Deborah Honig: Good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us today. We have a webinar with Microbix who just reported their Q3 results this morning. Good results showing progress in the business. With me today, I have Cameron L. Groome, CEO, James S. Currie, CFO, and Kenneth Hughes, COO. I do not believe that we will be working off a presentation, but this session will contain forward looking statements. If you would like to know more about those, you can find them on the company's presentation on their website. And I think format today is going to be a quick overview of the quarter. And some other key items, and then we are going to get to Q&A. So if anyone has a question, feel free to enter that in the Q&A box at the bottom of your screen. And with that all out of the way, congrats, gentlemen.

Cameron L. Groome: Well, thank you very much, Deborah. Appreciate it.

Deborah Honig: And, Cameron, I think I will turn the mic over to you.

Cameron L. Groome: Sounds good. Thank you. Well, thanks to everyone for joining us this morning for the call to review our results for the third quarter of fiscal 26 and the 9 months ended 06/30/2026, recalling of course, that Microbix has a September 30 fiscal year In the Q3, we demonstrated, I think, solid year over year growth of 17% for the quarter close to our goal of, at least 20% year over year sales growth and really putting us back on track following the 2 client-specific setbacks. In mid-year 2025. Antigen sales were up 20% year over year, and the cap sales were up 13% year over year in the quarter with the balance being, inbound royalties. Gross margins also improved to 4%, up from 41% in the prior year Q3. Reflective of some good manufacturing mix and discipline And we recorded a controlled net loss that is reflective of some fairly strict cost controls that we put in place as we build back up on revenues. Our outlook in Q4 is for continued year over year and quarter over quarter revenue improvements and continuing to move us closer to our, engineered breakeven point and reduce our net cash usage as we continue to execute on our mission. Both with respect to growing our diagnostics oriented business and advancing our therapeutic asset program back towards refiling and commercialization. I will have some more comments about some strategic highlights in the quarter. But before we get to that, maybe I can ask Jim if he has any further information about the quarter or the outlook for the balance of the year that he would like to share.

James S. Currie: Great. Thanks, Cameron. As Cameron outlined, we saw some really good growth year over year, 17% in both businesses, business product lines, antigens and caps, we saw a good growth. From gross margin standpoint, we also saw some improvement A good chunk of that was product mix, and the improved revenues and the absorption of the fixed manufacturing costs. We continue to control operating expenses. We are down from the prior year. We are in a-- we continue to be in a good strong cash position with 7.2 million in cash. And we have been able to buy back our shares of our NCIB for the quarter, we bought back just under 800 thousand shares at a cost of $209 thousand And for the year to date, we have bought back 2.3 million shares at just $571 thousand for the year. We continue to be bullish. We have said that we are going to continue to try and grow on our what was, I guess, our new base a year ago, Q3 last year. And we are as Cameron indicated, we are expecting to see some growth in Q4 against last year's quarter. Certainly, and even against the third quarter of this year. So a good end to 2026 that we are looking at for the for this year. that is it. Thank you, Cameron.

Cameron L. Groome: Okay. Thank you very much, Jim. Let me speak to a few strategic and developments during Q3 and some matters we continue to work on. First off, I will point to our poster presentation and attendance at the ESK Mid conference Europe. that is the European Society for Clinical and Infectious Diseases major scientific congress and trade show in The EU that we attend each year. At estimate, we presented data on synthetic controls we created for controlling tests for RNA based organisms, namely specifically RNA based viruses. And this really expands the range of safe synthetic controls that we can provide we can build and provide to different test makers and really gives us some greater coverage and greater abilities to support our clients in broader range of their diagnostic So very important development proving that and presenting that very well attended presentations at the conference. In association with such developments, we continue some very intense pace of work with multiple major international diagnostics companies on CAHPS related projects, and that is really to support the commercialization of new assays on existing or new instruments by those companies. And several such discussions are quite material in their potential scale and 1 of them is advancing. And I certainly hope to be able to conclude some formal agreements and be in a position to discuss those over the balance of this year. But of course, as we are working with clients, the timetable is very much theirs more than ours in terms of how that drives forward. So it can only be advanced in collaboration with them. And is not entirely under our control from timing point of view. Speaking of timing, we also see kinetic advancing. is satisfactory, and I am sure Kenneth will wanna talk about that a little bit more in his section, with the drug substance and drug product work both progressing. And we, therefore believe microbics in our life are very much on track for filing an SBLA and subsequently bringing that product back to market with the timing for such still being reflective of what is in our management discussion and analysis. Forward looking information. So the level of business activity has been very intense. And it is that level of support for clients, client visits, business and quality audit teams have led us, in fact, to making fewer conference presentations and a little bit less announcements these past few months is not reflective of a lack of activity in our business. Rather reflective of a very intense pace of activity that is engagement with multiple intense engagement with multiple clients that really have the potential to move the dial for us. So with that, Kenneth, maybe you want to take the-- and comment a little bit on some of the operational issues that you would like to highlight.

Kenneth Hughes: Absolutely. I will talk about operational matters broadly and then focus in a little bit on kinetics. I am sure everybody wants to hear about it. From the operational side, everything is good at Microbix as it usually is. We are set up to start to satisfy all sales requirements and move forward. As usual, I will complement the operational staff and all departments for manufacturing, R&D, QC, QA, IT facilities, and others. Etcetera, etcetera, and the manifestation of the operational team is described in how often we sail through regulatory and client audits. And we always do, and that is because we have an excellent team associated with that. So as I say, we can satisfy the sales needs of Microbix and more going forward, and we have been focusing as well on increasing process efficiencies, implementing automation, reducing burdensome testing, exploiting new capabilities within the framework of our QMS, which is allowing us to streamline processes as well, Implementing new technologies, we have talked a lot about recombinant technologies and synthetic biology. They are all ready to go, have been implemented, will be servicing and supporting our sales efforts going forward. From a general operational perspective, everything is great. I will lead then into Kinlytic, which is also going extremely well. The relationship with Sequel remains extremely strong and the drug substance, the active pharmaceutical ingredient work has really taken off and is going extremely well. There have been some major breakthroughs in process development which have increased yields and therefore will increase margins, and we are moving forward with that. We are moving forward with engineering batches leading into the GMP production batch of the drug substance, and we are in the process of developing the comparability protocols to compare the new product with the old product which will be presented to the FDA. There were a few little things associated with supply chain and getting reagents in place, but they are being resolved and we are moving forward at a pace. The drug product work is also going extremely well. Its sequel's contract manufacturing organization is doing that work, The analytics are in place. We are putting together the finished formulation, and we would be moving forward with that. I think that to illustrate where Sequel's head's at, they have just in the process of hiring senior executives in the drug product space, they have already got them in the drug substance space, and in the regulatory and quality assurance space. So they are driving on very, forcefully and vigorously and we will be going back to the FDA likely before the end of this calendar year to discuss our comparability protocols and our comparability strategy to show that our new updated and superior process for production of Kinlytic is the same or better than the process for Abbokinase as was the original market incumbent and is what Kinlytic is in our regulatory file. So in terms of Kinlytic, everything is moving forward as it should. In fact, process is probably better than we could even have hoped for based on the excellent work that is been done at Sequel's hired drug substance CDMO. And we are moving forward. It appears we expect to see the FDA this year and file the-- regulatory-- refile the SBLA next year. So there you go. Ops is good. Kinlytic is good.

Cameron L. Groome: Thank you very much, Kenneth. Well, I think that is a pretty good summary of the quarter from our perspective. I cannot think of too much that I would want more that I would want to call out. Unless we start naming names and violating CDAs. So which we would never do, of course. So perhaps, Deborah, we could move over to the Q&A section of things. Very quiet, Deborah. But I could ask that if anybody has anything to any questions to put them in the chat or the Q&A section, and then we can, we can start to answer them.

Deborah Honig: Yeah. Sorry, Cameron. I am in a hotel and they have the worst Wi Fi I have ever experienced. So if I cut it out, I apologize to you 3 gentlemen as well as the audience. We do have a So, why have your gross margins improved relative to fiscal Q1 despite similar revenues? Do you expect similar margins going forward?

Cameron L. Groome: Jim, why do not you take that 1 on? And some of it can be mix of mix of the quarter, but it is an astute sales mix, but it is an astute question.

James S. Currie: Yeah. No. it is a good question. Think it is it is very much impacted by the product that is sold during the quarter. We do have all of our for instance, antigens do not have exactly the same margins. Some of some of them have much more significant margins than the others. So you will see quarters that benefit from it, or go in the opposite direction sometimes. So I think what a good portion of it was related to the product mix, We have also got the I think on the absorption of manufacturing fixed costs, the costs are down a little bit more this year versus that time frame. As Ken indicated, we have been looking at efficiencies and also we have not been adding staff in the meantime. As we have indicated, I mean, this is a better quarter, but losing $800 thousand in a quarter is not what we are here for. So I think what we are looking for is to get the top line up and get it back to where it was about a year ago. And that is what we are targeting as we end the year and enter into fiscal 27.

Cameron L. Groome: Yep. A lot of the manufacturing overheads, of course, are fixed. And those are allocated in the product based on the number based principally on the number of labor hours that are expended in manufacture of that product So that is a bit of that fluctuation that Jim can speak to. Or speak to depending on what is sold in the quarter But I think generally speaking, we are seeing, good efficiencies being realized in the manufacturing. As we get sales back up through our breakeven level, we are going to see that those efficiencies reflected in better gross and net margins with similar revenues.

Deborah Honig: When you talk about the, different margin profiles of the antigen product, is that related to how big the batches are? The whether you are using, rollerball versus bioreactors. Like, is it a volume metric?

James S. Currie: No. I would not say it is a volume metric, so to speak. it is-- and it is not the materials that are being used. I guess it is the process more so. I think we are we have seen some strength and growth in Kenneth talked about efficiencies, there is 1 of our key products, we have probably doubled our yield in the last 2 years, So that is also starting to come through and improve margins as well on the antigens. Kenneth, I know Yeah.

Kenneth Hughes: I think without getting into too much into the weeds, you know, it really depends on whether the product large enough to justify investment and improvement in improving yields if there is going to be a meaningful return associated with that. All the methods that we look at, we develop and we do have continuous improvement as a as a really philosophy, but you have to make the investment case for whether it is justified to make those improvements. So we see those realized and we would like to do that in areas where we see the potential for real product sales growth, and that is where we will make the investments.

Cameron L. Groome: Yeah. And each individual organism we work on and each technology is idiosyncratic. in itself, and so the processes are different and some are more expensive than others and some are more amenable to efficiencies going forward. Obviously, we always want to make the maximum margin on each individual process, but cytomegalovirus is not the same as a flu virus, and you need to have different processes to do that by way of by way of example. And that goes for all our products. We have a diverse portfolio We have synthetic and natural biology brought to bear. Each product has its own idiosyncratic process, but we are always driving through automation and operational excellence to maximize margins. And that is very much on the on the antigen side of the business. On the cap side of the business, there could be diverse set of raw materials that go into a multiplex cap. Product, but we are really looking to have a template driven methods of assembling those products conducting the QC and the QA release specs on those so that we have got something that is very efficient and very reproducible and very scalable for that genre of product. Got it.

Deborah Honig: And have you reduced your breakeven point from $5.5 million a quarter, or is that an initiative that you are working on?

Cameron L. Groome: We have allowed some attrition of staff without replacing. People to, as we have realized efficiencies. So our headcount is come down from the peak levels we have had. But we have done this without degrading our capabilities in any way. And there is really a minimum level of capability that is tabled stakes for being able to credibly be considered for major new projects. So we want very much to demonstrate a strong, robust and resilient organization to our clients and prospective clients that they can rely on us for key deliverables So that is where we have not we have not tried to cut our way into prosperity. We are very much into growing our way into prosperity. And the nature of business development discussions that we are having with different groups, you know, in our proficiency testing, BQA programs. These are often starting in 6-figure type new projects that can grow into 7-figure projects. and in the diagnostics support of new assays with CAPS. These go through a cycle where you are doing feasibility samples then validation lots, and then going commercial. So it takes 2 to 3 years to get full stride on some of these projects. But those start at the 6-figure level and can move into 7 and 8 figures in terms of the scale of those, and that is the kind of business that we are pursuing and I believe pursuing successfully at this point. But until we have formalized supply and quality agreements and really reach that disclosure threshold, that is normal course business and does not require nor would it be appropriate to make formal announcements of those kind of projects unless until they really are fully gestated and delivered.

Deborah Honig: I think you answered the other question I do not know if you have any, more that you wanna add there. It was is there a point in the development commercialization process at which you will be able to start disclosing large caps customers and the products you are working on and is there a expected timeline for that?

Cameron L. Groome: Yes. I believe we should we should see the beginnings of such disclosures of the balance of this calendar year, calendar 2026. Just how granular we will be able to get or choose to get as gonna be a bit of a negotiation. So it might you know, customer may say, We are happy to have you use our name. We are not. You know, they may say, listen, we understand your disclosure obligation. As a smaller and public entity but we would rather you not describe, you know, what client and perhaps what instrument platform or what assay you are working on. And I think as we get a greater diversity of clients, that makes sense for us to we do not necessarily want to be pointing our competitors in the in the directions of, you know, who exactly we are working with. And on what projects either. So it makes sense for our shareholders as much as it does for our counterparties. So I think in large part, you will you will see with disclosures made by us without identifying the client as gonna be our bias going forward, unless there is a real reason for doing so. Makes sense.

Deborah Honig: You talk about competitors, Cameron. it is been a while since you have really laid out the competitive landscape. I know would be product by product or line by line. Can you talk a little bit about who you view as competitors?

Cameron L. Groome: There are not that many in each of the categories. You know, our competitors are really the life science and tools companies that would be described as you know, with an orientation toward the diagnostic space. In the in the antigen business, there is we sort of talk if you wanna buy a microgram or a milligram of an antigen, you will call a catalog a scientific catalog company, and order it out of the catalog. If you want to order a gram of antigen, you know, 1 thousand to 1 million times as much, the number of companies you can call and where you can go narrows that funnel narrows quite dramatically. And in the native antigen business, there might be 3 companies of any consequence globally that might compete with us. We are the largest I think, in volume of our major products that we produce. By far And, in the controls business, there is a half-dozen companies globally that are really involved in the controls, but deeply involved in the controls business. I think we are coming to be dominant in the infectious disease category. And virology specifically, around that area with the abilities we, have long standing abilities in our antigens business that we are really driving that expertise in the controls business. Whether with native products or synthetic product. And our bias is always towards controlling the whole process of the test and presenting the whole genome of the organism. So that it is not a control designed against really a specific test, but rather a control that could work for any test. And that is incredibly important for our proficiency testing and EQA or external quality assessment clients. That are controls really do represent a clinical sample and will work with anyone's assay When we get into in kit controls where our patient sample mimetics are included in with a kit of test cartridges, then it may be more customized to challenge towards the lower limit of detection or the LOD of the test for each of the channels for each of the pathogens, it is testing for? Is the test maintaining optimal sensitivity towards, detection for each channel, for each organism. it is called to detect And that is a more custom product. And has a different sometimes a different regulatory pathway as well. Thank you. that is helpful. I have a follow-up going back 2 questions ago, about the when you make announcements about clients, Given the 2- to 3-year lead time on projects, where are you right now in the process with the largest clients Well, with the, you know, with our largest CAPS, our largest antigens clients, we are already embedded in their tests, and it is a we cannot be unembedded unless somebody goes back to formula and completely is redoing a test from scratch.

Deborah Honig: So that business is very much ongoing and stable.

Cameron L. Groome: We see ourselves being included in new tests that are being manufactured from the native antigen perspective and perhaps recombinant newer recombinant category as well. With respect to caps, for the PTEQA clients, the agencies that do the quality checks on labs and then credit labs to do testing. We have ongoing sales and contacts with those companies and we continue to add new programs or schemes with those companies. And those are typically a 2-year cycle. there is a first year where there is a pilot program where a smaller number of labs usually in the order of 20 to 50 will be invited to pilot a program, see if it performs as hoped. To work with all the different instruments in use, and then that can expand to into well into hundreds of labs, potentially thousands of labs, in the second or third year when that second year when that goes commercial, and third year when it continues to get more labs accepting For the test makers, we have multiple large test makers for whom we are providing feasibility samples currently that they are testing. And then on the basis of those feasibility samples, that is what, like, drives a formal contractual agreement. And those are things we are working on now. And then in the second year, there can be validation lots or clinical lots if there is clinical work required on those, and third year, those can really hit full stride on global commercialization of an assay. And some of those test makers have thousands of instruments already in the field, in some case, tens of thousands of instruments already in the field. So if a new you know, it is it is similar to if you think about it in a PlayStation or a Game Boy. Well, if you have many, many thousands of units out in the field and you put a new game into play on those and there is many, many of the consoles already installed, the uptake of the new game is much faster and it is similar to what we see in the clinical assay field. that is an interesting comparison, Cameron.

Deborah Honig: When you say embedded, does that mean development is complete and the assay controls are now commercialized?

Cameron L. Groome: Well, when we said embedded, I was meaning more test ingredients. In the core of, immunoassay, for example. But we can be equally embedded in different aspects of our caps business. Where our reagents might be part of the internal of an assay, part of the chemistry. We might be in the regulatory file for a control in kit. Where our controls are independent of the assays, but they are literally in a box of tests test cartridges and form part of that regulatory file. And we are also seeing sales of our QUANTDx product line. This is the newest product line we launched last summer. Which are reference materials And those reference materials can actually be used for quality control release of tests and create an ongoing revenue stream on that base. And are doing so. In fact, still small, still in the 6 figure range. But I think we are quite satisfied with the early progress of that product line as it is really an earlier stage touch point for us with companies that are developing new assays. So they want the product line is proving as hoped and expected to be quite strategic for us.

Deborah Honig: Excellent. 1 last question here from the audience. Regarding the RNA virus control you mentioned, is that a naked RNA, or in virus control?

Cameron L. Groome: Kenneth, I think that 1's for you. No. Well, I could tackle it, but Kenneth, why do not you take a Well, sure.

Kenneth Hughes: I will start by saying that we do not make oligos for controls, and whether it is an RNA oligo or a DNA oligo, so I will not give any particular technical details unless Cameron wants to, but suffice it to say that RNA is armored. So it is encapsulated, it looks like the product that you are supposed to be testing for, as do all our CAPS.

Cameron L. Groome: Yeah. 1 of the challenges for PCR type assays, molecular diagnostics is actually cracking the shell of a virus or a bacteria. And getting to the nucleic acids and it is very important to validate that step of an assay. So as Kenneth said, all of ours are encapsulated in the case of our RNA controls, we are encapsulating the shell of a type of virus called a phage. And then we put a RNA payload into that shell so that the extraction process, which is critical to the function of the assay, is likewise controlled. So demonstrating that very sophisticated capability to take 1 form of organism and give it a custom payload so that it is a safe and fully safe control. it is fully representative of the workflow of the test. So, no, it is not naked. These are very sophisticated Yeah.

Kenneth Hughes: Our stated kind of mandate and direction is to make our caps as close to a facsimile of a genuine patient specimen as it is physically possible to do. So we challenge the entirety of a test from extraction through fluidics and everything else, not just whether or not the RT or PCR or the PCR test, reaction works. Everything that support it also that reaction also works. So all our samples look like as best possible patient specimens.

Deborah Honig: Good questions. Yeah. I know. I am gonna age myself, but feels like I am in OAC biology class sometimes when I am doing webinars with you.

Cameron L. Groome: Yeah. Hopefully not bringing back any childhood traumas there. You know? We will not ask you to do any square roots or anything like that.

Deborah Honig: I went to a French high school, and I do not speak French. So Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Another question. Are any of the CAPS products currently embedded in commercial stage assays?

Cameron L. Groome: Yes. Yes. Some of them are And if not yet, when do you expect to start to see the launches of assays with your CAPS. So yes, you already have them. Some assays have already launched in association with our caps. What we have been working on and working with are some companies that have very large installed bases of instruments that you know, if somebody is launching a new assay on an instrument platform that has again, thousands or tens of thousands of units in the field, those caps get ordered, you know, come out directly with the kits of test cartridges, and that is in principally in that point of care field. And that is very exciting to us, and that is something we achieved previously or were achieving prior to prior to a major program cancellation, and we are getting back into that into that flow. With now with a variety of companies to, to push through that and really remove our exposure to setbacks with any 1 particular client. Got it.

Deborah Honig: And is there any update on orders in China?

Cameron L. Groome: Has there been any progress Yeah. There has been. I mean, China was running at a, you know, $23 million a year portion of our revenues. It shot up dramatically in 2024 and through mid year 25 before falling precipitously. We are now beginning to see a recovery China has moved up. Back up into the 6-figure range this year, and I think we are looking for back into the 7-figure range in 2027. Although we only just started our budget cycle for fiscal 27. Okay. Great. And 1 of the things I will mention that is nice and maybe Jim can provide a little color on this too, is, you know, our sales historically have been almost entirely b to b, you know, business to business to diagnostics companies and proficiency testing and EQA, in agencies. But now we are seeing a growing proportion of b to c sales These are sales to end user clinical laboratories. And that is a more diverse client base and very much a recurring stream of sales that is not the dependent on any single client. Jim, did you wanna talk about how the b to c side is growing in significance?

James S. Currie: Yeah. It has been going quite well in its significance. Now it is on a smaller base, but it is growing very, very well, and in fact, during the quarter over quarter, we saw a 35% increase. So and it started to become a more significant portion of the CAPS business. So yes, it is doing quite well right now.

Cameron L. Groome: Yeah. And that is all Microbix branded products which is important too. So these are either under the PROCEEDx or REDx Controls product depending on whether use is RUO or IVD. But, again, you know, a growing franchise directly with the clinical labs which is now becoming a 7-figure, has become a 7-figure-plus revenue stream growing at the rate that Jim has indicated very satisfactory growth in that category.

Deborah Honig: And what is driving the revamp? In China? Is it inventories drawn down or other? Do you expect that biz to get back to the historic highest levels?

Cameron L. Groome: You know, barring another outbreak, I think it is difficult to see it jumping back to those elevated levels at this point. But I think we could see it return readily to more normalized level in the $2 million to $3 million per year range is not unrealistic at this point. But we are still in that-- still gauging how much of that is inventory drawdown by end users and what a new normal looks like. Okay. And what is the concentration of your caps revenue Are you diversifying that revenue base, and how long do you expect that to take?

Deborah Honig: Well, it is an interesting question in diversifying because you know, if you are adding a bunch of smaller clients, you are suddenly-- you land a huge client you are less diversified again, but your revenues have shot up massively. So we are gonna see some teeter tottering between growth and diversification as that advances. And 1 last actually, 2 more questions.

Cameron L. Groome: Can you provide an update on the NCIB?

Deborah Honig: Absolutely.

Cameron L. Groome: Jim, you have got the figures most in hand there. We continue to buy back about 15 thousand shares a day, which is not quite the maximum. But we are really we are really, you know, balancing a little bit between cash consumption as we are still a net user of cash at present level of revenues. And prudently buying back shares. So that more than offsets any sources of dilution. But we are not aggressively chasing blocks right now. Jim, what would we be in the quarter and year to date in terms of shares bought back Yeah.

James S. Currie: I think-- okay. As I indicated earlier, so Q3, we saw 796 thousand shares bought back at a $209 thousand. And year to date, 2.3 million shares have been repurchased at a cost of $579 thousand.

Deborah Honig: So as you track back towards profitability, will you ratchet that up back to where towards the max level?

Cameron L. Groome: Yeah. I think I think that is that is something we will absolutely look at doing. And the question will be just, you know, how we balance that. 1 of the things we are looking at is just, you know, we have good capacity. Right now, but if some of the big chunks of business land the way we hope that some of that capacity could be used quickly. And we do not want to be in a position even for the best of reasons. We want-- If we are ever approaching the markets for equity, we want to do it at a time of our choosing for expansion. Not otherwise. So the question for us is just how much of our cash we wanna use on buying back shares versus how much we need to have available for scaling production? Okay. And then 1 last question, which I think is a really astute 1.

Deborah Honig: Obviously, someone's been watching us, Cameron. Yeah. Do you expect conference and presentation to be at a similar cadence of the first half of the year. I guess what this is getting at really is, do you expect to increase your marketing and investor outreach efforts in the second half of the year?

Cameron L. Groome: There are 2 facets to that question. 1 is the scientific congress. And the presentation of those. Got it. I think that is slowed down a little bit just because we have been so busy working closely with major prospective clients on projects and responding to technical requests and revised, you know, proposals and pricing and quality systems audits and so forth, and that is kept us really hopping. And not as able to present about scientific innovations, but rather to support clients directly and work on business projects. that is something. From an investor point of view, we have been fairly quiet or a bit quieter. You know, I was unable to attend Planet MicroCap Showcase in Las Vegas because it moved 2 weeks earlier and conflicted with the conference. So Ken and Jim were at that investor side with you, Deborah. Yeah. And, but we are going to do some more investor meetings this fall. I think we are attending the LD Micro Main Event, And what is the third 1 again? Lytham Partners Lytham Partners. Lytham Partners. Yeah. In late September and through October. So we will be doing some investor outreach activities there and you know, with any luck, maybe we have a few fresh business things to announce by then. If not, we will certainly be talking about, the nature of what we are working on rather than potentially some deep specifics.

Deborah Honig: No. I think it is a good time to be getting out and telling the story. You have made good progress with the underlying business starting to grow again. So yeah, I think, it is a good time for investors to be looking at the story 1 more question just came in. Are there any updates on VTM, DxTM product line?

Cameron L. Groome: Given we currently have few confirmed orders in the pipeline with the plan for that assembly line? I think it is already been retooled, has not it? Well, it is it is being used principally for what we call control elution buffer. So this is where we are shipping, a DTM a similar, reagent to VTM out in parallel with the sample just to say, here's your, you know, here's your swab, for example, with a control. Here's the right dilution buffer to use it, so you do not to go chasing around and finding that to run the sample. that is what it is principally being used for But, you know, government procurement continues to be a real frustration. And, you know, if anybody's interested, you know, Kenneth and I recently co authored an op ed on the disconnect between the innovation support that governments give and the complete and utter lack of any procurement support that is provided in really highlighting that they are talking the talk, but not walking the walk. If, you know, companies are really too be able to tap a domestic market. Some similar comments made at a recent presentation from the Canadian Council of Innovators highlighting the precise issue that Ken and I were identifying in our op ed. About the difficulties that domestic companies have in selling domestically. You know, Canadian companies, you know, we are a case of 95% of our sales are outside of Canada and that is crazy. So, you know, the a lot of the elbows up is very performative right now. Rather than helpful. So, so I think hopefully we will get a little bit more of that, but the quick answer is not a lot to government or a whole lot to private industry. Got it.

Deborah Honig: Well, I do not see any other questions, and you have answered, my questions. Any final thoughts? Anything that you wanted to touch on that we did not cover in this session?

Cameron L. Groome: Just you know, we are an open book. We are doing what we have said we would do. And that is, recovering sales quickly towards our breakeven point and then back through into substantial profitability. You know, I think our Q4 will be still considerably stronger than our Q3. And you will see that continued movement forward. And then as we land and lock in some of these projects that we are working on, whether it is material agreements with major international diagnostics companies that we are working on or the advancement of Kinlytic All of those are things we are executing on and I think executing on well. And I hope our shareholders participating today see that and agree with us and encourage you to delve into our statements and our disclosures Those are not already up on our website. They will be, and they are certainly on SEDAR. And, we thank everybody for their ongoing trust and support.

Deborah Honig: Well, thank you very much for your time. Thank you to the audience for the questions and their time. If anyone has any follow-up questions, feel free to reach out. Or if you want a 1 on 1 meeting, I would be happy to set that up. And congrats on the quarter, and look forward to the conferences this fall.

Cameron L. Groome: Thank you so much. Likewise, and, anybody please reach out to us directly or through Deborah if you have any questions that occur to you later. Again, happy to answer them and delighted to have your attendance today and your support. So thank you everyone.

James S. Currie: Thanks, everyone.

Kenneth Hughes: Thanks, Deborah.

James S. Currie: Thanks, everyone.

Deborah Honig: Thanks, Deborah. Okay. Take care. Bye.