Monogram Orthopaedics, Inc. Price & Performance (MGRM)

You should also review our most recent Form 10 ks and Form 10 Q for a more complete discussion of these factors and other risks particularly under the heading Risk Factors. A press release detailing these results was issued today, March 12, 2025, and is available in the InvestorRelationssectionofthecompany'swebsitemonogramtechnologies.com. Your host today, Ben Sexton, Chief Executive Officer Anil Kanabi, Chief Financial Officer will present results of operations for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2024. At this time, I will turn the call over to Monogram Financial Officer, Noel Kanabi.

Good afternoon, everyone. Glad to be with you today. Thank you for joining us. I'm just going to dive right in and give you a review of where we are for the year. From a financial perspective, and then I'll hand it over to Ben to share some exciting upcoming events that are that are coming up in the near future. As you know, as a startup, cash is extremely important and we've done a good job of shepherding our cash this year ending with a cash balance of $15,700,000 which was higher than the cash balance at the end of previous year. This is due to one, being very frugal in our spend and maintaining our monthly cash burn to around $1,200,000 as it's been for some time. And also due to a successful preferred de raise where we had an oversubscribed $13,000,000 successful raise. [indiscernible] with some significant investment by senior management, And this is indicative of the faith they have in technology and the business and management going forward. So we're very happy to see that. And then we were also able to access with some institutional investors access to our ATM facility to raise a little bit more there.

So we have a strong balance sheet going into the year and to meet our upcoming milestones. We are still very highly variable in our cost structure. We have 27 full time employees. And we leverage outsourced engineering talent when needed We were able to scale back on that sum in Q4 as the BNB project portion of the project wound down. And we're focused on getting the AIR submitted and onto our next objectives. Again, we have no traditional debt or and very limited short term warranties. Warrant obligations right now. And we expect to have a solid cash through the year. So all things looking positive, all things going forward and we're prepared to enter the next stage of our journey. So with that, I'll hand it over to Ben Sexton, the CEO, who will walk you through the exciting things that are on the agenda and coming up shortly.

Thank you.

Thanks, Noel, and thank you everybody for joining us today for our fourth quarter call. Appreciate everybody's time. So I'm just going to start by really recapping what the Monogram investment thesis is. And it's really pretty simple. We think that robotic penetration today is not what it will be in the future. We think it's going to be significantly higher in the future driven by a lot of clinical factors that we can get into And we think that the we can get into the reasons for why this is that there's one dominant player that really has demonstrated significant robotic utilization They have the strongest market position. They're consistently growing year over year. And we think that they really have demonstrated what's valuable in orthopedic robotics, specifically in the knee replacement area, which we think will grow significantly in terms of robotic adoption. And so our thesis is that any company that really does not get its act together with a robotic knee strategy, let's say, and then moving into other applications as well. We'll really have a lot of an uphill climb let's say. So Monogram really has always from the beginning been developing a robot that we that we hope will address this market pain that we think is going to become more and more obvious over time in our opinion.

So just kind of starting out, we think that the market is currently digesting robotics as a growth driver. But not a kill shot. And what do I mean? I mean, if you look in the market today, in total knees, robot utilization is still low as you see here. It's not like the majority of knee replacements are not robotic. I think the key question is where is this going to be as we move forward? When you think about it from a clinical perspective, especially Mako, which has utilizes a personal [indiscernible] Robotics enable more personalized surgery They enable different types of alignment. They help with press fitting of implants. So instead of putting an implant in and cementing it down, they can help with let's call it, a more precise bone prep surface, which could accommodate breast fit implants. Systems like Mako have safety boundaries that we think are really imperative for helping to minimize the risk of cutting soft tissues or adverse outcomes. Then if you just look at the demographic trends seventy percent of fellowship programs have access today to a Mako At sixty percent of orthopedic surgeons, will be over the age of 65.

By the year 02/1931. So and we've seen forecast that suggest that one out of two knee replacements will be robotic within the next five years. So that's kind of just setting the table for where the market is going. It's important to kind of look at where we are now. And there's a lot of factors. Obviously, Stryker is a what you see here is stock prices for various players in our space. Stryker is the one in black and some of the other publicly traded companies. And we don't think it's any coincidence that around the time that Mako was cleared for total knee, that Stryker's outperformance has gone parabolic and obviously they've made a lot of really smart moves and they're a well diversified business and probably the most well diversified of any of the orthopedic total joint reconstruction players. But that aside, it's clear that they have done something right And I don't think that the market has fully understood what exactly it is that they've done right And understanding that is really fundamental to the Monogram investment thesis. And this is just to stress the point even more When you look at robotic knee replacements, eighty eight percent of robotic knee replacements use a Mako system and seventy three percent of PressFit knee implants This is per the orthopedic news network.

Our [indiscernible] that market is owned by Stryker. So in our opinion, the market has spoken. If you talk to surgeons and we talk to a lot of them, you're going to hear a whole bunch of different reasons why that is. I think the most common reason you'll hear is because Stryker had a significant first mover advantage with Mako. And I think that that certainly may be true and maybe a contributing factor But when you dig into the details, there are things about the Mako system that are unique to the Mako system that nobody else really can do. And we've in terms of taking a complex problem and trying to distill it down into what actually makes it different, I think it really boils down to the fact that with Mako, a surgeon can efficiently do the surgery by themselves We know a lot of surgeons that don't even use retractors [indiscernible] You have safety boundaries and you can efficiently cut bone with safety constraints. And there's just no other system on the market today that has been able to efficiently cut bone with safety constraints in the way Maygo has and the primary reason for that is their IP portfolio and the complexity of executing this problem without infringing on that IP portfolio.

And so that is the Monogram investment thesis in a nutshell. Is that we think that we have a system that can efficiently cut bone very accurately with safety constraints. And it really is going to be that simple And we announced too long ago, we had a press release and in that press release, we had a video that don't think has been fully digested by the market So Mako, the Mako system does not utilize external fixation. Meaning the surgeon doesn't have to bolt the bone down. It's not like a CNC, it's a real time system and the bone is free to move. And they utilize something called haptics where the surgeon is actually surgeon initiated cutting, surgeon is the one moving the robot around. What Monogram is doing is fully autonomous cutting The challenge of this, which it's never been done before is nobody's ever done it with two things. One, nobody's ever done it with a saw. As we're doing it. And nobody's ever done it unconstrained with a saw. [indiscernible] So what we put out in that video not too long ago and I'll just upload that is is we we can now very, very efficiently cut with a saw, and this is our next gen end effector that we will be deploying in our clinical trial which we hope to talk more about.

But we can now over the one of our larger size femurs. You can see that with this new upgraded end effector, I don't know if it's frozen on your side. Not playing on my side. Can you see it now? Is it playing for you? Or is it frozen? It's frozen. Then.

Okay.

At eight seconds.

Okay. Looks like the video is frozen, but it is we did have if you look at our last press release, I'm not sure why it's not playing, sorry about that. If you go to our last press release, I'll drop we can drop a link here. But we are now cutting the bone and blade time [indiscernible] blade and bone time is two minutes and forty seven seconds, right? So this is with a unconstrained saw, the feed rates, let me see if I can maybe play it from the presentation. I know that has a link too.

No, it's not going to play here. There might be one more option. I might be able to play it in our YouTube and share the screen. Let me try that. Real quick. Because I do think it's helpful for folks to see what our system is actually going to be capable of. So I'm just going to play this here real quick. Okay. And this was made public in the press release, but I don't think a lot of folks really comment. So I'm going to try sharing and see if that works. Okay. So Just sharing here. I'm going to press play. Hopefully, this does it. There's a couple of things I just wanted you to notice. Can you see it now?

No, still on the the presentation.

I'm not sharing your screen. Yeah.

Says I'm sharing. Okay. [indiscernible] I'll drop a link in here. Here's the link.

For folks to see it. Later. We go. Thanks, Chris.

So the the impact of this end effector release and getting to cutting speeds that are starting to be competitive with manual surgery. We think has not really been fully digested. And what Monogram is has really been working to put together is a system that can very efficiently do a total knee replacement with uncompromised safety and And so our system is is really designed for a surgeon to have very easily with a minimal learning curve coming into a total knee replacement And we think we have something that's going to be very, very competitive for total knee. And then from there, we have a seven joint arm which is a really high degree of freedom arm that we think is going to be pretty scalable to other clinical applications where we see similar opportunities for robotics to make a clinical difference. And that's really the monogram and thesis in a nutshell. And you look at the impact of what Mako had for the Stryker brand and we are hoping to do the same thing in orthopedics with a fully autonomous robot. In terms of updating on the regulatory side, so I know that there's folks are eager to get an update on this.

And [indiscernible] I'm just as eager as everybody else. And a lot of this is really out of our hands at this point. So I will kind of restate what's happened and try and on February 26, we announced that we had formally responded to the FDA's questions about our system. The FDA responded to us with those questions on September 30. So the clock had stopped about seventy three days into the submission timeline.

So the clock restarted on February 26. And we had full support from IQVIA which was our CRO formerly NICRA. They helped us review all of the team worked really, really hard What I can say is that I think that we have done we've made every possible effort to address the FDA's questions and we are eager to to hear what they think of our submission. So at this point in time, that's really what we could say. There's not much more we can say. We're it's fully in the FDA's hands. To to provide their clearance decision. In parallel to that, we are working on trying to get clearance to initiate our clinical trial. So we submitted to the Indian regulatory agency in October. We're working with a CRO called Reliance Life Sciences which is one of the largest private companies or subsidiary of one of the largest private companies in India. We're going to be doing the clinical trial with Shelby Limited. So the principal investigators will be surgeons that are employed by Shelby We will be doing clinical trial of three of Shelby's hospitals across India. We have already shipped a training system to India Doctor.

Eunice, myself and other Monogram employees were in India in late January for training and for the investigator meeting, which was successfully held late January, February, And the communications with the Indian agency or ongoing. This is the CRO really are the experts in terms of that process. But we feel like we've submitted a strong application We did a lot of testing obviously, for the FDA submission. So we're eager to hear back again, just like with the FDA, the timeline is really not in our hands at this point. We're We're eagerly waiting to hear back from the Indian regulatory authorities.

So those are the two regulatory updates. Obviously, we want to hear back just as much as all of our investors were very eager to move forward. I will say that we're not sitting by idly. So the the time it's taking to get clearance in India in some ways plays to our favor because once we ship our clinical trial system to India that design is frozen. So we you can't make major changes to the system subsequent to initiating clinical trial. So we're going to be releasing the higher feed rate, so it's significantly faster cutting time. So to give you some sense, it's almost almost a 300% increase in feed rates. So we're actually cutting it almost looks like you're cutting manually with our system now. And the cut times are significantly reduced which in our research is the number one driver for surgeon adoption is how long does it take If a surgeon has to slow down, do less surgeries a day to use your robot, It really is hard to drive adoption. So the fact that we can cut this fast and the accuracy of our system is really, really good right now. So just to give you guys some sense, the RMSE in terms of the cut accuracy in the and this is in non clinical testing, this is in catheter testing, with with the protocols was was around 1.1 millimeters [indiscernible] limb alignment was was less than a degree in the testing we ran in cadavers, obviously not a clinical claim, but the cadavers, we feel like we have a really, really started to have it dialed in So we're keep making the system better.

We're making a lot of software upgrades, a lot of upgrades to the guidance application a lot of upgrades to the case management application. So the team is working very, very hard to make sure that we have a product that's going to be well received by the market when we launch. So So in terms of just timing, it's not all negative that it's taken time for India to to clear. It's given us time to really make sure we have an A plus product And with that, we want to make sure we give everybody an ask questions. I'm seeing a lot of questions about FDA timeline, but beyond what we said there's not really much more we can say.

At this time, we will be conducting a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask a question, please submit your question by typing it into the webcast your platform.

Ben?

Sure.

Let's start with Jason.

Hi.

So, Jason, how are you doing?

Hi, Ben. Noel, thanks for all the color here on this call. I had a few questions, if I could, kick it off.

Yeah. That'd be great.

I appreciate all the color on in terms of what's going on with the regulatory bodies. I think you gave a lot of color, but I'm just curious in terms of what once you get those approvals, how long do you anticipate the trial to run-in India? And in The U. S, let's assume terms of the potential outcomes here, how should we think about that? I mean, it seems like you're actually cusp of getting an approval at least for, I believe, a semi autonomous device potentially in The U. S. What does that mean for you guys?

Sure. So I'll start with India. So from the day we get clearance, to the first surgery that time is going to be about two months. Give or take. And then we have 102 patients that are going to be enrolled in the study. So once we once we get clearance, we anticipate that we would start enrolling patients probably about four weeks after getting [indiscernible] Maybe more, maybe four to six. So kind of clearance plus let's just call it two to three, two and a half months, something like that before first live in human. And then from there, it really is a function of enrollment and how monogram is the bottleneck So as Noel said, we're really trying to count pennies and be really careful about not getting over our skis in terms of spending money after we've actually realized milestones. So the constraint is the number of systems we have at India and the personnel we have to manage those systems. And how aggressive we want to be in terms of actually executing the the system. So we know for sure, obviously, we're going to be sending one robot to India. We have a PO for a second robot and we anticipate that we may send two robots to India, which would speed things up But it's really the constraint of hardware and personnel not so much enrollment.

So the hospital we're working with does huge volumes. So Doug and I have actually been in the Operating Room and incredible how many surgeries they do a day. It's not uncommon for the surgeons we're working with to do 15 surgeries in a day. And they've even done more than that. So really the one thing with enrollment that is a little bit different than maybe in The U. S. Is that a lot of people because Shelby is pretty well recognized in India, a lot of patients do travel from outside of the cities that we're going to be working out of to have surgery and then they go back to wherever they live. And that can be we can't enroll those patients, but still we don't [indiscernible] that to be a huge blocker. It's really how hard we want to push it, I would say. Initially, we're going to be kind of a little bit slow and careful So once first couple of weeks, I would say we're not going to be doing five surgeries a day. It's probably going to be a couple surgeries a week. And just make sure that everything is going exactly to plan And then from there, we're going to scale as we get let's say, the first 10 surgeries under our belt and we'll start to scale.

But the robot is going to be we're it's unlikely that we will be running multiple sites simultaneously. So it's most likely that we will start at kind of the main site in Ahmedabad.

Do maybe on the order of 50 surgeries there. And then it'll be a mix of maybe like thirty, twenty the other two. Something like that. So I think we're going to get through it in a reasonable amount of time, but it's not going to be we want to have a really good trial and we want to do a really good job. So [indiscernible] That gives some color.

Yeah.

I mean, it sounds like it sounds like there's some moving. It's hard to pinpoint, but it's a relatively quick enrollment. I mean, it's under your control for relatively quick enrollment. I don't know if you venture to guess whether you know, in terms of months, I know you said it's basically two months to get it going. Is it another three to six months to complete the trial, generally speaking, to get 100 patients? Or [indiscernible] right? I think that sounds like a reasonable that sounds like what we're kind of planning internally. With the caveat that if if anything came up that was unexpected, that could slow it down.

Sure.

We're not going to be crazy aggressive in terms of just hitting it with five surgeries a day from day one. But we're going to scale kind of in a measured way. And so I think maybe at the peak, we'll do maybe two surgeries a day. I don't anticipate we're going to go more than that. And they do operate on weekends as well. So Got it. No, I mean it makes perfect sense that you want a clean dataset.

And then in The US Just don't discount the time it takes for the data to be processed. So once we once we and obviously, I think we're going to have opportunities to give feedback on how we think it's going. But that data does need to be basically, this is a protocol. So we're going to need a protocol report summarizing the findings of the study and it's a three month follow-up So we're going to start really kind of knowing how we're how we're doing, but there's going to be some period where we're just going to have to wait for that follow-up. On the back end.

Okay. [indiscernible] Yeah. Yeah. So then in the in The U. S, so just to be honest with you, the performance of the upgraded end effector has far exceeded we didn't expect that we would be able to get the feed rate to be this fast, honestly. It's very impressive. And so in light of that, our thinking was that autonomy was a major selling feature of our system. And a lot of companies have a kind of, let's call it, a multi generational product release strategy, where they'll try and get a five ten ks on a Gen one version of a system with the goal of submitting a subsequent one to move the ball forward to the ultimate let's say, market competitive product I think that with the new cutting system on on if we can upgrade the system that has been submitted to the new end effector. Which we are confident we can without too much of a regulatory lift. We think what we would be getting clearance on would be pretty competitive. So sure. Sorry. Sorry, Ben. I'd so that Yeah. Yeah. Go for it.

The FDA might approve what you submitted and then it's a relatively straightforward [indiscernible] Exactly.

Okay.

Yes. So Basically, we've changed we've made upgrades to the cutting system but the nice thing is that we for India, there's a lot of accuracy studies that we've had to do and a lot of BNB work that has had to go into that that can be leveraged to to improve the Gen one system and then it think it could be pretty competitive out of the gate. [indiscernible] yeah.

No. That makes a lot of sense. I didn't mean to interrupt you. I just Oh, yeah.

Yeah. Sure.

One follow-up related to that.

It sounds like there's a you guys have a lot of innovation going on here. One other area that I know you've mentioned in the past, I don't know if you can give us an update on, [indiscernible] is is the mapping and tracking in the registration Is there any movement there that you can disclose today or how should we thinking about how you're approaching that problem?

Sure.

So this is a biased non clinical claim Jason.

I think the new end effector on our autonomous system is extremely competitive with the current state of the art With So I think right out of the gate, we have something that's really compelling.

In terms of the upgrading the navigation system, we we've come a really long way It's a really hard problem. I think that similar to what we've done with Gen one, Gen two on the robot, We're going to have to do a similar approach with the within navigation. So just so everybody knows what Jason is referring to is what we call Envision. So Envision is a technology that Monogram is developing to try and go with fiducial less tracking. So a pretty significant pain point in the industry is registration and tracking. You have to place bone pins to originally mount arrays that are tracked It It's it starts to become like if you can optimize cutting and you can optimize planning, it's really the long pole in the tent in terms of really driving throughput for robotics is registration and that setup time. It's really hard. The fundamental problem, Jason, is if you had a supercomputer in the Operating Room, we could do it. But the amount of compute needed to to track with a low enough latency is really tricky. So we anticipate there needs to be an intermediate step where you have sort of let's call it a marker light what we're calling it approach where maybe you can do something that doesn't require bicortical fixation of a bone pin.

It's a lot faster maybe has is subject to less occlusion but I would say don't bake it into your numbers. Right now, it's a very sexy demo.

But jumping from a demo to a clinical product is difficult. It's something that dazzles when people come look at it. But realistically, it's going to take us a little bit of time to get it robust enough Okay. And I Work in a clinical setting.

And maybe if I could just ask one last question, I'll jump back in queue. I know you have other questions. And that is so what was the cash burn this quarter? And it's I don't know if you can give any kind of outlook for what the cash burn might be for the remainder for 2025 as we look forward?

Sure.

Noel, do you have that?

Yeah.

So we were able to reduce the third party contract spend a bit that we've been really focused on getting the robot ready for the India clinical trials. And then going through the the AIR submission So we reduced it. We're running under the 1.2 a month. Burn rate that we've been on for last year or so. But probably in the 1.1 area. And we hope to keep it around there going forward.

Yes. I will say that we have some big cash outlays coming. So the system has to be IEC 6,601 compliant. And that required a special type of panel that could pass this impact test. There's all these tests that had to pass at the most efficient way for us to basically the only way for us to have a sellable product is to make panels that pass this and that requires tooling, which very expensive So we're going to have to put an outlet for that. And then we have another robot cart that we're making at the moment. So that's significant. And then we're in the second quarter, we're going to be aggressively doing testing So for the VNB for the India trial, so to actually run the clinical trial in India, there's some some more testing that has to be done on the fully autonomous version of the system that cannot be cherry picked from the Gen one testing that was done.

It's not going to be as heavy as the Gen one, which had we had at its peak, we had quite a few contractors. It was a really big push. A lot of surgeons came in We had on the order of 20 surgeons come in. Obviously, that contributed to the elevated burn. But I would expect Q2 to be on the heavier end. And then in terms of baseline, the headcount, we're holding it pretty steady. Right here and we're really not going to be counting our eggs before they hatch. So we need to hit the milestones and actually have them under our belt before we keep growing. Increase the burden, let's call it the baseline burden. All right, got it. Thanks so much for all this detail here. I'll jump back in queue.

Sure. Thanks, Jason. Appreciate it.

And then next up, we have Tom Kerr, who's with Saks. Hey Tom, how are you doing?

Good. How's it going? [indiscernible] Couple clarifications, I think the answers just you gave were pretty thorough. But on the clarification on the spending, [indiscernible] normalized $3,200,000 $3,300,000 quarterly burn rate Is that inclusive of the $1,200,000 spent on the India trial? Or is that on top of that? Does that make sense?

So the incremental spend on the clinical on India is not yes, go for it, Noel.

No, I was just going to say that that is included. We're just taking kind of an average rate for the the Indian trial. It will be more sporadic we've just kind of averaged it out over the year.

We anticipate that to be about $1,200,000 for the entire entire project. So we've just we're seeing that as $100,000 incremental. Over the year.

This can be an offset from previous run rate of of the lower third party spend?

So it's inclusive.

Okay. It's not like it's $3,300,000 quarterly burn plus $1,000,000 on top of that. That's right.

That's good news. Going back to the FDA, this is a big picture question, but with the recent administration federal cuts, FDA was immune to that. Have you heard any scuttlebutt or rumors on how the FDA cuts would affect clinical trials? I know it's probably hard to answer that, but Yes, sure. So our CRO IQV is pretty well connected with FDA. They actually talked to them not too long ago about this specifically and the feedback was that the orthopedic devices branch reviewing their application is they're they haven't they don't see an impact at this time. But we certainly could be impacted by that He didn't anticipate there would be one from it.

Okay.

We actually have confirmed with the lead reviewer that application is being reviewed and that there's nothing's been flagged And Ken, AAR that a one time event or could they come back and say, here's a second AAR or here's a third AAR?

Etcetera?

That's a one time event. Okay. Yes. So we expect the next communication to be a clearance decision.

Okay. And then just following up on that one more and talked about this in the last few minutes. But once FDA approval clarify again what happened?

The next day? And when we have robots in the hospitals what is the month? Is it similar to India or how does that work?

It's going to take a little bit of time, right, because we're going to have to ramp the working capital needed to to support, but we have KOLs that really like what we're doing. We There's only one shot at good first impression And so we don't want to launch we want to upgrade the system to the new end effector. So there's going to be a little bit of work required to do that. But I wouldn't I think kind of what you're thinking with India is sort of a a reasonable thought. We think that we think it's it's going to be a pretty competitive solution with a new end effector. And what about I wouldn't be too aggressive just as we the company is going to need more capital for an aggressive launch.

Okay. Was one of my questions. Yes. Sales and marketing would increase and that would be funded by new capital and so on and so forth, right?

Yes. [indiscernible] Exactly.

Okay.

All I have for now. Thank you.

Sure. Appreciate it. [indiscernible] Mean, just looking at the chat here, obviously, I see investors who are frustrated with how long it takes to do this. I don't think that there's an appreciation for how difficult it is to autonomously cut unconstrained within 1.1 millimeter and less than the degree of accuracy And the engineering accomplishment that that is we've submitted what I believe is a very strong application. We've had the the leading CRO in the world, IQVIA, support the application. They've told us it's a strong application We're doing everything we could do. I'm sorry it takes a long time Obviously, the team is I wish that when you submitted something to the FDA, it was a five minute turnaround. It's not it's a lot of paperwork that they have to go through, a lot of testing they have to go through. The reason I was highlighting how many pages have been submitted is because it takes the FDA time to go through all of this testing and make sure that the company has done a good job proving safety enough efficacy of the system. So I hear the frustration, but at this point, the company has done everything it can do to to try and get this thing cleared.

And now it's in the FDA's hands. And as I said, the clock the time we submitted was seventy three days and we welcome folks to go online and try and see what the FDA's average turnaround times are. Yes. I see a question about needing capital Yes, you should go and look at what medical device companies, how much capital it takes to launch a product. You cannot become when Mako was a hundred billion dollars in sales. And you cannot get to $100,000,000 in sales with $14,000,000 unfortunately. [indiscernible] I just have to be fully transparent folks. We this is we've developed what I think is going to be a very competitive system. But it's obviously very difficult I think I think the product itself is going to be game changing for the orthopedic market, but it has to get cleared. And then that's where the rubber is going to meet the road.

This concludes today's conference call webcast. Thank you again for your participation.

Appreciate it. Thanks so much.

Unfortunately, So I just have to be fully transparent folks. We this is we've developed what I think is going to be a very competitive system. But it's obviously very difficult I think I think the product itself is going to be game changing for the orthopedic market, but it has to get cleared. And then that's where the rubber is going to meet the road.

This concludes today's conference call webcast. Thank you again for your participation. Appreciate it. Thanks so much.

Thank you.