Prepared remarks
Good day and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Quantum-Si Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I'd now like to turn the conference over to Risa Lindsay.
Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Earlier today, Quantum-Si released financial results for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2026. A copy of the press release is available on the company's website. Joining me today are Jeff Hawkins, our President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as Jeff Keyes, our Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that management will be making certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Federal Securities Laws. These statements involve material risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or events to materially differ from those anticipated. Additional information regarding these risks and uncertainties appears in the section entitled Forward-Looking Statements of our press release. For a more complete list and description of risk factors, please see the company's filings made with the Securities and Exchange Commission. This conference call contains time-sensitive information that is accurate only as of the live broadcast date today, August 13, 2026, at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time. Except as required by law, the company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. During this call, we will also be referring to certain financial measures that are not prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures is included in the press release filed earlier today. With that, let me turn the call over to Jeff Hawkins.
Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us. On today's call, we will provide a business update and review our operating results for the second quarter of 2026. After that, we will open the call for questions. Before diving into specific updates, I want to address at a high level the Proteus roadmap update we announced earlier today. We have updated the Proteus launch timeline from the end of 2026 to the second quarter of 2027. The primary driver of the change is the decision to add an additional integrated instrument design cycle to the program prior to moving to production. In connection with this roadmap review, we have also made program leadership and governance changes to strengthen accountability, improve technical oversight and ensure the Proteus program is managed against clear product readiness gates. Furthermore, we are taking operating expense actions in parallel with this roadmap update that are designed to reduce our cash burn and align our cost structure with the revised timeline while preserving investments in the highest priority Proteus work streams. Our conviction in Proteus remains strong. We have generated sufficient sequencing data from integrated units that we remain confident in the underlying technology. That said, we are taking these actions now because we believe it is more responsible and capital efficient to derisk the platform before production than to move forward before product readiness is fully demonstrated. Focusing on the customer experience at launch is the most important thing we can do to protect the long-term value of the Proteus platform. The remainder of the call will be organized around our three corporate priorities for 2026, which are as follows: to deliver Proteus with the capabilities customers need, to prepare the market for Proteus launch and to preserve our financial strength. Our first priority is to deliver Proteus with the capabilities customers need. First, let's start by diving a bit deeper into the instrument development. In 2025, we built and tested Proteus prototypes. In the first half of 2026, we built and began testing integrated units. Those integrated units have generated valuable learnings about both manufacturing processes and system-level performance that prototypes could not fully provide. Based on that testing, we concluded that moving directly from the current integrated unit design to production would carry more execution risk than we are comfortable with taking. We're therefore adding an additional integrated instrument design cycle before moving into production. The purpose of this additional design cycle is to reduce manufacturing risk, improve system repeatability, strengthen product readiness and to ensure a positive customer experience at launch. We are making this decision now because we believe it is more responsible and more capital efficient to derisk the platform before production than to scale prematurely and put the customer experience at risk. Finally, I want to reiterate that we have generated sufficient sequencing data from integrated units that we remain confident in the underlying technology. Turning now to recognizer development, we communicated on our first quarter earnings call that our internal developmental sequencing kit was able to detect 17 amino acids. Our progress in this area and the pace of improvement we are seeing has continued to meet our expectations. Given the revised instrument timeline, we will be able to progress even further in this area before locking the reagent formulation for launch. We believe that with this additional time, we will be in a strong position to deliver Proteus with a detection capability of either 19 or 20 amino acids at launch. We will have greater clarity on this specific reagent configuration when we get closer to launch. Finally, I want to share an important update on our Library Preparation strategy. As a reminder, Library Preparation is the process used to prepare a customer sample for sequencing. Our kit performs two key functions, digesting proteins into peptides and attaching a linker to those peptides. That linker enables each peptide to attach to the bottom of the nanowells on our sequencing array where it can be sequenced as a single molecule. Historically, we approached Library Preparation as a general-purpose kit intended to work across the broad range of proteins and applications. One of the important benefits of having our first-generation Platinum system in the market is that we have gained significant real-world insight into how different proteins behave during Library Preparation as well as customer needs across a range of applications. Through our work supporting Platinum customers, we have also developed improvements and add-on capabilities related to Library Preparation, both internally and, in some cases, in collaboration with customers. These learnings have led us to an important strategic shift, evolving from a single generic kit to a suite of application-oriented kits that can be used individually or in combination to optimize sequencing performance for specific customer use cases. We believe this strategy provides two key advantages. First, by giving customers more complete off-the-shelf tools tailored to their applications, we can make implementation more efficient and reduce the amount of customer optimization required. Second, this approach allows our development teams to deliver a broad range of capabilities faster and with lower technical risk. Developing kits around more specific application needs is less complex than trying to make one generic kit, which performs optimally across every protein type and workflow. We are excited about this strategy and believe it positions us to bring new Library Preparation capabilities to market in connection with the Proteus launch. Our second corporate priority is to prepare the market for Proteus launch. As a reminder, during 2025, we launched a placement program for our first-generation Platinum system. This program allows customers to access the Platinum instrument in their own labs without needing to secure budget for an upfront capital purchase. Through this program, we have gained important market and technical insights that give us increasing confidence in the opportunity for protein sequencing and in the alignment between customer requirements and our target specifications for Proteus. First, we have had the opportunity to work with customers across a broad range of applications spanning academic research and biopharma. One recent example is work we have been doing with a biopharma customer in Europe on the application of protein sequencing to adeno-associated viral vectors, or AAV serotyping. AAVs are commonly used as delivery vehicles in gene therapy, and the presence and relative abundance of different AAV serotypes is important to therapy performance. This application is well suited to protein sequencing because the differences between AAV serotypes often involves only a small number of amino acid differences. With Platinum, we have been able to demonstrate the ability to detect relevant amino acid differences. However, due to the limited sequencing output of Platinum, we did not reach the sensitivity required for routine use in that customer workflow. Importantly, using the Platinum data, we were able to model expected performance on Proteus based on its planned increase in number of nanowells, and that model suggests the customer sensitivity requirement is achievable on Proteus. Based on readily available market data, there are more than 150 biotech and pharmaceutical companies developing gene therapies that use AAVs for delivery, suggesting that this single application could represent an attractive market opportunity for Proteus. A second important learning from our Platinum commercial activities is the potential opportunity in non-human proteomics. Earlier this year, researchers at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory published data using our single-molecule protein sequencing technology for novel pathogen and toxin detection. Over the past few months, we have been working with multiple customers applying protein sequencing to agricultural applications, pathogen detection and typing, and viral protein surveillance applications. We have identified two important features of non-human proteomics that make it especially interesting for Proteus. First, many of these markets are not well served by traditional techniques such as immunoassays or Western blots. Second, in many applications, customers need a technology that does not depend on a defined reference because the pathogen or protein of interest may evolve through small changes including single amino acid differences. We believe these market features align well with the core capabilities we are designing into Proteus. Based on readily available market data and looking specifically at the pathogen research and agricultural research markets where our Platinum work has given us a clearer understanding of customer needs, we believe the non-human proteomics market opportunity for Proteus is substantial at more than $4 billion annually. We believe this is a conservative estimate because it does not include additional segments such as environmental, animal health, industrial or food applications where we believe there may be meaningful future opportunity, but where our understanding of the specific customer needs and fit for protein sequencing is still developing. Finally, I want to provide a brief update on our commercial initiatives to build awareness of Proteus in advance of launch. Our commercial team has been executing well, and we continue to receive very positive feedback on Proteus and the wide range of applications it is designed to address. To date, we have identified and qualified more than 250 unique institutions with stated interest in Proteus and the capabilities we are aiming to deliver. These institutions span multiple market segments, including academic research, biopharma and industrial applications, and they have asked to be updated as new information and data become available. We will continue to provide updates on this important market development initiative as we progress toward the Proteus launch. Our third priority is to preserve our financial strength. As I stated earlier, the operating expense actions we communicated today are intended to reduce cash burn, extend our runway and align our cost structure with the revised Proteus timeline while preserving investments in the highest priority work streams required for launch. We are making these decisions as a matter of fiscal discipline. Our focus is to concentrate resources on the activities that most directly improve Proteus readiness, derisk the platform before production and allow us to fund that work responsibly over the extended timeline. I will now turn the call over to Jeff to review our financial results.
Thanks, Jeff. I'll now review our second quarter and first half financial results, discuss the expected financial impact of the operating expense actions we announced today and then provide an update on our full year outlook. Revenue in the second quarter of 2026 was $344,000 compared to $591,000 in the second quarter of 2025. Revenue for the first six months of 2026 was $602,000 compared to $1.4 million in the prior year period. Results continue to reflect the dynamics we have discussed throughout 2026, including limited near-term capital purchasing activity for Platinum, ongoing consumable utilization for our installed base, customer awareness of the anticipated Proteus launch and deliberate commercial decisions designed to position customers for a successful transition to Proteus. Gross profit was $172,000 in the second quarter of 2026, resulting in gross margin of 50%. For the first six months of 2026, gross profit was $246,000, resulting in gross margin of 41%. Gross margin continues to be affected by the mix and timing of instrument, consumable and service revenue as well as the commercial choices we are making to support the market readiness for Proteus. Turning to expenses, GAAP total operating expenses for the second quarter of 2026 were $25.8 million compared to $30.5 million in the second quarter of 2025. Adjusted operating expenses were $22.6 million compared to $23.8 million in the prior year quarter. For the first six months of 2026, GAAP total operating expenses were $49.9 million and adjusted operating expenses were $43.9 million. We continue to manage expenses with discipline while prioritizing the investment required to complete Proteus development, scale internal testing, support manufacturing readiness and prepare the commercial organization for launch. As part of this disciplined approach, earlier today we announced operating expense actions, including a targeted reduction in force representing approximately 20% of the total company headcount. These actions are designed to better align our expense base with the updated Proteus development plan, reduce cash usage, extend our runway and provide additional flexibility as we execute the remaining product readiness work. In making these decisions, we were deliberate in preserving investment in the highest priority work streams required for the Proteus launch. We expect these actions, once complete, to result in approximately $12 million of annual operating expense savings. Net loss was $23.5 million in the second quarter of 2026 compared to a net loss of $28.8 million in the same period of the prior year. Adjusted EBITDA was negative $21.2 million compared to negative $22.2 million in the prior year quarter. Dividend and interest income was $1.7 million compared to $2.3 million in the prior year quarter, reflecting the rate environment and changes in invested balances. As of June 30, 2026, we had $169.9 million in cash, cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities. Taking into account the reduction in force and other operating expense management actions, we now believe we have sufficient capital to support the updated Proteus plan, execute the key activities required for launch and fund operations into the fourth quarter of 2028. This runway allows us to remain focused on the highest return uses of capital, including platform readiness, customer sample evaluations, manufacturing readiness and commercial launch execution. Our full year 2026 outlook remains focused on three financial priorities. Maintaining spending discipline, funding the activities required to deliver Proteus with the capabilities customers need and preserving the balance sheet strength necessary to support launch and adoption. For the full year 2026, we're reiterating guidance of revenue of approximately $1 million, adjusted operating expenses of $98 million or less, and total cash usage of $93 million or less. The key financial takeaway is that we are aligning our capital allocation with the updated Proteus development plan. The revised launch timing allows us to complete the additional design, testing and readiness work needed before production, while the operating expense actions announced today are intended to fund that work in a disciplined manner. We're also continuing to invest in the activities that support customer confidence ahead of the launch, including evidence generation with Platinum, Proteus awareness initiatives, customer sample evaluations and targeted commercial engagement. Taken together, these actions are designed to reduce cash usage, extend our runway and preserve the financial flexibility needed to execute the Proteus launch plan effectively. In summary, we remain focused on using capital efficiently, funding the critical path to Proteus launch, and making the right long-term trade-offs to support the adoption of the Proteus platform. With that, operator, please open the line for questions.
Questions and answers
Our first question today will come from Scott Henry with Alliance Global Partners.
I'm going to start with a couple big picture questions. I recognize you probably answered this perhaps in more detail, but I'm just looking for kind of a top-down, higher-level thought. What drove the change? Did it come from customers or, as you were working through it, did you just say, hey, if we make these changes, it'll be that much more of an effective product?
Yes, Scott, it's a good question. It comes from our internal assessment. It's a mix of the performance we're seeing in terms of repeatability and consistency across the machines we have, considering what the manufacturing processes have looked like all the way from the optical module and its yields and success rates into the integrated machines, looking at that and deciding what improvements are necessary to have a very high-quality repeatable manufacturing and supply chain, and planning for long lead components. We thought through all of those factors and concluded that to have the highest likelihood of success and ensure that this is the machine customers expect and that we can manufacture and deliver consistently, we needed to add this additional cycle. It wasn't driven by new feedback from customers asking for additional capabilities. It's an internally driven assessment of where we are and the best way to get to the product with the capabilities and manufacturing quality we expect.
Okay, great. That's helpful. And with regards to the target of second quarter 2027, do you feel pretty comfortable in that number? How much risk is there to that date, I should say?
Yes, Scott, it's a good question. It's a complex development program, so you're never 100% sure of anything. That said, we completed a very thorough review of the program. We took all the learnings from both prototypes and integrated unit testing into consideration. We've added this design cycle to retire a lot of key risk before we move into production. We have also stepped up program management, governance and oversight, including from my role in this project. When you take all of that together, based on everything we know, we believe the timeline of Q2 2027 reflects the work required to deliver the product that meets our standards. That's how we landed on that date.
Okay, great. And then, another big picture question. I think everyone understands the enormity of the proteomics market in the different applications and how each individual application can be a blockbuster indication. But your new products tend to have something that leads the way, a hook. Do you get a sense of, when you go to launch it, what the hook for the Proteus is going to be? Who will be the main initial users, adopters of the technology? Or maybe it'll be a mix. I just want to get your thought on that early adoption.
Yes, I think it will likely be a mix. With any new product launch, as we saw even in the earliest days of Platinum, some customers in the academic research space will adopt the new technology to explore its capabilities and performance boundaries. Those users are there in the early days. For more enduring adoption, I see two areas. First, the academic research environment where high coverage of proteins and the ability to address common post-translational modifications fit well for translational research. Second, biopharma and industrial applications and areas like pathogen identification and surveillance where our technology does not need a defined reference. We've worked with multiple branches of the U.S. military and internationally on pathogen and toxin detection. That usage—pathogen detection, agricultural applications, antibody production—could be a significant opportunity because those markets are not well served by traditional techniques and often require reference-free methods. So those are two areas we see as hooks across researchers, government entities and industrial users.
Okay, great. Just a final quick question on R&D. I can see SG&A contracting with the cost cuts. How should we think about R&D in the next couple of quarters relative to Q2?
I think you'll see R&D fairly consistent with prior quarters. There are some adjustments as we streamline the development process, but by and large the spend on the program and the important spend will remain intact because that's the most important thing we're doing here. There could be some ups and downs over the next couple of quarters as we change a few things to keep the program on track for Q2 2027. Our operating expense action affects areas across the company and is associated with the timeline of the program and efforts to make the company more efficient. From that perspective, you will see the spend relatively consistent with a few adjustments.
Our next question comes from Michael King with Rodman & Renshaw.
Maybe just a bit of a follow-up on Scott—your answers about the additional design cycle. Just to be clear on this, was this a function of you running demonstration runs with prototype systems, or was this a result of some scale-up you were doing for future customer delivery? That's the first part. And then the second part is, how does this affect your ability to satisfy the early access program you've put in place?
Yes, Michael. This was driven by us having deployed integrated machines in our R&D environment and assessing the repeatability of the performance we see. When developing a product like this, you also look at other fundamental performance metrics and requirements of specific submodules of the system. We examined how all those things are performing against our expectations and what we learned when producing those units. That led us to identify opportunities to make design-for-manufacturability changes now, which would make future production more efficient and increase first-pass yield. Regarding the early access program, when we launch we want to confidently and reliably make these instruments and deliver them to customers. Some of the changes are aligned to ensure we don't encounter those learnings down the road when we're in the market.
Okay. And would it apply to the reagents themselves, Jeff, or is this just the instrumentation?
It's very hardware-focused, Michael. Reagent development is still ongoing as well as consumables, but those areas have been tracking largely to our expectations. This topic is primarily instrument-centric.
Got it. And the part of the question about the early access—will you slow that down a bit?
Yes, we haven't yet officially started any early access. We have announced that for select customers we have done some sample testing. With this shift in timeline, we would expect early access to move out. We don't have an official start date. We want to complete this instrument design cycle, build and test internally, then open for testing customer samples, and after that deploy into the field for early access. So that event will shift in time.
Okay. And is there any thought about swapping Platinum Pro units to keep potential clients engaged with the company? Or was that not an option?
Yes, Michael, we have sufficient Platinum Pro machines to work with customers. We continue to use the placement program where customers can access the instrument in their labs. The AAV serotyping example is a good case of leveraging the placement program to engage a customer and understand what's needed. We feel good about Proteus closing the remaining gap. We have sufficient supply of consumables to continue supporting the placement program as customers request it. Some customers prefer that path; others prefer to wait for Proteus. We let customers steer that choice.
Okay. And just as far as merging the full suite of reagents with the commercial unit—assuming you hit your timelines—I was under the impression you'd have a full repertoire of 21 amino acids available sometime in the first half of next year. Is that still your goal? And would that mean when Proteus is out there the full suite of reagents is available?
Michael, historically when we expected to launch Proteus by the end of 2026, we had said we would launch with 18 and demonstrate all 20, adding 20 in 2027. With the timeline move, we expect now to be in a position to launch with either 19 or 20. If we launch with 19, we still expect to bring on 20 during 2027. We believe we'll be able to demonstrate all 20 this year. We just aren't ready to commit exactly to what will be in that kit except to say it will be either 19 or 20 given the additional time.
Our next question comes from Kyle Mikson with Canaccord Genuity.
On the additional cycle you're working on, can you speak to how performance or reproducibility could be affected by this? Or the steps you take to avoid impacting prior performance level expectations?
Kyle, what we've observed in the units we have internally is some instruments reliably perform at a very high level, above our internal specifications, while others perform at or a little below that level. With this design iteration, we're making changes we believe will allow all units to perform consistently at the higher level. The goal is to unify repeatability across instruments and reduce manufacturing complexity by making design-for-manufacturability improvements. We expect repeatability to trend up and be consistently above our internal specifications as a result.
That was perfect. On this note, could production time or timing be elongated through this process? It's not clear how much is affected in manufacturing versus the end product.
That's a good question. Manufacturing has been more challenging and longer to get machines than we anticipated. We have an optical module built up by a partner, qualified and shipped to our instrument partner who integrates it into the full machine. First-time production teaches you how each step works, how to bring everything together and how to test and confirm functioning. We have learned a lot with each machine we build, and the changes we've identified should compress that process in the next cycle and lead to a high yield at the end of the line. We are also conscious of long lead times for components. That is not a constraint today, but we are watching especially electronics and GPUs and ensuring we procure well in advance so production is not limited by supply. Overall, time to build should be largely resolved through this next spin prior to production.
Excellent. On the topic of data and the GPU supply environment, remind us of your exposure to that potential challenge beyond 2026 when you have Proteus out there. Historically the company has relied on semiconductors—how does that change?
If you look at Platinum, the consumable is based on a semiconductor chip and is in the foundry world. Proteus consumable is a fused silica array, a form of glass array that is not a CMOS chip. There are many vendors who can make that, and we're a small consumer of that. We also get many individual consumables per wafer. So our exposure to the semiconductor chip world decreases when moving to Proteus. For the instrument, we still have some exposure to GPUs for data analysis, but we're a small player in that world. We don't perceive it as a large risk. Lead times can be long, and given the low number of units we plan to use, we can stockpile to buffer potential supply issues. So we largely avoid the historical CMOS-related foundry risk.
Okay, that's what I thought. On the non-human market opportunity you mentioned at $4 billion, I assume it includes plant and animal applications. Why was the original focus on human research and pharma, and might non-human be a lower-hanging fruit early on?
Kyle, we've always aimed to address multiple markets. Given the backgrounds of our sales professionals, we initially focused on large academic centers and biopharma, which operate largely in the human research space. Platinum exposed us to the non-human market, initially through military pathogen and toxin detection and later through placement program engagements in agricultural and pathogen surveillance. Platinum gave us depth of understanding about customer needs in pathogen and agricultural research. While non-human has always been part of our plan, the Platinum exposure clarified how our capabilities fit and how Proteus can address those customer needs at launch.
Great. One more on AI. Are you seeing interest in using proteomics data to train AI models? For clinical human samples you need a large dynamic range; can Proteus satisfy that and serve pharma companies building AI models?
Yes, we're hearing that and other companies in proteomics are talking about AI. To get the most from AI it's about rich training data linked to outcomes or phenotypes. We're hearing this in biopharma and academia; leading academic institutes are operating at the cutting edge of AI tools for proteomic analysis and multi-omic integration. Internally, we've applied AI across operations, including analysis of data, recognizer design, kit enzymes, and business functions like marketing and finance. We believe AI is a powerful productivity tool and that Proteus will help customers build rich databases to train AI models.
Awesome. I have one more question for Jeff Keyes. On the $12 million in annual OpEx savings, can you talk about the cadence and timing of when that will hit and be fully implemented over the next couple of quarters?
We expect to start seeing the benefits in the fourth quarter, given severance-related costs and the timeline of certain folks leaving the company. On an annualized basis, once implemented, we expect approximately $12 million of annualized savings related to this action.
Our next question comes from Charles Wallace with H.C. Wainwright.
This is Charles on for RK. I was wondering if you could share the specific gating items between now and the second quarter of 2027. And what new items are in there that weren't in the prior gating items?
Charles, the main gating item is this additional instrument design cycle. That cycle involves finalizing the exact changes we'll make, rolling that through manufacturing, building those machines and getting them in-house and tested. We expect to work through that cycle—finalize the design, build, test and confirm performance—over the remainder of this year. Assuming that goes well, we intersect it with work on the reagent side and consumables, bring that together through the first half of 2027 and plan a launch in the second quarter. So the key gating item is working through that cycle, getting the instruments installed and confirming performance.
That's really helpful. Another question: you said earlier that you haven't started the early access program. Are you still planning to do that, and when would you do that—this year or before launch?
Yes, we haven't started early access yet. With this design cycle, we wouldn't expect to start it until after this cycle is complete. We don't have an exact date, but it's likely an end-of-year or early-2027 event. We hope to allow customers to send some samples for evaluation in advance of deployed early access. So, if you're trying to peg it, think early 2027 for early access.
Our next question comes from Jason McCarthy with Maxim Group.
This is Michael Okunewitch on the line. Just a couple questions, primarily on the market opportunities. First, about the non-human proteomics market—how mature is that and is it ready for a device with the capabilities of Proteus now? Or would you need to build out a base of published academic research first?
It's a good question. We focused on pathogen research and agricultural markets because we have hands-on experience with our existing Platinum and Platinum Pro devices in those segments. Those customers are trying to solve problems today and some are already applying our first-generation technology. We expect those markets are ready for Proteus. For other non-human areas like animal health, industrial or food, we don't have as much direct customer experience yet, so we aren't currently factoring those into our immediate opportunity projections. But in pathogen and agricultural research, given our Platinum work, we think the market is there today and Proteus will build upon the opportunity.
Can you help qualify the difference between capturing 17 or 18 amino acids versus capturing the full suite? Is there an incremental benefit to end users, or does having the full suite open up new applications entirely?
I would think of it two ways. As you move to 18, 19 and 20, you're generally addressing lower abundance amino acids. We initially targeted the most abundant ones. For many applications, the difference between 18, 19 or 20 may not be significant. For deep protein profiling—such as someone trying to sequence as many amino acids in an antibody as possible—that is where having all 20 matters. There's also a psychological element: customers regard 19 or 20 as 'complete' sequencing. In many cases the practical difference is marginal, but having the full suite can simplify the sales cycle and customer conversations by removing nuance about what coverage is needed for an application.
Yes, you don't have to justify why 18 isn't enough anymore.
It's the same concept as with DNA sequencing. Before we sequenced everything, arrays looked at selected panels. When sequencing became available, people moved to whole-exome or whole-genome because they didn't need to choose a panel. With protein sequencing, if you have the full suite, you don't have to help customers think through those choices, even though in many applications the difference between 18, 19 or 20 is marginal.
Congrats on the progress.
Thank you.
Thank you. This will conclude today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.