Okay, great, great. Well, good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. My name is Matt Della Torre, and I'm a biopharma analyst here at Goldman Sachs. And we're really excited to kick off the conference this morning with Teva Pharmaceuticals, where I'm joined by Richard Francis, the company's CEO. Richard, thank you for being here.

My pleasure, Matt. Good to be here.

Maybe just to kind of kick us off, you know, give us an overview of where Teva stands today, including, you know, your core franchises, both branded and generic, your key pipeline priorities, and just how you're thinking about the outlook and strategy, you know, for the company over the coming years?

Well, thanks for that question. So the outlook and the strategy for the next coming years is more of the same. So we sort of go back to the foundations of pivot to growth, the four pillars, deliver on our growth engine, step up innovation, create a generics powerhouse, and focus the business, which is all about capital allocation. And we've been executing that religiously for three and a half years, and I think you've seen the results of that. But specifically, I think the way for people to think about it is, when you talk about the branded business, if you think about delivering our growth engines, we have, I think, put Estedo on a clear path to more than $3 billion of peak sales, which I think was something which took a bit of time for people to realize was possible, and now people see that. and we've had good growth last year, good growth this year, good growth in Q1 and we're on track for our full year guidance and then Yuseti, continue to grow that extremely well both on TRX and on revenue and Ajovi, the one that everybody forgot about we've now said it's going to be a billion dollar product so I think we have those soon to be joined by Olanzapine our long-acting product for schizophrenia which is based on the same long-acting technology as Yuseti so excited to bring that to the market in Q4 So if you think about those first three, those first three products, Ajovi, Yoseti, and Esteto, they've been growing our innovative business over 30% last year. Soon to be joined by Alanzapine. And then next year, we're going to be launching EcoPypan, our product for Tourette's, that we did a business development and the acquisition of Amalek's. So those two are another growth drivers. And then obviously in 2028, we have Dario Dual Action Rescue Inhaler, as well as potentially Emery Solomon for MSA. So from a branded point of view, you can see just some fundamental good foundations for growth. And then we'll talk about the pipeline later, what could be added to that. But if you just think about those, that's good. And then, you know, the step-up innovation, the pillar two, I think we've really re-energized the pipeline. And we'll probably talk about Duva Ketug, NTR15, and RISOMA for MSA, and the multiple indications we have on Duva Ketug and in our target, as well as right into R15. So we're really excited that we continue this growth beyond 30 into 40. And then, you know, that's the sort of the branded innovative business, which people didn't realize that we had three and a half years ago, and now everybody's seen, you know, the potential of it. And then on our generics business, you know, we've turned that around from a volatile, somewhat declining business to a growing business, and we've significantly increased the amount of biosimilars we have. We now, I think, have 10 in the market. We have the second largest, third largest portfolio in the world, and I think we'll soon be the second. And so we have a clear path to creating a generics business, which has a significant amount of buzz in the portfolio within that. And so I think – and then the final thing is, which you didn't really ask, but I'm just giving you a bit of a monologue here, so I apologize, Matt, is focus the business. And so capital allocation to drive that has been really a core capability that we've built, whether it's the acquisition of Amalek's, whether it's some of the partnerships we've done with Blackstone or Wal-T Pharma to accelerate our pipeline, or whether it's making sure we grow our in-brand products with the right sales of marketing. I think we've shown we can do that in a very disciplined way. And then obviously we did announce in Q1 that we're going to have the potential to do buybacks in the future because as and when we see the good return on capital because we think that's a good thing for shareholders.

Great, great. Yeah, I want to dive in on capital allocation in a moment. Maybe before we do that, though, you know, the stock has doubled since we were here last year. You know, you speak with investors regularly. You know, in your view, you know, what do you feel is the most underappreciated part of the business still, if any?

Well, yes. There's no if any, I think. Look, I'm pretty measured. And so I'm sure this, don't discount this too much, but I think it's, but let me break it down because that feels like I feel like a trite answer, but it doesn't mean to be. So when I think about, if you think about our generic space, let's start with that. So we've taken that to stable over the last, well, actually grown over the last three years and we've changed the portfolio and we're bringing biosimilars into the US, bringing biosimilars into Europe. But not only bring him in, we're actually becoming market leader in many of the biosimilars we bring. And I just remind everybody that Simlandia, our biosimilar Humira, will I think soon be number one biosimilar in the US. We launched that two years late, and I think we are 11th to the market. That just shows timing's good, and I don't always want to be first, but it's how you manage that very complex market and what capabilities do you have, what scale do you have. So I think our generic business, business, because the surge of biosimilar portfolio coming through, I think, is probably underestimated as an opportunity for not just stability, but value creation in the future. But then the more obvious one is, I think as people have caught up with the innovative story at Teva, it's sort of moving so fast, they can't quite catch up. So the Esteda, we had the IRA overhang, that got taken away, and then people had to sort of ground themselves on this $3 billion, which we'd told them about before. and I'm like, okay, 3 billion, greater than 3 billion. And then I think, you know, if I just talk about Estedo, Ucedi, Alanzapine, Ajovi, and EcoPipe, and those five products, because in our hands, the amount that they can grow, I don't think they're valued with that growth trajectory on them by anybody out there, maybe by you, but by many people out there. Because I think what we've shown over three years, we can execute, regardless of the product profile, whether it's a competitive area like migraine or schizophrenia. So I think that part really still has some valuation. But probably the sole biggest is I don't think there's any value on our pipeline, or not enough. And I think if you look at Dari, which is a super high probability of success, but we'll know that at the end of this year, and look at Anti-R15, and you look at Duvikito, and you look at Emma Solomon. I mean, we have seven readouts this year, so I think this will be the year that people start to go, okay, tell me more about this pipeline. I'm already hearing a lot of people wanting to talk about NTR-15, do the key to new indications, because I think people are starting to realize we're very good at picking products to move into the clinic, and we're very good at engineering antibodies. And so because of that, I think people now need to know a bit more about it. But those, I think, are drastically undervalued. So I think those are the elements of it. And, look, I'm comfortable with that. I used to be quite uncomfortable with being undervalued. But as you say, we doubled from here from last year, and we'll see where we end up next year. But our stepping stones in the execution we know we need to do to continue to create growth, top and bottom line EPS, create shorter value, is very clear in our minds. And we know what we need to do. And even if you risk adjust some of that, I think we still end up in a very, very good place.

Great, great. maybe going back to capital allocation you highlighted this a moment ago this has been a major theme for you all in first half, you had the announcement of the Emilix acquisition you all did two funding deals with Royalty Pharma and then Blackstone for your innovative products a month ago you announced investment grade credit rating, the first of I guess three more potentially two more coming up and then also the potential authorization of a share repurchase program with earnings. So, you know, clearly you guys are taking, you know, a diversified approach to capital allocation and you've been making a lot of progress. So maybe I guess the question here is just, you know, walk us through maybe the underlying strategy that kind of ties that all together. And then, you know, how should we think about the next few years in terms of that strategy? Does it evolve? You mentioned a moment ago more of the same, but I guess how should we just think about how that kind of stuff is going to look over the coming years?

Yeah, so I think I'm really proud of our approach to capital allocation. So we talk about capital allocation at Tebba all the time. We don't talk about resources. We don't talk about budget. We talk about capital, and that capital has to work for us. And that was really important because when we started this journey three and a half years ago, we couldn't increase our OPEX. So we had to reallocate capital, and we reallocated it based on it could give us a return, and where we took it from was not going to give us a return, and maybe that gave us a negative, so we had to balance that out. So we became very clear about if we do something, we do it meaningfully, and any things in Teva that have capital, they have to earn the right to have capital. So that's everything. So that's a different mindset than I've ever experienced at any other company, and that's on purpose. So when we think about the things you said, if you just think about those. So we have not really increased our percentage of revenue, OPEX, since I've been here. We've transformed our pipeline, the funding of our pipeline. We've transformed the funding of our innovative products, and yet we haven't changed that. That's capital allocation, because we have to take it from one place and we have to put it in another. And we do that, and we do it in pretty big numbers. It's not a little bit here, a little there. We move big amounts of capital. We did that while we religiously played down debt. So we're playing down debt. And people forget that. And now we're investment-grade, which is, for one of the rating agencies, nearly two years ahead of when we said we were going to do that. And these are pretty hard markers, these rating agencies. And I think in the next quarter or two, we'll get the other two. So that shows when they look under the hood and they really evaluate the vital signs of the patient, they're saying this is on a good trajectory. So I think we've done that. And then we've made the decisions around partnerships. and to get partnerships, by the way, which I think are on good terms. So the partnerships we have with Royalty Pharma, the partnership with Blackstone, I think they're really good terms for us and they're good terms for Blackstone, but nobody got a good deal from Teva. It was a fair deal. And that's because of the quality of our assets and the quality of our strength of our positioning and our finance at that point. So I think that's one. And then the AMLX Biosciences deal we did, I just remind people we said we're going to do a deal like that between 500 and a billion de-risked asset that had its phase three results that we could put into our machine and we could make it a great success, but we don't want to put capital at risk with the turnover of phase three results. So we did what we said we're going to do, and I think that's going to be a really good return on capital. So we have done a lot. Going forward, I anticipate a bit more of the same, and we're constantly looking at our long-range plan, how we allocate capital, but we do want to make sure we're building our pipeline. We've got a lot of indications we'll do the key to going to R15 to push those through. But you also see some potential deals like Amalek's coming through again. You know, they've got to be right. They've got to be the right risk profile for us. But we know that our balance sheet is improving quite dramatically over the next few years. And our cash flow is going to improve dramatically. So we're planning for what that means, which is also why we talked about, you know, potential buybacks. But we've got to think about this capital's coming. Let's not have it when it arrives and go, what do we do with it? We're planning for what money we're going to have and how we're going to allocate that now, which means we can do it in a more controlled fashion. But hopefully people will see we're so disciplined in the past that as we go forward, it'll be more of the same, but in a really disciplined way. You know, we have to get a return on the capital we deploy. And we always think for long-term value creation, but I think we're very mindful of the fact that long-term is becoming shorter now. And for Teva to keep proving us to be a rising star, we want to keep showing that we can give a good return on capital. Great.

So I think you kind of answered this, but, you know, and we'll talk about the Amalix deal a little bit more in detail, but, you know, how are you thinking about kind of the cadence type and size of maybe further BD going forward? And are you guys seeing, you know, a lot of kind of opportunity like Amalix, which maybe went a little bit under the radar, but then, you know, when you guys announced it, people were like, okay, this is highly strategic for you guys, fits that kind of mold that you highlighted. Is there a lot more opportunities out there like that?

There are, but it's super... Look, I always joke, you've got to kiss a lot of frogs to find a prince. I was kissing a lot of frogs. So although it was well-received, we've been looking at many companies in the last three years. And I can tell you, we've been in situations where we haven't been able to get to a price. Because once again, go back to our discipline on capital allocation. You know, we won't pay something that we don't think is going to be a good return on that capital and a good return for shareholders' capital. So, you know, there are a lot out there, but, you know, we follow. As a team, we work incredibly well. So as myself, Eric Hughes, head of R&D, Aaron Lipman, head of BD, obviously Eric Clif, CFO, and then depending on where it is, it could be one of the regional heads, often Chris Fox, who's based in the U.S. So we're very tight. We take BD at the executive level. We don't. That's not delegated. We do it because we see the importance of it for driving value. But, yeah, I think there's more out there, but it's got to be the right price. You know, there's so many times that I have boards who think their assets worth more than it is, that their company's worth more. And actually, just sort of of the things we have looked at that I have of different value, none of them have transacted. Maybe I was more right than they were, but I think, you know, it's a tough world we live in, to get a return on capital. You know, commercializing products in the U.S. and Europe is really hard now, really hard. And I think biotech companies need to really think about can they really compete in this very challenging commercial environment, very challenging payer environment, and what return can they give their investors on their capital, and how quickly can they do it? And I think I try to help them understand that, and it's not too easy. But we keep looking. We're constantly talking about it, and hopefully we'll be able to do some more. But, one, we've got to be mindful of how much we can take in because commercially we're launching a product every year. And often these are synergistics. That's good, like our eco-pipeline will be. But at the same time, you can't literally plan it. You know, some deals come along, you get three together, and sometimes you go through a period where you just can't find the right one.

Maybe switching to the pipeline, you know, you guys are entering a busy catalyst period starting, you know, kind of mid-year. and we're going to see, I guess, the IL-15 data probably in the coming weeks in vitiligo. And so, yeah, I think there's a lot of excitement around on the pipeline. Maybe kind of just working through that pipeline chronologically in terms of the next launches. The next one is long-acting olanzapine, where, you know, there's a lot of excitement in terms of pent-up demand in that market for a long-acting option for that molecule. You know, you all have a 4Q PDUFA. I guess what are you guys most focused on from a commercial readiness perspective, given, you know, you have, you said, you're already on the market, and then, you know, kind of given your latest interactions with the FDA, how are you guys feeling on the regulatory side in terms of the label being clean and, you know, potential adcom or something like that?

So, I mean, on the, I'll do it in reverse because it's quicker. So from the FDA, we're still in a part of the process where there's not a huge amount of communication. You know, I think the bit we've had has gone well. I wouldn't necessarily read anything into that because it's sort of more the administrative side. I think now we're entering the period where it gets a bit more interactive. But we feel really confident about the data set, the quality of the data. I mean, you know, over 4,000 patients have now been injected, and there is no PDSS. So I think we feel very comfortable. They have a really important product for a very needy patient population. but there's probably more to come on that, you know, Matt, as we're now into the period where there will be more discussions. From our readiness, you know, this is one of those where we've spent a huge amount of time and effort on it. I mean, we have USEDI, which is in the market. We're talking to the same physicians. We're talking to the same nurse practitioners, the same formally committees in hospitals, the same payers. You know, it's Medicaid and Medicare predominantly. So we're in these every single day, and we've built a huge amount of credibility. So we've done really well with USEDI because we're very credible when we go to all of these different stakeholders. And I think we've become known as, I think we're now considered to be one of the top three psychiatric companies in the world from only a few years ago. I tell you that because as we launch Olanzapine, that's very different when we launched USEDI. So now we're launching Olanzapine with all of those relationships, all of that understanding. And we clearly know there is a lot of enthusiasm around Olanzapine. Don't forget, there are a lot of Phase III sites in the United States as well, so people have practical use. But that capability we have in that team, I think, is exciting. We are working hard to make sure, you know, from day one, we create access to Alanzapine. I think the one thing I'd say is, and I've made sure people understand this, there's not going to be any meaningful revenue this year because there'll be a bit of stocking. And even next year, I think H1, I wouldn't anticipate too much because first we need to get into the Medicaid. So we need to go out on all the Medicaid. Some will adopt it straight away, and some have time lags, and so we need to get through that. And then on Medicare, we think that's going to be, as it was with you said, and still is, a long negotiation. So the reason why I tell people about that is that doesn't mean I don't think we'll get a lot of prescriptions. I think we'll get a lot of prescriptions. We'll get a lot of sampling. I think people will use this a lot. But to the point where it becomes a real revenue driver, will be a bit later because we won't agree to deals that are not in line with the value and the premium we place on this product, which I think is important for long-term value creation. We did that with your study. We showed we had discipline. But I'm really excited about Alanspene for a couple of things. One, there's obviously, it's going to help us create a $1.5 to $2 billion franchise. But also, when you speak to psychiatrists and when you speak to nurse practitioners, There is a patient population so in need of a long-acting, you know, don't forget these patients, when they have an episode, their brain is slightly damaged, and the ability for that molecule to work as effectively as it did before goes down. So every episode you need to stop because the long-term ability to have an efficacious treatment would decline otherwise. So there's a real, real need here, and I feel that. I feel very privileged to be in a position that we can launch something where physicians know the molecule, they think it's the most efficacious, they want to use it, they just don't have a long-acting. So I'm really excited about that launch and the potential that can to create this $1.5 to $2 billion franchise.

So maybe think about it kind of taking off mid-27, second half of 27.

And I think we've got credibility. We saw what we did with Yuseti. We did not do any deals with Medicare. We did think they valued the product. And maybe they will this time. I'm like, okay, this one will come to the table. I think they'll take time. So I think that just means we have to grind through it. But we do know physicians will go through a prior auth. They will demand the product because they demanded your study. And olanzapine has a far bigger unmet medical need there. But that's the right way to think about it.

Simultaneously, you'll be launching Eco-P-PAM from Amalek-Steel and Tourette's syndrome. It seems like base case assumptions are probably like a mid-27 launch or perhaps late-27 launch. You all have highlighted, you know, clearly synergies with your existing neuro franchise. You'll add a pediatric sales force, though. Maybe, I guess, maybe kind of walk us through the, you know, broader how we should think about synergies with your existing commercial infrastructure. And then, you know, how do we think about the indication expansion strategy? I think there was potential that it could be used in stuttering, but just kind of high-level thoughts on longer-term.

Yeah, so, I mean, that's another one I'm really excited about. I mean, the unmet medical need in Tourette's is huge. I mean, there's 100,000 pediatric children who have Tourette's, 50,000 are on therapy, so half on. The ones on therapy don't stand it long because you tend to end up on an anti-psychotic, which I think we're both parents. If your child has Tourette's, you don't necessarily want to put them on anti-psychotic to deal with Tourette's. So there's a real... They may start on that, but they don't stay on it. So they drop off very quickly. So we think there's a real unmet need here for a safe and efficacious product. So I feel... There was another one. I feel super excited about the fact that I can, as a father, bring something to what is a very destabilizing condition for people in their formative years with a real unmet medical need so I think and if you think about it 100,000 50,000 on therapy not very good at staying on therapy that feels a bit like Estedo it feels like the muscle we built with Estedo under penetrated how do we create awareness how do we make sure patients start and stay on the right therapy that's something which we've built that muscle up really well in Estedo which I'd say is hard probably harder because They have schizophrenia. They also have stator. They also have sinus dyskinesia. But we've got that capability. So I feel we can make a really big impact on this. We are doing, there's a lot of synergies, but we also do want to have a good launch. So as you said, we're having a pediatric team put together. And then for the other indications, just to let everybody know, from a deal perspective, the deal was done on Tourette's. So anything that comes through that's stuttering on others, that'll be an upside. But I didn't model that into the case from a capital allocation of return on capital. But we'll definitely look at that. And we'll also look at life cycle management. You know, is there a way we can even put threats in the product offering for the children?

Maybe switching to DARI for asthma, which kind of flies a little under the radar. You know, this could be another, I guess, potential launch next year as well, late 27, early 28? Probably early 28. Early 28, you know, a clinical perspective, and you all have highlighted, you know, a differentiated device and broader label than the current competitor product from AstraZeneca. You know, so it creates kind of an attractive commercial setup. I guess, you know, assuming we see positive phase three data in early 27, you know, walk us through, I guess, the key points of execution from a commercial perspective and how confident you are in achieving that potential $1 billion in peak sales you all have highlighted.

Yeah, so we should have, we have the potential to have some data this year, the phase three will finish, so we could have some data this year. I think it's just a question of exacerbation studies, so if that's all done, but it'll be finished this year, whether we have it, I'd like to think that we could announce something, but we'll see. Then I think we're thinking about data law putting it all together, But, you know, I think I sort of conceded to the fact that it's probably 28 that will launch this. But we'll see. But in a way, it's interesting. When you're launching Lanzaping this year, you can pay for next year. The year after, it might not be a bad little cadence. And we could have Ember Solomon for MSA in 28 as well. So, you know, it would be not ideal like this. If they come along, we'll launch them. But that spread might not be too bad. But going back to your question of, But this is a super, it's another one that's a really unmet medical need. I think over 5,000 people in the U.S. die every year because they don't have a dual-action rescue inhaler. So this is, you know, really serious. I think Astra are out there forging the market, creating the market. And I think it takes a lot to change a market to change prescribing behaviors. So I think, you know, I'm glad we're following them. They can put the muscle, they're a good respiratory company. They have a legacy there. But I do think the fact that 25% of patients are pediatric patients, we will have the pediatric indication, and we have a very simple device. So for me, the way I get to it, and I think I've said, you know, up to 100% of patients in the U.S., there's nowhere near that now. So as that starts to come through, the pediatrics will come on us, and if we get 25% on that market, I think you're between 500 and a billion. And then we'll probably start to encroach into the non-pediatric because we just have a very simple device. And I think in asthma, the simplicity of the device, in many indications, has been shown to be very important. So, but I think, you know, dairy to me is one of those that will just, I think, it won't be a spiked launch, you know. I think we'll have some excitement around Lanzapine and Ikepaipan and potentially Amosoma and Duvikita. I think dairy will be slow and steady, but it'll go for a long, long, long time. and be one of those, maybe a bit similar to a Jovi, that just keeps on giving and becomes sort of your portfolio opportunity. But that's the way I think about it. We're going to have to put a bit of resource behind that because it's not synergistic with any of our neurology or immunology. You could argue there's a tiny bit of pediatric overlap with the ecoparapan. I don't think so. I don't try to be too precise on synergy there. I want to make sure we get the right launch. But that's also where I think we look at building around the dowry to make sure we have the right sales and marketing share of voice there, but being thoughtful about how much money we put behind it, knowing that it's one that's going to take time.

Great. Maybe switching to T1A, kind of your crown jewel in some sense of the pipeline. You know, the data-to-date, you know, both induction and maintenance in IBV suggests a potentially best-in-class profile, particularly in Crohn's disease. And so, you know, I realize this is a highly competitive space, and, you know, you all are making limited disclosures, you know, ahead of potential, you know, developments. But, you know, you did recently announce the $400 million Blackstone funding deal, and you're expected to disclose additional Phase II proof-of-concept studies, indications later this year. Maybe, you know, without spilling, you know, all the details, give us a sense of maybe what's happening kind of behind the scenes and how we should think about the pace and the breadth of this development over the next, say, two to three years.

Yeah, so let me start. It's an important question. So firstly, ourselves and our partners, we feel that Dubiketuk has massive potential. So let me be really clear on that. That doesn't mean just an IBD. I think we both think it has significant potential there. But we think across multiple indications. So the good thing is we're very aligned on the fact that we think this is a pipeline and a product, and we want to go after it like that. We will be announcing two new indications this year and starting them this year. That is the A. But then we'll have more indications to come. And that just goes to show that we believe, like some other companies who have a T1A believe, this is a multiple-indication asset. So I think just the ambition we have around this with Sanofi is very much aligned. And I really see that us pursuing this in many indications. and the good thing about it is it's an IPD but if you look at it it's safety and it's tolerability it's excellent so if any product you're going to move into multiple indications and as I speak to Sanofi about it they have a very similar product in Dupixer which is efficacious and very safe and that allowed them to go into other indications so I think we have a partner who understands this so the ambition is there we'll probably start to see some news flow on that but let's not any question about the ambition of it. And I just remind you, in IBD, I think the market when we launched is now predicted to be between 35 and 40 billion. And that market is super unsatisfied. You can talk about efficacy, but I think we'll come out and I think we'll still have either a leading efficacy, and you see, but we'll definitely have the best safety profile and tollability. We won't have monitoring, we won't have back box, because I mean, I think there's already been 70,000 of patients treated with the 218. So I think people are probably discounting where TL1A fits in the treatment path. I think it'll be a lot higher up, a lot quicker than people think just because it's efficacious and it's safe. And why would you not use something that doesn't require monitoring and doesn't have concerns about a black box? So I just remind people in IBD, I think, you know, think about the size of the market when we launch in 29 and think about a profile like that.

You know, there's going to be a number of readouts this year from competitors. you know maybe most notably Merck will have phase three data in UC and they're also supposed to share phase two proof of concept data in SSC ILD which which could kind of give the field you know insights in terms of I guess the impact on fibrosis and maybe open up another category for the class I guess how how important are competitor readouts to your guys's you know development program and strategy and is there anything you know that you guys view as particularly really important for your program?

Look, I like the fact that they're all doing the work they're doing. I mean, you know, I suppose I think about it. I'm not a scientist, so this will probably make Eric cringe a bit. But I think about our competitors are doing these proof of concepts. I believe categorically we have the best T1A, but by design. So it's by design. It's not just emotional. It's by design and the level of potency, specificity, neutralizing antibodies. And that's where you saw the difference in induction and maintenance in UC and CD. So because of that, I look forward to the data being turned over because those proof of concepts, in a way, are proof of concepts. So as soon as we see those, then, you know, just to let you know, we have listed out gene indications that they have the potential scientifically. And whether they all come up, you know, they don't because other things come out, other targets come out and are more relevant. So things move around a bit. but there's real scientific rationale. So as these turn over, then I think it will give us a real insight. But maybe then that allows us to think about moving to indications where we know we have the best TIL 1A. So that TIL 1A has good data. We know we're the best TIL 1A, so that gives us an interesting opportunity.

Great. Maybe now switching to IL-15, you all have your proof-of-concept vitiligo data in the coming weeks, and then celiac disease in the second half following your $500 million funding deal with Royalty Pharma. Clearly, you and Royalty have seen positive results in vitiligo already. But maybe walk us through how differentiated a profile we should expect here relative to some of the current treatments in vitiligo, the oral jacks, for instance. and I guess what drives your level of confidence in Celiac so look I mean touching on Fisiligo I haven't seen any of the data so we're going to have it in a few weeks so we'll see that but the sort of the product profile that we have the TPP is there's rationale to think there will be more applications but let's just say we are we're an injection that's once every

three months. And if we have, what we believe we'll have is a very good side effects and safety profile. So we're not a topical that has to be applied twice a day. We're not something which has to be monitored or something that may come up with a black box. So we're, every three months, we're safe and tolerable and the same efficacy. Now, will the efficacy be better? I don't know. But if you just put it like that, I think for a dermatologist than a patient. It's a bit of a no-brainer. I've sold products that are less differentiated than that, and there's a real opportunity. On the celiac, I think we'll see that data in the second half of the year. I think that'll be really interesting to see whether this is an opportunity to sort of modify the disease and not just to treat the symptoms. And so I think people are now starting to understand how big the celiac market is and how big the opportunity is. So I think that data will be really important. And I think that could, it's amazing as we've run that study, the level of interest has increased significantly because people don't understand the severity of celiac in the severe patients and how that really destabilizes their life. So I think this is another, a bit like vitiligo, no one knew about that market. And now they see that as a multi-billion dollar market. I think celiac it'll be a lot, lot bigger. But we'll have that data in the second half of the year, and I think that'll be some really high-quality data with some endpoints that I think will really stimulate the market. But I would add that in between that, we have a futility analysis on Emma Solomon for MSA. So no news, but if it keeps going, there's some news there. We have the Phase III readout of dowry towards the end of the year. We have the PD-1 IL-2 readout in oncology, first in human data, the dose escalation study at the end of the year as well. And we launched the Lanzapine. So I think we have, and then we'll launch two more indications in Duviketuk. So we have sort of seven readouts and two more announcements. So I think from a, you know, reposition, we've always said we're transforming Teva from a pure play world-class genetics company to a world-class biopharma company. I think that's already happened. when I look at your notes and other people and people are already saying that but I think this year will be the final paragraph that underlines this is a world class biopharma company and now how do we think about it from a value, how should we value it, how should we value the multiple what multiple should it be on and what is its earnings going to be top and bottom line what is cash flow going to be in 2030 because those things change dramatically whatever in the next few years and I'd encourage people to look at that Well, with that, Richard, thank you for joining us.

This is really exciting, and we'll look forward to all the updates in the coming months. Thanks, Matt. We appreciate hosting us.

Thank you very much.