Nanexa AB (publ)

Yes, nothing makes the investment team happier than to see the duo Ando and Westberg on stage. I am of course talking about Nanexa's chairman Göran Ando and CEO David Westberg. Welcome gentlemen. Thank you. It was a nice introduction. We will present Q4 and the whole year for 2025. But you will also present preclinical semaglutide data. You will also talk about the deal with Moderna. We also take questions in English for those who are English speaking and the answers will therefore also be in English if the questions are. So just briefly, David, how would you describe 2025?

I think 2025 has been a fantastic year for us. We started this year with Liragluti data, GLP-1 data, clinical data. What we then assess is the first clinical data on a one-month formulation of GLP-1, which we also got attention from the American Diabetes Association in It was at the end of June, on a midsummer evening. We were in Chicago to present it. It was a poster presentation, but it was well visited. A lot of people took notice. It was a strong start to the year. You know that we have gone over from Liraglutide to Semaglutide. Very good decisions from the management and board. Semaglutide long-acting is even more commercially feasible, so very strong. And then we added the deal with Moderna, which I think is fantastic. It is a validation of the technology of us as a company and is also a very interesting area to work in with mRNA. And Moderna as a company is also fantastic.

Thank you. Please introduce yourself and see you at the Q&A afterwards.

I have prepared some slides that I was going to present. As Mattias said, a very short commentary. I expect that you have several questions. A short comment on the year end report, and then semaglutide long acting, and then business development, as we said. And the only thing I was going to highlight here, really, is that we had a very strong end to the year with these three million US dollars that we got in on the Modern Agreement. And this is actually the first time ever in Nanexa's history that we have had a positive result, with 4.6 million in the whole year. And in the last quarter, I think it was 20 million plus. It's still worth noting, I think. We had a sales all-time high of 36 million. That modern contract is of course the big one. In addition, we also had revenue from our ending of the contract with Plagg Materials at a little over SEK 7 million. And then also, as I think it is important to note, we had a an expense level, at the lowest level since 2021. And that's due to the decrease in costs that we made mainly during 2024. So it still shows that it has given results. I think all these three bullet points are something to mention in addition to what is in the report. But as I said, I expect you to come up with more questions after I have presented the rest. And then we come to this with our product and semaglutide. This is more of a start-up picture here. We really look at what is called patient-centric development, where less frequent dosing is extremely important, not just for convenience, but also if you look at side effects and so on. We have a technology that allows you to work with extremely thin needles, something that reduces injection pain and so on, which of course is also good for the patient. And we can look at these bullets at the bottom of cost-effective manufacturing. I think this will become even more important when it comes to GLP-1s and and the entire market, because there will be a price pressure on that market. And that we can then go from aseptic production to what is called terminal sterilization is important, because aseptic production is very expensive. The same goes for cold chain logistics. We have shown that our product with our formulation can be stored at room temperature, which is a very, very big advantage. and so on, and compatible with available one-chamber devices. And you can see in this picture, this is just a picture we have taken, but this is how a final product will look like. In a regular injection pen, you can then have our pharmaceutical-applied particles in suspension in this small capsule, and it can then be injected into extremely thin needles. And then we can get to semi-glutinous data, where there was a lot before that. But I think this is worth showing anyway. This is the post we had on American Diabetes Association, one of the pictures there. This is the release profile of four different doses of liraglutide. And it shows very clearly that we can make a one-month deposit of a product that in other cases is a one-day administration. You could wish that the highest concentration Cmax here in the beginning would be a little lower compared to the lowest concentration there after 30 days. And that is something that we have continued to work with and then taken into the development of of semactide once monthly. And these results are from the rot study we have done now, which we started at the end of last year, where we have received results from the first six weeks. These are three different formulations. Two of them, the green and the blue, are formulations that are suitable for a one-month dose. And the pink, or red, is more suitable for a three-month, once quarterly administration. This is, as we call it, a very good result. It is a low Cmax. You have a very even release profile and plasma profile during this month. And you can compare it with the black curve, which is non-contaminated semaglutide, which drops down directly, so to speak, after a few days only. This is a result that we have then worked on and done simulations to see, okay, if we take The blue curve here, which is the shortest of these anyway, if we take that curve and simulate it with gang simulation methods to see how this would look if you administered this in humans. And how would it look if you administered it several times, repeated dosing? And then you can see, it's actually the same data in both curves, but there are different scales on the x-axis there. But if you look at it to the left, you can see that there are five injections. First a day 0, a day 28, a day 56, a day 64 and so on. And what you see as pointed or stretched curves, or one curve, is what Veggovi looks like today. That product that Novo Nordisk sells a lot of. You see that the variation is, it's a variation every week, it goes up and down, up and down, up and down, up and down. And this is what you think, the difference in Cmax to Ctros, which is the lowest concentration in the blood, which can cause side effects for the patients. And then you see what our curve looks like. It is incredibly flat and nice and has only one small top that is not really as big as Veggo's top once a month. And if you look at a value that everyone who works with this type of formulation looks at, it is the one to the far right of the table. Then you see that I have highlighted 1.25. This is the ratio between the highest concentration and the lowest concentration before the next dose is given. For VEGO, the ratio is 1.7 to 1.9, which is considered very good. 1.7 to 1.9 is the product that is sold today on the market. Here we are down to 1.25 for our product and a variation that only happens once a month instead of four times a month.

I think it's important to comment that this is data that is better than what I have ever seen and what others who have been in our business for a long time. have seen in all forms of what is called sustained release. Normally, you have problems with a big burst right at the beginning, which is devastating, and then it jumps up and down here and there, but at least it lasts. than a one-month period or whatever you're looking for. This is unique to me. And just as David says, this one month that we're out after, it's not just for that it is comfortable and it is much easier. It will make it much more likely for the patients to really take their dose at the right time and so on. It will continue to be good, but above all that it is Not all side effects, but a lot of the side effects that all GLP-1s and semaglutides are not exempt from, are mainly dependent on the top dose that comes in. And you have what is very well known, bad monocrystals on it. Most patients get it right at the beginning, but about 10-15% have it left. And they have it every time they take a new dose. It's no fun, right? And it makes many people stop way too early, before they've dropped down, before they've controlled their diabetes, or if it's because of weight loss, to dominate their target weight. So for me, this is clinically very, very important and very challenging.

If you look at the reports, you can see why patients end their treatment. Over 50% of patients end their treatment in the first 12 months. The biggest reason is a GI side effect, i.e. nausea, vomiting, etc. We may have something very interesting going on here. And I jump back to a picture of this. You see the pink curve here that continues to break out hemagglutin even day 42, as you can see. We follow that now and we will get data from it, end data from it, during the month of March. And then we will most likely have a formulation that fits very well for a once quarterly with a a quota of Cmax to Cmin, maybe not 1.25, I don't think we will reach that in three months, but maybe in the parity with what Veggovi is for a week and so on. That would also be revolutionary, I think. I don't know what you're saying.

Yes, absolutely. It's a huge advantage if we can succeed with it and that it looks good. So far it looks very good, but we'll see at the end of the day.

And that's what I was going to say. Oh, now I'm jumping. Lots of pictures here. That's what I was going to say about the data. You are welcome to come up with more questions, of course. I was going to jump to the Modern Agreement, which we wrote in December. There you have seen, it's a development for up to five compounds, mRNA substances. The first one they have a license for and then they have an option for four more. It is fixed milestones and license money in this agreement. Upfront is not huge, but it was important to us. 3 million US dollars. But what is important in this agreement is that we have, as you understand, about 100 million US dollars per substance in potential milestones, and that is development and sales milestones. In addition, we have a single-digit royalty on sales. For me, and I think for the company, this is enormously important, because it's a validation of our technology. A validation for us as a company that we now have a first license agreement. And I'm very, very sure that this is not our last license agreement. This has really created a ring on the water, and when I was together with Bridget Lacey, our Chief Business Officer in San Francisco, in January at J.P. Morgan, it was very clear that everyone we talked to had noted this Modern Agreement. It was a lot of congratulations to us on that and hopes for more business, so to speak.

Yes, I don't know if you want to add anything? If we look at it a little bit, it's not all too deep. Do they feel more modern to guess that this is vaccines? That's the question. That's what they do. They do both prophylactic vaccines, the classic cold vaccines, but also therapeutic vaccines in the cancer area above all, but also in autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and the like. There are a couple of problems that are not in any way specific to Moderna, but in principle that vaccine manufacturers have in today's situation. There are two things. One is that, just as we talked about at the same time, vaccines must be kept in the refrigerator. to keep a reasonable amount of time. And that works quite well in developed countries. In developing countries it does not work at all. It is an unfair obstacle and a very expensive obstacle in that sense. It costs more than the vaccine to keep it that way. The other thing is that you are looking at some vaccines, not all, but on some vaccines to get an extended effect. and therefore to see how you can, in principle, stimulate the immune system. That's what the vaccine is about. You kick it off. There are two components. One is aimed at the disease that you want the body to build antibodies on. The other is an adjuvant, that is, as a general remedy to wake up the immune system you have. And how can you extend it? For example, the Covid vaccine that Moderna produced here on record time and which has saved hundreds of thousands, probably millions of lives. In principle, it keeps it, gives a good protection 12, maybe 18 months, but not any longer. Can you extend such things to three years, to five years? Or ideally, like some vaccines, in principle, you take one and you never need any more. So it's fantastic, it's a fantastic success. So there are some of the opportunities that exist on the vaccine side. Moderna is a large company that works hard on many fronts, so it's very exciting to work with them.

And I can add, when we talk about business development, that we have written an agreement with Moderna, CECI and other companies, and we have received a few apropos from other companies who wonder and think it would be interesting if we could talk about it. So we'll see how it goes. We also have feasibility studies, as you know, with other companies. We announced one that was extended in the fall and a couple more that are rolling. Then we come in more specifically on GLP-1 and semaglutide. We have clinical proof of concept with liraglutide. And for those who are a little more involved in this, talking about halving time and so on between different substances, you know that liraglutide has a much shorter halving time in the blood than semaglutide. And can we do a long-term use of liraglutide? Then it's a bit of a worst case. So if we can do that there, then we can also do semaglutide. And these preclinical data that we have now developed and have the opportunity to show to all companies, So what we can say, as you understand, we can't go into too much detail. some real details, but we have ongoing discussions with a number of companies around semaglutide and other GLPETs in the current situation, and we are working hard on those discussions and negotiations, even if you want to add more.

It's hard to say, but you can say that it's more than one partner that we discuss with. It takes a long time, but that's what it takes. For an unbearable soul like me, it takes way too long, but you just have to accept it.

We also have an ambition to write really good contracts. It's not just about running to the finish line as fast as possible, but running to the finish line in a very smart way, and that's what we're trying to do. I think that was the final picture. You may have one or two questions.

Thank you so much, Göran and David, for that. You have a very committed investment corps, so there have been a lot of questions. We will try to take them from start to finish in that order, but we will start by letting in the analyst from Emergers, who is following the NEXA, Johan Widmark. If you have a microphone and camera on, you can start with your questions.

Okay, great. Thank you very much. Hello David and Göran, can you hear me?

You can increase the volume a little bit.

We can hear you, but you are very distant. Yes, I can hear you. Great. I was going to start with a question about Moderna and these five projects. It's one plus four options. Are they running sequentially? Are you waiting with confirmed success for the first project until you start the next one? And is that related to seeing a milestone if you feel it's worth continuing or how are they?

Yes, a little bit. This is one of the first projects that we are running. During this year, it will mainly be preclinical trials that they do. We will coat and apply this mRNA substance. When it has reached a certain milestone, it will Hopefully it will be continued by Moderna, and after that we will release the other four substances. If Moderna chooses to start all four at once, I don't think so, but maybe they will start one and then one a little later. They will come in some form of sequence, but we can also run them in parallel. I think it depends a little on what their strategy looks like at that time.

I understand. But can you imagine that when you choose to take in another project or use another option, it will also be linked to the time when you get the first milestone payment for the first project?

I would think that it can differ in time, but I think the first milestone payment is a bit free from when they choose the next one. So it doesn't have to be spot on that they follow each other. But I would think that Moderna is a modern company and they want to run fast. That is my absolute opinion. If they see that it works, which I think it will do, if they see that it works with the first one and we go further into clinical development with that, then they will continue with more. And there are also nice milestones that we will achieve.

I understand. And if you think in terms of work and development work that you have in front of you here, when in time can it be relevant that you reach the first months? Are you talking about spring 27, autumn 27 or even 2028?

No, I'm thinking... Before I say a number or a time point, I have to say that it's really hard to say. But the first half of 2027, I would say.

I understand. Great. I want to remember that you said that you want to license the same project earlier than what you did before. Now you should have about 61 million SEK in the bank account. How much of this bank account do you think you can allocate to the Semaglutide project in the future? If no one shows up, how far are you prepared to take it into phase 1, phase 2? How much will you finance yourself in the future?

This is what we have said to all the companies we talk to. We will continue this project in our own direction until we get an agreement. I am relatively confident that we will get an agreement during the pre-clinical phase. The next step is to carry out studies in mini-cows to study how the release profile and safety look like. And the money we have today in the treasury will not be enough to do a clinical study. But we will not get that far, is my clear understanding.

Our ambition is that this will be licensed for a much larger sum, set us much better for the future and then we can start working with a little bit of a project that we take on and therefore create much more value for in our own company before we release it from us.

Okay, but then I understand correctly that you need to come to some form of decision in this during 2026 then to know how to dispose of the funds? Yes. Or like if you will need more money then to take it on?

Yes, that's right.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Johan Widmark from Emergers. Let's start with some questions from the viewers. Is the ambition and hope to be able to end a contract for the Semaglutide project already in 2026? Can you give us a hint as to what phase these discussions are in?

Yes, we have said that. We expect that there will be something during this year. Exactly when it will be and with which company and in what scope it will be, I don't want to to speculate about. But there are different plans. Absolutely. But during this year? Yes, definitely.

And when you show these results for the quarter's dosage, if they are positive, how do you see the timeline and the next concrete development steps for this specific project?

We will There are a handful of companies that have expressed a strong desire to look at quarterly injections. With the results we will get in March, we will go out with that information to those companies. And there I see it as a development we will do together with someone, so to speak, under a contract.

What fascinates me about Quartals is that we are way ahead of everyone else. Many technologies to extend an effect time. It's just not possible to imagine that they could reach a Quartals dose. We have no problem with that. And I am convinced that we will succeed. It already shows that we are on the right track. Is it just that formulation? I don't know, but we know that we can do it. And then we are very much at the forefront of what is happening here. There is no doubt about that. It will be very exciting. And it's not just for what we call GLP-1s. It will also apply to other categories of drugs. You can imagine a blood pressure medicine that gives an injection every quarter. That would be quite nice. Those who take tablets every day, they don't do it every day. They should do it every day, but they don't. That's why the blood pressure fluctuates a little up and down. If you get a dose that lasts for a quarter, you're pretty safe. It improves how the patient feels and reduces side effects and follow-up diseases above all. Diabetes is the same.

A question then. You show how the spread decreases with your type of distribution. And you know that these side effects break your treatment, you said up to 50% or something like that. Is there any calculation model how it affects that you continue your medication if you get reduced side effects?

There are several reports, but one specific one that we have brought up, where we have compared Novo's products, the one based on liraglutide, daily to weekly. Adherence to treatment was around 30% for liraglutide. When you went to weekly, it became 10-15% higher. Many people think that's why there are that sucks after a one-month formulation among all companies in this industry. Because you think you will get up. And partly it is convenience, but partly it is also probably side effects that do it. Or the lack of side effects, or less side effects.

Interesting. A question for Göran. Could you tell us how the board and you see the company's strategy in the next 12 to 18 months? Where will the company be?

I think that we are working intensively to create the economic conditions to be able to think a little longer than we have been able to do so far. As David pointed out, we have kept up with the costs quite dramatically over the past year. It's not because we wanted to do it, or because we didn't have any good ideas, or because we couldn't use good people much more. It's to keep going, and make sure that we do what we absolutely have to do to create value. And then, hopefully, during the year, we will have a financial situation that allows us to think. Not just 12 months, but maybe 24 to 36 months forward. Then we look at other molecules. What can we do with them? Do we have enough production capacity? We have to build it up. think through the key parts that come forward here and it's quite natural. I think we have the track more or less ready in front of us. It's just that we need a little more stability so that we don't hunt month after month in principle.

More contracts with bleak on them. In the Q3 report it said that we will see who or which one will make it first. But no GLP-1 contract is seen yet. Should investors in the first hand hope for contracts from extension contracts in the fall or for GLP-1?

It is of course GLP-1. The others are also speeding up. But we are absolutely far ahead in the negotiations on the GLP-1 side.

And it's the magnitude of income for us that makes it a priority.

A question here about combination treatments like Kagrisema becoming more and more common. How well do these fit for Pharma Shell and how do you see that your technology makes it possible for future more complex drugs?

If it's a combination of two different active substances, then our technology fits perfectly. Often, two active substances may not be compatible with each other if you mix them in one solution. And that's how it is with Kagrisema.

Kagrisema doesn't like each other?

No, not at all.

Kagridelen, Kagridenitinid and Kagrisema Glutena don't like each other, so they mix first when you inject them directly.

There we could then coat both components one by one and then mix them in a stable suspension. So there you could come from having a two chamber solution to a normal one chamber solution. We will save a lot of money for the one who produces it, for example. And then for other molecules that have several mechanisms or parts that bind to different receptors in the same molecule, then of course it fits well for us. Thank you for the question.

Based on where you are today, do you see a greater probability in a broader platform agreement within GLP-1 and BCTAS, or in a more limited first license agreement, for example around monthly semaglutide?

On that question I would say yes, but it's hard to say. Both are being discussed, so I won't say more.

Thank you. Do you have a shortlist of suitable candidates for your own product projects if the funding would exist? And are there discussions with generic or biosimilar companies about this?

Not for biosimilar companies, where we don't have discussions. For generic companies, we don't have any discussions. Do we have a shortlist? Yes, we have a long shortlist. A long shortlist? That was very contradictory. But we have a shortlist. which we are working very actively with before we started our third agritide project. After that, we have maintained it in an up-to-date status. So there we have a list of discussions to start with. Then things happen on the market that we have to take in, so to speak, so that can have changed. But absolutely, we also have the resources to take those discussions internally.

There is an intermediate category, I call it. That is to say, it is biosimilar or generic companies, but who have ambitions to at least partially change their profile to become much more innovative. And it is often those who are very large in the area, especially large companies, who can afford to allocate money to it. They are a potentially interesting group to talk to.

What is the status of discussions with manufacturing suppliers?

We have a collaboration with a manufacturing supplier that we consider to be incredibly good at manufacturing equipment. They also have experience in ALD technology. in other industries, but the plan is to increase our capacity internally ten times from the scale we have now up to a half kilo scale towards the end of the year or the beginning of next year. It is also in the plan to take the next step, another 10 times to the 5 kg scale. All of that is in the plans and is in the process of being approved. But we will not approve it completely, unless we have a project that takes the costs, for example a GLP-project and an agreement there.

For those who are not in our industry, it sounds like half a kilo and five kilos is very little. The dose per month for semaglutide is 2.4 milligrams. It is enough for many patients. You have to remember that there are

Yes, absolutely. And what those scales are now mentioning is not a stone's throw either, but it depends on the market potential that you see from that company. And what is a suitable launch scale? And then you have to count back to see which scale is suitable for clinical trials and so on. So that will be a math that we will do a little more detailed when we have the numbers on market uptake, as it is usually called.

If we move on to the semaglutide data, what is behind this improved bioavailability that you saw there?

It's better bioavailability and maybe the release profile, I think that's what they mean. We have very good bioavailability, which is also worth mentioning, which also means that the dose can be kept low, and that's important. But what's behind that is our development of scale materials, where we now have And I can't go into that in detail here either, because then my patent manager will get angry at me. But we have one, it's how we put these atoms in relation to each other in the scale. We work with zinc and aluminum oxide and how we put it together has a meaning for how we can get How we get the release profile to be as it is. It is worth mentioning that at the same time as we improve the release profile, we also reduce the amount of material in the scales so that they become a little thinner but better. So that's very good.

What is the status of discussions outside the diabetes and obesity area? Yes, we have.

We have the other companies that we have increased our cooperation with. It is still a big indication, so to speak. And then we have a handful of other projects and discussions going on. The vaccine was mentioned. There is a lot of other things, too. But I can't go into detail on that.

And a question, when we mention Moderna, how is the collaboration progressing?

It's good. We have bi-weekly meetings with them. We have gotten over the first substances, we have started to apply them. We will send back for analysis. So it's a good project plan that is in front of us and the team works well together and so on. So it's going well.

Then comes a two-part question here. Pharmacels enable higher concentrations of drugs. How does this compare to, for example, halocyme? And is the conversion from intravenous to subcutaneous drugs something you're looking at?

You could absolutely do that. We haven't looked specifically at it, but of course you could Would you be able to save time instead of having to stay at the hospital and get an infusion for a while, instead of getting a subcutaneous, yes, why not, would we be able to combine that with Alzheimer's? Yes, maybe we could do that. Or would we be able to do it without it? Yes, maybe. It is like that. Above all, it is for monoclonal antibodies that we have a very big advantage. When you try to formulate monoclonal antibodies in a liquid, it is like a syringe that goes into each other and then it becomes a gel and a gel is very difficult to get through a syringe or a needle. What we see when we apply monoclonal antibodies is that the particles that we apply act as a particle and then you can pack them much denser so you can explain it. Therefore, we can make much higher concentrated monoclonal antibody suspensions. than in any other case.

We haven't looked any closer at the Haloscience technology, so we can't really answer that question. If it would fit together, if we are better or worse. We are different, very different. It's a completely different technology.

Yes, that's right.

Thank you. And the next question is formulated as follows. Without going into details, should investors see the ongoing Gilead P1 discussions as something that can potentially materialize over the coming weeks rather than over several quarters?

We don't want to answer that, but we work intensively with different discussions.

You have previously said that the dialogue with Novo Nordisk is both long-term and intensive. Can you confirm if Novo Nordisk continues to be actively involved in the discussions that are now being held with a few selected companies?

Yes, we have said that, so we can confirm that.

Shouldn't you experience a very intense interest from Big Pharma today? Do you want to wait for the PK results from three months before you signal anything to maximize the profit, or is the interest large enough already?

It's big enough already, because most of it focuses on one month. Then there are a handful of big companies that are also very interested in three months. So it will be a specific discussion, I think.

It's my imagination, but we know that there will be other companies that will come out with one-month formulations in a couple of years. They have them in development, it shows that it works. They haven't used any extra technology, it's the molecule itself that is so long-lasting. So that's why at least a part of this huge market will move over to it. And that's why you should be on the front line. And especially if you don't come out there first, if you're not a Nordic, then maybe suddenly the quarter will be very interesting. We already have interested people. There will probably be even more who see the opportunity to be on the front line.

And what is the most important signal you want to send to the market today, in the first half of 2026? How would you formulate that? You who love formulations.

Well, then I wouldn't want to say that it's a long-term effect, but rather fast track. The next six months will continue to be intense, and I hope that we will achieve very interesting results during this six months for ourselves, the market, and those we discuss with.

Exactly. Both from a business development and data point of view, we expect to have a lot of interesting things emerging during this first six months.

Thank you. Final question, where you can navigate. What do you think Nanexa will be in three years?

I usually use, and it's not just because I think Camurus has done a great job, but also because it's a company that, like us, has a long-acting injectable technology. They started a few years before us. They have a technology that fits certain molecules. We have one that we have seen fit the most. They have good technology. What is their market cap today? Unfortunately, it fell here the other day, but it is 30 billion or 40 billion or something like that. Yes, three years maybe we are not there. Yes, why not?

No, I don't know.

But what I want to say is that we have all the opportunities to create a company that with their own projects, with the other GLP-1s, hopefully as a basis for growth.

That's what I think. I think we will have a number of collaborative projects on the GLP-1 side and on the GLP-1 and combination side. We will have vaccines, maybe not only Moderna in that team. We will certainly have something else completely Then we will have our own projects that we run and move forward with. Then we will see how far we take them.

If you look at your patent portfolio, you see opportunities to have protection on pharmaceutical technology until 2046. From that perspective, it may not be a decisive decision that happens in the first three years either.

No, not at all. I think we are at a breaking point now, and we have reached the breaking point that I believe we have discussed in this conversation. then one will lead to the other and we will have money and start working with things that we have in the bureau box and then it will grow. So I think it is, yes, maybe not just for the patent side, but we will, and it is also an important parameter, I should say, just that we have long patent protection on our products. That is also very important in discussions with these companies.

I have to ask one more question. Are there other companies in the same or larger size compared to Novo Nordisk that are also interested in the same thing as Novo?

Yes, you could say that. Yes, definitely.

Well, gentlemen, thank you very much for your contribution today. Thank you very much. Thank you to everyone who is listening. Yes, absolutely. Thank you to all of you who have watched. Continue this exciting journey.

See you in about three months. Thank you.