The clock as my signal that when we're going to start. Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome again, and welcome back to the UBS Global Healthcare Conference. I'm Kevin Caliendo, Healthcare IT and Distribution Analyst, and we are very happy today to have with us the management of ZimVie. That is Vafa Jamali, CEO, and Rich Heppenstall, CFO. Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us. Thank you. Appreciate it. I don't know if you guys wanted to maybe do a quick introduction? Not everybody knows ZimVie as well. If you wanted to spend a minute or two talking a little bit about who you are before we jump into questions? Sure. So I'm Vafa Jamali. I've got a long history in healthcare and medical devices, mostly very, very large companies. And this has been a great opportunity for us to take a company public and really do some different things that you're not so exposed to in the other companies that I was at. Yeah. I'm Rich Heppenstall. I joined ZimVie in September of 2021 to basically spin the company out and take it public, obviously, with Vafa. My background, I was with Orthofix, Breg, and then some variety of companies, including high-tech manufacturing like Applied Materials and semiconductors and industrial manufacturing. So I've got a varied background of industries. Thank you so much. So it's been over two years since the spin, since you spun out from Zimmer. You've executed a lot of initiatives, transformational initiatives since then. Maybe just talk a little bit about the progress that you've made, why you're repositioning this company now as a pure-play dental business. Was this the right thing to do in retrospect and sort of where you stand now? Right. So when a management team's hired to manage a spin-out, they don't really decide what's in it and how much debt it carries and all that. You just hand it to it, and your job is to make the best of it and fix it and make it really a great company. So when we took over, we had a Zimmer Biomet carve-out of their spine business, their bone healing business, and their dental business. We quickly did a portfolio review to see where we thought the best opportunities were within those. And we felt like we could make a really, really solid run within dental. We thought we had a nice portfolio with some obvious add-ins portfolio-wise that we could do. So we decided to sell the spine business. And with that, we sold spine, paid down a mountain of debt. We had a lot of debt coming into a public company as a public company and really allowed us to be leveraged down to where we thought was appropriate and look at this market, and we think there's a lot of opportunities inside of dental that are favorable to us in our portfolio. Now we just need to execute, have a few quarters in a row of solid execution, and kind of really, really tell our story to a market that probably doesn't know who we are. Fair enough. Well, hopefully, this will help. Yeah, absolutely. You got rid of spine and didn't get rid of you. You sold spine. When you look at the business, when we come out of spin sometimes, and this is not any comment on Zimmer or anything else, but sometimes companies that are spun out aren't necessarily run the way you would run an independent company. What sort of operational improvements have you or what kind of operational improvements needed to occur, or what was the opportunity set there? How far along in that process are we in terms of just taking the business and streamlining it to be an independently run company? So maybe I'll leave the spine changes out of it, but there was a lot of change we made operationally in spine to make it ready to be sold and hopefully to give the new acquirer a really great opportunity to be successful there. But within dental, we really thought that there were a few things. One was around how to make decisions on portfolio, on spend. Companies that are carved out don't necessarily have that deep dive on how do we decide what money to spend. We just take our budget and we spend it until the parent company takes it away. So Rich and I implemented something that Rich calls a meritocracy, which is we'll spend the best dollar on the best opportunity. So we created that environment. It takes a little while to get a performance culture going, but I think that if you look at our margin acceleration that we've been able to implement in a flat market, I mean, no secret, dental implant market's been pretty flat for several quarters now. Even within that, we've been able to add a lot of margin improvements. We've taken a ton of overhead out. That's kind of a lot of what you're referring to is spans and layers that really aren't necessary. We took the time to say, "Okay, the market's a bit flat right now. Why don't we spend our energy on the operations and really improve that?" Meanwhile, make improvements, R&D, and keep going there. That's been sort of the highlights. Rich, I know there's more things that we worked on. Yeah. I mean, as Vafa said, changing performance culture, right, and coming out of a larger organization like Zimmer Biomet and being more nimble. I mean, the great thing about the spin is there was a lot of assets on the balance sheet that we were able to monetize, and that really kind of helped us carry through the debt load until we were able to divest spine. And now we're continuing to optimize the organization, which we can, I'm sure, get to as far as when we talk about margin expansion and the like. You're absolutely right. That's where we're going. But you mentioned the dental market has been soft. Maybe take a minute or two to talk about your portfolio products. It's somewhat unique, primarily premium, but there's other products, premium implants as well. How are you positioning this portfolio now? I mean, I can't imagine you think the dental market's going to remain soft forever. But how are you positioned? Just maybe talk a little bit about the product portfolio, and we can talk about margins and stuff next. Sure, so the number one reason why we like the dental implant market is because it's still very low adoption, so we still think that one in four patients that require an implant get a more temporary intervention procedure, so that means that there's a lot of opportunity there to increase adoption. Now, why is that the case? It's primarily the cost and the time for the patient and then the amount of work it takes the provider to do the implant and the amount of time it takes the provider, so we spent a lot of time on our portfolio to look at would a cheaper implant solve that problem, like a less technically superior implant, or would improvements around the workflow be better for adoption and for patient comfort and for aesthetics and outcomes, etc., etc., and what we landed on is it's really workflow. So if you look at our portfolio, we have basically a category of premium implants, and we've just launched our two newest implants there. And they're very robust. They're technically sound. They're ready for immediate implants. There's a lot of benefits to the implants themselves, and they're in the premium category. Then we have a biomaterials category, which we have the number two position in biomaterials, which is basically what you would put into the cavity if there wasn't enough bone. So you're making a patient better indicated for an implant. So you're putting that in there. And again, that would be an indicator of a future implant to come in. And then the third area, which we're really excited about, is the digital platform. What digital means in dentistry and implant dentistry is, am I going to freehand the positioning of the implant, or am I going to use the technology that's available? Now what you can do is you can take a scan, and we send those images to the cloud. Very quickly, we come back with a surgical guide, a surgical plan. We can develop the implant. We can develop the abutments, and we can do all of that digitally. What it does is it saves a ton of time in the back office, whether it be the lab or the office of the practitioner. Secondarily, it makes it very, very replicable for the provider who maybe hasn't done an implant. We'll train them. We'll build up the confidence, and then we'll provide a guide where essentially the guide will dictate where you drill, where you put the implant, and there'll be no mistakes made there. So we look at that as really outstanding outcomes. So those are the three categories of our portfolio: the implant, the digital, and then the biomaterials. How does this differ? And we know who the public players are in the market. There's clearly a leader in Straumann, and then there's a couple of other large players that do this. How is this offering different than what is out there right now? And we'll talk about the market dynamics and stuff, but just trying to understand your product offering if I were to compare it to Straumann, for example, or whatever one. Sure. One of the things that we do is we make it web-based, which means that you don't have to buy a machine to do the guide. And that itself is very flexible. So it creates a lot of flexibility for the customer. And then what we do is we innovate really quickly. So we have software engineers that are continuing to innovate. And what we're innovating around most recently are procedures that are more difficult than others, like full arch procedures, where we think we can actually take more time out of the workflow. And because we do it web-based, we can make iterations fairly quickly, which is really, really useful for us to keep advancing. So you keep moving this along. Like a software business is different than a medical device business in that the pace of change has to be much, much quicker. And then the other thing that we do that's very differentiated is we have very robust training because we need our outcomes to be good. If you do all this and your outcomes are bad, you're going to be out of business soon, right? So we think that the ease of the system, right? So robotics are great, but if it's too difficult to use, you're not going to use it. You're going to do something freehand. So this is a robotic was akin to that. But again, if you look at the ease of how do I do it and then the training, that's really, really critical. It's how do we train people and how do we get them to do implants where they weren't doing it before? It's interesting you say the training because we've heard from the other public players that, and I'm talking specifically about Sirona and Envista, that they lack. They lag, Straumann especially. Straumann's been the gold standard in this terms of training and getting dentists up to speed and running, and that's provided them as much as anything an advantage. And one of the reasons why they were taking share from others, not necessarily from you guys, but from others. And what does it really mean to do that? Because the other two companies continue to talk about making investments to do that, but they've struggled to catch up. Is it bringing people to Terranea Resort for two days and boondoggle, or is it you're in the office with them every day and really teaching them how to? What does it really mean to do that? Do you guys have any kind of advantage, or is your process different than others? The training, it has to be so. Again, I've been Covidien, Medtronic, Cardinal Health, all these companies. And sometimes we did really good training, and the doctor would go back and then go, "Well, I don't really want to do it in my environment." So you have to make it in a way that's believable enough for them that because they did it here, they can do it when they go home. So typically what happens with training is we will do a deal with a group or with an established entity, and then they'll send their providers to our facility. So it's not at a hotel, but it'd be our facility. And there we have both cadavers, and we have some synthetic cadavers, I suppose. There's probably a name for that. But they're all made to really teach you how to do an implant. Because it's so digital, you really follow the pattern, and it gives you a ton of confidence. So we'll fill our facility every weekend with people that are coming in. In fact, we have been so oversold that I looked at our numbers year over year. We're 30%-40% more customers coming in for training than last year. Last year was a pretty good year for us. Because we're overselling these, we're having to put them in a lot of them around digital. Again, if you believe that the market is only 25% penetrated, then there's 75% that can get it but aren't doing it for some reason. We think it's both the cost of the system and the confidence. So we think that this type of training drives a lot of confidence, and they'll go home and they'll start doing implants. It's really a test of good training. Okay. So it's interesting. You're seeing this kind of increase in demand. We're not seeing that in the market necessarily. And I want to definitely talk about the market in a second. But you said on your last earnings call, you're seeing strong demand and leading indicators for implant procedures, biomaterials and digital being the two. Were you referencing this in terms of your trainings? Is that was also something that was driving that? You guys are also taking market share. And again, I want to get into that in a second as well. But broadly speaking, when you see this kind of leading indicators, biomaterials, digital, do you think we're inflecting a little bit in terms of the market, or is this more a ZimVie related demand that ZimVie is going to continue to take share? How do you read into what you're seeing in terms of more doctors coming through, biomaterials being better, demand for digital increasing? What is that? As investors and analysts, how do we take that in? So the demographics would suggest that especially since it's 25%, this will continue to grow. So there's going to be continuous need for it. And we also know that a missing tooth is not just an aesthetic thing. This isn't a voluntary procedure. You probably have to do it at some point. We think that with some of the headwinds that we faced are credit card debt and interest rates because this is largely out of pocket. So you're choosing to do this versus that. So we do think that that's there. But then when you start to see the inflow of training, so I said 30% growth in training programs, there's no reason for someone that doesn't do implants to study how to do implants if they're not going to do them in the near future. We haven't quite been able to pick exactly when that moment of jump off is, but we know that other periods where there's been a buildup, whether it was a recession in the late 2000s or COVID, frankly, which had a couple of other elements that supported it as well, but if you look at those moments, when the patient was released, there was a bolus, and we were doing triple shifts just to make enough implants for it, so we do see that happening. You asked me about biomaterials too. There's no reason for you to get a bone substitute if you're not going to get an implant later, so again, that might be a way for me to just maybe parse out my payments a little bit, and that's what our physicians are telling us, that they think that that is going to happen there. So those are the reasons why I think that the market is getting better. U.S. did better this quarter than before. We actually grew, which was great. We grew 1.6%, which is again the most profitable market, the biggest market. So that's again an indication to have confidence. Okay. I really want to dive into this stuff because it's interesting. But you also said there's more out of pocket here. So maybe help us understand how an implant procedure differs in terms of cost versus alternatives, whether it's a crown or if you tell me what the alternatives dentures or bridges. What's the out of pocket? And how is your pricing positioned, your portfolio compared to really the other premium implants? And also we hear in the marketplace value is doing better than premium, which I think it normally does, but I'd love to hear. I'd love to just get a little bit more from you on this. Sure. So let me start with the patient, right? So the patient goes in to get an implant procedure. An implant is going to cost more than any of those temporary ones for sure, but you will go back and get that done again if you don't get an implant. Implants are a much more durable procedure. So. Can you explain how long? Because I'd heard, hey, I've had crowns and bridges that have lasted six months, and I've had some that have lasted five years. What are we talking about in terms of duration versus how long? Because I've also been told implants could last 20 years, and the cost advantage of an implant so blows away any other alternative. It's just upfront, it costs more. So I don't know if I have any retrospective studies to tell me exactly what. So if anything I quote, it'll be my opinion, and I want to be careful not to do that. But it's undoubtedly a durable procedure versus one that is going to be by virtue just a little bit more temporary. So that will be a short-term decision versus a longer-term decision to get the implant or not. Now, when I go to get let's suggest I decide I want to have a permanent procedure. I'm going to have an implant. When I go to have my implant, the doctor's not going to ask me whether I want a premium or a value, right? They're just going to give me what they want. And then let's just do the economics of it. If a $5,000 implant, how much of it is really materials? Less than a thousand, I'm going to say. So does the difference of $100 on an implant really make a difference? I don't see that price coming down. I don't see someone offering a $3,000 implant because they're using a value implant. So the economics aren't quite there. And the patient doesn't know that. The premium implant players, which is at this point largely Straumann and us, are priced the same. They're about the same. And then you have another brand, which is a challenger brand, which is a little bit lower, which are some other characters, other players in the market. And then you have a very low-priced group, which is kind of a drop-off or online, etc., etc. And we're yet to see what the outcomes are in terms of these. We have our own opinions, but we'll sort of see. We spend a lot of money on engineering, on surface technologies, and making sure the infection doesn't happen, and we would assume that we would have better outcomes long-term than some of the very low-priced ones. So if I'm going and Kevin needs an implant and my dentist says, "Well, your insurance is going to cover 80% of $5,000," and I say, "Well, I don't know if I want to spend $1,000 out of pocket. Is there a cheaper alternative?" And the dentist, why would the dentist choose the premium implant if they're going to make more money on a value implant? It sounds like they do. So is your process that you need to convince the dentist that they need to get a better outcome using your digital technology, your premium implant that costs them $400-$500 compared to $100? No, no, it's about $100 off. The difference is only about $100. Yeah. So really, the economics don't make a ton of sense. But then you sit there and you go, "What do you get with your digital?" You're going to get so in most healthcare now, it's very patient-specific care. In most healthcare, you can get something that's suitable for you as a patient. If you freehand or if you don't use digital or if you don't really look at where the nerves are, where the bone is for that particular patient and how big the cavity is or how the tissue is formed around it, you could very, very probably get an aesthetic outcome that isn't exactly what you want. So what we do is we spend a lot of our time on the back end of it, making sure that everything from the implant to the healing abutment is designed in a way to make the tissue look the most natural. So when the implant goes in and then you put the crown on it, it all looks like it was before. And I think that you get with a combination of a very, very predictable dental implant that's very durable, very stable. And then you get all the digital that ensures that all the pieces around it fit nicely so that when you're smiling, you've got the same look as you had before that happened. Okay. So that's really the sale. It is. It is. And it's very intuitive to somebody who looks at workflow, right? Because if I said that you've spent $5,000 on an implant and then you've got to redo it for whatever reason. It's faster. Is the $100 worth it at this point? Absolutely not. So let's talk about the market a little bit more broadly. You talked about it was better for you this quarter in North America, which is the most profitable market. And we can talk about that and why North America is more profitable. We've heard this from everybody that the North American market is the one that matters. The narrative that we've heard in the market, high-end full arch and half-arch procedures are down significantly. I don't know how much of the business is yours. Straumann, I think, grew low single digits in the United States is what they disclosed. It was probably the worst quarter that they've ever had. I don't know if you guys took share from them or felt like you did this quarter. Is it all economic? Is it all interest rates? Because we've heard this from all the dental companies that, hey, if interest rates get better or the consumer confidence gets better, is that it or is there some other dynamic going on? Yeah. Patients haven't been treated with anything else. So it for sure is the economics of it. And when you look at why have those full arch cases come down, these are really expensive cases. So you're going to. 30,000, 40,000. $30,000, $40,000, $50,000. You're going to buy a car, you're going to buy this, right? If your interest rates are wherever they are and your Visa is maxed out and you believe that if you wait a little longer, the rate will drop, which frankly hasn't happened yet. Really, I haven't had. The mortgage rates went back up again. Really dropped. So that's this period of, I don't know, in between where you're sort of waiting and trying to see if I can get a better deal later. And that's why I think things like bone healing, not bone healing, but bone substitutes should be a leading indicator that I'm about to get it and I'm just waiting for that to happen. So I really do think it's an economic thing. And I think the reason why you see it in the most expensive cases is because it's heightened there versus a single implant. Have value implants grown faster than premium? Is that normal? Yeah. Yeah, it's always like that. They have a place. So value implants have a place. Is it the lowest end of the value implants? Like you said, the $50, $100 implants. Those ones might be a little more temporary, but there's a very robust group of implants that good companies like Henry Schein and Straumann have that I think we call them challenger brands that fit that place. Maybe the rep doesn't need to be there, but many of our specialists really demand that our rep is there with them. And you frankly wouldn't do that if you were just dropping off implants. But I do think there's a segment there. And then if you look OUS, you see a lot of growth there. But again, a lot of those value implants are local for local. So a local Brazilian company that's really successful in Brazil, a local Korean company that's really successful in Korea, etc., etc. Those are usually very low-priced, but local. Envista's management team made it clear publicly that they were looking at value implants as an opportunity for them to fill out their portfolio. They don't really have a premium implant and one didn't really materialize, no pun intended, in the marketplace, but he's talked about maybe buying value implants. The dynamics in your portfolio, does it make sense for you to have a challenger offering or even a lower-end offering as a full suite? Does a DSO want to have both? If I'm thinking about DSOs, I'm asking how you're positioned or how you think about that. I think for the size that we are and coming off of the debt that we had, what decisions we make with our capital allocations are really, really critical and really important because I think people are watching to make sure we don't do anything crazy, and we won't. I think that if you look at the transportability or the exportability of a value implant, it's the question, right, so a very, very successful company, yeah, company in a particular country that isn't successful outside of those borders, you got to wonder why. Now, you may find it very, very compelling to buy them and then be strong in that country, which I think would be wise. Maybe even opens your channel up, so you do a channel deal and an implant deal. But I think the assumption that you're going to be able to quickly export that elsewhere and make it a success in the U.S., I would question that a little bit, right? But I still think that that would be something that we would look at everything and we would look at it through the lens of the ROI and the execution capability that we have and whether we would do it or not. So I wouldn't rule anything out, but I think we're going to be really specific on what expectations we have on it. Okay. Are you guys share takers right now? When you think about the overall implant market and you look at your segment, or do you look at the entire market and say, "Hey, we grew this fast in North America, we grew this fast in Europe"? And those are your two. Maybe you should let everybody know how much of your revenues are in Europe and how much are in the United States. Are you taking share and who are you taking share from or losing share to, in your opinion? In a market that's soft like this, it's hard to tell where it is. But what we do know is that our equivalent of same-store sales are what's hurting us. So a specialist that was doing 10 is doing 9. So that's where we're feeling it the most. And then where we have the most competitive activity is within DSOs, which are highly competitive arrangements that we have. And typically, it's us and Straumann shortlisted. Either we split it or one wins over the other. And the reason we do well there and the reason why we do often take some share is that we would train their constituents how to do more implants so they get more dollars out of it. And again, this goes all the way back from how do we make each practice a little bit more profitable? And implants are a good way to do it. Again, you do it if you have the training there to make sure they're really, really good at their job. You have the product portfolio there. And then you've got the contract dollars you go. Rich, anything else to add? No, I think that's right. I think the U.S. business for us is about 60%. And our top five countries include the U.S., many of the large markets, U.S., Japan, Spain, France. And in many of these markets, we're doing very well and performing. I think when you look at the U.S. and you talked earlier, Kevin, about training, we've got a direct sales force in the U.S. that's highly engaged, knows obviously canvasses the market very well. We made some investments in the third quarter to kind of fill some gaps in the sales force. And then it's kind of underpinned by a refreshed product development portfolio that we've been able to do over the last couple of years. Strong biomaterials, really strong digital dentistry, and then kind of underpinned by really strong medical education. Got it. We can talk about the implant market for probably the next couple of hours, but we only have a handful of minutes left. So I want to talk about the digital portfolio because you did say biomaterials was a leading indicator, but digital was. And digital grew over 30% last quarter. We talked about the product earlier, but what's the pitch on digital? Is it new users or is it your same-store users that are looking at this and saying, "Okay, this makes the process simpler"? Where are those sales going? Maybe is a better way to ask. So we have large, large specialist groups that really use so digital's a couple of different things, right? But they really like to use our software. So we have sandbox capabilities. They They can play with it. They can design what they want to do. And they like to do it themselves. So they'll do that. They'll design it. It's all right there and it's. Design the crowns even like that. Everything, yeah. The whole thing, they get to design it there. Then you've got another part of digital, which goes back to workflow. We started to see post-COVID, we saw that in several cases, a dentist might be doing the cleaning for the patient, which has never happened in my life before, right? Because you're basically doing a lower-cost item. And it was because they couldn't get the staff to come back. We saw this turnover of staff to be an issue. How does that relate to implant dentistry? The labs have the same issue. The back office of the person doing the implant has the same issue. We have another category, which is called Implant Concierge. What we do there is we take your picture, we send the images to Implant Concierge, and what comes back is a box with everything in it. So you've got your guide, your drill bit, your implant, everything is in the box, and it comes back to the doc on the day that the patient's going to come in. So we outsource all of that labor to an office that has a stable workforce. They know what they're doing. They're not getting trained because what our dentists would complain is, "I got to now train a new person because they don't know this thing." So you sit there and you go, "This is actually quite intuitive, quite obvious, but it works really well." And that uptake, I would say that that is a lot of new users like that because it gives them confidence to start going. And then on the surgical guide part of it, what I said, we have a lot of specialists doing it. They're also helping us with really complicated procedures. We think we can innovate around the workflow of full arch procedures, which if you again look at the economics, it's not product. It's the time it takes to do it. And if we can really outsource that. A lot of the design work that we do is 10 minutes on a computer versus three hours in the lab. And it gets exponentially bigger when you start to do more complicated cases. This is why digital is interesting. This is why it's the future. And it's also why you're able to offer patient-specific care to patients become more and more aware that I can get this or I can get that. It's actually working quite nicely within our portfolio. Super helpful. I think maybe a lot of investors don't know you have a relationship to Align on iTeros. Can you maybe talk a little bit about that? And we only have a couple of minutes, but maybe a minute on that just to explain and how do you profit from it? How does it work for you and for your customers? Sure. So they have a very good scanner called the iTero. And between the CBCT scan and the iTero scan, that's the juice or the infrastructure needed to do all the digital work. So the minute you have that, you can design everything you want in the back. So we felt like that was a really important part of our portfolio. And we distribute that for them too. They're primarily in the orthodontics, and we would distribute it to the implant team. We also have another product from a company called Medit, which is also a scanner that just gives us a little more variability in terms of the price that the customer is willing to pay. We learned from digital that it's difficult to get someone in this market to go buy a box. That's why we do everything online, web-based for all our digital work. We also found that there might be a price point where someone would not want to buy a scanner, even though it's the best thing to unlock the future for them. That's why we found these two tiers to kind of work through. It's not a big percentage of our business, but it's important strategically. Has the market moved more towards Medit recently or in the last just because of pricing and the same dynamic that's driving a softness in the market? Yeah, we report with iTero and without iTero, and our numbers are remarkably better without iTero. So it's been a drag for us. Capital has been difficult in these markets is typically what happens. And we do see that right now the Medit product is growing faster. I have to ask the obligatory. I know you just reported a week or two ago, but how do you feel the same enthusiasm in terms of what you've seen into November in terms of whether it's biomaterials or digital or even just ordering patterns or dentist behavior? In terms of, is there anything changed in. Two weeks. In two weeks. Oh God, no. But I have to, by the way, you have to get used to these kinds of questions because this is how it works. We all want to know, like, "What did they say? Did they sound better?" Has there been any? Have you seen any? Listen, we did have an election, right? And in certain markets, there have been interest rate cuts. So it's not just simply two weeks. There have been a couple of things that have happened. No, for sure. I think materially nothing changes. We haven't got it yet for next year, and we will as soon as we start to really, really get everything in our ducks in a row. I think consumer sentiment is going to improve. I think we feel it, and I think that's all positive. Our customers feel it. Now, whether that's obviously, I can't prove that with data yet, nor can they. But the feeling is there. And if we really attribute most of the slowness to waiting, then you should be through that. There was a pre-election kind of issue that everyone had, and now it's through, and we're through, and hopefully we can get on to better things, and that includes getting your implants done. So just remind us, your guide in 2025 on your fourth quarter call. Is that the right way to think about it? Yeah. Yeah, that's right. Sometime in February, is that right? Yeah. Okay. And so between now and then, we should just be tracking consumer sentiment and the like? Yeah. And between now and then, we'll continue to work on our corporate costs, bringing those down, improving our margins, getting our portfolio straight, getting our performance culture, kind of keep on working on that. Do you have leverage target? Do you have a leverage target that you stated that you want to get to? We do, and we're there. It was about three, three and a quarter X, and we're well under that now, and just one comment around 2025. The one thing we have said around 2025 is, and we reiterated this on our Q3 call, was our commitment to 15% plus EBITDA margin beginning April 2025, which is one year post spine sale. Okay. And what would be driving that? Is it mixed? Is it cost? Yeah. So a lot of it is a couple of things. A lot of it is when the TSAs roll off, and there's some stranded costs that need to be solved for. But the other thing is we expanded. We actually reduced cost of goods sold by 260 basis points from Q2 to Q3. So all of the initiatives we've been doing around manufacturing paid off in the quarter. And that helps really clear that pathway because it's two and a half points of margin that is just a step function change from Q2 to Q3 that really kind of clears the path for us to be able to achieve that in 2025. Kevin, we haven't contemplated foreign exchange or major changes in consumer sentiment, and for a company like ours where we've really fixed the back office and we've got fixed costs, it has a dramatic change to. There's real leverage to the model. Serious leverage once that happens, yeah. Guys, this has been fantastic. I really appreciate you coming and doing this. Thanks, everybody, for joining. And we will talk to you very soon. Thank you.