Yeah, get started. My name is Matt Sykes. I'm the Life Science Tools and Diagnostics Analyst at Goldman Sachs, and I have the pleasure of welcoming Olink to California. Thank you very much for making the trip. We have Carl Raimond, the Chief Commercial Officer, and Oskar Hjelm, the Chief Financial Officer. Carl, Oskar, thanks for joining us today. Thank you for having us. Thanks for having us. Maybe we'll start out and let you kinda set the stage first and talk about some of the key accomplishments over the past six to 12 months, and then maybe just focus on some of the recent results and key opportunities over the course of this year that we should be aware of. Great. Thanks. Yeah, maybe I'll take that in two dimensions. Mm-hmm. Financially, what we've been able to achieve with the business scientifically for our customers. Financially, great, you know, we finished our first full year as a public company. You know, in the first quarter, as you saw, we generated 72% growth year-over-year on a constant currency basis. We're executing on some pretty high standards we set for ourselves operationally and commercially, so we feel very good about how we're executing on the plan that we set for ourselves. We scaled the organization significantly during that time. I think important to point out, we were sort of profitable pre-IPO, and we've used the last couple of years to really build the organization and build the foundation, not just commercially, but across the organization. We'll have lots of leverage for that into the future. You know, we're operating with great margins. We're sustaining those, and that's also something we're quite proud of as an organization. Scientifically, you know, we're north of. Actually we're approaching probably 900 publications based on our platform. In our peer group, that really sort of sets us apart, especially being around since roughly 2016, we've generated a heck of a lot of content in the scientific space and publications. A lot of high impact publications as well. We feel good about that. We're north of 800 customers, so we continue to expand our customer base nicely. The UK Biobank, you know, that was a sort of hallmark event for us, being chosen by the PPP, the pharma consortium. There's about a dozen pharma involved in that. We're excited about that. That's gonna be the largest proteomic study of its kind, with about 56,000 samples. We're still delivering on the end pieces of that right now. We're looking forward to, you know, the consortium publishing on that because I think that's substantial scientifically. Yeah. So we're pretty proud of, you know, what we've been able to accomplish over the past year. We've set the stage, I think, going forward for success for the rest of this year and into the future. Great. Thanks for the overview. I think, you know, one of the things that we most appreciate about Olink is the ability for customers to move from high-plex to low-plex and frankly, in reverse. We think this is a very unique value proposition for Olink, but we might be in the early stages of that development. I think traditionally you've seen people kind of barbell high-plex solution with a low-plex solution without the, you know, without the Olink solution. Now that it's coming into play, you can actually use a similar technology across the spectrum. Can you talk about customers, particularly in the biopharma segment, who are utilizing Olink as they move either from low to high or high to low? What kind of margin lift can we expect for Olink when you have one customer using, you know, the entire platform throughout their process? Yeah. Great point. First of all, I think on the technology and the scalability, I think that's something that definitely sets us apart again in the peer group. Being able to go from thousands of proteins down to, you know, a few numbers of proteins is really powerful. You know, and we do have a lot of customers that are interested in the platform for that ability to be able to carry it down from discovery down to application. Octave is a good example of that, right? They've launched an LDT for MS. Yeah, I mean, they took exactly this kind of approach where they cast a wide net, and then they went and were able to focus that content down using fundamentally, right, the same assay. So that's a very powerful part of our story. Across our customer base, not just pharma really, I mean, I guess I can say this more broadly, it is interesting how these things are sort of create a virtuous cycle of sorts. Mm-hmm. We've seen this more and more. Actually, it's been sort of picking up pace a little bit where our, you know, we'll see lowplex customers migrate to the Explore platform... Yeah ...to higher plex and vice versa. I can't share details of any of our pharmaceutical customers. I'm sure they'd appreciate that, but, we're seeing that in that space too, clearly. I mean, I can think of just a few off the top of my head who have certainly taken, you know, both directions, started low and went high or high to low. The margin profile of the business is same for us whether you scale up or down. That's a fantastic part of our business overall, is that, you know, regardless of whether customers are looking at low-plex or they're looking at high-plex, we still enjoy the same margin profile for our business. Great. Within that context, when you know just the fact that you can do both high and low, could you talk about growth rates within each of those categories? Like is high-plex growing faster than low-plex or vice versa? Perhaps maybe even if you break it down further, Explore versus Target versus Focus, product lines. Yeah, sure. I think looking at sort of the, you know, Explore, Target or Focus, you know, we see great growth sort of across all the product platform. You know, clearly sort of Explore having been launched in sort of, you know, in you know, just two years ago has enjoyed, you know, great success and with the kits coming to market about a year ago. I mean, clearly we're seeing very high growth rate within the Explore segment. We expect to sort of, you know, Explore to be the sort of driver of growth moving forward. I don't think we should forget about the Target and the mid-plex space and that opportunity. I think especially, you know, we saw that when we launched the Signature Q100 in Q4 and the rate of placements into Q1. That's great momentum in the mid-plex business and that sort of presents a meaningful growth opportunity as well. Got it. You guys had a presence at AGBT and made some interesting announcements there. Maybe discuss a little bit more about your readout agnostic strategy and what these new collaborators could bring, how it benefits Olink and just maybe overall proteomics. Yeah. You know, whether we're talking about our Explore platform on NGS. Yeah We're talking about the, you know, the Target and Focus product lines, which uses qPCR. I mean, these are counters for our technology. That same PEA assay, it's just being counted by an NGS machine, or it's being counted via qPCR. You know, we have this agnostic strategy of, look, we want to be where our customers want to go. I thought, you know, we feel that's pretty important, you know, working with these next gen sequencing companies, so that again, you know, whatever our customers want to do, we're gonna be able to be there and to have solutions for them. Certainly I think it's, you know, it's interesting for the space, right? I think what they're talking about, their capabilities and how they intend to reduce the cost of sequencing, and that's only good for our customers. It'll reduce the cost per experiment. We have a great relationship with Illumina and we'll, you know, continue that. Yeah, you know, this agnostic strategy is, you know, just again, important for us so we can serve our customers no matter what platform they decide to go with. Yeah, because one of the things that kind of attracted us to Olink was that you're leveraging the equipment that's already in a lab, obviously, not for an analysis service necessarily, but for the distributed kit. That gives you the ability to really approach many different types of customers agnostically. How has that resonated with the customer base over the past couple of years in terms of the spend required and sort of the agnostic approach that you have? Yeah. I think to your point, that's been a success factor for us, right? When we were sort of looking at the business model early on, you know, we calculated there was, you know, roughly 4,000 Illumina instruments out there, NGS sequencing instruments that we could potentially leverage with the Explore platform. That reduced, you know, the barrier to entry tremendously, right? You know, there's some automation that sits up front of the assay. Even there we've actually looked to validate some different solutions there to again, sort of lower the barrier of entry to be able to leverage to some degree what a number of these labs would have. It's been a great strategy for us, sort of leveraging the customer base. We get this question quite a bit, so I'll clarify. Yeah, in that Explore space, we don't sell an instrument. Mm-hmm. Right? It's really enabling labs that are out there. You know, to that point, you know, as Oskar mentioned, really importantly, 'cause it I don't think it garners enough attention, but our Target and our Focus product lines are also, you know, a really exciting space. Launching that Signature Q100 instrument in a very affordable price point in the fourth quarter of last year has been great for us. From 2016 till, you know, about, you know, Q4 of last year, there were 40 external sites that were leveraging the Biomark HD from Fluidigm, sort of an older instrument. Just from Q4 through Q1, we placed 37 of those Signature Q100 instruments, almost doubling the number of instruments, leveraging the Olink technology. We're really excited about what that means too. What we were talking about earlier, being able to go from high- plex to low- plex. If you think about that is creating a net to capture those customers as they go from discovery and trying to sort of apply those discoveries down to, you know, an application. You know, again, a virtuous cycle with the portfolio. Got it. Just given that we have you here on the commercial side, I do wanna kind of talk about on the Explore side, it seems a lot of the installations you've done are leveraging the NovaSeq. Mm ... which is great from a pull-through standpoint. It almost strikes me that there is an untapped opportunity within NextSeq. Is there a change in behavior of the customers that you're approaching in terms of desire to use sort of the higher throughput NovaSeq, and therefore we should assume that that should continue? Is there an opportunity within NextSeq to really penetrate those users as well? Yeah, that's another good question. Excuse me, NextSeq, we do have NextSeq users... Mm-hmm ...you know, leveraging the Explore platform. What we've seen, yes, is there's been more of a gravitational pull, if you will, toward the NovaSeq, which is a higher throughput instrument. A lot of these studies are larger number of samples, so NovaSeq does allow for, you know, more throughput. It's the most cost-effective way today, especially if you're using an S4 flow cell... Mm-hmm ...to generate a lot of data quickly. What we've seen, too, and this was interesting, so in the early days, when we were sort of modeling the Explore business, even sort of, you know, near launch time, you know, we were sort of looking at that entire install base that we were talking about of 4,000 or so NGS instruments, and we sort of had some, a simplistic one-to-one sort of model thinking, you know, one customer, one instrument. What we've seen is we have a lot of very high volume users. It's not quite what it seems in some ways, because one customer can have tens of NovaSeqs. Mm-hmm. The capacity out in the marketplace is really, you know, much higher than I think one might consider when we talk about the number of externalizations we have. But to your point, sure, there's a, you know, a large number of NextSeqs out there, and again, we still have customers looking to add Explore capability into their labs who have NextSeq. I think we'll see a bit of a balance, but NovaSeq seems to be the gravitational pull for all the reasons I mentioned earlier. Got it. Mm-hmm. Maybe Oskar, one for you. In your early years, as Carl mentioned, you generate EBITDA, you're profitable. Maybe talk about your decision to reinvest in the business just prior to the IPO and how you see your path to profitability as you balance that with the potential growth in your business. Because it seems like, you know, you have been profitable, so there's clearly a path to profitability 'cause you can get back to where you were before. Yeah. At the same time, you're in a market that's growing very fast, it's expanding, and so you don't wanna give up these opportunities for growth. How are you thinking about that equation at this point, given the flexibility you actually have in your model to kind of, you know, turn the switch, if you will? Yeah. No, great question. As you said, I mean, sort of, you know, the company was founded in 2016 and I think, you know, profitable from year one and, you know, basically, you know, self-funding up until the IPO. I think where we saw, you know, a great opportunity to invest in the platform, in the technology and into the organization. What we've done over the past two years is clearly sort of, you know, scaling with growth, but also sort of building a platform and sort of, you know, building a company that, you know, can sort of, you know, take us to the next step. When we think about sort of, you know, the future and you know, the path to profitability, it's not just sort of, you know, it's not just words, it's, you know, it's sort of. It was our plan when we went public, and it is, you know, it's very much indeed our plan to be profitable next year. I think looking at sort of, you know, the growth rates of the business and the business momentum, the strong gross margin profile of the business, and then sort of, you know, the investments we've made, I think we, you know, we can continue to invest in the business next year and the years ahead as well. You know, we built that platform from which we can, you know, truly leverage and scale. Got it. In terms of gross margins, very impressive gross margins, particularly for Explore, sort of like the mid-80s% or even higher. One thing that you guys did in 2021 that I don't think gets enough attention, 'cause it wasn't a large acquisition, was Agrisera. I thought it was really interesting because it allowed you to vertically integrate your antibody supply. Right now you rely on sort of third-party suppliers, and there's a royalty fee and that impacts the margins. It seems to me that if you continue to integrate that Agrisera capability, you can actually, you know, sort of augment that gross margin that either gives you pricing flexibility or gives you higher margins depending on what you wanna do with it. Maybe just talk a little bit about the progress of Agrisera and that vertical integration and could this be an additional gross margin lift, going forward for you if you look out longer term? Yeah. No, a great question, and as you say, I don't think it gets sort of enough attention. It was. It's a great acquisition, and it's really sort of enabled us to not only sort of, you know, increase our own content. When we look at the first iteration of Explore, the 1,500 assays, you know, the majority of that was sort of done with external antibodies. Then as we now look to sort of, you know, the 3,000 product and beyond, the majority is sort of yeah, our proprietary antibodies. Not only is it sort of, you know, ours and only ours, it's also, you know, free of a royalty. Over time, as we increase the plex and as sort of the Explore business grows, you know, it's clearly sort of a tailwind for our gross margin. Then I think this, the acquisition has you know, a lot of other benefits to sort of the organization, and we are continuing to invest in Agrisera and to add more people and sort of building R&D capabilities to their site. It's been truly a really fantastic acquisition. Got it. Maybe focusing on Explore. I mean, we've spent a lot of time looking at it. It's an important part of the growth drivers within our model. The installations were maybe a little bit softer than we had expected in the first quarter, but we also know this business can be pretty lumpy, particularly from a seasonal perspective. Could you maybe provide any color on installation as we kind of moved into Q2 and beyond and has the growth tracked to your expectations in terms of specifically for Explore installations? Yeah. As I mentioned earlier, I think it's important to emphasize what's critical for us is sort of high-quality labs who can deliver to the ultimate end users, right? Mm-hmm. This is part of success in exporting your technology. As I mentioned, again, the numbers probably don't, you know, give the full story there, which is again, we've, as I mentioned, our early models were sort of more one-to-one. Mm-hmm. We're seeing many, in some cases, you know, where one site can have so much capacity. I think we shared a figure in Q4 about, you know, we have, like, about 500,000 samples worth of capacity out in the marketplace, just, you know, at that point with whatever it was, about 25 external sites, which is pretty incredible. Yeah, we're happy with that and with the quality of those sites, importantly. Yes, we're continuing to add to those. Yes, we have a pipeline of interested parties. You know, I think we had a press release not so long ago with Oxford, you know, launching a core facility in the U.K., which is great. Yeah, we're continuing down that path, but it's really more of a play of sort of quality and volume versus quantity. Because again, we're not selling an instrument in that space. I think sometimes people, again, sort of look at that figure, and they think like companies who are talking about placements of instruments, you know, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven mass specs. It's not like that, right? We're not selling hardware there. We're selling, you know, assays. It's about how much volume we can push through each one of those, which as I mentioned, can go from, you know, a NextSeq user on the smaller side to those who have tens of NovaSeqs and could be, you know, tens of thousands of samples that we can put through that lab. Got it. I mean, one thing that as you were answering that question, I was kind of thinking about when you think about that maybe fewer labs, but much higher capacity and higher throughput, should I assume then that the level of recurring revenue from that customer could actually be higher as opposed to sort of I do my experiment, I run it, and then I move on? Versus sort of the other strategy, which would be to try to get as many labs as possible, but maybe you're getting a number of kind of one-off projects in some of those labs. Is that a correct assumption? Is that something you guys have thought about? Yeah, it's a good way to think about it. I think when, you know, folks adopt the technology, they, you know, have the volumes to go through there and the projects, you know, it's an investment of sorts, right? Whether you're training your people or whatever. If it's a one-off project, you know, would it make a lot of sense? I think they're thinking about how they implement the technology more programmatically, and so we don't get sort of more one-off type things. As you mentioned, they would start to sort of build volume that they would sort of pull through their lab. We're already seeing this, so we see volume growing and they're saying, "Oh, let's add another, you know, automation line up front of that to increase throughput even further." We're seeing exactly what you're talking about take place, where they're sort of building their business, they're getting comfortable with the technology, and then the projects are starting to come more and more and they're scaling. Got it. How long does it take for a new installation to start contributing meaningfully to Kit's revenue? Because I think initially we thought you announce the installation and boom, the revenue start. There's actually an installation process that is totally understandable, and actually it's probably great with some of the larger labs like that only probably has to happen once across the system and then you kind of go. How long does that really take? Like, how should we think about the timing from announce the installation and then in terms of contributing to revenue? Yeah, that's a great question because it's quite variable to be honest. Okay. You know, if you have a site that, you know, they already have some of the automation, for instance, and they have the expertise and they have the people and everything else, it can go quite rapidly. As I mentioned, we're not selling them an instrument. Yep. It's a matter of training and we've become quite proficient at that. On the other end of that scale, if they need to acquire all of the automation and training and sort of bits and pieces, and maybe they need to hire people, that could stretch out to several weeks. Even, you know, maybe a few months. It's everywhere in between. On average, you know, if I had to guess, I would say maybe six to eight weeks, but it's highly variable. Got it. This is a question I think for both of you, so it's good to have finance and commercial in the room, and it's seasonality, which Oskar is probably shaking his head about this one. It is something that we talk about a lot and we deal with and you're dealing with. There's obviously a very high level of seasonality in the business, and that's not just true for Olink, that's true for sort of life sciences. Could you maybe walk us through some of the levers you're able to pull to soften this a bit so as not to, you know, because you're at the point where you get to Q3, you have this guidance number for the annual year, and you're trying to make it a lot in the fourth quarter. Is there a way to kind of reduce seasonality? Maybe it has to do with attracting some of these larger customers that are doing higher capacity work. Talk to me a little bit about how you think about the seasonality. Shall I go first? You can go first. Yes, I think, I mean, just sort of as a background, I mean, it's been sort of a, you know, Olink's been seasonal since sort of day one. I think we're very sort of, you know, accustomed to, you know, delivering through that seasonality. I think that's also, you know, when we see how sort of, you know, pipeline and then customer demand builds up, that's sort of, you know, that's what sort of drives the seasonality. I think we are very much sort of accustomed to, you know, executing to that, and I think we've always been able to deliver. Then sort of in terms of, you know, as you said, I think, and Carl mentioned it earlier, I think as our customers as sort of proteomics becomes more of a strategy, it's more programmatic. We have, you know, installs out there that, you know, run sort of large, you know, or high throughput, large capacity labs. We do expect sort of seasonality to come down and we're doing sort of, you know, a lot of things and everything we can really to manage that seasonality. I think, you know, it's sort of we'll continue to live with that for some time and we're sort of used to that at this point. Yeah. Otherwise, it's exactly what you said is, you know, as we export the technology, you would expect that to sort of smooth things out a bit more. We're still, you know, we still have quite a bit of service business, but as that mix shifts over time, you know, you'll tend to see more, run rate's not the best word always, but to some degree, right. You'll get sort of recurring purchases versus these one-time projects which, you know, create some of that lumpiness that we're still experiencing, you know, today to some degree, given the size of our business. As we grow, and we shift that mix more, I think we should expect to see that start to smooth out a little bit. I think even Illumina has 30% of their revenues in Q4. I mean, we're not wildly off. Yep. You know, with 40%, but a bit high, sure. Is this something that you'd be willing to address with incentives to pull forward some of that demand? Or is that sort of a road you don't wanna start going down? You know what I mean? Yeah. I think, you know, we meet our customers' needs around that. Okay. Some of it comes, you know, in annual budgeting. Yeah. On the service side, you see this too, right? Customers go through their annual planning and then they, you know, they plan these projects, and then they, the sample collection, all these things that happen in between, and then they, you know, wanna meet their goals for a year. To some degree, you know, there is some pattern to that. But again, as you get away from project-based work and more into the exportation of the technology, you tend to see that smooth out as it's running through service providers, and then they're just on a constant treadmill of projects coming in. Got it. In the last earnings call, you guys talked about geopolitical and COVID-related headwinds, and that's baked into the 2022 guide. Obviously, the macro environment is dynamic and changing, and in terms of how this could affect OpEx or CapEx budgets of your customers. If we start seeing some weaker growth in the back half of the year, how do you think Olink is positioned from that standpoint, from either being defensive or the visibility that you have on your customers on what's driving their spend? Yeah, I'll start on that, and you can add anything to it. Yeah. Yeah. As far as COVID, I don't think we've changed our position on that. It's the new normal sort of thing. We know where the bottlenecks are. We prepare our customers for that, or we help them with that. Nothing new from that perspective. As far as our business mix, I'll speak about like pharma in particular, which is a little over half of our business right now. You know, we're working with the top 20 pharmaceutical companies, so the vast majority of our pharma revenue is coming from big pharma. Mm-hmm. I know in this economic environment we're in right now, you know, on the biotech side, obviously funding can be more challenging, but we're, you know, we're not very exposed to. We don't have a lot of startup business. It's a lot of well-established pharma. Again, we feel pretty good about our business and, you know, the prospects as we're, you know, looking ahead for this year. I can tell you, I was just doing, you know, business reviews recently with my team. We're not getting signals of people saying, "Oh, you know, our budgets were cut," or, you know, "We're pulling back," or, you know. So far, no signals are coming through, so we, you know. Again, we're staying with our thesis for how we see progression of our business. Yeah, no, I think that's well said. I think just to sort of reiterate the point around sort of, I mean, our customer base, you know, it's sort of largely large biopharma, well-funded academics, and it's a very sort of broad and diverse customer base. So there is no, you know, sort of single customer dependency either, which I think sort of further sort of, you know, I mean, speaks to sort of the strength of the platform. Got it. Carl, you mentioned the diagnostic revenue, specifically Octave, earlier. You know, that's something that when I remember when we were doing the IPO, diagnostics was sort of an upside case that wasn't necessarily modeled in, but something that down the road could be pretty important. Given your experience with Octave, you know, they're obviously prepping to use the test in Multiple Sclerosis over the course of the year, is there a type of volume lift as partners have tests move on from research to real-world use? Or we have to wait for some type of reimbursement. Like, how do the economics work for you with a diagnostic customer? Yeah. We haven't changed our sort of guidance on any specific call-out rather... Mm-hmm ... for the clinical market and clinical applications. I think more than anything, that speaks to a great use case for how the technology again can go from, you know, wide net down to an applied set of proteins for a specific application. Yeah, I think that speaks to, you know, the future opportunity. Again, we've talked about, you know, this tremendous TAM that's in front of us and, you know, part of that is certainly clinical. You know, our intention is to enable that as much as possible. As of now, there's no specific, you know, updated thoughts or guidance. I mean, it's everything that we have in our numbers are sort of predicated on what we see right now with the evolution of that and the rest of the segments of our business. Really, you know, nothing new to say. Oh. I think, around diagnostics,... Okay ...clinical applications. Oskar, just going back to gross margins for a bit, obviously as the Explore kit business grows, this will be accretive as that mix shift happens sort of away from analysis services. At the same time you're gonna see UK Biobank roll-off, which we know is compressing margins a bit, and that's sort of the back half of this year is our assumption. How do you see gross margins improving throughout the year as you look at these dynamics? Yeah. No, as you said, I think sort of, you know, the biggest sort of catalyst for, you know, gross margin expansion for this year for us is sort of, you know, the second half when we sort of deliver the UK Biobank project, and we should see sort of service gross margin revert to sort of historical levels. So around sort of, you know, 65% or, you know, what we've seen, you know, in 2020 and prior to that. I'll see sort of, you know, and we talked about this earlier, sort of, you know, the impact of Agrisera and our library as sort of, you know, the 3,000 products, you know, becomes a more and more meaningful contributor of Explore revenues. That should also sort of have a positive impact on our kit margins. I think over time, you know, we should see sort of, you know, the margins over the second half of this year improve, you know, largely due to improved service margin. Over time, as sort of, you know, we drive that sort of kit sort of, you know, service to kit mix is sort of the overall gross margin should improve as well. Got it. Talking about the commercial ramp, you guys, a lot of the, you know, prior year profitable, and then you started to invest. A lot of that investment was in commercial. Mm-hmm. You spent a lot of time and money doing that, and it's been so far clearly shown up in the growth. Maybe two things on that. One, any pressure from wage inflation in terms of the hiring? Any difficulty in hiring those folks? Then just in terms of SG&A ramp, as you move into the back half of the year, do you feel comfortable with where the commercial kind of field force is today? Or is this something that you think will continually be added to as you continue to grow your business? We did make some foundational investments in commercial, which were really quite important. As you mentioned, we wanna take full advantage of the growth opportunity in front of us. Much of that too, as I'm mentioning, is foundational, like a modern commercial organization is much more than, you know, throwing some sales reps out there and executing. You know, a modern commercial organization is a very integrated system of sales, marketing, and digital, and then the operational sort of parts that hold it all together. I focused very much on building something that could be highly leveraged going into the future with great cost of sales. I feel like we're in a great spot right now. We don't have to sort of double that investment, right? To get to the next level of growth. There's a tremendous amount of leverage we're gonna be able to get out of the organization that was built. That said, we'll continue to strategically add sales teams as we're able to grow and expand territories. We'll continue to make investments in the right spaces there. But, again, we're sort of good, sober, responsible business managers as well. We're, you know, going to grow responsibly, in that way, but, in no way sort of letting up on how aggressively, you know, we're going to try and grow and expand the market. It's a great balance that I think we're striking there, and I think really across the company, right? We're investing in innovation, but we built, you know, foundational capability across Olink, right? Which was part of that investment that was taking place so that we had a company that was creating that long-term sustainable growth, right? At the scale that we're at right now and beyond. I think we're in a good spot heading into the future. Yeah, there's some wage inflation, you know, in parts of the world, of course, a bit, but I think nothing that's, you know, materially impactful. As far as recruiting and so on, I mean, Olink's a great company with great culture. I think the market, you know, is very excited about what we do, and so I think people are excited to come to Olink. That hasn't been actually a tremendous challenge. Although, of course, the, you know, the unemployment rates have been pretty low for some time. Even then, I think we've, you know, done pretty well in a competitive environment, so it hasn't been a drag or, you know, limiting our ability to grow in any way. Got it. Maybe just one on the competitive landscape. It's something that was interesting 'cause there was so much talk about the competitive landscape, and if you look outside of mass spec or the non-mass spec, there's really not that many folks that we're actually talking about, but it still seems to be generating a lot of conversation. You know, there was a deCODE paper that came out that showed some pretty significant benefits to the Olink technology. Any comment as to how that's resonated with the customer base and particularly on the Olink Flex side, you know, how has that impacted in the commercial opportunities for you? Yeah. Yeah. There was a preprint, you know, and then there was a retraction. There's some work within that group about leveraging the UK Biobank data and that, you know, that's for that consortium to sort out. Yes, that preprint was picked up by, you know, many of our customers. It's been, you know, referenced since. We, you know, don't tend to sort of lead, you know. Mm-hmm With that information, but it's very well known out there, and it's been very positive because I think it you know the data that was shared you know had some very compelling information in there about the performance of the Olink platform. So again we you know think that's interesting. I think we're looking forward to the you know formal you know publications and prints of those. Mm-hmm. I think then again, I mean, ultimately, look, I can, you know, I can talk about Olink and say all the great things that we do or any other company can do this. At the end of the day, science wins, you know? Yeah. I mean, the number of publications that we have and these sort of hallmark studies that do these comparisons and show the importance of quality and specificity of the platform, I think is critically important, and that's what our customers are gravitating to. That's why we have the success, that's why we have the number of publications. Is because at the end of the day, it's not like genomics, where a base pair call is a base pair call. In proteomics and protein measurement, specificity matters, and there's a wide range of what you get out there. We pride ourselves in executing on that, and that will ultimately lead to great science, and that will lead to great commercial success for the organization. Great. Well, we're out of time, and it's a great place to leave it. Carl, Oskar, thank you very much for the time. Really appreciate it. Great. Thank you, Matt. Thanks for having me on. Thank you.