Peter Beetham: Yes. Thanks, Rory, and thanks, Bobby. I think, no, great question around how we develop with our customers a pricing strategy that makes sense in the marketplace. As Rory said, this is a market that has really understood the value of productivity traits. Farmers are fighting every day to manage their input costs. And so being able to bring productivity traits to market with our customers allows us to really understand that value proposition very clearly. So I think when you hear these very large annual royalty payments, It’s for us, that is the addressable market and the opportunity and we continue to get customers wanting more, more of their genetics, through our system. And the only other thing I’ll add is the excitement around the fact that we’re integrating into their plant breeding programs at a level that they haven’t had before gets people very excited of being able to penetrate the market very quickly.
So being able to put edits or therefore traits into a broad genetic base means that you can get the traits into more product lines more quickly. And so that’s something we’re looking forward to see how that pans out in the next few years.
Operator: Our next question is from Sameer Joshi with H.C. Wainwright.
Sameer Joshi: On the European front, is the timeline for the European Council and the European Commission coming together still in that July timeframe? Or do you have some additional color on that?
Rory Riggs: Thanks, Bobby, and thanks for your support. It’s really our big story, right, is that once they come through this, suddenly the rest of the world will start to follow them. So it’s exciting. As you probably know, there’s a final council vote that hasn’t happened yet, and so the debate we have is once that happens, it could be any day now, which combines the groups and from that we can put timetables together. The question for all of Peter to encourage it more is, it seems quite clear that there’ll be a bill passed that says for our type technology, that is going to be treated in a certain basis, but there’s a bunch of fine tuning to that regulation that we’re hoping to have completed by year-end and that’s the debate we’re waiting for. Peter, do you want to add to that? Is that clear enough?
Peter Beetham: Yes. I think that’s clear enough, Rory. Just to add a little bit to that because I think Rory stated that the process has started and there was, as I went through the process, there was a lot of amendments that they have to finalize. And the council vote is they’re discussing that as we speak. The bottom-line is I would like to make sure that people understand this process will go to completion and there will be an avenue for gene-edited crops into Europe or into the EU here in the foreseeable future. So that is the exciting part. You have the UK already with all their laws implemented, and we’re hearing already that companies are putting field trial applications into the EU and that is exciting also. So it is a process and it is going in the right direction.
Rory Riggs: And you’re actually trying to be able to do the field trials. So I know you’re probably hoping we’d just commit to European being done, but we’re working with it. It’s pretty exciting where it is.
Sameer Joshi: Right. I mean, the next if this gets through, then you can use your existing American technology out there. There won’t be any new process that begins from scratch?
Rory Riggs: No. The encouraging thing is that we told the story about the bridge right in the paper there. They totally got oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis. And as you know, in their safety study, it wasn’t just gene editing was safe, it’s an oligonucleotide. So it’s safe. And so we’re pretty comfortable that our technology by itself is spotlighted in these new regulations and then we’re encouraged at the traits we have. It’s a new crop. Winter royal seed rape is different, so we’re starting to do field trials in England, which has been really helpful. But it’s not the trade itself that we’re really encouraged by. And you know how big weeders in Europe, that’s a big product for us also, but we don’t see a risk in the trade itself. I think we’ve actually had really positive encouragement on that.
Sameer Joshi: And then just following up on Bobby’s questions related to the royalty. So the 250 million acres for the developed and advanced trades resulting in $1 billion annual royalties to you. Does this mean that the total savings or additional productivity is or yield is $2 billion to $3 billion on this 250 million acres? Is that — I’m just trying to triangulate some numbers here?
Rory Riggs: Well, I’m going to, let you’ve heard us often, I’m going to take the soft side and let Peter take the side of it. But any revenues we have, by definition, result in direct savings to the farmer. We’re dealing with in rice, they’ve never had a gene edited trait for herbicide trust. And so there’s some big savings in rice and in Pod Shatter. It’s been an immensely powerful new trait. And if we can do Sclerotinia, it is the toughest crop in Europe and by definite in canola and in soybean. Every dollar we get results in a direct increase decrease in cost for the farmer. Peter, you want to add anything to that?
Peter Beetham: Yes. I do. I think that as Rory stated in his remarks, we’re really fortunate with our technology to be able to address what I see as multi crop, multi trait, multi stackable traits, if you like, into very different geographies. And I think that’s the area that we see the huge value drivers. So when you think about stacking traits and going across different crops, you can look at the market and even conservatively see these large numbers generated over time with royalties. Just like we’ve seen in the market with the GMO traits. As we’ve stated before, they continue to generate billion of dollars of royalties every year. So when you have compelling traits and you’re able to get them into multiple crops and multiple geographies that you create a huge amount of value.