Hi, good morning, everybody. We're ready for our next session at the Lehman. Let's see here. Richard Francis, CEO of Teva, thank you so much for joining us. I used to cover Teva a long time ago and have known the name for a while, and Richard and I know each other from trips I've taken to visit him over in Europe. He was at a different firm back then, and now he's running Teva. It's really been very interesting as someone who doesn't cover the stock to kind of watch what Teva has been doing. It's really been going great. I mean, so far, so good. You've really done some great things there. Talk about just what's been working. What was the strategy and what's kind of, wow, this was like the box checking of the past couple of years that's kind of got us to this point. Yeah. Firstly, Mark, thanks for having us. I really appreciate it. Yeah, I mean, it's an exciting time at Teva. I think people are very proud of the last two years of what the company's achieved because obviously we've had many years of challenging times with trying to pay down debt. One could argue just trying to stay in business. The last two years with the pivot to growth strategy has really aligned the company on what we want to do and how we want to do it. In the last two years, we've invested heavily in our innovative business, our innovative pipeline, and we've stabilized our generics business, actually grown it. It really comes down to just four simple pillars that the company gets behind. Delivering our growth engines, which is all about accelerating Austedo, Uzedy, and Ajovy, and investing and building capability in that. Step up innovation, the pillar two, which is we've got an innovative pipeline. When I came and I spoke to Eric Hughes, Head of R&D, and I was like, "Eric, this is a good pipeline. Let's just invest in it." I mean, we invested heavily in that and we accelerated it through the clinic, be that Olanzapine, be that Duvakitug, now Dual-Action ICS/SABA. We've got some good data on that, which shows Teva is, I say it to people, Teva's a biopharma company that has a world-class generics business. Our third pillar, which is Creative Generics Powerhouse, we are bleeding generics. 65% of our business is outside the US, which is very consistent. In the U.S., we did have some ups and downs, but we've stabilized that business and we've grown that business. I think in the last two years, what people have seen is a very focused company that's very focused on execution. There's very focused on capital allocation to those specific areas, which means we take capital from other areas because we've kept our P&L very tight if you look at our OpEx. I think that's allowed people to look at Teva in a very, very different way. We've had a lot of good conversations over the last two years. I've always said they sort of started with this strategy seems like it's fiction, but over the two years, it's become non-fiction because we've executed and we've delivered. I think I would argue the best is to come because we're just at the beginning of the strategy. The first part was return to growth, which I think people thought was challenging, but we've had eight quarters of growth now. We've changed the fundamentals around Austedo, which when we arrived at the start of the strategy was peak sales of $1.4 billion. We could do $2 billion this year. We're going to do $2.5 billion by 2027. That is not peak. I think we've really delivered in driving that growth. Now it's all about acceleration. How do we bring the pipeline through quicker? How do we maximize the opportunities we have in our innovative portfolio? How do we continue to grow our generics business? That throws off a lot of cash that pays down our debt, but also invests in our innovative pipeline. A lot of good stuff the last two years, but it's just the beginning. Do you feel like the whole organization is now completely, "Okay, this is what we're doing. We're on board. Everyone's comfortable"? Because I know when I was covering the company for a while, it felt like there was just a lot of head fakes going on. It's like two years we're doing this and then it would, "Okay, then we're doing that." Is everybody on board? Yeah, no, it's a great question. What I say is there's no way you could do what we've done in 24 months without everybody being absolutely committed. I think the reason why people have been so behind this strategy is first, it's super clear. We've made decisions so fast on reducing resource here, adding it here. There was no ambiguity. We execute it every month. Firstly, it was clear. The second thing is we've never wavered. The final thing is the Teva people, it's an amazing company. They really wanted clear direction. They really wanted to know, "Can we return to growth? If this was what it will take, we'll do it." The only reason why I can sit here two years on is because 36,000 people did it and they did it in unison. So impressive, really. I want to jump into the innovative portfolio. Before we do that, when I was listening to the last conference call, there seemed to be some issues with respect to margin guidance and just in the context of, "Okay, how are we going to get to these longer-term goals, these three or four-year goals, whatever it is, given this year's numbers?" Maybe you can just spend a minute or two just explaining to people, "Okay, this is what's going on here. Yeah, no, that's a good question. I appreciate you asking it. Look, it's interesting. When we started this journey two years ago, nobody thought we could grow. We grew the first year 6% and we grew 9% last year. We're giving guidance, which is remarkable because this is six, seven years of decline. This is not just edging into growth. This is growing really well. We gave guidance this year, which we always give a range. The high range is over 5% and we grow top line and the EBITDA. People went to the mid-range and said, "Yeah, but the mid-range, particularly in EBITDA, you're not growing it." I think I learned then that no matter what you do at Teva over two years, you mustn't forget some of the legacy issues. People started to say, "Can this company hit its 2027 targets?" We have high confidence we're going to do this. We have a very detailed plan. I think what happened there is people, I often say we're the victims of our success. They thought we're 6%, 9%, it's just going to keep on going. Although I think 5% on that CAGR was really healthy for any company, but particularly Teva, I think that that's probably made people sit up and say, "Okay, are they convinced?" What I've said to people is, "Look, let me be clear. We'll get to the 2027 targets because next year we will grow EBITDA. We'll grow EBITDA in absolute money, absolute dollars, and we'll grow EBITDA as a percentage. We will. We are going to hit the 2027 targets. I think that's probably the gap that people needed to have filled in. That's what I sort of reiterated: this year is all about still investing in growth. I still think we'll have a good year. Next year we will grow EBITDA and we'll grow it as a percentage and we'll grow it again in 2027 and hit our 30%. Yeah. Let's talk about Austedo, which is a product that I have been watching very carefully and the company's done a great job. What's so interesting to me is when the two players, obviously it's Neurocrine and you in the tardive dyskinesia market, and together it was roughly $4 billion-ish in the US last year. That was a 30% growth rate from the year before. Yet if you put the guidance together for this year, it's more like a 13% growth rate, right? Midpoint of the range of guidance for both companies. I guess the question is why such a steep drop-off in market growth? You're both talking about it. Clearly something's going on behind the scenes. Yeah, look, I think firstly, I think what I said, I'm really impressed with what we've done on Austedo because we sort of, I think we're behind in the market and we came in and we resourced it well. We brought in capability and people. I think we've transformed the direction of that product. I think one thing to consider on Austedo, don't forget we've had the change in Medicare Part D. Although we get low-income subsidy, we get a phase in, we still get hit by that. That is part of something. Right. You're both feeling that. Yeah, we both feel that. Look, what I always talk about is I think it's great we're having a discussion: is $2 billion enough? We're absolutely going to hit $2.5 billion in 2027, but that is not the peak. We're going to keep growing this because there are 650,000-700,000 patients who have yet to be put on treatment. The potential is huge. For us, it's about how can we maximize Austedo. This year, that's the slight, I think, drag we hold on our growth rate. That doesn't change the ambition around $2.5 billion and then beyond. It's interesting listening to both companies. It feels like every couple of years, the number of TD patients, the opportunity seems to actually grow. That's why I was kind of asking. Obviously we have the Medicare change this year. Was there anything else? Do you feel like there's any pushback going on in the payer world or anything that's making it more difficult to get prescriptions filled or anything like that? No, no. Look, I think, no, in short answer to that one, no. As you saw last year's results were very strong. We had really good growth. Oh, very strong. Maybe that's just it. Last year was just such a growth anomaly a little bit. You over-indexed last year because of everything you put into. There comes a point where. Yes, our launch. Yeah, there comes a point where, although I will never say this to the team, so I hope they're not watching, but you keep building the base and growing big percentage on a big ever-increasing base just becomes harder than maths. No, I think, look, we have a great team. There's more to come in Austedo. People ask me how we've managed to perform so well so quickly from a very labored start. We have a super talented team. We invest very thoughtfully, but we understand the complexity of this market really, really well. When I say it's going to keep getting better, when you think about all the things we do, some of it's about bringing patients to the market who have yet to be diagnosed. Some of it's about getting those patients prescribed. Some of it's about making sure they're on the right milligrams. Some of it's about making sure they're adhering and they're compliant. All these things, it's multifactorial. I think we have excellent programs, all of them. I think they will all continue to get traction as we move forward. Yeah. Neurocrine was up here literally in the same spot yesterday, basically saying that Teva took market share from us. They increased the share of voice and now we got to get back to share of voice. They are going to try to increase their share of voice back. I do not know whether your response is, "Well, we are going to keep increasing our share of voice. No. You feel comfortable where you are now? We do not talk about anybody else. No, I mean, seriously, internally, we do not. There are 700,000 patients not on therapy. For me, I have just said to the team all the time, "$2.5 billion in 2027. $2.5 billion. We will do this. That is what we do. We are single-minded on that. If that means we grow market share and whatever, that is fine. It is not about that. It is about helping these patients, understanding the unmet need, and executing on that. For us, once again, I go back to the quality of our strategy, the quality of our plans, the quality of our execution. For me, that is why we are doing so well. the U.S., you feel like there's a good opportunity over there? Yeah, we do. We've submitted it to Europe. I think we're hopeful about Austedo being brought to the market next year. By the way, we'll bring Olanzapine to the market in Europe. Once again, going back to the pivot to growth strategy, we looked at all our innovative products and said, "Okay, we need to get these to the US, but these can actually go global." Actually, Austedo, we also have in China, and we're looking at how we expand that footprint because that's what you should do as a biopharma company. You don't just get into one market because of the footprint. Especially a company like Teva, you have the footprint already. Exactly. At Ajovy, we're knocking it out of the park in Europe in a very competitive space. We have a real capability from sales and marketing that we can leverage with Olanzapine and with Austedo. The LAI market was tough like last year. And yet you put this Uzedy out, the Risperidone LAI. How did it do so well in such a, I mean, it's crowded, the market's not growing, and yet you come in and I mean, the numbers are really strong. Yeah. Look, I think it goes back to those core fundamentals. We're really good at commercializing products. I mean, really good. And we do that because we have really capable teams, really well-thought strategies. We understand the market. In schizophrenia, the patient journey is absolutely critical. It's really difficult. A schizophrenic patient can be somebody who's in an institution, can be somebody who's homeless, can be somebody who's a functioning professional in the working environment. It's very, very hard to be able to really penetrate that market where there's very established people, you have to have two things. A great product, which we have, like a very good differentiated product, but we have to have a commercial capability to get into those institutions, to get into the hospitals, to get on formularies, to get KOLs to understand our product, and to get obviously payers to pay for it. I think what we've done, and I like the fact that you've raised it, in a really crowded competitive market where some big players have really ingrained in that market and come in and disrupted it so effectively, so quickly. That builds onto Olanzapine, which we're filing this year and we'll launch next year, which isn't a crowded market because there's only one LAI that's not used at all because of the black box. When I talk about this great commercial team and I talk about Uzedy, then remember, everybody we go to with Olanzapine, be it the payer, be it the formulary committee of the hospital, be it our patient services, be it the physicians, be it the nurse practitioners, they're all the same. They are obviously, they really like Uzedy, but they're already excited about Olanzapine. This is more differentiated, like you said. There's nothing there for Olanzapine. Olanzapine is considered the most efficacious product. It is used on the severe patients. If you think about it, the severe patients need compliance. They need it. That is why I think there is a big unmet need they were excited about. We have the two things I want people to be left with there: what we have done in Austedo, what we have done in Uzedy, and what we have done in Ajovy, which is a product that everybody forgot. We have now hit $500,000,000. It is going to be $600,000,000 this year. Shows when it comes to commercializing products, we are really good. Does this product have bigger, I mean, do you have bigger thoughts for it than Uzedy as far as just peak sales? Just because it just seems it should be, right? Yeah. I mean, look, you have. You have all the other risperidones. You don't have the other Olanzapine. Exactly. You have, I think it's 20% of the schizophrenia market is Olanzapine as a molecule. It's the largest. People want to have a long-acting. Yeah, we see that as a significant potential and we're excited about it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Talk about this TL1A market. Obviously, I do not know as much of that market as I understand the neuroscience market, which I focus on so much. Tell us about how you are going to compete. It just seems like when I was looking at us, I was like, "Wow, there is a lot of players here. How is yours going to stand out?" Obviously you have a good partner. Look, firstly, by the time we launch, it's going to be a $31 billion-$32 billion market. That big. If you look at the amount of UC and CD patients, it's close to 5 million. You look at how many patients cycle through therapies and how many patients end up on surgery. It is really high. There's a high level of unmet medical need. For us, when we look at Duvakitug in the Phase 2, the two things that stood out to me were, okay, very good efficacy in Phase 2, but the safety and the tolerability was excellent. If you look at all the products in the market that you highlight, there's a lot of, there's some with black box, there's some with monitoring required. There's a complexity to it. With ours, the dropout rate in the clinical in the phase two was minimal. I mean, I think in the Crohn's, which is a placebo-controlled randomized study, the only TL1A to have that. I think Eric talks about one or two. I mean, this is a remarkably well-tolerated drug. And it has very low neutralizing antibodies, which is critical in a disease area where you're having to cycle because you don't want to take away options from going forward. I think we really think this is a big opportunity in IBD. Don't forget, because of this mechanism of action, as we've seen from other people of TL1As, there are multiple indications this can go into. I remind people, if we only were in IBD, this is transformative for Teva. If we move into more indications, two, three, four, five, and people talk about up to ten, if one is transformational for Teva, then the multitude, even if you could argue they only get a small percentage, whatever indication they go into, I mean, it's an absolute game changer. Talk to what's the plan here? Kind of quickly. The plan is, we're obviously partnering with Sanofi, which is excellent because they have that appetite because of the experience with Dupixent. They know our multiple indications. Certainly in the market, yeah. They want to have a big blockbuster because Dupixent does come to an end at some point. We are going to go into phase three this year with IBD. We are going to announce two more indications this year for other areas that we are going to take our Duvakitug. We also have a list of other indications that we are going to go into. One of the reasons for picking Sanofi is we knew this all along and we thought we want to leverage their capability, not just in development, but their capability about creating a pipeline in a product, which often people talk about, but I think we can argue Dupixent is probably one of the best at doing that. We really want to leverage that. They are very excited. We are excited. We are going to move at full speed on that. The opportunity is really, this is an efficacious product, but it's just better tolerability. It's a better safety profile than the competition. Absolutely. We're going to move into all these different markets and it's going to work in multiple markets. This is going to be a multi-billion dollar product. Absolutely. You share it with. We get 50% of the profits. Then we get the milestones. I mean, I don't want to discount that. We have a milestone, which, by the way, we didn't put in our guidance when you talked about people being a bit guidance. When we enter phase three this year, we'll get $500,000,000 from Sanofi. We didn't put that in our guidance. It's real money. It's real money. I mean, it's real money for anybody. It's definitely real money. I think that's important just to highlight. The other product is the dual-action rescue inhaler. Talk about that product a little bit. The market, obviously there's some competition, but what's the hook for your product? By the way, isn't it great that we've just, we're spending, I don't know how long we've done here so far. All we're talking about is innovation. We're talking about Austedo, we're talking about Uzedy, we're talking about. We can talk about generics if you want. I just want to hear about this other stuff. No, I want to say, I want to remind everyone, that's because Teva is a biopharma company. It's not a generics company. That's why. ICS/SABA, the DARI study, is a dual-action rescue inhaler. As you rightly say, there's one competitor. It's AZ. There are 10 million patients in the United States who the guidelines say should be on a dual-action rescue inhaler. There's only one out there, which is AZ. They're creating the market and they're a great respiratory company. We'll come in 2027. The differentiation is we will have a pediatric indication, which is 25% of the population. How'd they miss that? did not. They are going for the big opportunity, the big population. They get 75%, one could argue. They do. I'm surprised they missed anything. Are they going to do a pediatric as well? I would imagine at some point they may. Right now, we're coming into the market with a simpler device and a pediatric indication. We come in, we follow them. You always want to be first in the market. Maybe in this situation, it's quite nice to have somebody create the market. We're good at doing that. We come in, we differentiate for our pediatric indication. 25% of a very big market is very meaningful for us again. How is the inhaler different? You said it was a better inhaler. Yeah, it's just very simple. Ours is a, actually I wish I had the demo here. Eric Hughes, our R&D, he always brings it with him to show it. It's just a click inhaler. You open it up, inhale, and that's it. As opposed to having to time it, which the AZ-1 does. I think from a compliance point of view, obviously we pick that because children want the simplest device. I think adults probably will. We'll probably pick up a bit of the bigger market just because we have a very simple device. There's another thing. We've been making devices for 30 years at our Weston facility in New Jersey. Actually, it's not in New Jersey, it's in the U.S. When it comes to devices and making the right devices, we're really good at that because that comes up a bit from our generic system. Yeah, no, I remember. I remember all those devices and stuff. Before we leave the innovator, we really didn't talk about Ajovy at all. I mean, that's a crowded category. How have you been able to break through? I think it comes back to the Pivot to Growth Strategy. It's focus. We came in, this is our deliver on our growth engines, Austedo, Uzedy, and Ajovy. We focused on it. Is there more resources behind it now or the past two years than the previous two years? There are more resources in some of the markets, absolutely. There is more focus. There is more expectation. There is more planning about execution and about accountability. Because of that, I think the team in Europe and international markets have done a great job. In the U.S. as well, we are growing market share. I know it sounds really basic, but some of it is resource, but a lot of it is about focus and expectations, making sure we have the right plans and executing. Ajovy, I do not think anybody talked about it. It It did $500,000,000 last year. It is going to do $600,000,000 this year. That is a product that everybody sort of discounted. You think about. A crowded market, you're competing against Lilly and Amgen. Is the Amgen even? The orals as well. Trying, of course, to get onto your business. We're actually, I think, bucking the trend and growing that product really well. Grew 18% last year, which is a big number on a product that old. I think that shows as much as people appreciate orals, there is a compliance benefit from having injectables still. Just once again, it goes back to that capability we have of commercializing products. Let's talk about the U.S. generics business. I always think when you're modeling U.S. generics, the first thing you have to do is kind of, okay, where are the big lumpy big wins that you get? I don't know how long you get those big wins. Sometimes they're planned for a year, sometimes six months, and sometimes. Just talk us through how to think about the growth for this year, the next couple of years, and break out the lumpy stuff for everybody. I always remind people that roughly 65% of our business is ex-U.S. generics business. It's really important. As you saw last year, that grew at mid-single digit in Europe and high double digit in international markets. That's really important because this is a big business. Ex-U.S., very predictable growth, steady growth, good profitability. The U.S., you're right, it's lumpy because you have good products that come along and you benefit from those. Then you have fallow years where you have less launches. We've stabilized that a bit in recent years from a decline. We've managed to get the U.S. back to growth. To answer your question, how is it going to go going forward? We have a big product in our generic Revlimid. That will have competition next year. I think that's going to obviously significantly impact the U.S. business and the U.S. generic business and our generic business as a whole. That's one of the reasons why people are asking us about what happens in 2026. We're saying, well, we're going to have the Revlimid, which is going to disappear. We've actually said. You have to model it that way. I mean, if you're going to do, I don't know, a billion dollars of Revlimid this year and next year, it's $200 million, you have to model that. Exactly. We're actually modeling it pretty much to zero. Okay? Because we're very, I don't want to say conservative, but everything we predict, we try and predict with maybe slightly a more measured approach. We don't look at things going our way. Revlimid pretty much disappears. As I said earlier, we're still going to grow EBITDA. We're still going to grow the percentage OP. How we're doing that, by the way, in the company, there's three things we're doing. Our revenue will continue to grow in Austedo, Uzedy, and Ajovy. We also have other complex generics we're launching. We're launching four biosimilars as well in the next 18 months, possibly five, both in the U.S. and another four in Europe. Our revenue is going to grow. That helps net out. From a profitability perspective, because we want to keep growing our EBITDA, we have two important programs. One is a manufacturing and what we call a value acceleration program, which we started mid-last year. This is to reduce our cost of goods. In the past, after the Actavis acquisition, we closed 40 sites. The sites we had remained with, we never drove efficiencies in them. We have not really reduced our cost of goods over the last number of years. In generics, you need to reduce your cost of goods. I can't believe we're still talking about this because I feel like it was like 10 years ago. I know, I know. With a different CEO. Yeah, so it's a slightly different story. Our value acceleration program means we're going to reduce our COGS over the next three years. We have an organizational effectiveness program, which we've launched this year, which is about Teva was, we never really designed Teva for what it needs to do because we just kept adding companies to it. To become a biopharma company with the right capabilities in the right places, how do we do that? This is about reducing cost by simplification. Those two programs, which primarily hit the cost element of it, allow us to offset all of Revlimid and allow us to grow next year. Drive gross margins. Drive gross margins and allow us to hit 27 target. Yeah. So, I guess if you just eliminated Revlimid right now from this year, what's kind of the growth ex Revlimid this year? Is there growth in the business ex Revlimid? Yeah. I mean, when you think about what we're launching in both U.S. and Europe, I mean, obviously. Just U.S. for a second. Just U.S. We launched. Can you grow without Revlimid? We can, yeah, absolutely. We launched Victoza. We launched Octreotide. We launched many, many small molecules. We have a number of complex generics. I think we announced two years ago we had 13 to launch. We announced this year we have 10 to launch over the next two years. Complex generics. We launched all the other generics as well. Do not forget, we're improving our manufacturing base because there are some products we can sell a lot more of. We just have constrained lines. There are products which even now when I look on the metrics, we can sell more of. We're unconstraining those lines as we speak because that's part of the value acceleration program. Yes, we can. We just got to keep launching those complex generics. That's where we need to get better. Is the pipeline there? The pipeline's there. For 2026, for 2027? We're not sure of the pipeline. I mean, the one thing about you needed, as probably you know from the time you did cover Teva, you need to have a great commercial market, go to market model. You need to have a great pipeline and great manufacturing. We had a great pipeline. We just didn't launch it on time. We spent a lot of effort the last two years simplifying our processes, focusing on the high-value generics and making sure we get the right file into the FDA, get the right CapEx in manufacturing so we can launch on time. By the way, we haven't cracked this. This is not a journey you do in 24 months. We have significantly improved it and we'll keep improving it. Pipeline, we have a big pipeline. Now it's about getting into the market on time, optimally. It also sounds like behind the scenes, if you excluded Victoza, not Victoza. Revlimid. Revlimid, and you looked at kind of the core of your generics business, the gross margin is increasing behind the scene. That's what sounds like that's going on. That's our aim, right? I mean, part of that is about manufacturing efficiencies. That's going to drive gross margin improvement. Are we seeing that this year, or is that you're saying maybe next year, the year after, we'll see that? It depends on the product mix. As we launch products that I mentioned, the Victozas and the Octreotides, obviously they have a high gross margin as do some of our biosimilars. The manufacturing is a core element to make sure that base business we have, we're continuing and improving, or at least maintaining the gross margin. Those things are in place. What excites me is we don't have those all up and running at real efficiency yet. We will. That's to come. That's still to come. That's to come, yeah. I think you don't complete a transformation and a turnaround in 24 months. I think we've done a huge amount, but there's still good things to come, which is what I like. The 65% of the generics business, which is ex-U.S., which is less lumpy. Just talk about what is the natural growth rate that you see for the next year, two, three, four? Is this a 2%-4% grower? What's natural? Yeah. I would say it's that. It's sort of 2%-4%, 1%, because Europe is so big. It's such a big business. We're number one in most markets. When you have something that big a base, we launch pretty much every product, but you can't really change the trajectory. I think 2%-4% is a good way of looking at it. Now, we've outperformed that the last two years. Your question could be, we outperformed it. Can't you keep that going? Part of that is we've started to deal with the fundamentals around supply chain and manufacturing. We had some constrained lines and we managed to release that. Sometimes you just get more launches in one year. I think a 2%-4% is a really good forward CAGR to look at, which is really healthy for us because it's very profitable, throws off a lot of cash, which helps us pay down debt, but also helps us invest in our innovative portfolios. Yep, yep. Talk about, I guess, just our last kind of time here with business development and how you think about what you're doing here. I mean, because we got to pay off the debt. Yes, true. We've got this innovative pipeline we have to invest in. What's going on in business development? How are you thinking about that? Despite our balance sheet, and our balance sheet is improving so dramatically, so quickly. As you can see, we've had all the rating agencies improve the outlook last year for us. Our commitment to get to net two times net debt to EBITDA, we're well on track to do. We'll do that before 2027. Business development. We always knew this day would come. We've been really active in business development, looking at opportunities, particularly in Europe, because that's where our capability and that's where we have room. I mean, our commercial team's so good. I want to give them more. There's a lot of U.S. companies here who don't know what to do while U.S. They're looking for partners. They can send them my way then. At the same time, what I would say is, we're open for business, but capital allocation is really important at Teva. We have, as you say, a great pipeline. We have great products. We have Austedo. We have Uzedy. We have Olanzapine. Whatever we bring in from the outside better deserve that capital because we have a lot of organic growth potential. Are they going to be early stage or are they going to be later stage? We're going to later stage. We don't want to take on any risk, right? So we want things that are either. Proven mechanisms, fast follower strategy kind of thing. Yeah. We're not going to have a moonshot and hope for the best. Once again, don't allocate capital to something like that when we have really good returns within the company organically. That is how we think about late stage, be able to put our commercial team behind it, accrete to the top line and the bottom line relatively quickly, and continuous on our innovative journey. Neuroscience is still an area of focus for ED? Big focus. Immunology? Are we? Yeah. I mean, the one thing about immunology, we've obviously talked about TL1A, IL-2, Duvakitug, which can go to multiple indications. That is pretty big. We have an IL-15 and TL1A behind it, which also we are into indications already. Immunology, yes, but we have quite a big pipeline already. Yeah. Good. Thank you. Thanks a lot for joining us. Good to see you again. Good to see you again too. Thanks for your time. Good luck with everything.