity for our spatial franchises and the stability of nCounter. We think put us in a really good position to get where we need to be on our existing cash resources. Our perspective on that is unchanged. Got it. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Baird. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey, guys. Thanks for the questions. Catherine Schulte here. Brad, you mentioned expecting to carry a CosMx backlog into 2024. What was the CosMx backlog at the end of the Q3, and what do you expect it to be heading into next year? Catherine, thank you for the question. You know, we're, we're no longer reporting the quantifying publicly our backlog on CosMx, so, I'm not sure I'm in a position to satisfy you on that. We are, I'll say, in a mode of continuing to work down the backlog. As you know, we, we accumulated an enormous backlog of pre-orders that required some customers to wait up to a year to receive their CosMx instrument. That's not a situation that we want to continue. We are, you know, steadily working down the backlog to a situation where customers would be able to receive their instrument either during the same quarter that they ordered the instrument or the quarter subsequent. So, that's, that's the trajectory we're on. We will continue to carry backlog into 2024, but certainly we don't want it to be backlog that will require long delays in customer receipt of instruments. Okay, got it. And then what kind of top-line growth is needed to underwrite your full-year profitability in 2025? You know, would the street revenue outlook get you there? And then just on the OpEx side, recognize your comments on, on street probably being $15 million high, but, you know, is most of that leverage going to come from R&D? Any sort of bridge you could give to the 2025 full-year profitability would be appreciated. Sure, Catherine. I think, you know, we'll reserve comment on the, on the revenue side until we guide in 2024, but I think that we're, we're generally comfortable with where street models are right now. We can say that. We'll comment more explicitly as we get into 2024. On the OpEx side, most of the leverage that we're talking about in that $15 million number is out of a combination of R&D and out of operations, which is where most of the reorganization activity occurred. So thinking about updating your models, if you're taking OpEx down, I would take, I would take most of it out of R&D, and, and then a little bit of it supports that better gross margin number, which just comes out of the operations side of the business, which gets reported out of cost of goods sold. Yeah, and then maybe just to build on Tom's answer, Catherine, you know, we've always said that between $200 million and $300 million in revenue was where we thought a business of our type should be breaking even. And I think street models on 2025 are just about the midpoint of that range right now. So I think it's consistent with our past commentary. All right, great. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Stifel. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey, guys, this is Evan on for Dan. Thanks for the question. I kind of want to dig a little bit deeper into the previous question. I mean, I think that the backlog is something that people are going to be pretty focused on. I understand maybe your peers aren't giving too much visibility to that, but I think people are... Especially with the guide down here, I think people are, you know, I guess you're in a little bit different situation. And so is there any kind of commentary that you can give that can give people comfort as to, you know, how next year is going to shape up and, like, you know, how you're going to exit the year? Because I feel like a lot of the commentary a year on previously was, you know, we have this big backlog, we're probably going to exit the year with a, I think you said something similar to kind of where you were. So if you're starting to draw that down, I think people are going to start to get a little concerned as to maybe how the outlook is into next year. So anything you can give there would be really helpful. Thanks for the question, Evan. I think Tom, in answering Catherine's question just a moment ago, without guiding 2024, said that we were comfortable with where the current street models are. So hopefully that should provide some reassurance. You know, we, you know, most companies don't carry massive amounts of backlog around like we have been and can continue to grow, well without it. Certainly, backlog is a good thing in the minds of investors in terms of providing predictability and revenue, but it's a bad thing in terms of the customer experience, because it provides long delays between when people want to get their hands on a piece of technology to begin their science and, when they, when they want, you know, and when they actually can. So we want to always keep those things in balance. So I'm sorry to disappoint if we are not going to be overly quantitative on backlog. Most companies choose not to be. And, you know, we'll provide commentary, I think, about sort of the market potential here and the ongoing growth and orders, which I think, as you can see, both across NanoString's reported results and that of our primary competitor, you know, this is a market of extraordinary growth. I mean, I think we're seeing a kind of pace of total instrument placement that is hardly been seen in any product category in the history of our industry. I think you're seeing, you know, two companies simultaneously reporting greater than 200% year-on-year growth in revenue. So, you know, and NanoString is neck and neck with our competitor and fighting for market leadership here. And I think, you know, that kind of leadership in a market of very strong secular growth is the primary thing that customers should be looking at to gain confidence in our outlook. Gotcha. So, I mean, if you're not willing to give any commentary about the backlog, is there anything you guys can say about, about orders in the quarter and how that kind of was up sequentially or year-over-year comparison? Maybe that'd be helpful in terms of framing where things are versus last quarter. Evan, I, again, I'm going to, I'm going to disappoint you here. We're, we're no longer and haven't been reporting order trends in quite some time on our spatial biology business. Yeah, other than to say, yeah, we felt really good about the order trend. It was robust, and, you know, we're, we're, we're pleased with how things are going. All right. And yeah, I guess that's it. I appreciate the help, guys. Thanks. Your next question comes from the line of Canaccord Genuity. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hi, this is Alex McKesson. I'm on for Kyle Mixon. Thanks for the update, guys. One quick question, just to kind of dive into the recent legal proceedings. I was just curious if those have had a meaningful impact on CosMx placements and/or the order book over the past quarter? Thanks. I think your question was, have the most recent UPC proceedings had an impact on the order book or the demand over the last quarter? So, the answer is yes and no. Yes, within the European countries, of course, are being enjoined from selling our CosMx instrument for RNA assays has slowed down the pace of new orders coming out of Europe for CosMx, and we've experienced, you know, a handful of order cancellations from customers who had not yet received their CosMx instrument for RNA. And of course now could not do so. So that has had an impact. But I'm pleased to say that that impact has not spilled over into other markets. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks, while instrument orders slowed down in Europe, the robustness of the North American market continued to drive the overall momentum of our spatial biology franchise. Great, thank you. And one just to kind of build off the last question there. So just curious on how you intend to grow placements in 2024. I guess just given, like, current macro headwinds and whatnot, like if there are some, you know, initiatives, you know, that'll be coming into play in the near future, or some marketing efforts, or anything of that sort. Thanks. Well, you know, as I said, and maybe the answer to an earlier question, we're seeing a market in spatial biology that has extraordinarily extraordinary secular growth. I mean, we're in a major adoption cycle of a new form of science. These kind of new revolutions that are often declared Nature's method of the year, you know, they play out over 7-10-year time frames, and we're right in the steep part of the curve of the adoption cycle here. So I think the secular growth of spatial biology will be the most important driver of continued momentum in 2024. Of course, on top of that, we have a very exciting series of product launches and a roadmap to support them that should keep customers, you know, interested in our technology at the forefront. The most important of those is the launch of our CosMx 6,000-plex RNA assay, which will put our technology at 12-15 times higher plex than the competition. There's already tremendous customer interest in that, and that'll become available for shipment in the Q1. And then on the genomics side, the recently launched GeoMx IO Proteome Atlas, which is 5 times higher plex than any other protein panels offered by other companies, is driving a resurgence and interest in that platform. So I think, you know, the secular interest in spatial biology, combined with, you know, our specific and compelling product offerings, should be the key drivers of growth in 2024 on the instrument side. Then I guess maybe finally, you know, we've placed a tremendous number of CosMx instruments during 2023 that will just be becoming active and utilizing consumables in 2024. And so we expect to see, you know, that—we expect that to drive spatial consumable growth, which has the benefit of also expanding our gross margins in the way that Tom alluded to in his prepared remarks. So I guess those are the three big catalysts, you know, the CosMx 6K, the GeoMx IPA, and the activation and consumable utilization of our rapidly growing spatial biology install base. Great. Thank you. That's really helpful. Again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. Your next question comes from the line of UBS. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey, everyone, you have Christian on for John. You know, thanks for taking my question. I guess, you know, starting off on the CosMx in Europe, you know, I know you guys previously put out some, I guess you could say, workarounds in terms of having customers kind of ship their samples to CROs in jurisdictions not affected by the injunction. You know, I was just wondering if you can give any update and, you know, maybe even if you can maybe possibly, like, quantify how well that's working, the customer reception to that, how it's been, etc. Yeah. So, you know, we obviously want science in Europe to continue to benefit from our market-leading CosMx Spatial Molecular Imager. We think it would be a tragedy for European science if they were constrained to work on the less flexible offerings of our competitors. So we're working as flexibly as we can with those groups to help them get access to our technology by shipping samples to either CROs or to NanoString located, so those samples can be processed where there's no injunctions. And I'd say we've had, you know, modest success on that. I think a number of our customers are still in the process of figuring out how best to do that. And, you know, our customers have been, yeah, very supportive of the company. And I'd say overall, the scientific community is rooting for NanoString to succeed in our litigation and to, you know, maintain choice in the marketplace. I don't think I can really be too quantitative about that. You know, I think overall it's fair to say whatever commerce results from those types of activities is gonna be a modest part of our overall mix. The primary driver of our growth will be the continued, you know, sale of our technologies into those major markets that are not enjoined. And just as a reminder, I think we, we issued this kind of important fact at the time of the UPC injunction. The nations that... the 17 countries that are part of that UPC jurisdiction only account for about 10% or less of our overall CosMx, demand and backlog. So it's while it's obviously a headwind, it's not one that should overall change the overall shape of the market. ... No, thanks for that. That makes sense. And then switching gears, I know China isn't the most material geography for your revenue mix, but can you give us some color on what you have been seeing over there? And then also just on—it looks like just throughout time, you guys have been changing the mix in terms of the CosMx from primarily academic. It's still primarily academic, but biopharma and biopharma and CROs are becoming a bigger mix of that pie. You know, is the primary driver of that actually like more CROs, you know, buying instruments, demand from that side? Or are you seeing anything on the academic where sales cycles have been slowing and then maybe purchasing hasn't been up to, you know, previous levels, if that makes sense? Yeah, let me take the biopharma slide, and then I'm going to ask Tom to take the China piece. On the biopharma front, yes, we are pleased to see an increase in interest in the CosMX system from the biopharma community. You know, I'd say overall, the translational research and biopharma communities have been slower adopters of non-spatial, single-cell technologies. But, yeah, I believe we're starting to see that tick up, and single-cell spatial technologies are ticking up right alongside it. You know, CROs are, I think, a very great avenue for biopharma companies to access technologies that they're not 100% sure they want to scale internally yet, especially smaller, more cash-constrained biopharma companies who, you know, would be reluctant to, you know, spend $300,000 on a piece of capital equipment. You know, CROs have been a really great avenue for us to bring spatial biology to those segments of the market. Tom, maybe you can take the question on China trend. Yeah. Yeah, on China, it's less than 10% of our revenue. It's consistent with what it was last quarter, and I would be, I think, remiss, we would be, to draw any macro trends from our sales in China. We've got a relatively new sales effort there, and it's just, it's just—I would say we're just too small of a portion of our revenue and our overall business and the dollars as a whole for us to draw any macro trends from it. But it doesn't... If you just look at it in and of itself, it doesn't—it hasn't been our sales have been pretty consistent as a percentage of the total in China over the last several periods. Your next question comes from the line of Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Good evening, guys. This is Edmond. Just wanted to ask you quickly, Brad, how has the CosMx ASP been trending lately? Was this a meaningful driver of the lower gross margins in Q3? And how should we be thinking about the CosMx ASP in 2024, given that on the last call, you noted ASPs have been improving, but you're still continuing some of your discounting tactics? I'm going to let Tom answer that question, Edmond. Yeah. Thanks, Edmond, for the question. Yeah, our ASPs were up a bit in Q3 over Q2, so we're up just over $230 on ASP. It's a little bit less than we had originally expected, and again, I wouldn't say that's necessarily due to any sort of overall broad pricing pressure. That's just how the shipments that shook out during the quarter. It is a little bit lower than was originally planned. We would still continue to expect those to rise in coming quarters as there have been rising list prices across all the competitors in this marketplace, as well as the continued popularity of these products puts us in a position where pricing isn't really the key driver for these instruments. So I think as we get into next year, it probably should go up, but if I were modeling based on ASP alone, I would—I think you could use $230 as a good number where we were in Q3 for your models for next year. I got it. Super helpful. And then, switching gears a little bit to looking at your CosMx panel, I was wondering if you guys could provide some color on the mix of how or how your users are deciding which panels to use. I know you guys have a 1K panel, you guys have a human IO 100-plex panel, and a mouse panel. I guess I'm trying to figure out, with the upcoming 6K panel next year, what are your expectations for 1K panel usage? Yeah. What we've seen every time, Edmond, that we provide a new panel of higher plex, is that it does tend to cannibalize the lower plex panels. And that's consistent with my prepared remarks, where I characterize scientists as having a huge FOMO or fear of missing out. You know, scientists are paranoid that if they don't include a gene in their panel, they'll somehow miss the most important insight. And as a result, more plex is generally better. So just to take the couple of panels that you mentioned, you know, when we initially developed a 100-plex IO panel, we thought there would be great demand for that. On the system, it could run a lot faster than the 1,000-plex, and it's more cost effective. There's been virtually zero demand for that panel. Okay. The 1000-plex human panel today is by far our most popular panel, followed by, you know, I'm sure what will be good demand for the mouse panel as it's coming to market. Mm-hmm. Human accounts for the majority of the type of science that most of our customers do because they're focused on human translational biology. So that's most of it. But, you know, I would expect that, you know, as we bring the 6,000-plex to market, we may very well see a rapid transition towards that higher plex panel, even at a price premium, because customers are, you know, interested in making sure they're not missing important biology. ... Got it. Super helpful. And then, Brad, it's good to hear strong early feedback for your Immuno-Oncology Proteome Atlas for the GeoMx. What are your contribution expectations for this in 2024, and how should we be thinking about, I guess, GeoMx consumable revenue growth in the upcoming year? Yeah, that's a really good question, Edmond. I think we're gonna hold off on providing quantitative feedback on that until we do our 2024 guide. But I will say, you know, proteomics is a very popular application for GeoMx. Historically, it's been half of our samples, but much less than half the revenue, because the average unit price of a protein panel at 50 plex is less than the average unit price of our Whole Transcriptome Atlas. That will change with the IO Proteome Atlas. It's, it's priced at a premium to our Whole Transcriptome Atlas because there's really nothing like it in the world. And so I think that bodes well for the potential pull-through on our existing installed base, and I'm excited about the early resurgence in interest in acquiring GeoMx instruments that has resulted from this new capability. But it's a little too early to quantify that. We'll provide an update on our February call in more detail. Got it. Thank you for the time today. Thank you. We, we have no further questions in our queue at this time. I will now turn the call over to Doug Farrell for closing remarks. Thanks again for joining us today. If you did miss any portion of the call, a replay should be posted in about 2 hours from now. Domestic callers, please use 800-770-2030. International callers, please dial 647-362-9199. The conference ID is 72369. Thanks again. That concludes our call. This goodbye- This concludes today's- This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation, and you may now disconnect.