This conference call transcript was computer generated and almost certianly contains errors. This transcript is provided for information purposes only.EarningsCall, LLC makes no representation about the accuracy of the aforementioned transcript, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the information provided by the transcript.
spk08: Good afternoon. Thank you for attending today's SES AI Corp third quarter 22 earnings conference call. My name is Daniel and I will be your moderator for today's call. All lines will be muted during the presentation portion of the call with an opportunity for questions and answers at the end. If you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. I would like to pass the conference over to our host, Eric Goldstein, Vice President of Investor Relations. Eric, please proceed.
spk02: Thank you, Operator. Hello, everyone, and welcome to our conference call covering our third quarter 2022 results and outlook for the year. Joining me today are Chi-Chao Hu, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, and Jing Nielis, Chief Financial Officer. We issued our shareholder letter just after 4 p.m. today, which provides a business update as well as our financial results. you'll find a press release with a link to our shareholder letter and today's conference call webcast in the investor relations section of our website at ses.ai. Before we get started, this is a reminder, the discussion today may contain forward-looking information or forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. These statements are based on our predictions and expectations as of today. Such statements involve certain risks, assumptions, and uncertainties which may cause our actual or future results and performance to be materially different from those expressed or implied in these statements. The risks and uncertainties that could cause our results to differ materially from our current expectations include but are not limited to those details in our latest earnings release and in our SEC filings. This afternoon, we will review our business as well as results for the quarter. With that, I'll pass the call over to Qiqiao.
spk07: Thanks, Eric. Good afternoon, everyone, and thanks for joining our third quarter conference call. As the leader in lithium metal battery cell development, our organization continues to evolve and innovate in order to meet all the challenges that come with manufacturing large format cells. During the third quarter, we achieved several important milestones, First, our SCS Korea pilot facility was completed, and its cell assembly line was ready to use in September, only eight months after breaking ground on this greenfield facility in January. Since opening, SCS Korea has already been able to produce about 100 of our large Apollo Base 50 and 100M power cells. Second, our Shanghai Giga facility was fully operational in Q3 And since January, has produced about 1,000 Apollo Base 50 and 100 empowered cells. Both SCS Korea and Shanghai Giga have much higher capacity, approximately several thousand cells per month. However, we intentionally slowed down their lines in order to focus on quality and to identify and address manufacturing issues. We plan to increase volume when our manufacturing process becomes more robust. We have shared 50m power cell data with all of our OEM JDA partners and have shipped 50m power cells to some partners. Going forward, we plan to ship cells to all of our partners, including GM, Hyundai, and Honda. We also expect to share data on our 100m power cells and will begin shipping them to our JDA partners early in 2023. Importantly, the 50 amp hour cells produced at Shanghai Giga have received UN38.3 certification, which means they have been deemed safe for transport by an approved independent testing lab. Additionally, our Shanghai line received IATF 16949 quality certification, which means it is on track to meeting the process quality requirements for the automotive market. We expect to receive the same certifications for our 100 mPower cells produced in Shanghai and SES Korea. Customer interest in these large format cells remains strong. In addition to the three OEM JDAs that we have formally announced, we have also shared cell data with several other EV and eVTOL OEMs around the world. We believe that we are the leader in lithium metal battery development and have built more small and large-format lithium metal cells than anyone else. However, developing and building large 50- and 100-amp-hour cells has been incredibly difficult and, candidly, much harder than we expected. We have encountered complex problems, including poor press density of wide-format lithium metal foils, powder arising from using lasers to cut our anodes that can lead to cell shortage, optimizing pressure distribution over a larger area, and developing accurate health monitoring algorithms for large cells without any data initially, just to name a few. Importantly, as a result of these problems, which have led to numerous large-capacity cell failures, we have gained a lot of incredibly valuable data that we are now using to train our health monitoring algorithm, Avatar. For example, our ability to predict failures in large 50 and 100-amp-hour cells has increased from 0% to approximately 60% in the past few months. By comparison, our ability to predict failures in smaller 4-amp-hour cells is now more than 99% after four years of data training. In addition, these issues have forced us to make several key changes in our vendor partnership and manufacturing process. that are now yielding significant improvements in cell performance, quality, and yield. Our shareholder letter contains a table that summarizes the performances of our four MPAL cells, first published last year and recently updated, 50 MPAL cells, entirely new data, and 100 MPAL cells, still ongoing. On cell engineering and manufacturing, while there's still a gap between the performance of our smaller 4M power cells and the larger 50M power cells, we are making great progress in bridging this gap. We remain confident that the larger cells, both 50 and later 100M power cells, will match the performance of the smaller 4M power cells. On new material chemistry, We're making excellent progress in developing new electrolytes, coatings, and animal materials that will improve the performance of all cells. Stay tuned as we plan to publish more detailed 50m-power cell data this month and expect to show performance improvements leading up to our expected transition from A-samples to B-samples. As a result of our real-world experiences with large lithium metal cells, we have started to take a fresh look at our supply chain and have elected to take certain operations in-house to improve performance and quality. Our lithium metal supply chain has a lot of overlap with the lithium ion supply chain. Having a comprehensive supply chain is critical for us to develop a cell system that meets OEM requirements and to scale our volumes and reduce costs. This is not only important for getting to B samples, but also for pilot scale development. Improving our internal capability for R&D in every component and having control over every step in the process now allows us to quickly troubleshoot, identify, and optimize. Initially, we only focused on our electrolyte anode in the cell. We simply purchased the cathode within foil and separated and had little ability to investigate and optimized besides a simple quality analysis summary from our vendors. Now, for all cell materials, we either make it in-house or we partner with our vendors and have them develop new materials to our specifications, which has improved the performance and quality of our cells. A cell is really a living and breathing system, especially a large 100mL metal cell. If you don't have full access and control of the entire supply chain, Every little detailed step, you just will not succeed at meeting the full-blown specs from OEMs for A-samples or get to the D-sample stage. In late September, I had the privilege of meeting the South Korean president at the South Korea North America Investors Roundtable in New York. I committed to advancing research and development for lithium-ion batteries in South Korea. SES was the only North American battery company to participate in the event where South Korea announced a total of $1.15 billion of planned investments for batteries, semiconductors, and other industries. South Korea is the world leader in EV batteries and plays a key role in the global upstream supply chain. This is why we are investing in the development of SES Korea. We are proud to have been recognized by the government of South Korea for our innovation in lithium metal battery technology and our commitment to supporting the future of the electric vehicle and urban air mobility ecosystem. The recent Inflation Reduction Act, IRA, offers very attractive tax credits and incentives for battery manufacturing and supply chain build-out in North America. We are actively discussing with our partners to see how we can leverage our learning from the global supply chain to establish a robust North American EV battery supply chain. We are very excited about the potential here. Earlier this year, we set three milestones we hope to attain by mid-2023. These are incredibly challenging, but we are making good progress on all three. One, deliver and optimize A-sample batteries for our three JDA partners. Two, begin to transition from A-sample batteries to B-sample batteries. And third, continue to establish supply chains for key materials. Finally, we expect to hold our second annual Better World in December, and hope everyone will be able to join us. Topics at Better World will include data and performance of our large-format cells, AI-based battery health monitoring developments, and further thoughts on our supply chain initiatives. I'll now turn over to June Nialis, our Chief Financial Officer, to review our third quarter results and outlook.
spk00: Thank you, Chichao. Good afternoon, everyone. Today, I will cover our third quarter financial results and discuss our operating and capital budgets for full year 2022. In the third quarter, our operating expenses were $21.7 million, an increase of $11 million from the same period last year. Stock-based compensation expense was $7.2 million in the quarter. We reported research and development expenses of $8.4 million, an increase of $4.7 million from the same period last year. This increase reflects higher personnel costs due to increased tech counts to support battery cell development, an increase in software development costs related to our advanced AI software and battery management systems, and an increase in lab consumables and material supplies. Our growth R&D spend in the third quarter was $11.5 million, which was offset by $3.1 million reimbursable from our JDA partners, which was treated as counter R&D expenses. Our G&A expenses were $13.3 million, an increase of $6.3 million from the same period last year. Similar to the second quarter, this increase was primarily driven by higher personnel costs to support our operations as a public company, higher insurance costs, an increase in professional fees and outside services, and an increase in travel-related expenses. We incurred a non-cash loss of $4.9 million at the end of the quarter associated with the change in fair value of our sponsor earn-out liability. As we have previously outlined, certain tranches of our sponsor earn-out shares are accounted for as a derivative liability measured at a fair value based on the price of our common stock at the end of the quarter. For full year 2022, we now expect cash used in operations to be in the range of $55 to $60 million, a reduction from the previously provided range of $70 to $80 million. This reflects a combination of some initial conservatives on our part and lower spending materials at our pilot line manufacturing, as Xichao highlighted we're emphasizing quality over quantity. Despite the lower level of spending, we remain focused on improving manufacturing processes, cell performance and quality, developing new materials, and training our machinery model. All are important for us to achieve our goals. CapEx in the third quarter was 600,000, in line with our expectations entering the quarter. We now expect 2022 capital expenditure to be between 20 to 25 million, down from our previous guidance of 25 million to 35 million. We believe most of the reduction in our forecasted 2022 CapEx spend will be pushed into 2023. Looking at liquidity, our balance sheet remains strong. We ended the third quarter of 2022 with cash and cash equivalents of 395 million, which we continue to believe is sufficient funding to get us to commercialization. Our third quarter and year-to-date cash usage, defined as net cash used in operating activities and capital expenditures, was approximately $10.3 million and $48.5 million, respectively. For full year 2022, we now expect our total use of cash to range between $75 million and $85 million, down from our prior guidance of total use of cash between $95 million and $115 million. We expect to end the year with north of $350 million of cash. With that, I will hand the call back to Eric.
spk02: Thanks, Jing. We will begin today's Q&A with some questions for you and for Qichao. I'll start with Qichao. Qichao, we are starting to provide some data on our large sales. From the table we released in our shareholder letter today, can you give us your perspective on what these numbers mean? And can you talk about what has surprised you positively and negatively?
spk03: Thanks, Eric.
spk07: So we introduced the first 100 m power cell this time last year at the 2021 Better World. And then this year, In the past one year, we built these large 50 and 100 mPOP cells. And the fact that we built these cells and now we are publishing these data is significant because no one else in the world has demonstrated these large lithium metal cells. And not only we've demonstrated the ability to build these cells, we also, in the shareholder letter, we published this table that has room temperature, energy density over different power density, also cycle life, and safety. And the safety test data are actually from third parties. Nail penetration, thermal overcharge, and external short circuit. So we published all these data, and then there was a lot of work to do. design, build, and then get these cells to this stage. We literally went through the tunnel of hell to get to where we are today. That's really exciting. I think we are far ahead of other companies pursuing lithium metal because of where we are and what we have demonstrated. Also, this confirms our initial approach and focus on hybrid lithium metal. So designing this very high energy density lithium metal cell by using a very mature lithium ion manufacturing process. So leverage the benefit of the high energy density of lithium metal with the mature scalability of the lithium ion manufacturing. So that's, that's, uh, uh, to us as a huge milestone. And then this gives us confidence, uh, to continue, uh, push forward, uh, uh, and then catch a B sample in terms of what really surprised me, uh, uh, positively. I mean, uh, positively is the fact that we actually solve a lot of these problems. Um, what surprised me negatively, just how hard it was. We thought, okay, we had the small cell before and power cell last year. And then, so to go from four to a 50 and a hundred, we'll just make it larger. Um, I think we, we definitely underestimated the challenge and, uh, um, um, in the material chemistry, the processing, um, I think what surprised me negatively, just, just how hard it was to build these cells and then get the large cells the performance of the large cells to match the performance of the smaller cells.
spk02: Yeah. Great. Okay. The next question for Chi Chow. So we've talked a lot about the supply chain and I guess we get a lot of questions. Why is SES focusing on the supply chain? Some people might say it's too early for us to be thinking about the supply chain. when we are only in the A sample development stage?
spk07: Yeah, yeah, that's a really good point. So typically supply chain, when you are in C sample and SOP and beyond, supply chain is about cost and quality. And you are absolutely right. For us in A sample, those are not the top concerns now. For A sample, supply chain is about degrees of freedom. and then how many degrees of freedom we have to improve the performance and then meet the OEM targets. So our job, our goal for a sample is to deliver a cell, which is a system that matches the OEM requirements. And then all the problems that we encountered, we really need more and more degrees of freedom to solve the problems. For example, in the past, before 2015, the only thing that we controlled was electrolytes. And then since then, gradually, we started controlling salt, the solvent, separated coating, cathode, cathode coating processing, and then recently, anode, even lithium foil itself. And then lithium metal cell design, cell engineering, equipment. uh manufacturing equipment testing equipment and then the environment the temperature the pressure the the charge and discharge rate how we test these cells and we just found if we limit ourselves in terms of the number of the degrees of freedom that we have to optimize the entire system we will never meet the oem targets but The fact that in the past, we added more components, and we started controlling more aspects of this entire system, both the material and the manufacturing process, and then now we have a lot more degrees of freedom. We are really able to improve the performance. For example, the data that we showed for the 50 amp-hour cells, If we only controlled electrolytes or capital or just separate coatings, there's no way we can meet the performance targets. So supply chain for us in ASAMPLE is about degrees of freedom and then controlling every component, every material, and every step of the entire process so that we can deliver a system, a cell, that meets the OEM requirements. the full-blown OEM specs. Great. Thank you.
spk02: So next question, and then we'll open it up. It's just for Jing. Our cash burn has been much less than expected in 22. How much of that would you say is purely just a timing issue?
spk00: Thanks, Eric. So we wanted to be prudent with our cash and invest it efficiently to make meaningful impact. on our lithium metal cell development to move forward from A sample to B sample in the timeline we expected. As we highlighted during the call, we'll focus on quality over quantity until we overcome the challenges in the short term. So OPEX will grow as we increase production volume at our pilot facilities when our manufacturing process becomes more robust. CapEx is more of a matter of timing. But having said that, with lower level of spending, we are making great progress on all of the aspects of our business. And we remain pretty confident that we have sufficient funding to get us to commercialization.
spk02: Okay, great. Thank you. Danielle, we're now ready to take Q&A. You can please open the lines for questions. Okay.
spk08: Certainly. If you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. If for any reason you would like to remove that question, please press star followed by two. Again, to ask a question, please press star one. As a reminder, if you are using a speakerphone, please remember to pick up your handset before asking a question. Also, we would like to ask that you limit yourself to one question and one follow-up question. We will pause here briefly as questions are registered. The first question comes from Gabe Dowd of Cowen. Please proceed.
spk01: Thanks, and good afternoon, everybody. Thanks for all the prepared remarks and the questions. I guess maybe, Chi-Chao, just starting with, you know, some of the manufacturing issues that you laid out in your prepared remarks in the letter. You know, one of them was just optimizing pressure distribution over a larger area. I guess it's a bit self-explanatory. As you scale from 4 to 50 to 100 amp hour cells, I guess you kind of have to use more applied pressure. But can you maybe just discuss a little bit more some of the issues there?
spk07: Yeah. So in terms of pressure, the total amount of pressure that we apply for the larger cell is around the same as the pressure we apply to the smaller cell in terms of the value of the cell. the value of the pressure. But then because the area is larger, and then in the past, we had a lot of issues with the electrodes, especially the anode, such a large size anode. We were struggling with making the anode uniform, and then separators, and then also filling the cell with electrolyte, and then also soaking that in a uniform way. So there was a lot of work to optimize the cell assembly process, the formation process, and then also the pressure that you apply to the cell during formation, during testing. And in the beginning, even though we controlled the value of the pressure, the distribution of the pressure was far from uniform. So and then through lots of imaging and characterization, then we could find out exactly why it was not uniform and how non-uniform it was. And then we actually have a dedicated team just focusing on the design of the pressure jig, the team just on the pressure jig. And then we tied that to the formation process to the cell assembly. And then that really improved the pressure distribution, uniformity quite a lot. Other manufacturing challenges, I would say a lot of the manufacturing challenges are due to this large anode, this wide format lithium metal anode. Because no one is really making this at scale, and then we partner with a vendor to get thin lithium foil at this wide width. But then we had to actually apply this onto copper, and then and then to punch it out using laser because we couldn't find a steel die that size that could stay sharp and straight for that size. So we cut anode with laser, but then the laser would actually melt lithium and then create a lot of copper powder, and then a lot of those got trapped in the cell and then in the manufacturing process. So those were also... create issues and then we've since then we've optimized and improved the line a few times so we've really solved the challenge of the panel punching so I think these are probably the two main challenges that we had and I think we've made a lot of progress solving those well that's
spk01: That's great. Thanks, Chi-Che. That's really helpful. Maybe as a follow-up, I'll maybe ask just on the policy side, you noted the two big initiatives, I guess, one in South Korea and then obviously the Inflation Reduction Act in the U.S. Could you talk about maybe the South Korea award, the $1.15 billion of planned investment for batteries, etc., How do you disclose what maybe SCS, what the award has been for you guys? And then on the IRA, just any thoughts there on like timeline and if you're in discussions with your JDA partners on maybe accelerating, starting up or at least planning to start a gigafactory here in the U.S. given all the incentives? Thanks, guys.
spk07: Yeah. So for South Korea, it's really focused on equipment and manufacturing line. And we signed the lease this January, and back in January, it was just really a piece of land in the mountains. And then this September, nine months later, we built a facility, the line went in, and the 50M power line actually became ready to use in eight months. So For us, the South Korea facility is really focused on equipment development, cell manufacturing equipment development optimization, as well as cell assembly process optimization and development. And then on the IRA, yes, we have already started working with our partners not just the OEM partners, but also electrical companies, salt producers, even all the way up to refining and discuss about plans to put capability in North America from lithium refining to ingot to produce this lithium anode and also other key materials like salt and this high-concentration electrolyte. And then so we are more focused on the materials for now. And then down the road, we also plan to add looking at ourselves once we successfully enter into B sample.
spk01: Great. Thank you, Jeff.
spk05: Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Sean Severson.
spk08: of water tower research.
spk03: Please proceed. Sean, your line is now open. You may proceed with your question.
spk02: Danielle, why don't we move on to the next question and maybe Sean will hop back in line.
spk08: Certainly. The next question comes from Winnie Dong of Deutsche Bank. Please proceed.
spk00: Hi, thank you very much. I wanted to dig in a little bit more on sort of the changes to the vendor partnership and the manufacturing process that you're alluding to in the shareholder letter. in terms of yielding significant improvement in the cell performance of quality. I was wondering if you can dig more into that in terms of sort of what kind of changes are being implemented.
spk07: Yeah, yeah, yeah, sure, sure. That's a very good question. So in the past, we would just buy, for example, the salt. We would buy the separate base film. We would buy the cathode. we will buy lithium foil from the vendor and then we will build a cell internally. And then all we have from the vendors, just some basic quality assurance summary from the materials. But then we realized that's far from enough. The salt, we have to control the purity, the separator. We actually have to customize it, potentially, replacing one of the existing coatings with our coating, cathode, we have to optimize it. The cathode coating, slurry, the mixing process, all that, we really have to control that. If we can't control that, then the final cell will have issues. And we don't know if the issues from the final cell comes from our electrolyte or the cathode material or the coating process or the separator, we just don't know where the issues come from because we don't have control of the entire process. Even the anode. I mean, we thought the anode, just pure lithium foil, what can you do there? But actually, it turned out a lot of the foil, especially for such a wide width, the density is not as dense as narrow width lithium foil. And then when you apply this onto copper foil, we have a lot of challenges. And so in terms of changing this partnership with the suppliers is we go from just a simple supplier relationship to pay them to buy a fixed product. We actually now some of the materials, the cathode, the separate coating, the solvent, we make all that in-house. So we know exactly what we put inside. So one is to ensure batch-to-batch quality. But also, one day, maybe we decide to add a different material. We decide to make a different solvent. We decide to add a different coating. So we can change all these things. Even lithium itself, the batch to batch quality was so poor from the vendors. We first improved the quality and then we actually started adding our own materials, our own process, our own design to lithium so that So now we make a lot of these things in-house because also a lot of the changes that we make to the materials and the process are trade secret. So we do a lot of that in-house. And so having control over all these components and the process, And then that really allows us to develop new materials and then improve the performance of the cell much faster than if we just waited and rely on vendors to supply us these materials, because the cell is not really a bunch of Lego pieces putting together. And then each Lego is very established and you can have the vendors make that the final spec, of the cell is still not finalized. So the spec of each process and the spec of each material is not finalized. So we really have to get into all these process and materials, even for R&D, even for a sample development. And that's what we started doing in this past year. We really had no choice, but we started doing this. And then now the improvement at the cell level, especially at this large cell level, is quite impressive. Also, the manufacturing equipment. We actually started making changes to the equipment, to the process. So all this just, again, it's about how many degrees of freedom you have. and then how much control you have over this entire system. The more you have, the easier it is to actually meet the final specs.
spk00: Got it. That's very, very helpful. Thank you so much. So with this kind of changes that you're sort of alluding to, is that more critical for B sample and C sample delivery? Or is it, or does that sort of like impact possibly like the sample delivery as well? Like, but you're, you're, uh, we're iterating your, your sort of, uh, you know, target to achieve that by mid year next year.
spk07: Yeah. So for now we're, we are in a sample and then, uh, having this control, uh, allows us to improve the performance. Um, and then, For example, cycle life under slow charge or fast charge or different charge rate. If you just buy lithium foil, if you just buy separator with existing coating, maybe you get 300, 400. But if you can make that material in-house, one, you can improve the batch-to-batch consistency. Second is you can actually put your own coating, your own material on top. Then you can improve the cycle life by 100, 200 cycles. So for now, all these initiatives are aimed at improving performance. So we meet the full-blown A sample specs. And then once we actually meet the performance, then later in B sample, C sample, then these initiatives will become about improving the quality, the consistency, and eventually lowering the cost. But in A sample, these initiatives are really aimed at improving performance and broaden our scope of development.
spk00: Got it. That's very helpful. If I may, I have a couple more follow-ups, if that's okay. I was wondering if you can also comment on, you know, sharing data with some of the other EV companies that are not, you know, GED partners yet. What kind of feedback have you gotten from them? And then maybe you can just comment on possibly like the interest level.
spk07: Yeah, we have a few OEMs in the pipeline that are interested in testing ourselves. Of course, our main focus is on the three OEMs that we have JDAs with. And then so we produce these cells and our Shanghai line. And then we have these standard tests, energy density, cycle life, safety tests. And then we put them in the package. We publish the assembly table in the shareholder letter. And then in the coming weeks, we expect to publish more detailed data, the plot for each one. So we show that to all the potential OEMs. And we sort of keep them in the pipeline because Now we don't really want to have more A-sample JDAs because we are already busy enough with the three. And then we want to focus on solving the core problems, the material problems, the manufacturing engineering problems. And then once we can solve these problems, then the three A-sample JDAs will move forward to B-sample. And then all the OEMs that we currently have in the pipeline, they can go straight to B-sample. So we will have multiple B-samples. So now we are, so a lot of these EV companies are very excited. We keep them in the pipeline so we can focus on delivering for the three OEMs in A-samples and also really just heads down, focus on solving these core technical problems.
spk00: Got it. Thank you. A more financial-related question. On the reduction in the OPEX guidance, is that mainly sort of wrong D or is she in a cut in terms of impact? And then I was wondering if you can sort of comment on, in terms of like the reduction in CapEx, is that more of a push of capital purchase or what's being deferred to next year? Thanks. Sure. So on the OPAC side, the reduction is, one, we are being prudent with our cash. So we wanted to spend it only on key initiatives and things that are very important for us to move from A sample to B sample. Number two, as we mentioned, that currently our focus is to solving the challenges that we have and focus on quality, not quantity. So the material spending to make large 50 and 100 m power cells has reduced comparing to before because we initially had higher budget to make more cells. But now that we focus on quality, So we just make enough for us and our OEM partners for testing and then, you know, put our resources all onto solving the challenges that Chi-Chao mentioned. So that's pretty much the main drivers of dual patch reduction. For CapEx, it's more of a timing. It's a little bit related that we have our Shanghai pilot line operational and then we have our Korean line also operational serving three OEM partners in our own development making cells that we need in order to do that so some of those capex spending will incur in 2023 so that's more of a push out in timing got it thank you so much for taking my questions appreciate it thank you
spk08: The next question comes from Sean Severson of Walter Tower Research. Please proceed.
spk06: Great, thank you. Can you hear me this time, guys?
spk02: Yeah. Hey, Sean, we can hear you.
spk06: Sorry, I had a... Can you hear me this time? Hello?
spk02: Yeah, we can hear you.
spk06: Sean, we can hear you. I'm sorry, I had a Bluetooth fail here. I apologize there. My question, Chi-Chao, is around looking at additional opportunities inside that manufacturing and supply chain. There's two parts to it. I'm trying to understand what else there is that you can really target. I mean, are you in the third inning, fifth inning of this? Do you see a lot of things in front of you that you still have room to optimize? And then secondly, are all of these changes scalable? Obviously, I know you manufacture to look at commercial viability, but these things you're doing internally, Is there anything we need to think about in terms of how they would be able to scale at higher volume?
spk03: Yeah.
spk07: On the first question, in terms of additional opportunities, so our focus is on the cell, the final lithium metal cell, the final system. And then we've developed new electrolyte, new solvent coating anode. Each of this, maybe there are opportunities to provide us, to sell the materials to other lithium metal makers. Maybe there are opportunities, but we are really focused on the sale at this point, because that's everything we do, A sample and N2P sample. So delivering this final sale, the final system that meets the specs. And then in terms of the second question, scale up, very good question. So a lot of the new materials, the salt, the solvent, the coating, and the anode itself, currently we started making a lot of these materials in-house. And then between our Boston team, Korea team, so Korea team mostly on the cathode, the manufacturing equipment, and the cell, and the Shanghai team mostly on the electrolyzed solvent anode. So between all three teams, I think we have the best combination of new concepts, new ideas, and also the industrial perspective, that industrial capability to take this lab scale and then quickly develop a process equipment around it. And then the members of our cell and material scale up teams come from currently large lithium ion industries and also lithium ion material industries. So have that perspective. And when we do the scale up, we really make sure that we don't do anything that cannot be scaled up. So I'm less concerned about that. Of course, we will have more issues to solve when we are at A sample stage and then later B sample, C sample stage because the scales are so different. But fundamentally, these processes that we use for making all these new materials are very scalable.
spk06: And then my second question is, as you, you know, you're talking about non-GADA partners and really talking with additional OEMs and going straight to B samples, what is, what's your sense of the timeframe on this from their evaluation side? I mean, is this something that, because the data's there, you've already gone through this, that there's sort of an accelerated cycle, you know, relative to what you would normally expect in this, or is it still you know, you expect it to be long runways, uh, to reach those, uh, to reach those, um, you know, those types of agreements.
spk07: Yeah. Um, I mean, first of all, our focus is on the three OEMs that we have JDS with because we, uh, promise them and then we really have to deliver it. So, um, that's what we focus on. Uh, and then, um, uh, during this development, um, uh, and, and, Different OEMs have different requirements, but the core is actually quite similar. So as we focus on the three OEM example, we are improving our core capability. Materials, cell, engineering capabilities, software, we are improving our core capability. So when we discuss with OEMs in the pipeline, we don't need to start where we were, say, two years ago. we just show them the latest data that we have. So the timeline for new OEMs in the pipeline is definitely a lot more accelerated compared to the three core OEMs that we have a sample JDAs with. But just because we've improved our core capability so much, why should we start, say, two years ago? where we are today. But again, the current focus is on the three OEMs that we have a sample JDS with. Great. Thank you.
spk05: Thank you. There are currently no additional questions registered at this time, so I will pass the conference back over to the management team for closing remarks.
spk03: Oh, we just like to thank everybody. Yeah, go ahead.
spk07: Oh, sorry. So I think this past year just was really difficult. And then we went through the tunnel of hell. But I think it's a tunnel of hell that every battery company, every EV company has to go through. So we have so many problems. And we're still in that tunnel of hell. But we also learn so much and then make so much progress. So that makes us feel quite good. So please stay tuned. And then we do expect to publish more data and more progress in the coming months.
spk05: That concludes the conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect your lines.
Disclaimer