[cal?] segment, our partnership with Thermo Fisher continues to progress, with two customer sales in the quarter, including one conversion from an evaluation from a French lab — we mentioned that in our last quarterly, so that's converted to a sale — and the other being a new facility, or a new site, I should say, in the United States.

It's worth noting that those two instruments were sold out of Thermo Fisher's existing APAS inventory, which clearly benefits our annual recurring revenue. However, it's not going to contribute to upfront revenues to the company in FY26.

Worth noting that there is no further inventory held with Thermo Fisher. Look, in summary for the quarter, really what we've done here is continued to progress in building a higher quality, more diversified customer base and a pipeline, which we believe is the key driver to sustainable long-term growth.

With that in mind, I'll hand it now over to Ray to take us through the financials.

Thanks, Brent. I'll now provide an overview of the financial results we reported in our Appendix 4C lodged with the ASX in April.

All figures are in Australian dollars and in accordance with ASX listing rules, though not audited. Pleasingly, the company remains in a solid financial position, with $2 million in cash at the end of the quarter, together with expected cash inflows of at least $2.6 million in the next two quarters, largely comprising instrument sales committed or nearing that contracting stage or close to execution, and also the R&D Tax Incentive claim.

The company has other advanced opportunities beyond that, with the potential to also progress to firm commitments before 30 June, that is not included in that $2.6 million figure. For the quarter, the company had total net cash outflows of $1.1 million.

That was basically all represented by operating and investing activities, which included $1.1 million in inflows from customers and $2.2 million in cash outflows from expenditures. That was higher than usual, being impacted by the final payments related to the latest replenishment of instrument parts for the manufacture of the instruments.

Overall, the company remains well-capitalized and maintains a disciplined management of cash flows. Back to you, Brent.

Great. Thanks, Ray.

Looking ahead, our strategy really remains unchanged, but I think the level of execution and the opportunity continues to improve. Our primary focus remains on that global pharmaceutical customer segment, where we see really the largest long-term opportunity.

There are three areas I want to kind of draw attention to. First, expanding the customer base.

We do expect to add at least two additional top 20 pharma customers in the next two months. This is all about continuing to build that depth and the resilience in our customer base aligned with our strategy for this financial year and beyond.

Second, progressing the pipeline. Over the next six months, we expect to advance current evaluations, moving those customers into a validation process, and finally to progress towards that broader deployment, that expand phase that we keep talking about.

This is central to our land and expand strategy, and we do expect this to increase to larger rollouts as we move through FY27 and beyond. Finally, strengthening the market engagement.

A great example of this is our first APAS Discovery Day, which is being held at AstraZeneca in the UK in June, just a couple of months' time. It's really an important initiative that's going to bring together existing customers, new customers, with some key opinion leaders.

These stakeholders will really get to understand how AstraZeneca went through their process and managed to roll out and standardize on APAS on a global level. Of course, participants being at the AstraZeneca facility will be able to see the instrument in action and have quite a lot of engagement with the AstraZeneca folk, as well as a contingent from our company that is obviously going to be there to support it.

Look, as we wrap up here, the final sentiment just wanted to kind of outline from a company standpoint is that we're on track to deliver what we set out to and really to close out what we believe is going to be a successful FY26 over the next couple of months. With that, Jack, I'll hand it over to you to facilitate any Q&A.

Yeah. The first part of that, they are two new pharma.

Two global pharma companies that have not been named or identified. It's incremental, therefore, delivering really on our strategy of expanding that global user group.

In terms of whether it's going to be an evaluation or a lease or an order, look, we'll disclose that to the market as we finalize these contracts.

I think very broadly speaking, from a supply chain perspective, short answer there is no. I think there's two elements.

One is, can we get components to build and manufacture our instruments? That's, kind of one element.

Because we buy in kind of lots of batches of inventory, we haven't seen any material impacts there. Then the second one is, can we get our product into the various countries?

We ship all of our products, and the answer to that is no. At the moment, we haven't seen any issues relating to supply chain, that's for getting the parts to build our instruments, no issues there.

We haven't seen issues in terms of getting our instruments to our customers.

Great question. Thanks for that one, Andrew.

Pfizer has been under evaluation for some time, and this is at their Melbourne facility here in Australia. Look, I can't go into a lot of detail about their internal process, because that's kind of confidential.

I would say it's taken longer than we would have expected or hoped on both sides, and it comes down to various priorities that the customer kind of goes through and has. We don't see it at the moment being a negative outcome.

We see ultimately longer-term that this is going to be a positive process with that key and important customer. I think yes, longer than expected; no, we don't see any kind of longer-term issues.

In fact, we still see the Pfizer group as an opportunity for us on a go-forward basis.

Look, we're manufacturing or building one instrument a month, and that's kind of been pretty well the cadence we've been having over the last year, and that will kind of continue. We can ramp that up to two a month if needed.

We don't see any supply chain kind of issues with respect to orders. I think I would say that, look, the sales cycle is long.

If Thermo Fisher were to have a demand to buy multiple systems, we're going to know about that with a long lead time. In a similar way with our existing customers, if one of those global customers are looking to expand in a similar way AstraZeneca did, I can share by our example with AZ, we knew exactly when they wanted to kind of roll that out.

We have very clear line of sight, we don't see any supply chain issues.

Ray, you want to take that one?

Sure, Brent. Short answer is yes.

Where there's a paid evaluation, it's quite simply a cost that's charged upfront as a nonrefundable deposit. They have the right of a return, we don't recognize the full sale, and it remains in our inventory until they've completed their evaluation.

Look, I think generally speaking, the Thermo Fisher relationship continues, and it's great to see a bit of life, actually, in that clinical market. As we've reported, it hasn't been a focus for the company, but we certainly support our channel partner being Thermo Fisher, we support our clinical customers through the recurring revenue that we generate through the annual software license and maintenance contracts.

Look, I can't really answer it definitively. We collaborate on an ongoing basis with Thermo Fisher.

I think I will note, and it's publicly available, that the Thermo Fisher Microbiology division was acquired just earlier this week by a private equity company in Europe for a bit over $1 billion US. That is the division that we've been working with specifically within Thermo Fisher.

I do see part of that divestment with Thermo Fisher creating some uncertainty, but it could actually longer-term be quite opportunistic. Just too early to say, but worth drawing people's attention to that.

You want to take that one, Ray?

Sure. Yes.

Because of the long sales cycle, as Brent mentioned before, we do have visibility of them in advance. At the moment, 10 is enough.

Obviously, we would move to be purchasing more as we see the pipeline starting to fill out. Then In fact, we would get better purchasing terms buying more than 10 at a time.

So 20 would definitely be our next step. I don't see that as an issue.

Then on the manufacturing side, like Brent mentioned, we can produce straight away two a month from our current one a month. Beyond that, we can negotiate to increase our size at our outsourced manufacturer.

We can increase the size of our footprint in the manufacturing zone and increase that capacity.

Leave that with you again, Ray.

Is there any benefit? Yes, most definitely.

Look, we prefer a sale upfront, but if it's the difference that gets a sale to occur, we would much rather lease it. It's definitely in our sales kit bag.

Surprisingly, pharma customers rarely mention it, but it's definitely on the table. Yep.

I think in reality, it's going to be a combination of the two. When we talk about land and expand, we should always be trying to land, right?

We should always be trying to add new customers and the new large customers like I mentioned. I think kind of to the second part of your question, we would certainly expect in FY27 that expand part to start happening with some of those newer customers.

That will commence in FY27 and beyond. Like I mentioned, every customer is going to operate their own cadence, they've got different decision-making processes, and the importance is to expand the base and the number of those customers so that if each of them were to look to buy maybe two or three, well, that starts adding up once you've got 6, 7, 8, 9 of the big customers, and that will kind of trickle through over future years.

This is a multi-year strategy, not just a one-year strategy.

generally speaking, with pharma customers, we don't see the capex or the financial limitations being the primary issue. I think really where we see kind of the challenges is prioritization.

Firstly, they've got to understand our technology exists, and that's why we go to conferences, do marketing and all these types of activities. Ultimately, there is a lot of internal work that's required by the customer to adopt new technology.

This isn't a plug-and-play situation. The manufacturing of sterile drugs is a highly regulated process, and the customer bears all the responsibility associated with that manufacturing process.

My point there is that any change to the manufacturing process, including environmental monitoring and new technology, needs to be very thoughtfully considered and understood and then executed upon. Those projects need to be prioritized.

Once they're prioritized, we see a very clear cadence of execution. Until that point, kind of we can't progress too much.

Look, I think what the company said, it's going to be this financial year, so that's in the next two two months. We're at an advanced stage and would like to kind of move them forward obviously as quickly as we can.

As soon as we do that, we'll obviously let the market know. I can't give any more guidance other than what we've already provided.

Yeah. If I'm understanding the question correctly, it's what's the internal effort required to support these evaluation processes.

Look, I think the short answer is at five or whatever it might be, the short answer is yes, we're resourced appropriately. There's a combination of obviously our sales team that support that work on-site with our customers, but we do most of it actually remotely.

It requires our team here in Adelaide to kind of work across our global customers. Short answer is, I think we've got a cost base that can support additional growth.

We're not concerned there. We have got a couple of new roles that we've recently put on.

We've got a software person we've just added to the team to support some of that growth, and we're actually kind of advertising for a European-based validation kind of person to help with some of that customer work as well. The company has made some investments in that area to kind of anticipate, if you like, some of the growth that we are expecting on a go-forward basis.

Thanks, all.