Earnings Call Transcript - MOLN Q4 2022

Operator, Operator

Good day and welcome to the Molecular Partners conference call discussing the Full Year Results for 2022. Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Seth Lewis, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations. Please proceed.

Seth Lewis, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations

Thank you, Betsy, and welcome everyone to the Molecular Partners 2022 full year results conference call. My name is Seth Lewis, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations, and I am joined today by Patrick Amstutz, CEO, and Robert Hendriks, Senior Vice President of Finance. If you have not had a chance to see the press release issued yesterday evening highlighting these results, it can be found on our website, www.molecularpartners.com. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that this presentation contains certain specific forward-looking statements, beliefs, and opinions. Such forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, which may result in a substantial divergence between the actual results, financial situation, development, or performance of Molecular Partners AG and investments and those explicitly or implicitly presumed in these statements. If you haven’t accessed this morning’s presentation, it can be found on our website, molecularpartners.com under the Investors tab, News and Events, and Presentations tab. If you are listening to this on replay, this call is recorded on March 10, 2023. Please refer to our latest news and filings as results may differ in the future. With that, I will pass the call over to Patrick Amstutz. You may begin.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Thanks, Seth, for the nice intro and making everybody aware of how it goes. So we will start with a few slides. I will then hand over to Robert, and I will summarize with an outlook, and then open for questions. I think that’s the real reason for the call – that we can get your questions. So we are welcome and an exciting call for us as we will have backward-looking and forward-looking into ‘23. Thanks also, Seth, for pointing out the disclaimer. I add that I am just off the plane, so a bit of jet lag. Any unclarity, I would assert to that. You did not and I am back from the Cowen Conference, so also a good chance to then maybe follow up in the Q&A a bit on investor sentiment, the questions we are getting, and how sort of we present also in the field with other biotech. But let’s kind of first zoom out and look at what this is all about. It’s the breakthroughs of tomorrow that link back to the company purpose: building value for patients where value today is not possible. We have invented the DARPin technology to bridge the gap between small molecules and large molecules, and we have validated the DARPin approach in over 2,500 patients with 7 clinical stage compounds. I think it is important to stress that this is a proven technology and that all of these compounds – one not yet, because it just went in – but 6 of those are showing the exact activity in patients that they were designed for by our protein engineers and biologists. What is our strategy, or how do we apply it? We have a very high bar on the unique DARPin solution. You can also call that differentiation. Every product we make must solve a problem that is not easily addressable with other technologies. The second is the true patient value that’s clear. We want to solve a meaningful problem and we want to see an early clinical readout. The early clinical readout goes to the return on the investment, because if we don’t see it, we can stop it. That was one of the learnings as some of the earlier programs did not have that built in. That led to the undesirable moment that we had to stop programs for strategic reasons, as we could not further invest in them. That’s where the partner comes in. We have and will partner to generate patient value for products that are not best in our hands but where we see the value and where a partner can help us bring it forward. It can be early partnerships, it can be biology partnerships, it can be technology partnerships where a payload – let’s say, a radionuclide DARPin – we all classify that as a partner, and we are always open to partner to bring our breakthroughs forward. Now I am going to Slide #4. It gives you an overview of how we think or structure our approaches. In the center of this picture, you see a DARPin and what I like to say is that the DARPin is a therapeutic modality. It’s not in itself a platform. It is larger than the platform. We have built sub-platforms and there are different ways you can classify that. The way we like to do it is, on one hand, the multi-DARPin platform, where we have 533, or also Ensovibep, our COVID DARPin – was part of that. Then we have the Radio DARPin therapy platform, and that’s something I will also talk about. The newest addition is the SWITCH or the either/or, our gating platform that we have built. That’s sort of the basis for then the products and the candidates that we move forward. Let’s move to the candidate level and look back into 2022. I would like to start with the poster child of last and this year, and that is 533. It’s a novel tri-specific T-cell engager in AML. We have dosed the first patient, and we have a lot of preclinical data that supports the mode of action and we will also generate more of that. I will have a slide later on and also touch on it in the outlook. MPO317, that’s the local CD40 agonist, proud to say that we have the safety that supported dose escalation. We are at the highest dose and have not found any dose-limiting toxicities, supporting the mode of action of local immune stimulation over systemic immune stimulation. Then regarding the platform, we have not yet defined the candidate while we have defined the first target for us. It starts with a Novartis collaboration with two targets. In the Radio DARPin Therapy Platform, it’s all about reducing kidney uptake, which is the dose-limiting organ for many protein-based or even peptide-based approaches. If you can reduce the kidney uptake with a high tumor uptake, you are in business. Virology here is open-ended. A year ago, we were very heavily invested in virology with Ensovibep; it actually had great data, got EUA, but then from variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus came along and made the medical need much lower. That program is quasi on hold and hopefully not to be used, but would only be used if a new variant of higher virulence would appear again. At the same time, it did open the path for discussions with Novartis. We have a Letter of Intent to look into a Research Framework Agreement also to establish pandemic preparedness. The next slide is, in a way, a similar overview. You see the stages, the programs – this is the pipeline view. We will talk about 317, 533, the DARPin platform virology, and I touched on the immune cell engagers, which you can equate to the SWITCH platforms. That's an area of activity. We also have Abicipar, and we list them below the active pipeline. We see them as optionalities, but we are not building on them as the future basis of the company. Let’s take the time and just quickly talk through our key few programs that will be of interest in ‘23. I will start with 533 in AML. What is the problem in AML? AML is one of the most deadly liquid cancers that there are. The problem in this disease is that there are no clean targets like CD20 or CD19 on B-cell malignancies, but there are targets. You see three of them here: CD33, CD70, and CD123. The issue is that these targets are also expressed on healthy cells. Our scientists found that they could, with a lot of bioinformatics work in many databases, establish that they are mostly co-expressed, with at least two of them. So, what we built is a tri-specific T-cell engager with a long half-life that will kill preferentially the dual and triple expressers but not the healthy cells with mono-expressing one of these targets. This Phase 1 is ongoing and we are extremely focused on getting results. We are guiding towards the second half of this year for safety, but also initial efficacy. Let me point out that we do expect on this one that we will see single-agent activity. We added the preclinical work to support further development, so that is a bit cryptic, but you can think if the first Phase 1 looks good, you will want to go into different settings, different lines, and different combinations. So that line hints into additional work we are doing for combination settings pre-clinically. Moving to Slide 8, here I will speak about 317, this CD40 by FAP. CD40 is a new stimulating target. It activates the immune system. In simple terms, it could turn a cold tumor into a hot tumor. When targeted systemically, with systemic antibodies, you get dose-limiting toxicities; the highest dose you can reach is still below 1 milligram per kilogram. We have built a molecule that is FAP gated, that goes to the tumor, and localizes it to activate it. We are now at our highest dose far above the antibody doses, even with a smaller size; the molar dose is at least 30 times higher than what you see with antibodies, and we don’t see the toxicities. It seems that this texture really solves that problem. We have presented data showing localization and initial data on activation. We will do more of that, complete the dose escalation, and then, depending on the data, obviously, enter partnering discussions. Here, I would also point out the indirect value inflection point, as Roche has a similar molecule. The data of the FAP x CD40 of Roche will obviously have an impact on this one. If that data looks good, there is a cross-validation of the mode of action. Let’s go to Slide #9. Now I am a bit in the conceptual part. Here, you have a cartoon. You see three DARPins. You have a green DARPin that targets the tumor antigen. You have a blue DARPin that is an effector function. In this case, CD3, and we have a gray DARPin that has two binding sites. It was made from two DARPins; a yellow and a dark blue one were put together into this gray DARPin that is now called two-in-one. The blue part binds the CD3 DARPin with a very low affinity, but a high local concentration of the linker. You can think of the blue DARPin and the blue part of the gray DARPin as on-off, on-off, very fast, but mostly off in circulation. If on healthy cells, you would even find the target – the green target; nothing would happen, as your CD3 is off. If you are now in the tumor, the green DARPin will accumulate this drug in the tumor. There is a yellow antigen, and the gray DARPin with its yellow binding site will release the blue because there cannot be simultaneous binding, which frees that activity and recruits T-cells for local killing. For us, this is the first time we have seen or this has ever been described such a mechanism. All others rely on protease cleavage like CytomX; they were pioneers in this local activation field. This is entirely based on binding, and we are excited to move this forward with one or two programs in our pipeline. With that, I will switch to Radio DARPin Therapy. This is, let’s say, a link to radioligand therapy, but we want to expand the ligand space with the DARPin space. Ligands can target a set of targets that are on tumors, but DARPins can expand that set dramatically. It started with a collaboration with Novartis, as they were or are the leader in the field, and we recognized the potential of DARPins as delivery agents or vectors. We did a deal a bit more than a year ago with a €20 million upfront payment and CHF560 million in potential milestones and double-digit up to double-digit royalties. This is for two targets, so two targets are exclusive for Novartis. There are many more targets out there, and one of those is DLL3, which is our first in-house target, and we are expanding to additional targets. We are looking into partnerships to get access to radioisotopes, and this will be one of the activities that you will see this year. We definitely want to sign one or two agreements with these companies. Let me show you some data. We wanted to make sure that our investors know of that. Last time I presented, we showed that. You see on the left-hand side is the kidney, and the bars should go down. Lower bars are better, as they show how much of your drug is in the kidney. You see the solid red – that’s a parental DARPin. The striped red is a different approach; on top of cells, that’s now blue and it again reduces by 60%. What we are doing is moving the tumor to kidney ratio into a favorable direction. Now switching a bit of gear, going from science to corporate sustainability. Corporate sustainability is maybe a large abstract for it. But it is something that we at Molecular Partners always live. Our company is almost 20 years in existence, and with this purpose-driven mission, we want to do good for patients, society, and the world. ESG or corporate sustainability has always been part of our culture and our DNA. With the current trends of ESG and reporting, we went back and we were able to bring out what we have always had in the company. It is also carried by our employees. This is not just a tick-box exercise; it truly reflects our values. Here you can see the different pillars that we are moving forward and some of them, like human capital management, are dear to our hearts. We are passionate for our co-workers. Those are the titles that one uses in the ESG exercise, but these are full of life at Molecular Partners. This slide is not just a dry tick-box slide; it shows what is dear to our heart where we also are willing to show what we’re doing and be a role model for the industry. With that, I’ll pause and hand over to Robert, who will lead us through the numbers. I think he has set an exciting year that we had, and happy to hear him talk about the numbers.

Robert Hendriks, Senior Vice President of Finance

Great. Thank you, Patrick. Currently on Slide 13, just to discuss some of the basics here. The numbers that we will present will be stated in million Swiss francs. Of course, the rest of the details will be in the press release as well as in the appendix of the presentation, and the presentation is clearly also available on our website. It is a privilege to speak about our financials for the past year. I'd like to focus your attention on three numbers in particular. The first one would be the revenue number, almost CHF190 million in ‘22. I will provide more detail on the next slide, but it’s clear that this was largely driven by the funds we received early in ‘22 from Novartis. The second number to highlight is our operating expenses. The guidance that we provided during last year consistently was in the 70% to 75% range, and the CHF73 million ended up right in the middle of that guidance. These costs have been stable over recent years. Combined, these two numbers clearly lead to the positive results we achieved in ‘22. The third number to note would be the cash balance of almost CHF250 million. This is the cash on the bank account, including the short-term deposits we have with banks. We feel this will carry us into ‘26, putting us in a privileged position in the industry. These three numbers – revenue, expense, and cash – are important as they tell the financial story of Molecular Partners in ‘22 and reflect the company’s healthy financial state. Moving to Slide 15, when we look in more detail at the revenue numbers, it becomes clear what a remarkable year ‘22 was: revenue close to CHF190 million. You can see that in recent years, the revenue was mainly related, if not entirely, to the Amgen collaboration, whereas in ‘22, we see the impact of the Novartis collaborations. If I break down CHF190 million: CHF173 million of revenue is attributed to Novartis. The biggest portion of this was CHF163 million, triggered by the exercise of Novartis on the license agreement in the first week of January. A further CHF10 million of revenue then comes from the December ‘22 collaboration, which can be broken down into CHF2 million of FTE recharge and CHF8 million from the recognition of upfront payments from this agreement. The balance of the upfront on the collaboration will be recognized as revenue in ‘23 and ‘24. Following the notice from Amgen on MP0310, we were able to recognize the remaining contract liability or deferred revenue of CHF10 million that we had on the books. This number aligns with recent years regarding Amgen revenue. Finally, we recognized CHF7 million into revenue from the Swiss government, per the reservation agreement we concluded with them in 2020. That agreement transitioned to Novartis upon their option exercise. This revenue, together with the operating expenses, led to a positive net result of CHF118 million in ‘22 and a cash balance of just below CHF250 million. Moving to Slide 16 on the guidance for operating expenses for ‘23: in line with the past, we will not guide on revenue. For ‘23, we guided total operating expense of CHF70 million to CHF80 million, of which around CHF9 million will be non-cash. As always, this guidance is subject to the progress and changes of our pipeline. In summary, with almost CHF250 million in cash and no debt, we are in a privileged position. Funded through to ‘26, this does not take into account any possible revenue from collaborations and future partnerships. These numbers show the healthy financial base we enter ‘23 with, allowing us to continue to invest and bring drugs to patients in need. Thank you for your attention. I’d now like to hand back to Patrick, who will detail the R&D and scientific outlook for this year.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Thanks, Robert. Really a lot of numbers, impressive numbers, and I can only echo the health of the company, which is not guaranteed in the current setting where not all biotechs can build on such a strong balance sheet. But before we open for questions, let me quickly walk through the outlook. What can you expect from us in ‘23? I’m now going to Slide #18. I do start again with 533 and that is the key driver where we are focusing heavily on execution that we are able to present you with safety and efficacy results in the second half of this year. Again, additional preclinical work, especially for combinations, but also understanding the drug where to develop it further is ongoing and will be presented over the year. 317, that’s the completion of the escalation and safety trial in the first half of this year, initiating partnering discussions on the back of that, and stressing again the indirect catalyst by the Roche FAP CD40, that’s Roche 6189. If you want to look it up, that would have a direct read-through to 317 in both good and negative data regarding the working therapy platform. We will definitely advance the platform, working on that kidney to tumor or tumor to kidney ratio. It is about selecting targets and candidates. So, that’s an activity ongoing – which of these kidney reduction approaches we build and put in that candidate. Last but not least, very importantly, the collaboration with radioligand companies that we can secure access to. The better our results, the better our arguments with these companies are. The aim is one to two collaborations in that space. On further opportunities, we have the SWITCH DARPin platforms, where we are aiming to advance a program for ourselves, but there is also partnering optionality there as these are platforms. We have a rich pipeline, and we could add more through partnerships on the SWITCH platform and also provide updates on the virology projects. That’s kept a bit open because there is in-house activity and partner activity with Novartis. Let’s see where that goes; essentially, an update over the year. With this, I’d like to echo what Robert said: we’re well funded into ‘26. Nothing we take for granted, but we take that as a mandate to work hard to push forward and generate value for patients and shareholders as we invest that smartly in our pipeline. With that, I’d like to formally conclude the presentation and open up for questions. Happy to take those as they come.

Operator, Operator

The first question today comes from Joe Walton with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Joe Walton, Analyst

Thank you. I have a few questions, but your line did seem to cut out a bit. I apologize if I ask you to repeat some information that you’ve already said. Firstly, can I ask how many people are recruited? Any update on the size of your studies for MP0533 and 317? You last said you would be looking at something like 25 to 45 patients starting to be recruited in the back end of 2022 for 533. So just some updates there. On the Novartis radioligand collaboration, what you have done for Novartis cut out for me. Have you delivered any targets to them, or are you still trying to sort out the kidney accumulation issue before you can go much further? Could you also just expand a little bit more on the sort of partners that you want? Are you absolutely confident you can sort out the targets and the linkers yourself? It’s just you need help with the actual radioactivity, and you can do everything else yourself. We’re mindful that it’s taking Novartis a huge amount of time to sort out the manufacturing complexities. Just wondering how you’re viewing that? Finally, on the funding side of things, I appreciate that if you keep your current level of spending, you're funded through ‘26. But given the progress you’re making and the extra people you’ve taken on board, presumably, you would be looking to accelerate this level of spending over the next couple of years against which you would need to achieve some partnership income? Those are my questions. Thank you.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Joe, very good questions, and let me go through them. I think your last question was linked to the first one, so maybe I’ll take that one last regarding spending guidance. I’ll start with the 533 trial. As you said, we guided 25 to 45 patients. That is absolutely correct. There is a slide on dose escalation. One point to note is that we have to start with low doses as we do not have reactivity. So we’re in a naval setting. We have a few patients on low doses, then spend to higher doses, developing a plan to recruit more patients. We want to, pending the progress, recruit more. This year, given the timeline, we will have initial safety data for a good handful of patients – around ten or so patients. We are currently recruiting right now. We will also see initial efficacy results since activity has to show itself in the first weeks after applying the drug. The caveat is there have been successes in AML where some drugs have shown early results, but they didn't last long. Even if we see an early response, the real value we are aiming for– since we are targeting the leukemic stem cells – is to see activity lasting beyond one or two months. We want to see durability beyond three months. Biomarkers can help predict this, but data is data, and we will have more safety and initial activity data to show this year. The Novartis collaboration…

Seth Lewis, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations

Yes. I just want to clarify regarding the Novartis collaboration. The deal we made with NIBR involves two targets they asked us to build, which we agreed to, as they were not things we were actively pursuing. There is a consideration around the kidney accumulation issue, which is a systemic problem for all protein therapeutics. We're showing that we can overcome that, and it is not rate-limiting to our relationship with Novartis. They aren't waiting for us to solve it, and we’re committed to ensuring success.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

No, I absolutely echo what Seth said. When we signed the agreement with Novartis, there were no major issues. No orthogonal approaches. This is all on top. It's fair to say that we have delivered initial DARPins to Novartis. So there is absolutely no setback there. That’s going as planned, but the timelines from binders to candidates to clinical trials – you need to ask Novartis. We can only guide our pipeline. We hope to see the first radio DARPin Therapy in the clinic next year in ‘24. That’s our aim. You asked a good question about what we need a partner for. It’s not as simple as linking a DARPin to a radioisotope and putting it in a product. The chemistry is simple; we have managed that several times. The complexities come in logistics, quality of manufacturing, and global distribution. We aim to partner with leaders in the field to ensure this drug class benefits patients. The challenges faced by Novartis are evident, and we don’t want to navigate it alone. We will likely pursue a collaboration structure of 50-50 that allows us to co-own the product with a company that provides radioisotopes and builds the logistics around it. I hope that clarifies our stance. Regarding funding, we have a conservative cash burn scenario, which is built upon steady spending. If we see rapid progress, particularly with 533, we do want to accelerate. Our cash burn would naturally change, but good data could lead to a different investment approach and better partnerships. 533 is our foundation, and if possible, we want to pursue it independently with our cash flow, and a positive outcome would affirm our plans.

Joe Walton, Analyst

Yes, thank you. You’ve given us your FTEs, you increased your staff by 7% on Page 14, but thank you very much.

Operator, Operator

The next question comes from Georgi Yordanov with TD Cowen. Please go ahead.

Georgi Yordanov, Analyst

Thank you for taking our questions and congratulations on the progress. Regarding durability for 533, can you share when we can expect some initial insights? What have you observed in your preclinical data about evolving mechanisms of resistance over time? How should we interpret this data? Concerning the radioligand therapy, can you explain how you selected the tumor-specific antigen? We’ve noticed other companies targeting options like mono. Why did you choose a different strategy? What unique advantages do you think the DARPin platform provides in this market?

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Thanks, Georgi. Both great questions. Happy to answer. Let’s stay on the durability of 533, and it is actually the key design feature of this drug. The problem of durability is also faced by other drugs through clonal escape – if you’re not killing all clones, you might reduce the tumor mass, but if 10% of your tumor cells are not killed, you return to the starting point in two months. Mono-targeting leads to short-lived responses. We aim to go broader with our tri-specific approach and target not just leukemic stem cells but precursor cells. If we can kill those upstream cells causing relapse, we hope to provide a much longer durability of response. We have supporting preclinical data that was presented at ASH, and we want to show that in clinics. As stated, we aim to follow patients and aim for non-relapsing patients. Performing bone marrow aspirates to check for MRD positivity or negativity will help establish durability. That is something we are focusing on as early as possible when we see a complete response. If we can achieve MRD-negative status, that would be a positive biomarker for durability. The drug design aims to achieve this success. Now regarding DLL3 and the Radio DARPin therapy: while many competitors are utilizing ligands, we believe DARPins provide a broader target engagement due to their agnostic nature. We chose DLL3 due to its high medical need, especially in small-cell lung cancer, and its association with high metastasis rates. Similarly, we’re broadening our target space by identifying new targets for DARPins.

Operator, Operator

The next question comes from Daina Graybosch with SVB Securities. Please go ahead.

Daina Graybosch, Analyst

Hi. One question for me: in other T-cell engagers, there is often a steep dose-response curve. I wonder if you target three different targets; how are you thinking about pharmacodynamic markers and when will you know you’re in an active dose that should yield clinical activity?

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Yes, great point, Daina. We are examining this closely. With our tri-specific approach and lower affinity, it’s not as straightforward to establish effectiveness. We can leverage AML patient samples in this stage. We are looking at target engagement and T-cell activation, analyzing performance based on your questions. Your observation about the steepness of the response curve is indeed valid, and we will need to assess the data as it comes in. Finding that optimal engagement and killing window without side effects is our goal. We will update you with data as we measure the necessary parameters.

Operator, Operator

The next question comes from Yi Chen with H.C. Wainwright. Please go ahead.

Unidentified Analyst, Analyst

Hey, Vikas Tyagi on behalf of Yi. Just a couple of quick questions on 533: any plans on expanding the clinical sites to the U.S.? And regarding Abicipar in AMD and DME, where does it stand in relation to commercial activities? Thank you.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Regarding 533 and U.S. expansion, the initial phase of the trial is planned for Europe. We're starting in Switzerland, then in the Netherlands and Lithuania. Upon success and good response rates, we plan to expand to U.S. sites, and those plans are currently being built. Regarding Abicipar, to remind you, it went through two Phase 3 trials with stellar efficacy data showing non-inferiority to monthly Lucentis injections. However, it received a complete response letter on inflammation at that time – about 15%. We believed it was due to impurities. We’ve made progress driving that down to below 10%, but we hit a ceiling we couldn’t explain. Recently, we've identified silicon oil used in syringe lubrication likely causing DARPin aggregation, leading to inflammation. The resolution involves using non-siliconized syringes, thus facilitating progress. Current discussions with potential paths forward are ongoing, but we won’t be funding that ourselves. Those discussions are secondary to the main development of 533.

Operator, Operator

The next question comes from Sebastian Vanderzeil with BOK. Please go ahead.

Unidentified Analyst, Analyst

Hi, it’s William dropping in for Sebastian today. Thanks for taking my questions. First regarding 317: you’ve mentioned completing patient recruitment in the dose escalation part of the Phase 1 study in the first half of this year. Can we expect to see additional results from this study in the second half of this year? What are your thoughts regarding suitable partners for this program? Thanks.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Yes, that’s correct. We are closing in on recruitment for 317. The results will come from trials and we will look at several biomarkers for immune activation and safety. We are setting important data points to affirm the drug’s efficacy and potential. As for partners, we foresee immuno-oncology companies with extensions in franchise needing to build on or defend their assets. Companies in competitive landscapes, such as Roche, with Atezo, will show interest as we advance our findings. We’re also considering combination partners across therapies like chemotherapy and radiation therapy that could enhance immune activation for better results. Ultimately, it will evolve based on how the trials perform.

Operator, Operator

As there are no further questions, this concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Patrick Amstutz for any closing remarks.

Patrick Amstutz, CEO

Thanks, and thank you for all the great questions. I think the questions allowed us to highlight how we are thinking about our pipeline and how we differentiate from other approaches. Our highest mantra is differentiation to gain high patient value and early clinical readouts. This year is about execution to reach those inflection points. We are excited to have them on the horizon and look forward to working with all of you to realize patient value. Thanks to my team, thanks to Seth, who I had the pleasure of visiting this week, and thanks also to everyone on the line and all our investors supporting us. Take care, stay well, and talk soon.

Operator, Operator

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect.