Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Tejas Savant. I'm the life science tools and diagnostics analyst here at Morgan Stanley. Before we begin, for important disclosures, please see the Morgan Stanley Research Disclosure website at morganstanley.com/researchdisclosures. If you have any questions, do reach out to your sales rep. So it's my great pleasure this afternoon to host Olink, and from the company, we have Carl Raimond, President, and Oskar Hjelm, CFO. So thank you both for doing this. Thank you for having us. Maybe, Carl, just to set the stage, can you just discuss what you view as your key accomplishments over the past six, 12 months, and what do you view as the most important opportunities and goals for Olink, heading into 2024? Yeah. So, yeah, the launch of our Explore HT product in July is probably the one of the biggest accomplishments for sure. That's sort of launched, you know, the platform just forward in a remarkable way, not just in terms of the amount of content that we've added to our high-plex product line, but also in terms of the throughput and capability of that platform. So I think we sort of over-delivered on the content side, but I think what was a little less expected was all the other innovations that were packed into that, and that was, you know, years of planning. So we're super excited about that, and the uptake has been tremendous so far in the short time since just like July 12th when we launched the product. So yeah, so some good stuff there. And then, yeah, as we look ahead, I mean, I think there's, you know, tremendous opportunities that lie in front of us. I still think proteomics, generally speaking, is early days. So, you know, another big accomplishment is we, on our Insight platform, which is our sort of free informatics platform that supports our entire ecosystem, we posted normal data from the UK Biobank and the China Kadoorie Biobank. Just sort of adding more value to, you know, for our customers in terms of... and the scientific field in general, just understanding the basics of, you know, what does normal even look like, right? It's one thing to measure a protein, but then to understand. Yep. I s that okay? Is that strange? You know, what, what does this mean? It's really fundamental in helping our understanding of biology. So I think, sort of a combination of these things, and of course, you know, we do not rest on our laurels, so we're continuing to innovate, and you should expect to see more and more from, from Olink over time. And, you know, for right now, the, the focus is, you know, post-launch execution of Explore HT, and then commercial execution, of course, in the latter half of the year. So let's start with Explore HT. You know, following the mid-July launch, can you share, you know, just early feedback so far from your customers? What new use cases do you see HT enabling in the field so far, and how does it advance sort of high-plex proteomics in your mind? Yeah, I think, yeah, the launch has been tremendous. You know, customers have been very excited, as I noted, about, you know, the not only more content and more high-value content, too. We've been, you know, we looked at all the different sort of categories of biomarkers we included in the panel, included more drug targets, more, more inflammation markers, a bunch of classes of proteins our customers are interested in. And the response, again, with the high throughput and the, you know, tenfold reduction in a number of boxes and simplicity of the assay, has been great. You know, so, we are not discontinuing our Explore 3072, the predecessor product, but I think, you know, just about every customer will transfer over to the new product. We've already seen a number of projects transfer over to the Explore HT. You know, we've seen some customers who were, you know, evaluating internalizing the Explore platform in their lab. Mm-hmm. And that was a, you know, the Explore HT launch was a catalyst for them to say, "Wow, okay, this is the moment. You know, we're gonna go ahead and- Right and adopt the platform. So it's been, it's been really, really positive, overall. Yep. Got it. And so you mentioned, Carl, so continuing to support the 3K for now. How do you see, you know, HT being a driver for the top line in the back half of this year, and then, of course, you know, in 2024? And should we anticipate that by the time we're in 2024, the majority of the orders will be for HT, essentially? Yeah. I think Explore, you know, today it's about, you know, roughly two-thirds of our, of our business. So yeah, it's gonna continue to be a really important driver. You know, and we saw that in this year as we were sort of thinking of the planning. I mean, we knew that, you know, we'd be launching this product and that there was anticipation was growing. You know, we had, we had signaled that we were gonna launch something this year in the high-plex space, and so that anticipation just started growing from day one of 2023. So yes, it's gonna be very important for execution of our business now, certainly into 2024 and into the future. So yeah, I think all still positive things to come from Explore over the long term. As customers, you know, your 3K customers, when they view HT, beyond sort of the 4x improvement in throughput, you've talked about, you know, the non-Olink related sort of savings to them, you know, running costs, you know, FTEs, plastics, ancillary reagents, et cetera. Has that value proposition started to become more and more apparent as you get these early adopters to talk about the platform for you? Yeah, yeah. I think it's absolutely resonated. I mean, just the reduction in, you know, an FTE cost is not insignificant. I mean, from, you know, from July 12th, as soon as the customer wants to adopt that platform, I mean, they've instantly increased their productivity by 4x- Mm-hmm. Excuse me, without adding any more equipment or, you know, any additional FTEs. So, I mean, yeah, so they're excited about that. And yes, we've, in doing that, we reduced the amount of plastics, the amount of FTE time involved. So, you know, they're enjoying that productivity, which is great. So while there's a slight uplift in the, in the cost of that product versus the Explore 3072, they sort of regain some of that value. So it's, you know, from our point of view, we capture a little bit more of that wallet share that would have been sort of spent otherwise in the processing. Got it. When do you expect to see sort of, you know, the elasticity of demand part of the equation, you know, play out with the HT? Is this something that we could see, say, the back half of 2024, or do you think it'll take longer than that to really see that inflection come through as, as customers, you know, expand their work on HT? Yeah, I think, I mean, that tends to always play out over time. I think we see, you know, the demand is, and the, the funding behind these projects sort of matches where we are. We feel like we're at the right price point in the market. We've added a tremendous amount of value, you know, in launching this product. I mean, we increased content by over 80%. We reduced the cost per data point by over 30%. So we've delivered a, yeah, a heck of a lot of value, and I think that's continuing to drive even more interest, more demand. And it certainly creates the opportunity for our customers to think a bit differently about their science. I mean, to imagine, you know, what it took us at Olink to do with the ex... With the UK Biobank project, that took us, you know, several months, you know, a lab right now with, you know, a NovaSeq and a standard automation setup could do in, you know, 12 weeks or so. I mean, that's pretty, that's dramatic, what's happened here. Is there a sort of theoretical maximum pull-through for Explore HT to be thinking about, you know, as it versus, say, the 3K? And is it reasonable to assume a certain capacity, let's say, you know, 20% or a steady state pull-through across the installed base? Yeah, so I think it, it's very scalable, right? So you could, I mean, there's a couple, excuse me, dimensions to go after there. Mm-hmm. I mean, you could, you could run more shifts. Mm-hmm. You can add more equipment. So, excuse me, theoretically, you could scale on scale, so there's no sort of limit there. Yeah, but I think when we look at sort of the utilization today, and if you think about sort of the, I mean, the pull-through we observe sort of on 3K, the sort of 700-800, that only represents maybe sort of 2,000 or 3,000 samples. So from sort of a... I mean, that's a very sort of low utilization. So I think sort of, you know, there's definitely sort of room to grow there, and that sort of, you know, as proteomics become sort of more embedded and, and more sort of, you know, in across sort of the, the organizations where we, we work with. But again, to sort of your point on that sort of inflection, I mean, that's sort of, you know, it's a, it's a process that will take some time. Got it. You know, you've got Illumina's 25B flow cell expected in the Q4 here. You know, that gets the cost of sequencing down to, you know, $200 a genome. When do you expect to be able to offer your customers, you know, compatibility of HT on, on the X? I know customers like asking about it. Yeah, absolutely. And we're working on that validation right now. And so, yeah, we're excited about that. So that will, you know, offer more cost efficiency for our customers. Mm-hmm. So again, we haven't completed validation yet, but, you know, expecting that should be successful, and that would reduce their sequencing costs by another, you know, 25% or so. Mm-hmm. So I think that's, yeah, that's all upside for our customers, for sure. Excuse me, and allows more opportunity for them to expand their wallet share spend with, with Olink a bit. Got it. Now, you know, following launch of, you know, HT, looking at, you know, over, I think, 5,300 protein targets, you're getting closer to the estimated number of proteins in the full proteome in plasma, right? And at what point do you start to see diminishing returns for the number of proteins that you need to be evaluating from plasma? Yeah, I think that, I mean, that theoretical limit is still to be determined about, you know, when are you getting incrementally more that's not adding a lot more value? But I don't think we're near knowing what that is right now. Again, theoretically, in plasma, there's only gonna be so many proteins. So, you know, would it be the predicted 20,000? That seems not terribly likely, but I think we're gonna have to let science sort of tell us where that goes. But, yeah, I think there's still opportunity to run. There's still clearly value being added. So we have a customer, Ulf Gyllensten, from Uppsala University, who was sort of an early access customer to do some validation. And he had a panel for ovarian cancer prediction, and he ran the Explore HT versus the Explore 3072 data that he had. He was able to revalidate the biology he had previously discovered and added additional biomarkers and reinforce some of the pathways that he had seen in his prior work. So, yeah, I think there's still value to be added with more content today. Yeah. And, and so as you think about the, the roadmap for, for Explore, is the focus now not necessarily on more plex, but also perhaps on looking at, you know, other things like, you know, proteoforms, PTMs, et cetera? Yeah, I think there's room to expand, you know, the, the content itself in different ways to think about that. I think driving more protein measurements in general, I think is, you know, there's still so much to be discovered. I mean, it's sort of like the early days of genomics. It's like, hey, you could start talking about all these sort of, you know, more exotic things you could do, you know, in genomics. But, you know, we fundamentally needed to get to just, you know, gene sequencing, exomes, et cetera, et cetera. And so I think there's this opportunity statement sure into the future to, to, to look at some more and different types of content. But, you know, today, I think there's, like you said, so much room to run, just a very fundamental understanding of the proteome. Got it. I want to switch gears to Focus, Flex, and Signature, right? So starting with Signature, you know, placements have continued to, you know, come in ahead of, of most street models. Could you talk about how Signature in combination with Focus and Flex is driving your share in low-plex and mid-plex? And, what, what's your ability to address this market? What does it mean strategically for those, you know, high-plex customers as well? Yeah. I mean, Signature in and of itself is a great product that, you know, competes in that low and mid-plex space. And importantly, the launch of the Flex product line was, you know, really critical. It sort of entered us into a sort of a new sector of that mid to low-plex market. And that's an area that's sort of ripe for disruption. There's technologies that have been around for, you know, 20-odd years. So there's, yeah, tremendous potential for that platform, which also, of course, runs the Focus and our other mid-plex products, the Target product lines. So we see that as a, you know, we talk a lot about Explore, but actually, our mid-plex and low-plex space is very interesting, and it's a very important net to sort of capture all the work that's being done in the high-plex space. Right. Because often the intent is to sort of make discoveries and then drive that down to a smaller set of markers that you could then use in a clinical trial or a, or a, you know, a clinical test and so on. So yeah, I think that's a really important and critical part of our portfolio and something, again, that we're... Doesn't get as much press as Explore, but we're, you know, we're very excited about. So that, that's actually a great segue into my next question. Are most of the Signatures today essentially placed in labs with Explore installations to run pilots, or do you also have, you know, Signature standalone installations as well? Yeah, yeah, we absolutely have Signature standalone installations as well. And as you were asking your prior question, it's like, there's a virtuous cycle between them. Again, we uniquely can look at the very many down to the very few, and that's, like, one of the very fundamental strengths of Olink, that we don't really have any competitor that does that same spectrum. We have some high-plex and some lower plex, but we can uniquely sort of take our customers up and down that scale which is very important to them in terms of being able to scale, especially when they go from the high-plex to the low-plex, 'cause when you have to change technologies to do that, it's a tremendous amount of additional validation, et cetera. So I'd say roughly half of our Explore users are Signature users as well. And then we still see this very virtuous relationship between those two spectrums. We have customers who start with low-plex- Mm-hmm And then they sort of work their way and say, "Hey, yeah, we would like to adopt the high-plex platform as well." And then vice versa, where they start off with high-plex, and then they decide to go and adopt the low-plex platform. So we're seeing that, you know, it's not just a statement that we can do the very many to the very few but it's actual customer value, and we see that reflected in the way our customers are sort of buying and adopting the different parts of the portfolio to have more of a complete proteomic offering than just one or the other. Got it. What does the pipeline look like for the low to mid-plex segment, Carl, in your mind? You know, you've got Focus, you've got Flex, you know, you've got the hardware now with Signature. Along what dimensions do you need to, you know, move that portfolio forward? Yeah, I think, well, Flex was, you know, a relatively new launch. We announced it last year. We began shipping it, excuse me, in Q1 of this year. So, that's still fairly new. We'll continue to, you know, expand our offerings in that space. But we're, yeah, we're in a great position to continue to expand that marketplace. And the pipeline, yeah, continues to grow, so, you know, demand for Signature is there, demand for our mid-plex products. Like I said, that, you know, the Flex product line put us into a space where we really hadn't been competing before, which is a very large market. Mm-hmm. It's still actually quite early days for us in that space, so there's a lot of opportunity still in front of us. Got it. I want to switch to some market-level questions before we get to the numbers. You know, we've been seeing the macro environment impact biopharma customers, you know, elongated sales cycles, et cetera. Is that dynamic still more limited to EMEA for you, or, or has that headwind started to crop up in the Americas as well? Any signs of stabilization at all through September? Yeah, we haven't. You know, we had our earnings last month, and nothing has changed significantly. You know, we see the opportunity, especially with the launch of Explore HT, being the tailwind that we were expecting now. And some of those macroeconomics, I mean, you know, everything's tending to get painted with the same brush, but in reality, we don't see it quite like that. We see some customers are spending just as normally as they ever have, and then we see some customers who have been a little more conservative. I think we did see that a little bit more in Europe in the H1, where there was a little more conservatism. But, you know, we actually grew nicely in the Americas during that same period of time. So it's a little bit, you know, a little bit of this, a little bit of that, but I think we saw in Q4 of last year, we already signaled we had seen a difference in sort of the year-end spending. Mm-hmm. So we contemplated that when we looked at this year. We didn't expect it certainly to be any better than, you know, what we saw last year. But, yeah, it's, you know, it's not a digital event that kind of, you know, you hear about sort of that year-end spending. It's not like this. It's a bit of a gradient. That's how we see it. And again, we have very strong tailwinds, we feel, heading into this in the H2 of the year with the launch of Explore HT. So that was a, you know, important part of the equation. Then ultimately, customers are sort of spending where they can derive value. Right. So even those who have become more conservative, they're thinking about their, their spend and putting it in places where they're going to get results. And that tends to be less on their sort of roads type investments and more in, like, How am I gonna drive my pipeline forward? How am I gonna find that biomarker I need? How am I gonna understand mechanism of action, you know, in this drug to push it through the pipeline? So, you know, it's funny when you talk about sort of growth rates in the markets, and I said, even if it's, you know, not growing as much as everybody would like to see the markets growing in general, there's still a heck of a lot of money flowing, you know, regardless. And I think it's being in that flow where you're adding value is the most important thing. We are hearing from our customers that they're prioritizing their spend around next generation proteomics, 'cause it's a place where it's adding value to their work. Got it. You know, in the Q2, the academic market actually grew faster than biopharma for you. Mm-hmm. One of the questions that investors are focused on is, you know, with academic budgets being, you know, potentially flattened down next year, is that a point of concern for you, or do you think, like, because proteomics is so new, there's a degree of insulation relative to, you know, a 5%, 10% swing one way or the other in academic budgets? Yeah, so to your point, so yeah, we did well in academics last quarter, as we reported, and I think that's sort of a leading indicator, if you will, of sort of where things are going and how the, you know, how budgets are changing and reflecting that interest in new science and demand. And we've heard from some of our big genome centers who told us outright, like: Yeah, we, you know, we don't have access to some grants if we don't offer proteomics as well. Mm. So that sort of tells you how the landscape is changing a little bit, and it's sort of moving in areas where there's, you know, where there's a lot to do. I mean, you know, just going back to the example I provided earlier, I mean, just providing normal protein ranges, we don't even understand this today. It's so... I mean, if you ask the same thing in genomics, you went, "Oh, my God, of course, we know all of this, and we know all the polymorphisms for all these things." In proteomics, people can't even tell you what normal looks like in, in some proteins. So, I mean, that just tells you how early we are in this, in this process. I mean, everyone wants to run ahead, like in genomics, like, "Oh, when is the, you know, cost gonna be down to this, and when is, you know, can we do these exotic things?" But it's like, man, we have so much, you know, so much room to run here in proteomics that. But I think you, you see that again, sort of reflected in the funding environment, which is a good thing. And I think going back to my comment, I think even when, you know, things aren't growing at the same, you know, we'd love life sciences in general to be growing at 10%, 20%. But even when it's, you know, when it's not, that's an incredible... If you look at the NIH budget itself, even if it didn't change think about the amount of money transacting there. It's still massive. The same thing in pharma R&D. Mm-hmm. The question is: Where are they spending that money, right? How are they reallocating from, you know, low quality, low, you know, productivity projects to, you know, higher productivity work? Got it. So on that point around, you know, NPX and sort of what's normal, where is NPX in terms of becoming an industry standard for normal protein levels? And are there other databases available to scientists who are not using the Olink platform and/or NPX, I guess? Yeah. So, yeah, I mean, there's a number of databases out there that have been built on a variety of data. But yeah, I mean, we'd like to think, yes, you know, NPX is, you know, becoming a strong brand out there. Mm-hmm A s far as a measurement. And then, you know, putting the UKB data, the Chinese Kadoorie Biobank, as I mentioned, we have a third smaller cohort there from the West Coast, you know, it's powerful. It's, you know, it's easier to utilize and understand that data if you're running an Olink experiment. Mm-hmm. You could certainly, you know, gain an understanding without that as well, but, you know, it, it certainly enhances the value of using the Olink platform, which, and we continue to think about how do we continue to add value in that, sort of, in that data interpretation and understanding realm, which again, gets- doesn't receive as much, as much press as it should, because, you know, we don't, Insight, we don't sell so we don't wind up talking about it as much. But, you know, when you-- our customers appreciate the fact that why do they like to work with Olink, and then among many other things, is like, we're thinking about that whole workflow. Mm-hmm. It's not just like, "Well, here's a box and a kit, and, you know, good luck, and you'll get some data." It's kind of we think about, okay, how are they going to interpret that data? How do we make it easy for them? How do we make it easy for them to turn around and order a custom panel on the back end of that work? You know, how do we help them understand what normal is? Mm-hmm. So we try to be quite thoughtful about that whole ecosystem of getting from, you know, a question to an answer. Got it. You know, Olink Insight, is it essentially normalized to NPX? And at some point, will you also add, like, absolute quantification in that? Good question. I mean, there's, I think there's a lot of opportunity what we can do with that platform. I think it's... Even that platform is relatively, early days. But yeah, to your question, yeah, we, I mean, our, our Target 48 products, the Flex product line, Focus, are all absolute quants. Mm-hmm. So yeah, so I think there's, sure, there's an opportunity statement of, you know, what you could do to, you know, continue to build that. Plus, there's consortiums out there, you know, outside of what we're doing at Olink, like the SCALLOP Consortium, is based primarily on Olink data, and you see a number of public and industry participants there. Right. Mining data and looking at some projects and absolute quant and relative quant, combining data sets. So, yeah, so even beyond our own work, the field is evolving itself around Olink as well. And in fact, there's at least two or three I can think of consortiums that have popped up around, around Olink data. Got it. You know, given the bigger push towards multi-omics, outside of proteomics, you know, what other omics do you see increasingly incorporated into these large-scale Pop-seq projects? Or is the priority really, you know, proteomics plus sequencing at this point? Yeah, I think proteogenomics is probably the strongest hand right now that we see out there. Yeah, I don't see metabolomics as often, but certainly metabolomics is another modality, and I think all modalities offer, you know, some degree of value. But yeah, I think what we're doing in proteomics and the tools we've provided have certainly opened up this sort of world of opportunity that, you know, didn't exist prior. So I think there's, you know, there's a lot of strength and momentum behind proteogenomics, which can include both, you know, DNA, transcriptomics, you know, and, and proteomics. Fair enough. Oskar, one for you. In light of the, the second quarter performance, you cited sort of longer sales cycles and deal friction, but there was also a component of customers, you know, pushing out orders ahead of the HT launch. Have those, you know, delayed orders largely come back at this point, which, you know, essentially would be evidence of the fact that it was more HT that caused the, the Q2 weakness versus the macro? Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. So I think sort of we've seen—I mean, there was a press release today with sort of, with Eurofins, sort of a, a, a new customer. We had sort of Baylor coming online quite sort of shortly, sort of after the release. Mm-hmm. And I think we talked about sort of in general, that we see, you know, we expect sort of, you know, momentum to improving in Q3. So we definitely sort of see that sort of impact, and you will sort of in the numbers from the, sort of the Explore launch on the second quarter and then sort of the, the accelerated growth in the Q3. And yeah, to Carl's earlier point, just sort of the opportunity for the rest of the year is sort of substantial within the sort of Explore HT opportunities. Got it. And the full year guide, I mean, implies a greater step up than usual in your H2 revenue versus what you had in the last couple of years. Can you just frame for us, you know, what drives your confidence in that H2 acceleration? Did you see, you know, Americas performance kinda like get better? And do you expect sort of a normal year-end budget flush in at the midpoint of the guidance range? Yes, I think, I mean, when we sort of look at the I mean, when we reiterated the guidance at that earnings call, I mean, we have a, you know, a very robust process, how we look at sort of pipeline, sort of where we are this year compared to sort of where we normally are, where we need to be. You know, the quality of that pipeline, and also sort of, you know, where we typically sort of, you know, generate during the sort of the H2 in terms of new revenue opportunities. And sort of clearly this year, a bit more back-ended. I think we communicated that sort of, you know, early on that this year will be more in line with 2021. Mm-hmm. Given that sort of in 2021, we had 3K launching late in the year, and this year we have the Explore HT. So I think the sort of all of those sort of factors combined, that sort of gives us sort of, you know, the, the sort of, the, the confidence that we can sort of, you know, reiterating guidance at the, at the earnings call. And then also that sort of year-end money point, I think Carl mentioned earlier, we saw sort of a slow, like a lower level of, of year-end money already last year. Mm-hmm. We're certainly not sort of, you know, expecting that to sort of improve this year. I think, you know, we're reflecting sort of the macro environment and sort of, you know, where we are today. Got it. Yeah. And then on gross margins, you know, you've got this, the shift in kit versus services mix, and you've got the launch of the HT as well in there. Can you put some guardrails around how we should think about the gross margin line? You know, I think 2023 ends up just over 70%, but, how do you think about that in, in, you know, 2024? Yes. I think in 2024, I mean, we expect sort of, you know, to improve the, the sort of the corporate gross margin, sort of over 2023. I think largely driven by the continued sort of shift towards, towards mix or sort of the reagent side of the business. Mm-hmm. And then also sort of, you know, the full year effect of Explore HT on the service side, I mean, the workflow reduction sort of benefits our service lab as well. And then also sort of like, sort of smaller but also incremental sort of improvement on Explore HT from the kit side as well. But it's... At the very high level, it's really that sort of mix shift that is sort of driving down the margin improvement. Got it. Can you talk a little bit about your approach to just investing in the business and your EBITDA targets? How should we consider your long-term profit potential? Yeah. So, as sort of, you know, as stated in our guidance, we expect to be sort of, you know, adjusted EBITDA sort of positive this year. Mm-hmm. And then, you know, we will sort of evolve from that point, sort of in the next couple of years. And there will always be sort of, you know, a balancing act of sort of taking up profitability. Mm-hmm. And we were very profitable before going public. I think in 2019, we had 39% of adjusted EBITDA, with largely sort of a service business. Mm-hmm. So certainly sort of over time, as we sort of expand the kit revenues, you know, we have a lot of room to sort of to reinvest in the business and still sort of take up profitability over time. And certainly sort of the aspiration is to sort of, you know, come back to sort of those levels. Mm-hmm. But, you know, we will sort of balance investment and profitability. But it's very important for us to sort of, you know, be profitable and sort of, you know, generate cash flows and sort of, you know, be self-sufficient. Got it. Carl, last one for you here. You know, you've got about $150 million cash on the balance sheet. You know, you've done Agrisera. What other sort of opportunities are you looking at in terms of M&A at the moment? And, you know, what constitutes a good strategic fit for you, you know, in terms of what's in-house versus what you could add to the portfolio? Yeah, I think we're, you know, we're looking at, you know, strengthening our supply chain. I think, you know, some tuck-in opportunities will be great. I mean, that Agrisera one is a great example. I mean, that's been incredibly productive for us. Mm-hmm. So I think as we, you know, as we're looking ahead, I think increasing that capability and antibody generation, antigen generation, et cetera, so we can continue to expand our content, and own that. I mean, right now, with that Explore HT, we own 61% of our content. That's, you know, sort of uniquely Olink generated. Mm-hmm. You know, that's also a sort of a bit of a superpower we have. You know, we have one heck of a library at Olink. You know, and continuing to expand our capabilities to, you know, to build and grow that, like you said, and, and add, you know, varied kinds of content over time is, Mm-hmm. You know, is a great opportunity statement for us. So yeah, so we're, we're sort of actively looking at what are opportunities that might be for us there. Got it. Awesome. That's a great place to leave it at. So thank you both for doing this. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Of course.