Med tech analysts. They don't do all of healthcare, just med tech. Next up, we have Nevro, Kevin Thornal, President and CEO, and Rod MacLeod, Chief Financial Officer. So thanks for joining us. Yeah, thanks for having us. Yeah. So, Kevin, I think I first met you here a year ago. It was your first conference, so it's been a year, basically, since you've been at Nevro. Just kind of curious how the strategy's played out, and kind of the vision from here, and kind of what you think you've accomplished in the first year and still kind of left to go. Yeah, it's just after the one-year mark. Look, I'm really proud of the team, with what we've been able to accomplish in the first year. Just a couple of things. One is, obviously, we had some changes in our commercial organization. That structure is now done and changed. We did the first deal in the history of the company to help diversify us into other areas around pain management. We refinanced our debt and kicked that out into the future, so that we'd be able to run the company in a great way right now. We also brought about half of our leadership team is new to the organization, and then we've done now two restructurings to rightsize the organization to get our cost structure where it needs to be for the size of the organization and the growth projections ahead, which allow us to get to now the first time to give guidance with an adjusted EBITDA, you know, around breakeven, a little positive and a little negative in the guardrail. So, I think it's a lot accomplished within a year. And then, Chris, you just promote Chris. I can't say the last name. Christopher Christopher. Chris Kluka. I messed it up on the earnings call, too. Don't worry. Okay. All right. Well, I don't feel as bad. Yeah. To the new COO role, you know, what's the strategic thinking behind the move? And I think this is the first time Nevro's had a COO. Yeah, first time, and don't forget, we also, about nine months ago, brought in Greg Siller, who worked with Rod and I at Stryker previously, before 17 years there, ran their interventional spine business, which is right where it is. So Greg now is responsible for anything commercially focused, what we're doing for strategy, where we're going. And Chris has been at Nevro for nine years. He was at Thoratec prior to that long-term history, and so he's got everything else other than finance and IR within the organization. So he has all the plumbing of the organization. He's really the one, the architect behind our move down to Costa Rica for manufacturing, also by running R&D. And so with this move, he also picks up regulatory and quality. And so with that, now we'll be able to have everything streamlined for our cost improvements, what we're doing as far as streamlining the organization. And so while we're out winning minds and spirits and customers, he's making sure that everything is run and the foundation of the organization is solid and where it needs to be. Great. So Q1 just reported last week, $4 million beat versus the street, but did see some softness in the trial market. Just kind of curious how, maybe just an update on how you thought Q1 played out kind of versus your original expectations. Yeah, it definitely came in hotter than what we thought, and those are always good news. But we also know that the first half of the year is probably around what we thought it was in our guidance. That's why we didn't need to change any of our guidance for the year, and we reaffirmed what we think the year is going to play out. You know, during the quarter, we also—it's the first full quarter we owned Vyrsa, so a lot of integration work going on as far as internally building up and scaling up that organization, but more importantly, pulling reps and physicians sort of out of the field and out of their practices to really start to be educated on that device. Things are going really well there, but still a smaller part of our business, but the ramp-up is definitely what we're doing for the first half of this year. So we still feel good about the guidance for the first half. Yeah, I mean, you know, we grew 6%. One of our competitors posted pretty strong growth. One of the private companies out there, we think, had a pretty solid quarter. One of our competitors was down kind of mid-single digits. So I think it was a little bit of a, you know, haves and have-nots in the first quarter, but overall, we were pretty pleased with how we performed. What caused the trialing in the market? Just, it wasn't just you. I think it was across the market, maybe that softness in the quarter. Yeah, I think it's a couple of things. One is for us, I can just talk about us. We did pull a ton of physicians. We said we've now trained... It's even more than 220 that we said on the earnings call last week out of the field. If all of those doctors are out one day, 220 people not doing a trial, that adds up to a little bit of the softness there, but that's why we said we planned on it. We knew we have to do this, and it's really not. You know, some people call it a disruption. We call it an investment into the future because those physicians are not only getting trained on SI joint. All of our reps are flying in with their physicians, and guess what they're talking about as well? Spinal cord stimulation. And so the first group of people that we trained were really Nevro loyalists. You know, you want to start with your friends as you're learning and coming up the learning curve, but now we're getting in where we have competitive SCS physicians coming to learn SI joint procedures. And obviously, well, while they're there, they're going to get an earful about high frequency and why why Nevro is the best choice for SCS. You think about the guidance, so despite the beat, you basically reassert the guidance and said, comes out to Q2. Is it just because of the trialing that you saw, or is there anything else that kind of led you to kind of keep Q2 and the rest of the year kind of in line? Yeah, I mean, like I said, Q1 came in a little hotter than we thought, and with that last week of the quarter, you know, each of our implants are over $20,000, so it doesn't take a lot to pull things into weeks back and forward. So it's still early in the year, and so we thought it to be prudent just to reconfirm for the year, give our time for our reps to ramp up with the SI joint procedure and our physicians to ramp up as well. And then we'll see how Q2 and Q3 play out. What's the plan for the training on those reps? Did you do everybody in Q1, so it's kind of done, or is it? We're going to see that impact over the course of the year? It's gonna still go on right now because it's really the bolus. This is the first time our reps have had it and also the first time that physicians have been trained on SI joint procedures. So we're still in the middle of almost every weekend, we're at a hotel somewhere in the U.S., flying in 30, 40 physicians with cadavers and models and things like that. So we're right in the heat of it. One thing that we did talk about, we had a lot more demand for training than we ever would've imagined. So we went out and polled our reps to say, "Hey, how many people would you want to train or that are interested in training?" It came back double than what we thought. So we had to add on even more courses throughout right now. It'll still be a little bit of an investment and not a disruption that we say in Q2, but we'll continue to talk about it. We'll get better scale as we go along, 'cause once you get your reps trained, you don't have to retrain them, and they'll be able to train out in the field. As we go along here, we're gonna be getting new tools to be able to do even more training out in the field as opposed to. So we'll definitely get more scale and efficiency as we go throughout the year. There's a big bolus right now. You know, we have 500 people out in the field, and so getting them through the training so that they get certified to cover these cases is really important. I mean, I always think about it, look, that's my mom that could potentially be on the table. What rep would I want in there to help guide the surgeon through their first case? I want one that's been certified, that's done tons of these, watched tons of them out in the field, and so that's the process we're going through right now. So you think by, like, Q2 is probably similar impact as Q1, and by the end of the year, you're probably feeling very little of it? That's a really good timeframe to think about. Okay. And, like now you're pulling both the rep and the surgeon at the same time, right? Right. And so that gets fixed, or I guess the rep doesn't have to come back out of the field. At some point, we're not pulling either of them out of the field because we'll actually be able to train them right in the field. I t's far, no travel days, you know, et cetera. Then the demand you saw for the training, like what, in terms of a sense for what that was for Nevro doctors versus competitive doctors, or maybe even doctors that are kind of split accounts or like no, no Nevro share at all with SCS? Yeah, it's a really good question because your first instinct is, let's go get all the competitive reps and let's go—or competitive physicians, and let's go bring them in to try to convert them over. However, we did the other way because we wanted to learn with people that we've been doing business with, that are our friends for over, you know, 10 years of the existence of the company, so that we could do that hand in hand and learn together, so that when the rep goes into a competitive physician that doesn't use us for SCS, they're gonna be gold star, five-star, ready to go and put their best foot forward when they go through. So I'd say for the first quarter, and a little bit in the beginning of this quarter, it was mainly Nevro physicians. We also had to have some loyalty to them as well, right? I mean, they've been our loyalists for a long time, and they want to get trained. I don't want to tell them no. And so now we're starting to get in with more and more competitive SCS physicians coming through to the second half of Q2, and we'll continue to grow that. That's where it gets really exciting when we become a more valuable member to a physician's practice because we bring two things, not just one thing, and we'll see that continue to play out. How does that conversation go with the competitive surgeon who's not doing SCS? It's like: "Hey, I got, I heard you have this new product. I'm interested in this." Are they kind of reaching out to you or are you kind of being proactive and on the offense more? Both. Right now, we're trying not to get them too excited because when they say, "Yes, I want to go for a training," you're like, "Well, take a number because we still have, you know, people ahead of you." So right now, it's a little bit of holding back just because we can't fill up all the... The courses are already full, filled up, but it's both. We're pushing the demand on that and having good conversations with them, but they're also reaching out to our reps that they've known in the area that might not just do SCS with us, but they're actually reaching out saying, "Hey, can I please go get trained on this? Why, why do you think they want to get trained? Is it they can make more money doing this procedure, or is it like it's the new thing to do? Just curious, why, why do you think they're reaching out? Well, they've seen patients in their practice for years with mechanical back pain and really not a tool to be able to treat them. And so typically, they've had to refer those out to a spinal surgeon or to someplace else to get the mechanical back pain sort of fixed. They've been able to take care of the neuropathic pain, but now that they have a tool available to them that has a much simpler approach and a safer approach, a posterior approach versus a lateral approach, now they're saying: "Oh, this is perfect. I, I want to keep this patient in my practice, and I want to take care of him holistically, not just one of them. I'll take care of neuropathic and kick it down the street to the surgeon for mechanical." They now can solve the entirety of that patient's chronic pain. I think that's a really important part that gets lost on people, is that they really didn't have a means to treat these patients. They had to pass them on, and now they have a much easier, and we would say, better way to treat these patients on an ongoing basis, and they can keep them in their practice. So, those that have seen it, there's a, you know, quite a level of excitement about that. When do you expect Vyrsa to be material, and how would you define material? It's the biggest question we get right now, and we just don't want to get ahead of ourselves. One of the things we do have to do is scale up the manufacturing, not only of the implant itself, but also of the trays that you need to do the procedure. It's not big. It's about the size of the Snoopy lunchboxes we all used to carry to school when we were in elementary school. But we're having to scale up suppliers that weren't used to the demand levels that we need out there. So that's a little bit of the gating items, but I think you'll hear us talk about it more and more as the revenue continues to grow towards the end of this year. Is there a CFO level where it becomes material, is it like 50 basis points of growth or like 10 basis points or a point of growth? I don't know, there's like a accounting- We haven't put anything out there, but I think we'll all know what material is when we hit it. I mean, so it's probably more in 2025, though, than 2024, that you're talking about material revenue? Yeah. Probably. Okay. But possibly in 2025? Yes. Right. Okay, when you—when you think about, just the adoption curve in, in general for this procedure, I don't know if you kind of think about it as like you're building a new market, kind of a, a slower linear adoption versus, you know, taking shares tends to be very quick. So just how would you think about the adoption curve from the longer term for, for Vyrsa? Yeah, it, it definitely is. For physicians that are currently doing the procedure, it's a quick flip, right? It's like: "Hey, you know, you were doing a more difficult type procedure. Look, let me show you a different approach, a posterior approach, and it's safer, quicker. Let me show you what it does." Those are instantaneous. The others that are just learning, one of the things we talk about with the slow ramp-up you have to do is when they go back, they have patients in their practice that are dealing with mechanical back pain, but you don't just go straight to a surgical intervention. You have to go and get a di-- make sure you have the diagnosis code for SI joint pain, and then you need to do injections, and then after the injections work, then you're able to go back. So that's a little bit of the adoption as well, because the patients need to go through that conservative pathway before they get to the, to the implant. Anything on clinical evidence that's needed to build this market? So it's a 510(k) device. We just got approval in the quarter to be able to use the device without a lateral screw, and we have the indications of transfixing. And also, we use for our mechanical testing the data that we used for that. We'll be publishing soon. And so we have the manuscript written up right now, and we're gonna be going out to get that published. Once that's published, we used a really reputable lab to do that, and you're gonna see some really good comparisons against some of the products that are out there. Don't forget, on the 510(k), we actually used a predicate device that's actually already being used in surgery from a really big company right now, and we got a claim that allows us to say, "Just as good as," and then the mechanical data, we think will actually show that we're superior to some of the things that are out there. And then after that, what we're doing right now is we're going back to the hundreds of patients that had already been implanted with the Nevro1 device prior to acquisition, and we're going back and getting their CT scans and their X-rays so that we can show six months out and a year out fusion actually taking place. And so that's some of the clinical work that we're doing right now. A little bit off because we have to go back and retrospectively go get all these patients, but that's already underway. Is that the Nevro1 product that got approved? Nevro1, correct. How do you think about that kind of rolling through the model? Is that, you know, impactful or not, or? Yeah, the Nevro1 device— Oh, not being able to use the, not needing to use the screw? Yeah, that was the big. Right. We already had it into the model. We just it happened to come earlier. So you'll see one of the uses of cash we had in Q1 was paying a $10 million milestone that was tied to that, because that was going to be unlocked. We thought it was gonna happen in Q2, but it happened a little bit earlier than that because of the great mechanical data that we were able to show FDA. They really didn't have a lot of questions, because of the lab we used and the results that were shown. And then, maybe talk about the commercial, the sales force. Like, any changes, how excited they are to have another product in the bag? Does it change the compensation structure in any way, and how you kinda see balancing, you know, them going after one market versus the other? Yeah. Take you back to when I first got here, and I knew that the plan was to help diversify the revenue, and I came from this type of space back at, when I was at Stryker, so we understood the SI joint space already, and with Greg Siller coming on board as well. And so we had seen the need for diversification, and we needed to change the sales force to be able to be ready for this acquisition. So I sort of telegraphed to all the investors, "Hey, look, we're gonna diversify. We're gonna change our commercial structure." Then we did the deal that basically said, we're gonna do something, and it's not gonna be a, you know, a hundreds of million dollar deal. It's gonna be something that's adequate size. We did the deal knowing that—or we did the sales force restructuring, knowing that we're gonna add a new product in their bag. Then we added the product in the bag, and now we're executing that ramp up. So the reps are really excited to have something new to talk about. It's always difficult when you've gotten a no from a competitive SCS surgeon for some number of different reasons. Maybe they've known the other rep for 15, 20 years, or they've used the device for 15 years. Now we have something new to talk about, and that's always exciting. So from a compensation structure, there's two things good that will happen. One is the rep has the opportunity to diversify their revenue streams as well. You know, if an SCS trial doctor is out for two weeks on vacation, they can go do three or four SI joint cases and make that money back for their comp plan. It also allows us to be able to say, "Hey, rep, you can sell. You're gonna make more money this year than you did last year, but we're gonna take your commission points down a couple because you still can make money, and that allows us to be more profitable." And that's why I kept talking about leveraging the biggest asset we have in the company, which is our sales force, dropping things into the bag. The Vyrsa acquisition didn't come with any reps. It's all right into our, into our reps. There's no additional cost on the sales line. Are you incentivizing one or the other with the reps? So they, they can't make money unless they sell both. So there's, they have to fill both of their buckets, and they, they won't be able to make it just on SCS, but they surely can't just make it on SI joint. So, they're still heavily incentivized to keep their SCS business, so they're not taking their eye off that ball. And then, adding reps, like, what's the hiring plan there? Kind of how many sales people you have today versus kind of what you're adding today and how long it's taking them to get up to speed. Yeah. So last year we did the restructuring, or the, you know, realignment of the sales force. We will continue to add territories as this grows. It's the other benefit of adding diversification. If you're a rep and you can make just as much money, but drive two hours from your house instead of six hours from your house, because now you have more things to sell closer, we might need to add an expansion territory in those sort of outlying areas, with a newer rep coming through. So we're adding, you know, a handful at a time. Nothing that's gonna be meaningful to say, "Hey, look, we just added 40 new reps," or anything like that. It's, it's, you know, four or five at a time when needed. I think it would be helpful for people who aren't as familiar to just understand the kind of referral pathway and, like, how these patients are, you know, getting to the pain doctors before they get referred out to the surgeons, and so, like, just how they're kind of capturing these people before they get to the later point. Yeah. So, both on SCS and for SI joint, what happens is a patient typically is at their family care, a physician, or they're at a podiatrist or an endocrinologist for PDN patients, and they complain about, "Man, I just have chronic pain." And after they've tried aspirin, after they've tried, you know, maybe heavier doses of pain medications, and it's still not helping, they typically get referred out to a pain management physician. And then typically, when they get there, they have a diagnosis code of chronic pain. And then they have a different pathway, depending upon, is it mechanical back pain or neuropathic issues that are ongoing there? So for SI joint, they would need to diagnose it as SI joint pain, do an injection, and then they can do that procedure. For SCS, you go through, you say, have the same diagnosis code, you feel, realize it's neuropathic back pain, then you need to do some, injections, RF nerve ablation, maybe some bracing as well, and there's a very, clear pathway to get them to SCS. But that's usually like a eight-month to a one-year process, whereas SI joint, between diagnosis and implantation is much shorter, typically. You basically are capturing them before they even get referred? Correct. So yeah, before, what they would do is they would diagnose them with chronic back pain, and if they realized that it was mechanical and there's nothing they could do, they do an X-ray, and they realize that maybe there's an issue with the disc or an issue with the vertebrae, they would refer that out to a surgeon that may do a fusion, and then they would get referred back into their practice to follow them for longer term, and maybe they need an SCS as well as a fusion. And so that's how the symbiotic relationship goes back and forth between a surgeon and a pain management physician. It's exciting, this versus the majority of revenue is still SCS. So, let's talk about that for a little bit. Yeah. That market has been challenged. I don't know if you have any big-picture thoughts on anything new on why the market was challenged and kinda why it could get better from here, and any expectations for the overall SCS market growth? Like, it feels like it might be improving a little bit, but not a lot. I don't know if this is kinda like the new normal that we're at. Yeah, I mean, look, in the quarter, we know that it grew mid-single digits. Now, we think Medtronic will announce here in a couple of weeks. We do think there's gonna be the story this year will be winners and losers. Like you said, in the first quarter, we know that one of our public competitors grew. We know we grew 6% growth this quarter. We know that the private players are growing as well. Not huge yet, but they're still doing that. And we saw one of our public companies probably be the donor of that growth to all of us there, and we'll see what the last one does. But if you look at the pure financials, it's about a mid-single-digit growth, and we think that that's probably where it could play out this year. All we can do is make sure we get our fair share and, and more, and we believe that all of our projections for this year have us doing that, and that's why we reaffirm guidance. The market's usually kinda driven by product cycles. Market historically has been, like, launch a new product, your growth accelerates. Year two, it slows back down again. Like, is there just a lot of product cycles being launched right now across the market that's kinda driving the mid-single-digit growth, or is this, like, 5% volume that's really coming through and, like, more sustainable? Yeah, I don't know on the competitors front, I know on one of the competitors front, but for us, obviously, our launch of 1Q last year, we're just about to... Well, it just went over a year from when we launched that. We are doing extremely well. We went from 53% in Q4 to 58% in Q1 of adoption. Now that we have a solution for Android users as well, we think that'll continue to climb throughout the year. You know, we are getting some price there, but we're also getting some competitive conversions. And then the last part that I mentioned on the earnings call for the first time, we are just now right about that 10-year mark in the U.S., a little bit longer in international where we're starting to see a replacement cycle come up where the batteries are ending, and they're end of their useful life are upcoming. A lot of our competitors have enjoyed sort of that replacement cycle for many years. We never have. This is our first point where a lot of the patients implanted are coming up, where the useful life is starting to wane, but they've enjoyed the therapy. If you stayed on this therapy for 10 years, it's changed your life, and they don't want to go from high frequency to low frequency. So we believe that we'll have, you know, a group of patients that will build over the years that we'll be able to help them continue that treatment with 1Q or a subsequent generation of our SCS device. The replacement cycle, I don't know if you've thought through, like, capture rates that you think would come through, as the kinda the ASP, like, the same as a regular procedure. And I don't know if there's anything... If you think about, like, what that could add to the growth rate, like, low single digits overall, longer term, I don't know if you can quantify that. We haven't yet, because this is new to us. Like, we just have really a first quarter where it's like, "Hmm, that's, that's interesting." There's a little bit there, and we can see this growing as we see the patients that got installed, you know, eight, nine, 10 years ago, maybe coming back and saying, "Hey, I love this therapy, but my, my charge isn't as lasting as long." Think about it from an iPhone perspective. You know when it's time to get a new one, when your battery goes down, like, by lunchtime, you're like: "Oh, my gosh, I need to recharge it again." It starts to patients will start to see that and go back to the physician saying, "Hey, I need to get a new battery implanted." So we haven't quantified it. It's really, really small right now, but we wanted in full disclosure to talk about it because we think that in future quarters and years, that it's gonna be a more meaningful part of our revenue, but nothing really to model out right now. Are you gonna break it out when it's material? No, I don't—I mean, at this point, I don't think we'd anticipate breaking out the replacements. But where you'll see it, though, is in what you see with our competitors, is when there's a deviation between trials and perm. You don't trial when you're doing a replacement. The leads are already into the back, and so you're just replacing where those leads attach to. Okay. So that's where when you see little trials down. Why, you know, it might not be a true indication for what the permanents are going to be, especially for some of those competitors that are doing some of the replacements. Yeah, let me rephrase that. I, I mean, I think it's gonna depend on how material it is. But right now, it is a pretty small number, and, you know, we're new to it. You know, we've—we came into the U.S. market in 2015, so we're just approaching that nine to 10-year sort of mark. So I think we have to see how that plays out. What about the competitive landscape that some new competitors coming to the market that are launching? Any kind of views on share and your ability to kind of either hold share or gain share in this market? Yeah, we really don't see a lot of the competitors right now. I think, you know, if you see who had a bad quarter, one of our public competitors had a bad quarter. We believe that they're probably the biggest donor to, to some of the, the newer private entrants, and the reason why is they are low frequency. If you're a physician that's been doing Nevro high frequency, paresthesia free, where you're not waking up the patient during surgery, you see the benefits of the algorithm, you see the benefits of our data lake, of, of the hundreds of thousands of patients are there. For you to all of a sudden go back and go, "Oh, I'm going to go back to low frequency," these physicians have already switched from low frequency years ago, so we don't really see them as much. So, I think it's really a battle between the low-frequency players right now for, for a lot of those patients, a lot of those physicians that are looking to try something new. Then on margins, are there any thoughts on why you think this business has kind of struggled to kind of get to the sustainable profitability historically and kind of what you're doing to kind of change that moving forward, so we can kind of get it to, you know, margins that are cash flow positive and actually generating cash in this business? Yeah. It, so a couple of things. One is we, we moved manufacturing or we brought manufacturing in-house to Costa Rica, and that's, that's going well. We do think that we'll have good margin, gross margin expansion opportunities over the next couple of years. We're still in that transition phase, going from contract manufacturer to bringing, bringing it in-house. We might have a little bit of headwinds over these next couple of quarters. It's really just from an accounting perspective, in terms of some of those variances that'll be rolling off the balance sheet and hitting COGS. We're super happy with our labor costs down there, our material costs, and we'll, we've got that pathway to that margin expansion. As long as pricing holds, that going into the kind of the mid-seventies over the next couple of years. As you mentioned earlier, we've also taken some restructuring efforts this year, and we pulled out about $30 million on an annualized run rate from our cost structure. That's enabled us to flatten our organization and, you know, you go after something like that, one, because you want to right-size your P&L. You want to get into a place where you can draw profits on an adjusted EBITDA basis, and we've definitely moved the needle in that regard. It's also moving us a heck of a lot closer to getting to that cash flow break even, which we're really driving the business towards. But really, you do it because when you flatten that organization out and you get focused on the really important things, your organization moves faster. You can respond faster. So, you know, we've got the SIJ business or the product that's in our bag now, and we're training up our reps on that. You know, we're also out in the field, you know, working on the SCS part of our business, and I just think we're able to respond quicker, faster, and in a more nimble way to what's going on out in the market with our new structure. So to add a couple of things there, don't forget, when we acquired Vyrsa as well, it's accretive to both margin as well as revenue. So the margin profile, gross margin profile is much higher than what we have in SCS. We also talked about diversifying the revenue because the revenue streams grow without adding new reps in there. That's also continuing part of our play and our R&D pipeline coming through. I've publicly said it's not just the next generation SCS device for back pain, it's getting us into new markets that are really close in to what we already do, but utilizing our R&D expertise around neuromodulation to be able to help us get there. So those are new revenue streams that'll be products that'll just add directly into our bag. When you diversify that revenue, you can leverage more of that to drop down cash flow, a lot of cash flow. It's why it was a top three pillar when I first started. We have to have the march towards profitability. I'm used to controlling our own destiny with, you don't need a lot of debt over and over again to get that growth going and you know, that's why we raised our Adjusted EBITDA, to show that it's really important for us, and it's what we think about every day. Yep. Two quick follow-ups. The gross margin expansion coming from Costa Rica, does that kind of flow all the way to the bottom line, to the op margin line? And then two, on moving into new markets, from the R&D side, does that go in the existing rep's bag- Correct. or do you need to hire more reps to do that? No new reps. What's the ramp call point? Same call point, same people, right where we are. We want to stay right in that wheelhouse and leverage our sales force. Yes, it'll drop through. All right, great. 13 seconds, anything on M&A? Like, should we expect another deal this year, or is it more longer? No, look, right now, we're just integrating Vyrsa right now. We'll always look at some things that are out there. We're always looking to uncover it, but we'll concentrate on what we have right now. Great.