Perfect! Good afternoon, everyone. This is Rachel Vatnsdal with the Life Science Tools and Diagnostics team. I'm joined today by the NanoString management team. This will be a 40-minute session with 20 minutes, give or take, of a presentation, followed by some Q&A. If any of you in the room do have questions, please feel free to email them to me. Otherwise, you can submit them in the portal. With that, I will pass it off to Brad. Great. Thanks, Rachel. I appreciate everybody coming to this afternoon. I wanna do three things today. I wanna first provide an overview of NanoString for those of you who might be new to the story. The second is, I want to recap how we did on our strategic objectives in 2023. And the third thing I want to do is lay out the catalyst that we see ahead for 2024. I will be making forward-looking statements and would refer you to our SEC filings, and particularly the risk factors, and I will be using some non-GAAP measures today, and there's reconciliations available on our website. So NanoString's mission is to map the universe of biology, and we do that with several different life science tools platforms that together put together a compelling growth trajectory for the company. We started with our nCounter Analysis System, which is a gene expression platform that I'll tell you a little bit more about, that today provides a stable, growing base for the company, and it's actually quite a profitable business. And it's in a more mature stage of its development. And then the growth engine of the company are a set of spatial biology platforms that in our most recently reported quarter, the third quarter, grew 200% year-on-year in revenue. We won't be reporting fourth quarter revenue or full year revenue today, but I'll be talking on our third quarter basis. So through the first nine months of FY 2023, revenue overall grew by 38%, and in the third quarter, as because growth accelerated, we grew by 60% year-on-year. So the history of the company is we really started in digital gene expression with our nCounter Analysis System, which was launched in 2008, and that was the sole focus of the company through the first 10 years of our commercial efforts. And then we invented a spatial biology approach and launched it in 2019, called the GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiler. It was initially a sample prep system that allowed spatial biology to happen upstream of our nCounter system and was later broadened to read out on Illumina sequencers and provide even more capability. We really found we had a tiger by the tail with spatial biology, so we pivoted a lot of our efforts at that point to spatial and launched three years later, our CosMx Spatial Molecular Imager, which started life as a sequencing program and actually was adapted to spatial biology. And to tie all that spatial information together, we launched around the same time as CosMx, the AtoMx Spatial Informatics Platform. So I'm going to spend just a few minutes on nCounter, which is probably an underappreciated asset within the company. nCounter allows gene expression on a bulk fashion in what's called the midplex, between 20 and 800 genes at once. It's sold into core genomics labs that often have other gene expression platforms, like RNA sequencing or quantitative PCR, and then kind of really fits between those, occupying a unique niche where speed of results, high-quality digital data, and a focused gene expression panel in the biology of interest is of value to the researchers. We've established over the last, you know, 15 years almost a tremendous installed base of about 1,200 nCounter systems. These are wildly productive. They still generate about 100+ new papers per month or over 1,000 new papers a year. You know, the average pull-through on an nCounter system is still about $45,000 per system per year in recurring revenue, and that's inclusive of a number of the older systems that have been inactivated within the installed base. So nCounter actually also has a great margin profile. It's an 80% consumable revenue business, so a great gross margin, and we've, you know, we've disclosed in the past, its EBITDA margin is over 30%. So it's been helping subsidize our entry into spatial biology. Now, what is spatial biology? You know, so we're... Life is made of tissue, cells that work together in a structure. Different cells have different functions. They have a particular structure. So think of it as those cells as Legos and the tissue as something like the Millennium Falcon you see here in the third panel from the left. Most biology is done in bulk, which means we basically disassemble all the cells by grinding them up or lysing them, and we look at average at the size and shape of the Legos, you know, the overall kind of average biology. But you can only detect really strong signals that way. And a few years ago, techniques were developed to capture the individual cells in droplets or other microfluidic approaches, and that became single-cell biology, and that allowed us to see heterogeneity that wasn't visible in the past. Think of it as dividing the Legos into piles by size or shape and looking at those differences in more detail. But you still didn't know where those pieces fit together, and so spatial biology really comes down to the idea of keeping the tissue intact while you analyze it, so that you can understand how the proteins and the RNA vary region to region and ultimately cell by cell. And this is a revolutionary new tech- set of techniques that is really opening up new types of biological insights. It was named Nature's Method of the Year in 2020. Now, spatial biology needs to take place at multiple levels of resolution, much in the way that a map has multiple different scales. So if you were, you know, trying to find your way to Manhattan, you might first look at a big gross scale to see kind of what the Mid-Atlantic and the New York region look like. You'd find blocks within Manhattan, and then you'd zoom in on a particular building. In biology, you know, you do the same thing. You might look across an entire biopsy, mounted on a slide, that might be at the centimeter scale. You might zoom on certain morphological structures that might have, you know, a 100 micrometer scale, and then individual cells that have, you know, 10 micrometers or less of scale. And typically, different tools in biology are useful for these different scales. And so as we map the spatial biology market, we've aligned our platforms to kind of two different product categories that are defined by resolution. The first, the GeoMx, which launched in 2019, is in a category we call profilers. These are multicellular in resolution, and they read out on sequencers, external sequencers, as Illumina usually. They can, but because they do that, they look at up to the whole transcriptome in plex. Then the newer category, we call imagers. CosMx is in that category. We call them imagers because the data is basically pictures taken of the tissue over and over again with the tissue intact, and it brings the resolution of single cells rather than sub-cells. And historically, those imagers have come at a cost of lower plex. You can't see as many molecules, though, you know, NanoString is breaking that barrier in ways I'll describe here shortly. So our spatial biology portfolio aligns to these categories. GeoMx is the multicellular resolution. It's, today, the fastest in terms of throughput, multi-omic profiler. Then you have the CosMx, which is our imager. It's really the highest plex single-cell imager on the market. And then because the data is so large from these systems, we've had to create a cloud-based informatics system we call AtoMx, that's a place to store, to collaborate, and take advantage of the compute power in the cloud to analyze this data. We haven't done this alone. We work with great partners, Illumina on the sequencing, the Danaher divisions of Leica and Abcam on antibodies and automation of staining, Bio-Techne on in situ hybridization probes, Visiopharm on image analysis algorithms that help us select regions of interest on GeoMx, and Azenta as a service provider for the sequencing for reading out GeoMx. So that's kind of my summary of the company. Let me talk about what our goals were this time last year as we kind of framed 2023. We laid out three strategic objectives, and the first was to penetrate the spatial biology market, and we have achieved that objective for the first three quarters. The second was to deliver steady and predictable revenue growth, which we did through the first three quarters. And the third was to demonstrate progress towards cash flow breakeven, and we've made some hard choices throughout the year that have achieved these goals. So we've really achieved all three of these goals. So on penetrating the spatial biology market, you know, the best way to think about that is to look at the installed base growth, and as of the end of the third quarter, we had 510 spatial biology systems, GeoMx plus CosMx, installed worldwide, and we had more of those that had been shipped and were in the process of installation. Those systems are beginning to having a tremendous scientific impact, measured by peer-reviewed papers published by our customers, and at the end of the year, they had published over 380 peer-reviewed papers. AtoMx, our informatics system, actually gives us telemetry on the CosMx systems we've placed, and so we can watch the productivity of our customers, which is exciting. As you can see, as of September this year, the cumulative number of single cells processed by our customers on a spatial basis exceeded everything that had been done by the Human Cell Atlas collaboration as of the first of January. So those systems that we've placed are tremendously productive, and our customers are getting amazing insights. In just six months, we did more than what has ever been done on the Human Cell Atlas project. We also introduced great product innovations in 2023. On GeoMx, it's not really appreciated that half of the volume of samples on GeoMx is actually protein analysis. For our customers that enjoy looking at protein, which is really like scanning a whole bunch of immunohistochemistry markers at once, we introduced the highest plex protein panel ever conceived, 570-plex immuno-oncology panel. And we worked with Abcam to do this, and we basically asked Abcam, "Give us every single marker in your library, and we want to barcode it at once and offer it out there so that customers can scan every potential IHC biomarker at once on a sample and determine some utility to those IHCs that you might not be aware of." And we just began shipping this in the third quarter, and I'll say the customer reaction was incredibly strong. In just six weeks, 50 different customers ordered $1 million worth of this panel, and that's trial usage, but those folks are excited to get their hands on it and try it and hopefully incorporate it into their recurring workflows. And the architecture is such that we could do this over and over again. We could do it in other fields, beyond immuno-oncology, and, you know, our colleagues at Abcam are eager to do so. So on our second objective of, delivering predictable revenue, we, we did a great job of that through the first three quarters. We beat every single, quarter on revenue. We beat actually on the individual line items of nCounter and spatial as well, and we actually raised our revenue guidance in the first quarter. Now, we did withdraw our revenue guidance in November in the wake of intellectual property, ruling in Delaware that I'll talk more about, but really through the period that we've reported up to that disruption, we've had tremendous revenue, predictability. Now, the progress towards breakeven is important for all customers, companies in our kind of category and our stage, and we approached it this year by thinking first about the evolution of the company. We looked at how the past and the future are really different, and that guided our logic. So the company is evolving from a situation where we were really technology-driven, it was really about what we could invent, to a situation where we're technology-driven and with our now customer insights about what really spatial biology researchers want, a little more focused in what we're developing. We moved from a mode where capital was cheap and revenue was valued at almost any cost, expense, to a world where we need to find a way to both grow and do so on a profitable basis.... We moved from a mode where we were introducing new instrument platforms about every three years to one where we have three great instrument platforms, and most of our effort is now about improving the capabilities of those platforms through additional consumables and software. We moved from a mode where our competition dimension was almost entirely on speed to market, to one where we're really trying to drive unit costs down to improve our gross margins and pass value on to customers. So guided by those principles, we made two important reorganizations in the last several months. The first took place in November, where we reorganized our research and development and our manufacturing operations to eliminate some of the roles that were associated with instrument development that are no longer needed, and to combine and synergize duplicated departments across R&D and ops. About 100 employees left as part of that reorganization. Then last week, we announced a commercial reorganization that had been in planning for some time to simplify our go-to-market strategy and create dedicated teams, sales teams, some for nCounter, which is an underserved product that hasn't got the attention it deserves, and is highly profitable, and then a larger team for spatial biology. So net-net, we've reduced our headcount by about 25% in the last 4 months. That translates, in terms of a pro forma EBITDA basis, into about a 25% improvement in our bottom line. Now, these numbers are... I want you to look at them carefully. They're retrospective, looking back for the first three months of the year on a pro forma basis. But I think the important thing is to get a sense of the magnitude of the operating expense reduction, and, which is about $25 million-$30 million, and the, the improvement thereof. So this sets the stage towards that important path towards profitability. Another step we took during the year, that was kind of connected to our balance sheet, was to renegotiate and amend our convertible debt that had been issued some years ago, right around the time, actually, of the GeoMx launch, and exchange it for a new debt instrument that extended the maturity of that debt out till September of 2026. At the same time, we were able to get the interest associated with that debt as paid in kind for the first year, and importantly, you know, part of the consideration was warrants that help align our noteholders' incentives and economics with those of our shareholders. Now, with all those great things, you're probably saying, "God, geez, Brad, sounds like you made all your goals in 2023. Why has the stock performed the way it has?" Well, it comes down to intellectual property litigation. There's been disruptive to, you know, of course, company expense, and created noise in the marketplace. And I don't want to spend a lot of time on it, but I just want to orient you to those ongoing lawsuits, all of which are with 10x Genomics, our competitor. Well, for Geo, our GeoMx product, we have one lawsuit that's here in the United States. It went to a Delaware trial, a jury trial, in November, and that jury decided against us, and we are currently in the post-trial motions, all of which will be submitted by the end of this month for the judge to make the final rulings on questions like royalty rate, damages, and injunction. That'll be expected in the weeks or months following the post-trial motions. And we do intend to appeal this, and the realistic timing for that appeal is around the middle of 2025. I will point out a stat I learned that's interesting, which is that 40% of guilty verdicts for patent infringement in Delaware courts are overturned on appeal. So, you know, keep that in mind as you kind of evaluate the risk of that. CosMx is involved in litigation both in the U.S. and the E.U. In the U.S., we have a jury trial scheduled for September. We have four ways to win in this trial. It's the usual ways of proving we don't infringe or invalidating the patents, but because of some of the activities of Harvard and 10x, we also have an affirmative defense called unclean hands and an antitrust counterclaim against those groups. We're in litigation in Europe as well, in Germany, where we've recently had a stay on the initial injunction in Germany, and then in Europe, through the Unified Patent Court, well, we've had an appeal hearing, and we're waiting the results. Now, let me, now let me switch gears and talk about the year ahead. I've been talking all day, so I'm gonna take a cough drop while I do this. So some of the exciting catalysts for NanoString relate to products that we'll be launching and announcing in, in the upcoming months. The first exciting product is a 6x increase in the plex of our CosMx Spatial Molecular Imager, making it six ti- or 6 x more powerful than what we have today. That'll be taking place in the first quarter. We've already shown what this technology is capable of through the public release of a dataset back in September on the human brain, which showed amazing sensitivity and detection of a huge genomic breadth of different cell types in the brain. Even more exciting is what I call the Holy Grail of spatial biology, the ability to look at every gene and every cell in a tissue sample through the CosMx Spatial Molecular Imager. This is the whole transcriptome panel that we've been working towards on CosMx, and we just announced that we've achieved this goal over the weekend. It's 19,000-plex. We've released a dataset that's already been downloaded many dozens of times by many dozens of customers, and we look forward to seeing what our customers can do with that dataset and talking a little bit about it here. So the first thing we did with the whole transcriptome was we applied it to pancreas. Pancreas is an interesting organ 'cause it has a lot of structure. You may have heard of beta cells and islets of Langerhans. Pancreas has exocrine cells that are dark here in the photomicrograph, and endocrine cells that are in those islets, that tend to do a lot of the things you hear about related to diabetes. We were able to very quickly image and identify where those islets are, and when we showed this data to some of the leaders in the field, they were incredibly impressed and excited with what we were able to do. Because pancreas has been well-characterized, we're able to test to make sure that we could find the rare cell types that you would expect to see in a pancreas, and we did. Even though the islets and the endocrine cells only represent, in totality, about 3.5% of all the cells in a pancreas, we were able to identify all the major types, including the very rare cells, like, the epsilon cell, which represents only 0.08% of all pancreas cells. In addition, because we have the whole transcriptome, we're able to listen in on the private conversations of cells, looking at cells that are proximal to each other and how they're talking back with ligands and receptors. When we look at all the conversations we can hear, we found 1,500 individual conversations, which is 3.7x what you can get with our 1,000-plex overall panel. So a really great demonstration of what you can see with the whole transcriptome. So that was our public data set. This is a customer data set that I think is also a great demonstration. By having the whole transcriptome and not panels that we've designed to specific diseases, we can do really basic research, like in developmental biology. Here you see an analysis of a seven week embryo, human embryo. We were able to look at spatial modules of development and see where they're taking place. So on the left, you can look at the neural module and see exactly where the brain and the spinal cord are forming. You can look at a cardiac module, see exactly where the heart's developing. You can look at hematopoietic modules and see exactly where the bone marrow is forming that's gonna actually make blood. So this, this is possible because we're including all the genes, not just the ones that are disease-associated, but things like fetal hematopoietin, which you wouldn't normally think to put in a panel, but it's important for some of these modules. Now, this is informatically intense. These data sets are about 1.2 TB for every sq cm of tissue at the whole transcriptome level, and we have to work with the best and brightest to process all that data. We have NVIDIA GPUs, or a GPU unit built into each one of our CosMx systems. We're working with NVIDIA to develop new methods and techniques and algorithms that provide the fast processing power to make sense of and present and analyze all this amazing data. Now, you don't have to take our word for it. If you come to the AGBT meeting, which takes place in Orlando in February, you're gonna get a chance to hear three more of our customers provide oral presentations on their experience with the whole transcriptome atlas. There'll be work on the brain, work on colorectal cancer, and I can't remember the third field, but there'll be a great amount of science, and in addition, we'll be holding an investor workshop in the afternoon to talk more about our prospects. So with that, I'll wrap up and look forward to taking your questions. Perfect. Thank you for that. So first up, I just kind of wanted to talk about the, you know, framework of how we should think about wrapping up 2023 and then kind of getting into 2024. After the U.S. District Court decision back in November related to genomics, you decided to withdraw the guidance just to evaluate the potential impact of that decision. So at this point, could you tell us, do we have an update on that 2023 guidance, or do you expect to keep it withdrawn until 4Q earnings? And then also, when we get to 4Q earnings, could we anticipate receiving 2024 guidance at that time, or are you still really determining? Yeah. Thank you, Rachel. Yeah, so we are not providing any updates on FY 2023 today in terms of the revenue guidance expectation. We will do that on our February call. We haven't yet decided whether we'll be issuing guidance or what form that guidance will come in, but- Got it. We'll do all of that all at one time. Perfect. That's helpful. Then, you know, one of the trends that we've been talking about a lot across your peers and everywhere else in life science tools is this dynamic of the macro impact and also budget flush expectations for 4Q. So can you just talk about, you know, first up, you haven't seen as much of a macroeconomic impact for your business at NanoString. Why is that? And has that, you know, resiliency continued throughout the end of the year? And then on the budget flush side, did you really see any catch-up spending from customers in 4Q? Yeah, I'd say, you know, we're not-- we probably don't have great answers on questions about macro because we're lucky enough to be in a very exciting field where most labs are building a brand-new capability, and even in tight environments for capital spending, these new capabilities tend to be prioritized. So I think demand for spatial biology was robust into the end of the year. You can see that in the reporting of some of our other peers who did report updates this week. And, I don't expect that NIH funding or those types of matters are going to be a primary source of volatility for the company. Mm-hmm. For us, it's more about product cycles, competition... and managing through the litigation noise that's ongoing. Got it. That's helpful. Then I appreciate we won't get, you know, 2024 commentary right now, so I just wanted to ask on how are you thinking about your main strategic priorities as we head into 2024? They're not too different from the ones I just outlined in 2023. Clearly, continued penetration of the spatial biology market and asserting our leadership there is critical. Continuing to drive towards profitability and cash flow break-even is critical, as it is for many other companies. And I guess I'd add, in this case, in this year, managing successfully through the litigation and the background noise and the financial strain that that can introduce, that'll be something that, of course, Tom and I are spending a lot of our time on. Yeah, definitely. So in light of that topic on the litigations, you kind of laid out a lot of the, you know, key data points and when dates that we should be looking at for future injunctions and things like that. But I just want to ask about the impact of the business so far. Can you give us an update on how you've seen cancellations trend, both for CosMx and GeoMx, following some of these litigations? We're not going to be quantitative about that today, but, I mean, cancellations have not been a primary driver of our business. What has been is our competitors deliberately used the questions that surround litigation to instill fear with customers in a way that slows down their buying cycles. So really, the first-order impact of litigation in our field, outside of course, being enjoined in certain regions in Europe, is a slowdown in the purchase cycle. And, you know, our reps are managing through that, and we'll provide more updates that are more quantitative on that as we get to the February call. Got it. That's helpful. Then, you know, alongside that, you were... You have to pay a $31 million fine for the GeoMx litigation there. So I was wondering, can you just talk us through how does that impact your cash flow break-even expectations? Well, obviously, the damages haven't been finalized, so we look forward to hearing what those are. But we do expect we'll need to post damages in some form sometime in the late first or early second quarters, probably in the form of a bond. A bond that would be almost think of it as cash in escrow that, you know, if we win on appeal, comes back to us, and if we lose the appeal, goes to the plaintiff. And, you know, that's non-trivial to find $31 million in cash. Tom and I are spending a lot of time working on that. We're engaged in a close dialogue with our note holders, with other potential strategic partners, looking for ways to continue to shore up the balance sheet through 2024 and continue the mission of the company. Perfect. Then I wanted to shift over to the nCounter franchise. You mentioned in your presentation you think this is an underappreciated area of the story. So it's very high percentage of recurring revenues, but it's also a more mature business at this point. So taking a step back, can you just remind us, how should we think about nCounter placement from a run rate perspective, balancing that with some of the deactivations? And then what's that pull-through trajectory look like over the next two to three years? Yeah. So the nCounter business was our sole focus up until 2019. And two things happened in 2019. One is we launched the GeoMx, which became, you know, an incredibly exciting thing for the company, our shareholders, and our sales reps to spend their time on. And you remember the pandemic happened, and because nCounter was mostly a recurring revenue business at that time, nCounter dropped as labs closed. And when it recovered a year later, things were different. NanoString was a spatial biology company. Our sales reps were energized to sell spatial. Those of us who joined, joined because of spatial. And so from that point on, nCounter really was underserved, I would say, by our sales team. One thing that we've done, we've taken the opportunity of this reorganization to create a dedicated nCounter sales team- Mm-hmm ... as well as a larger, dedicated, spatial biology sales team. We think that's going to help revitalize that important franchise by giving it the focus it deserves. In terms of the numbers, you know, at peak, we were probably placing about 120 new nCounters a year, and that's dropped to about 50 a year in the last periods. We'd like to see that number go back up modestly. I don't know if it'll get to 120, but, we'd like to see that go back up. But more importantly, we want to see our reps go out and reactivate some of the dark sites, some of the current customers who have moved away from nCounter, and drive their utilization back up above that 45K average. Okay. Got it. That's helpful. Then maybe shifting over to the spatial portfolio, just on CosMx, can you provide us any color on the CosMx backlog and discuss the customer composition of that backlog for the full year? So how should we think about customer split between academic and pharma versus, you know, new to NanoString customers, for example? Sure, we get data. This is... I'll take this question for press. So on backlog, the last time we actively talked about the number of instruments we had in backlog was at the end of Q2, and we stopped doing that because backlog really isn't an important long-term metric for the company. We typically like to deliver the instruments to, to customers within the quarter in which they order it, and that's been the case with all of our other platforms. And the reason we had discussed backlog on CosMx was because we had a large, large number of pre-orders in the 2022 timeframe, and so we wanted to give backlog and order numbers out to investors to help them to understand the demand that we received for spatial biology. So we still do have some backlog headed into 2024, but we won't be reporting that number. In terms of the mix, among the different customers, it's about the same as our other platforms. It's about 60%-65% academic, and the rest being biopharma and pharma-type customers. That's consistent across all three of our platforms. Got it. Just to add on that, CosMx started as a very academically focused platform, and I remember quarters were 90% academic. In the last quarters, we've seen biopharma really turn on and begin to adopt this. So it's starting to match more of our overall nCounter and GeoMx mix, which is more of a two-thirds, one-third mix that Tom talked about. Got it. Perfect, that's helpful. Maybe just give us some color on the expected pull-through on the CosMx side. You've been disclosing pull-through for both CosMx and GeoMx together, but as our customer base continues to scale up for CosMx, do you anticipate disclosing this as a blended pull-through forever, or at some point, will we start to get that pull-through just for CosMx? Yeah, I think we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. One of the things we're very careful about is not taking stocking orders for CosMx that yeah, and then, you know, guessing how long it's gonna take to consume them, you know, and getting a pull-through wrong. So on average, we've been reporting about $70,000 per system per year across GeoMx and CosMx. Of course, numerically, that's mostly GeoMx, because GeoMx has a larger installed base and is further along in its history. And we've always guided that people should model that number, $70,000-$75,000, across both our platforms on a go-forward basis, and there's no change to our thinking on that at this stage. Got it. That's helpful. Then maybe just in terms of the competitive positioning, you know, NanoString spatial instruments really lead on plex, while some of your competitors focus on other aspects. So why do you think that plex is so important for customers? And then also, what do you think are really the three main technical aspects of spatial instruments, and, you know, why should we be paying attention to those? Yeah, I think experience shows that whether it's spatial or otherwise, scientists want to get the maximum amount of insight from their very precious tissue samples that they've collected. And plex, whether it's DNA sequencing or RNA expression or spatial, has always been a primary axis of competition, and we see customers trade up over and over again. When more plex becomes available, even at a premium price, they very often pay for it, and that's why we've bet in part on, you know, plex as a very important dimension. And we've seen it in our own experience with the CosMx launch. So when we first conceived of CosMx, and we first kind of released it for test driving through our Technology Access Program, we actually had 100 plex and 1,000 plex, and the 100 plex was really fast. You could get a lot of samples through it. Not a single customer ever ordered that 100-plex, and that told us louder than any market research ever could, that driving plex up was gonna be something our customers value. What are the other dimensions of performance? I mean, I think, obviously, there's throughput, which is simple to understand, the number of samples per week that can be run. That's important if you're doing biology at scale, but, so far, that hasn't been a main component of our conversations with customers. So I'd say those are the two main dimensions. Got it. That's helpful. And then, you know- Yeah ... how should we think of the main bottlenecks that are, you know, prohibiting further adoption of spatial biology, and how is NanoString working to really overcome some of those bottlenecks as well? Well, one of the bottlenecks that a lot of researchers talked about in the early days was, "What am I gonna do with all this data? I don't know how to analyze it. There's no paradigms for even how to visualize so many genes at once." And we really worried that that would be a governor of growth in the whole field, and that's why we invested so heavily in AtoMx. AtoMx provides a place to store your data, a way for all your colleagues to dial in and see it at the same time, the compute power that allows any number of analyses you might imagine to be done. And it's also geared towards the open source community. So we built into AtoMx a way to import R code and other things that would be developed by the academic world and, and help it grow and enhance over time. So that's, that's probably one of the number one things, and I don't hear researchers talk as often about the bottleneck of informatics as I did, you know, when we first began to describe these systems. Perfect. Then maybe shifting again back to some of the competitive focus. So in terms of RNA versus protein, NanoString is much more focused on the RNA side, while companies like Akoya are predominantly protein-focused. So how do you expect this dynamic to really evolve over time between RNA and protein? Well, I think... Look, we know that both are important to researchers, and we all of our systems, to be clear, offer both RNA and protein. And as I said, on GeoMx, actually, by sample volume, half the use is protein, though we've traditionally charged less on a per-sample basis for protein reagents, so on a revenue basis, it's not quite half. But on the GeoMx system, I think we've sent a strong signal. We intend to continue to offer compelling protein panels. The barcoding architecture that allows virtually unlimited plex, we think is a real advantage. And we're excited about the early weeks and months of demand for the 570-plex. We'll also continue to enhance protein panels on CosMx, but at least in the first instance, almost all of our customers are doing RNA right now. And we'll see where the protein goes there. The protein in CosMx is most useful as a way of identifying the cell boundaries, so you can do what's called segmentation and understand how to assign the RNAs to the right cell. That's a very important aspect of the protein in CosMx, but, you know, at least early demand for the panels on protein is much less than the RNA. I think all these product categories that we're talking about will continue to coexist, and challenge each other and push the whole field together, and I hope, you know, a lot of companies kind of flourish and continue to innovate. Perfect. Then maybe in the final few minutes here, can you just kind of walk us through, what do you think are some of the misunderstood or underappreciated aspects of the NanoString story? Yeah, well, one is, you've heard us talk about nCounter, which is Tom's favorite. He- that's why he's looking over at me. You know, the fact that nCounter is a 60-something million dollar a year business with a 30+ EBITDA margin, I mean, I think that's underappreciated, and I think by both our shareholders and even us sometimes, right? Which is why we've kind of recommitted to it through our sales efforts. So that's one piece, and I think the other is, you know, if you look at where our enterprise value is today as a company, and you look at what nCounter provides alone, you have to... Yeah, you can see that we're getting a lot of- a very little amount of value attributed to spatial biology, and I think that's because of the litigation noise. And, you know, I think litigation is a situation where you win some, you lose some, and over time, it all kind of... You know, it's not all done in one round. And, you know, I think the investment community is misjudging the impact of the long-term impact of litigation on NanoString's ability to flourish and lead in spatial biology. I mean, I think our risk assessment is different- Perfect ... than the market. Awesome. Anything, Tom, from you? Nope, I think those are the two... Yep, those are the two things. Perfect. Yeah. With that, we are out of time. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Rachel. ... for joining. Appreciate it. Yeah, thank you so much.