Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Pressure BioSciences First Quarter 2022 Financial Review and Business Update. At this time, all participants have been placed on a listen-only mode. If you have any questions or comments during the presentation, you may press star one on your phone to enter the question queue at any time. It is now my pleasure to turn the floor over to your host, Richard Schumacher, President and CEO of Pressure BioSciences. Sir, the floor is yours. Thank you, Matthew, and welcome everybody to our first quarter 2022 financial review and business update. Before we begin, as always, I'd like to read the following cautionary statement. The following remarks may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of the company to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, those detailed from time to time in the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We expressly disclaim any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect any change in our expectations or any change in events, conditions, or circumstances on which such statements are based. For today, for the first time in a while, I will not have a colleague with me. I'll be handling this myself. Usually either John Hollister, who's our Director of Sales and Marketing and does many other things in addition to that, or Jeff Peterson, our Chairman of the Board, or both, would join me on this call. This call isn't on the day we expected it on several weeks ago, so neither was available today, so I'll be handling it just myself. For today's meeting, we're gonna start with a brief discussion of the 2022 first quarter results, and I'll highlight some of the accomplishments thus far in 2022, followed by a general business update. Afterwards, I will certainly be pleased to take any and all questions. On the financial review, in terms of the highlights of Q1 2022 versus Q1 2021, total revenue for the quarter was $480,000. These are all rounded, by the way, to the nearest hundred, except, of course, the earnings per share at the end. Total revenue for Q1 2022 was $480,000 compared to $560,000 for Q1 last year, which is a decrease of 14%. Instrument sales were $246,000 compared to $319,000 for Q1, a decrease of 23%. I do apologize that some people received this, the press release that had a mistake in it. It had the numbers slightly higher, but the actual decrease was about the same. It wasn't material. It was 19% in the first one, 23% now. Instrument sales, again, were $246,000 compared to $319,000 for Q1 2021, which is a decrease of 23%. Consumable sales for Q1 were $40,000 compared to $102,000 for Q1 2021. That decrease was 61%. A lot of that, of course, had come from the fact that the previous year, the major pandemic year in 2020, we had very poor results and very especially poor in instrument sales and consumables because our customers are mainly in the lab, and they were not in the lab during that year. We had a bit of a catch-up, especially on consumables, in the first quarter of last year. The BaroFold and UST services in Q1 were at $15,000 compared to $6,100. I'm looking forward to talking about that number in a few quarters from now. As we all know, we are starting to push BaroFold, but most importantly, we started an early access program for UST services. That's a number that we anticipate will be quite different in several quarters from now and then quarters to come after that. The new PBI Agrichem subsidiary had initial sales in Q1 of $83,300 with no sales in Q1 of last year. Although that number is a decent number, it's not anything close to what we had expected to have. We are disappointed that it's only $83,000 and still expect that number to be significantly larger in quarters to come. The operating loss for the first quarter of 2022 was $1.086 million compared to $1.075 million, so basically the same between the two quarters, and the basic and diluted net loss per share was $0.48 for the first quarter this year versus $1.45 for last year. We, of course, have more shares outstanding, which brings that number down. In terms of some of the operational and technical highlights, we'll start with the most recent and go back, and we're gonna talk about the highlights during the first quarter, but also over the last two months, April and half of May. On May 4, we announced the first nanoemulsions manufacturing agreement, which came under the new UST early access program. That early access program was announced on April 27. Those press releases are available, of course, on our website and a lot of other places. We can talk about those programs in a few minutes, but we're very excited that we were able to develop this program and very quickly sign up our first customer. As we said in today's press release, we're in discussions with actually more than four others, but I just wanted to make sure that I put in there the number that we're actually in, you know, really distinct discussions, and there's four companies that we've started talking to or have been talking to for quite some time that are interested in the early access program. There are many other potential customers that we have talked to and that we are getting back to, but we have a limited number of companies that we could actually bring into the early access program. We wanna make sure that we're bringing in those that make the most sense for us as a company, as well as for them. There's one that is signed up, and there's four others that we are in discussions with that are in deep discussions, and there are many others that we've had some discussions with. Again, it makes us very excited about what we think is gonna happen to this company, especially because of the UltraShear Technology nanoemulsion processing capability. On April 5th, we reported last year's fiscal year results, which were quite strong. The second best year we've ever had, and you know, had a lot of good news that we talked about on April 5th and at the conference call that followed. March 17th, we thought it was important to get out to all of our stakeholders, including, of course, all of our shareholders, our key 2022 goals. There were four in particular that we highlighted. The commercialization of the UltraShear Technology platform first and foremost was there. We expect a major revenue increase in the second half of 2022, probably at this point, looking at mostly the fourth quarter, but it's gonna be coming from the early access program that we've just talked about. We've clearly improved our financial position over the last couple of years. We've still have a lot of debt. We actually have more debt than we had several years ago, but there is good debt, and there's not good debt. We had a lot of not so good debt on the balance sheet several years ago. We have debt on the balance sheet now, but for the most part, it's all good debt. It's from true investors. It's from people that are gonna work with us. I've mentioned before, I'll mention again, that in talking to the individuals that hold these notes, about $20 million in notes, about 85%-90% of the notes, the holders have said they would convert at the $2.50 price when we do our up-list. I ask when I talk to people, I point that out all the time that, yes, there's a lot of debt on the balance sheet, but that debt is with about 35-40 different lenders and one major lender and some somewhat major, and then a lot of other lenders that are in the $50,000-$250,000 range. We've spoken with them all, we keep in touch with them all, and the vast majority, 85%-90% of the notes, the investors have said they would convert on an up-list. That would mean that would leave very little to pay off or to work off somehow, which put us in a great position to find a good bank that understands that the vast majority of any money that might be raised prior to or during an up-list, depending on what we decide, would not have to go to pay off debt 'cause the vast majority would convert. We expect an up-list to a national market. We need to do it at the right time. We're thinking that right time could be between now and the end of the year or now and the beginning of next year. We certainly see ourselves as a listed company on a national exchange sometime over the next, you know, 3-12 months, hopefully sooner than later. On February 28th, we announced that and also around the same time, Ohio State announced that there was the first successful commissioning of our production scale BaroShear UST Max system. This is the very largest of our three systems. To remind everybody, we have a benchtop system that we call the Mini. This is mainly for formulations. It can be used for by groups that have small amounts that need to be processed. But for the most part, the Mini is there for formulations. If one is developing a product, and that product is gonna have an active ingredient in oil, and you need to nanoemulsify that, I think there's one thing that there's not much in this world that you get a lot of consensus on, a lot of agreement on, but one thing that I hear out there a lot is that everybody basically understands and agrees that the best way to present a product that has oil and water mixture and emulsion, that oil contains an active ingredient. It can be a pharmaceutical, a nutraceutical, it can be cosmetic, it could be agrochemical, it can be industrial. That the best way to do that, hands down, is to convert that oil and water into a nanoemulsion. Almost all emulsions out there now are much larger than nano. Some people call them macro, some people call them micro. There isn't even a lot of agreement on what nano means. Is it 300 nm or smaller? Is it 200 nm or smaller or 100 nm or smaller? 100 nm or smaller means it's smaller than a bacterium. We believe that a true nano is under 100 nm. When we say we can get a very stable, long-term stable, highly water-soluble and therefore expected to be highly bioavailable nanoemulsion, we're talking about emulsions where the oil droplets are below 100 nm. Our system can let us go to just about where we want it to go to. We can essentially dial it in by knowing how many times it gets passed through our system in this very powerful patented valve that our guys have developed. This system can reduce it to 500 nm to 300 nm to 100 nm. Knowing what it is, having done a trial and error on it, we can probably come within a reasonable amount of saying, "Okay, we're gonna get to 200 nm or 100 nm or 80 nm or 50 nm." I will remind everybody that smaller is not always better. Everyone. I've had too many phone calls by, "Well, how low can you go?" You get to a level of diminishing returns where you, as a producer, are spending a lot of time and money getting from some number, maybe, you know, 100 nm or 80 nm or 120 nm or 50 nm down to 20 nm. Can we do that? Yes. We believe in most cases we can do that. Is it necessary? In most cases, it probably is not necessary. It's probably necessary to get down close to 100 nm, but the difference between an 80 nm and a 40 nm may not be worth the extra cost and time and money to get there at all. You don't get much benefit from that. That can be determined by the customer and the product that they're using. We installed our largest machine. I just talked about the Mini. We have a K45, which is the middle of the road, which we think will be the workhorse. We have our very large machine, the one that we installed in Ohio State. This is the one that could scale way up there and could be used by someone that perhaps wanted to put in, you know, enhance a soft drink or something and put it in millions and millions and tens or hundreds of millions of bottles in a year. Our Max system is for very large amounts. Our K45 is probably the workhorse will fit for most. The Mini will help some smaller manufacturers that insist on doing it in-house, but they don't need a larger system. It's mainly meant for formulation. One size doesn't fit all. You can't just say because I'm going to put CBD into this soft drink, or I'm gonna put astaxanthin into this cookie or whatever it's gonna be, that you come up with one formulation, and you use it for all. That's not gonna work. We have developed a very high expertise in formulation. There's a lot of things that get involved when you're formulating. We've developed that. We were not formulators several years ago, but now we are. We have a great group in our formulation lab. This instrument, the Mini, is the one that can be used 'cause it doesn't require a lot of material upfront, and you can generate, you know, milliliters of some. enough to test, enough to know that you need to go higher or lower, change the pH, add different materials to it in different concentrations, but not have to use very large amounts in that. The Mini has a great use down the road. The K45 will be the workhorse and the Max. When we introduce someone to the Max, and they're gonna do a very large amount of nanoemulsification. Very happy that our partners, The Ohio State University, they have a College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences. They are experts in using high pressure. Dr. Bala, who's a full professor in the college there at Ohio State, is a colleague of Dr. Ting, who runs our engineering. They both are pioneers along with the U.S. Army in bringing high pressure into the food and beverage industry. I'm talking 25-30 years ago, when this idea first was hatched by the Army, and they sought the experts, and two of the experts were Dr. Bala, who happened to be at Ohio State, and Dr. Ting, who was at a company called Flow. They worked with the Army, and they developed the first process of high pressure that was being used to treat food and make it safer, and not lose the nutritious value of the food because heat, anything that's thermal can cause a major problem with anything that contains proteins like food. You try to keep away from heat, and pressure can do many of the things that heat can do, but you can control the heat, keep it minimal, and once you take the pressure off, it's off. When you take the heat off of something, it still is hot, and it takes a while. It might take two minutes, or it might take 20 minutes to get it back to equilibrium. Pressure has a lot of advantages. Two of the experts in that field, Dr. Bala and Dr. Ting, are with us. Dr. Ting's full-time employee, he's one of the, I'd call him a co-founder. He was one of the first hires I made, along with Dr. Lazarev, who's our Chief Science Officer, and Dr. Lawrence, who's now retired and living the life of a retired scientist, but still consults for us. The three of them all came in the year of 2006. These guys are experts in proteomics and experts in high pressure. As I said, at this point, the high pressure market is, last I saw, estimated to be about $14 billion-$15 billion in just high pressure. This is not UltraShear Technology. This is not adding shearing to high pressure. This is high pressure alone, which is a wonderful technology, but it has limitations. This is a $14 billion-$15 billion market worldwide. The UltraShear Technology, we think can do some things that I believe personally that a lot of users of high pressure processing, HPP, would love to have, but they can't get it because they don't have shearing as part of the process. We're bringing a whole new process to bear here, where we've combined high pressure, now well accepted, by the government and by the food and beverage industry, by many people. We've combined it with very high intense shearing, and we're making 1+1 sometimes equal 20. We announced that on February 28th at Ohio State. We saw a video yesterday. They're gonna be presenting at a meeting coming up, a food technology meeting coming up. They're gonna be talking about data they've been generating with UltraShear using the UST Max system that was installed there in January and announced in February. They've been generating some incredible data. We're very happy with it. This is part of the deal we got when we took $1 million from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and got a piece of that, and Ohio State got the other piece to develop UltraShear, is that we need to generate certain data and present it at meetings like the Institute of Food Technologists meeting. Very, very happy that we are a partner with Ohio State. We actually have formed a consortium where we and they are together. At some point in the near future, perhaps in the coming weeks, Ohio State is gonna be inviting food and beverage companies from all over the world to start coming in and visiting and to see UST and maybe even try UST for themselves. January 27th is when we actually installed the BaroShear instrument at Ohio State. It was installed in their world-acclaimed advanced food processing technology pilot plant. They have a 40,000 or 50,000 sq ft facility where companies from all over the world come in and bring the next generation of equipment. We're in that now, and we're looking forward to the opening and the invite to some amazing companies to come in and take a look. Those were the major advantages. I do wanna highlights of the year so far. I do wanna go back to the early access program, and after that, we'll open it up for questions. The early access program came about because we had several companies who were chomping at the bit to try to get access to UltraShear Technology to use it. We've had a number of companies come to us in multiple applications. Certainly, CBD is one of the major applications. It's extremely well known that CBD, as it is now, and put into food, into beverages, into gauze and creams and things, if it's not a nanoemulsion, the bioavailability, ability of the body to use the CBD inside that oil is very low. CDC, not the CDC, the World Health Organization published three or four years ago, they estimated only 6% of CBD was actually used. The rest of it was excreted. Remember, we as human beings and our pets, everybody that's taking CBD, for instance, in this case, we're water-based, so when we ingest something with oil, our body wants to excrete the oil pretty quickly. If there's an active ingredient in the oil, the body is trying to, you know, extract out of that oil the active ingredient while the body's trying to extract out of the body the oil. There's a battle going on there. If you have globs of oil with active ingredients, you're not gonna get very much of that active ingredient. However, if you break that oil into billions of nano-sized droplets of oil and spread the active ingredient among all of these billions of tiny nano-sized droplets, these droplets are so small that a light will go through and doesn't get blocked, so they become clear. That's a good sign of a nanoemulsion. It comes from cloudy to clear. Another sign is stability. We're up to over two years of stability. We've shown people our CBD product, and this CBD product has been stable for over two years. It looks exactly like what it looked like two years ago. It's amazing. We've done some testing on the size of the oil droplets. They've remained very consistently around 40 nm-50 nm in this case. We're very, very happy and excited about the data generated so far on CBD. We're also generating data on astaxanthin, which is considered by many to be the world's most potent antioxidant. We've generated data on that. We've generated data on other active ingredients, on prednisone, as a pharmaceutical, and retinol as a compound that's used in the cosmetics area. We've had terrific results across the board. With the push from several companies saying, "Can't we get an early access? Can't you do it sort of like a beta, and you can learn from it, and we can learn from it?" We decided just a month ago, not even a month ago, that we would, and we've signed one contract, we're talking to four others. I believe that we will sign additional contracts in the coming weeks and months, and that these will generate revenue, substantial revenue in the fourth quarter and for next year, 2023. Matthew, I'm gonna open it up now for any questions if there are any from our guests. Certainly. Ladies and gentlemen, the floor is now open for questions. If you have any questions or comments, please press star one on your phone at this time. We do ask that while posing your question, please pick up your handset if you're listening on speakerphone to provide optimum sound quality. Once again, if you have any questions or comments, please press star one on your phone. Please hold while we poll for questions. Your first question is coming from George Markelson. Your line is live. Hey, Rick. George Markelson. Oh my gosh. How are you? My gosh, George. It's been a while. I think on this phone call, maybe a year or a year and a half ago. I hope you're well. I am, and I hope you are as well. Sounds like you're with the company now. I really just wanted to, if I could, quickly sort of break down into in terms of the debt that you were talking about before that you consider good debt, and also warrants that you have outstanding. Because I'm trying to figure out, going forward, what kind of shares outstanding there's going to be if this debt does convert. Again, there seems to be a bunch of warrants. I have no idea where these warrants exercise at or when this. George, you're breaking up, but I got the gist of the question about the warrants and the debt. Was there anything else? Can you hear me? Now I hear you. I get the question about the warrants and the debt. Yeah. I'm just trying to get an understanding. If you're, I see there's a lot of convertible debt. If the warrants, if the debt converts, how many warrants exercised, how much stock is gonna be outstanding? I'm just trying to get a sense of where we're headed in terms of number of outstanding shares, fully diluted. All of the warrants, to my knowledge, and if I'm wrong, I'm not wrong by much. Virtually all of the warrants are convertible at $3.50. There is no warrant, I know that for sure, that will convert under $3.50. There are no warrants that are registered, so there's not a warrant overhang. I know you and I go back many years, and I know that sometimes a company gets a nice run and the stock moves up, and then all of a sudden, all of these registered shares come out, and the next thing you know, it throws cold water. There is no warrant overhang. I go to bed, and I pray that the warrants will get exercised. I really do. Sure George, because Sure They're $3.50 a share. Right. There are about, you know, I know I'm pretty close, $14 million warrants. It's in the 10-K and the 10-Q. Right. These $14 million warrants have various exercise dates, termination dates. Some of them are under a year, and some of them are four years. Right We never give warrants. We've never given warrants to date longer than five years, and these warrants are between, let's say, six months and 4.5 years. With a lot of them, I would say around two years left in their life, and they're at $3.50. We would be so lucky if we could get these individuals to exercise those warrants. That would be accretive, highly accretive to this company, and I think everybody would applaud that. Warrants are not an issue, in my opinion. You know, debt is always, almost always an issue. George, you and I both know there's good debt and there's bad debt. Mm-hmm We had, for reasons that we don't need to go into, we had to take a lot of bad debt, and we had close to $7 million three years ago of bad debt. This is a debt that could convert and adversely affect the company in a very big way. That number is down to about $1 million from $7 million, and nobody has ever converted that debt at any price other than at $2.50 a share. That debt has been whittled down. You know, I look at that debt every day for the last five years, particularly the last three, and said, "Rick, you gotta get rid of this debt 'cause it's dangerous." Again, close to $7 million, down to about $1 million, all convertible at $2.50. Everything that's been converted to date is at $2.50. I would expect that the rest of it, the goal is to get rid of it this year, sooner than later. Again, I just say that no one has ever converted that debt under $2.50. Either we have to raise money at $2.50, or the holder of the debt says. The stock's at $3.50, I'm gonna convert it at $2.50. Whatever. Or sometimes it's a hybrid. I have to say, it's more of a hybrid. That's how we've gotten rid of it over the years by saying, "Okay. We'll give you $50,000, and you convert $150,000 at $2.50," shake hands, and the deal is done. Would you have roughly $14 million of convertible debt? Am I right? We do. All right. It's all convertible at $2.50. A lot of that- So far I can say you've got, like, potentially another $5 million or $6 million shares that would be outstanding if they all converted. Correct. Okay. Correct. That $14 million is not counting the $1 million I just said. Right. That $14 million is held by 20 different people. One person holds a majority of it, and that person is a very strong supporter of the company and has, in my opinion and my knowledge, never sold a share. Mm-hmm. has supported us through thick and thin, and we've had plenty of thick and thin. It's good debt, and it converts at $2.50. I believe that I don't want to take up all of your time. I just have one last question. You had talked about a potential uplisting sometime later this year or hopefully early next year. I don't want to assume anything. If you were trying to do an uplisting, I'm assuming you're going to have to do some sort of reverse split to get your share price higher. I'm also wondering, I've just gone through this with two other companies uplisted to the NYSE American. With one of the companies, one of the concerns was in their financials, they had to get rid of statements from their accountants that said going concern. Isn't that something that you're contending with, or am I mistaken? I would just think that potentially is an issue given the history of losses with the company over the last number of years. We know the rules. I've met with one of the two national exchanges. I've had four companies on NASDAQ, for instance. I've run them. It is a concern, it is an issue. George, I guess I'm gonna step over a line I probably haven't stepped on before, but it's my belief. I do not wanna do a reverse. Our stock is not at $4, so the only way to not do a reverse is to get the stock to a point where you don't have to reverse it. We have something that many companies don't have. Many companies either don't have the technology, whatever it is, maybe it's a drug, maybe it's a vaccine, maybe it's a, you know, a diagnostic, whatever, or they have it and it looks great on paper. We have something different, George. We have a technology that is the. You know me, I go back 45 years in this, and I've rarely seen anything close to this. I had a company, as you know, that went to almost a billion-dollar market cap. This technology is platform. It can be used across the board in so many different areas. Each of those areas is exciting on its own, whether it's food or beverage or pharmaceutical, you know, nutraceutical, cosmetics, Agrochem, they're all exciting. This is a technology that fixes a major problem. What we have that others don't have that perhaps try to go on NASDAQ is we've proven it over and over again. We've proven it for the last two or three years. We have the data, and we're ready to start selling. If I had had the option, which I did, to try to uplist by now, I wouldn't have done it, which we haven't, because we think it's in our best interest and the best interest of our shareholders to not do a reverse, and to wait and see whether or not this technology is as good as we think it is. If it is, see if the market and the investor base can understand it and can absorb it and can welcome it. If that happens, that's our expectation, is we would not have to do a reverse. Okay. We're so excited about this technology because everywhere, every time somebody comes in and says, "Can you nanoemulsify this product?" We've never done a product in Agrochem, let's say. We've never done a product in cosmetics. We do it, and it nanoemulsifies, and it's stable, and it's active. We get even more excited. Right now, our plan is to. We've got our expectation to do an uplisting on the middle burner, not on the front burner, on the middle burner. What's on the front burner is to get this technology out, show people that this is a new company. Don't look back. George, you can look back more than anybody 'cause you and I go back those years. You were an investor 10 years ago when we were struggling. Yep. This is a different company. This is a company that has spent a lot of time and money on an amazing technology that we think is as good as. We're blessed to have it. We think the smartest thing to do is to get this early access pro-program going, get some customers in, hopefully get some name customers in over the coming months, show everybody what can happen, and let the market tell us where we are, and then make a decision on the uplist at that time. All right. I wish you luck, and I will continue to follow your story and potentially get involved once again. I'll let you move on to other questions, but it's good hearing your voice. Be well, Rick. I will. You too, George. Thank you. Once again, ladies and gentlemen, if you have any questions or comments, please press star, then one on your phone at this time. Your next question is coming from Bob Jackson. Your line is live. Rick- Hey, Bob. Thank you. Rick, love what you guys are doing, and I really like how you present the case. Kinda relating to what you just said, I'm only curious about do we have competitors, and if so, how close are they to us or who might they be? We have competitors. You know, a lot of people will say it's good to have competitors 'cause they keep you on your toes, and they keep you moving forward. Bob, it depends on how you define a competitor. Now, are there others out there that can do what we do, and make nanoemulsions on a commercial scale? Absolutely. Are there others out there that use other technologies other than the combination of high pressure and high shear? Yeah. Most of the companies that are out there that people are using to make what they call a nanoemulsion, if it's, you know, it's on the verge, it might be a macroemulsion, but whatever it is, don't use high pressure and high shear. Use other methods, other physical methods. There are companies, there is a handful, you know, I can count them on one hand, that have combined use high pressure and. We have something that those companies don't have. We have a patented valve that is unlike any valve, and we call it a nano-gap valve. It is an incredible invention that our guys made, which is why we got the U.S. patent issued several months ago, and we have patents pretty much wherever we've gone. Europe is coming along and Canada's coming along. Japan, which takes usually a long time, has already been issued. China, Australia, already issued. As I said, U.S. This valve is the key. The pressure is important. We have data that shows the higher the pressure, the better the nanoemulsion. We don't know of any of the two or three companies that use pressure that can come close to our pressure. We are pressure experts. We go to 45,000 in our sleep. We've gone to 60,000 PSI. Pressure's important, but there's so many things that are important in addition to pressure. One of them is the valve. Ed Ting and Alex Lazarev and their team have invented this nano-gap valve that is exquisite. It is the key to our success. It will be the key to our success going forward. I'm just in awe of these guys and what they've done. This is what's gonna put us on this map. My prediction, it's gonna be used in a lot of places other than just not in nanoemulsion preparation, in many other areas 'cause it is so unique and so good. We have the valve, we have what's called an isolator, which the other groups that use pressure don't have. They put their material through the pump, which is fine, perfectly fine. It's been done that way for 100 years. When you're done, you have to take the pump apart and clean it out and make sure you get it totally clean. We don't put it through the pump. We have a ingenious discovery that these same guys made that isolates the material and doesn't put it through the pump. We have a patent on this in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. We have higher pressure. We have better controllability. We don't put it through the pump. We have a patented nano-gap valve. We have a patented isolator. We've built it in a way that it can scale. If you want it the size of a warehouse, we'll build it the size of a warehouse. Might be pretty expensive, but we can scale. We have competitors, and maybe they'll, you know, fight on price or something, which is generally what happens. If you can't beat them with the technology, you go to price, right? That only lasts so long. People see the light. Right. They go, "No, no, no. I'd rather spend another 20% and get this thing here, that valve that's never gonna clog, and it's gonna give me the ability to dial in the size of my nanoemulsions within reason." Bob, we do have competitors. We respect our competitors. We're not afraid of them. We respect them. But we think we have not just one, not just two, but two, three or four things that put us head and shoulders above the competition. Rick, thank you, sir. You've answered the question. As I said, I like how you answer your questions, sir. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Thanks. Good to talk with you. Thank you. Thank you. Once again, ladies and gentlemen, if you have any questions or comments, please press star, then one on your phone at this time. Your next question's coming from Kevin Barbalace. Your line is live. Yes, sir. Thanks for having me on. I'm an investor. I think your technology is pretty much off the charts. It's totally cutting edge, and you could probably I mean, there's dozens of platforms you could get involved in. Especially pretty excited, I guess, about CBD oil and infusing it into a multitude of products. I do have a friend of mine that works at a very large company that is looking at your technology. You know, he seems to feel, and I feel that if there's a chance to commercialize with that company, and it could probably increase your market cap 10 or 20 times. Are you planning on announcing any major contracts within this quarter or next quarter? Kevin, nice to meet you. I don't think we've spoken before, right? No, we have not. Nice to meet you and welcome aboard. Nice to hear you're a shareholder. If I was, I couldn't tell you. What I can tell you in general is my goal, our goal is to do just what you said. We are talking to. I have no idea who you're talking about, and I'm not even sure what field you're talking about it in, and nor do I wanna know. I can tell you that our goal, as I said, just what? 15 minutes ago, we wanna sign 3 or 4 contracts over the coming weeks or months, and I'm hoping that one or more can be from very recognizable or large companies, 'cause I think that will help get people to understand that this is for real. Yes, our goal is to blow you away with some of the customers that we wanna bring in. We do have. I will not go into detail. I won't even tell you what the active ingredient is. I can tell you that we're working with a company that has a parent that's in the multi-billions of dollars in annual revenue. We're having you know very good results there. I am looking forward to the day that I can do what you just asked, which is to announce that we've just signed a deal with a very recognizable name, which means it's probably a very large company. It is a goal that I don't like to not achieve goals. Let's hope that what you're asking about happens and happens soon. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Appreciate the kind words about the technology. Thank you. There are no further questions in the queue at this time. Okay. We've got everybody? We might be setting a record for the fastest. I try to keep it under an hour, but this one's under 55 minutes if I shut up and let everybody go. As always, you guys, my number is out there. Call me anytime if you have any questions, or we didn't get to something and you think of it now, after we hang up. We're available. I am. I'm very excited about what's going on, and I'm pretty excited thinking about what's gonna happen the second half of this year. When we meet again, it's gonna be in August after the second quarter is done. Again, I would ask people, and I think that's what I've been seeing lately, which I appreciate. This is not, in my opinion, a story of Pressure Cycling Technology and how many more accounts we can get. We have some wonderful accounts, and it's an amazing technology. We have shifted. We have pivoted. This is a story about UltraShear Technology because this is a technology that solves a major problem in multiple areas, and we've proven it in many of these areas. We have an amazing partner in Ohio State University. We have very hardworking, intelligent, smart people here. Even though we're a small company, it's amazing how blessed I am to have these people. We know we're onto something that we think is very big. These calls, I think, are gonna, in my opinion, get more excited. Let's think about the future. If we wanna talk about revenue, there's nothing in the past that excites a lot of people. I get it. I understand. I've taken a lot of heat for that over the years. But to those people, I say sit back and watch 'cause we're very excited about where UltraShear can take us, not two years from now or three years from now, but we're talking, you know, months from now, as we start to unveil the early access program. Thanks again, everybody. Talk to you in August. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's event. You may disconnect at this time and have a wonderful day. Thank you for your participation.