Sri Ryali: Yes. Jacob, I do think that the Q4 OpEx is a good barometer for how the run rate will look like in 2024. We expect that base to actually come down a bit, but then be offset by some incremental investments in ECO, including in the ECO lab later this year. So I think that’s a fair barometer.
Jacob Johnson: Got it. Thanks for that. And then maybe for Kevin, you’ve partnered off the DNA ligase, the Nestle stuff, the RNA polymerase. Anything else kind of major on the partnering front? Or was that the kind of heavy lift? And maybe just along the same lines, is there anything else contemplated in guidance this year from any additional partnering activities?
Kevin Norrett: I’ll let Sri speak to the guidance aspect, but the things that we’ve been talking about are the remainders of the genomics portfolio, which really encompasses our three other launched enzymes as well as a host that we had in development, and we’re in various conversations with multiple folks around those. Again, blue chip players have come to the table as they’ve been looking for engineered variants of this and sort of highlights the value that we’re able to create out of this remainder of the portfolio that could help extend our cash runway. But you want to speak to the guidance?
Sri Ryali: Yes, the guidance really reflects the deals that we’ve already announced and the additional programs that Kevin mentioned would likely be smaller in terms of our front payments from the ones we’ve already completed.
Kevin Norrett: Yes.
Jacob Johnson: Got it. Thanks for the questions, guys.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Matt Hewitt with Craig-Hallum Capital Group. Please proceed with your question.
Matthew Hewitt: Good afternoon, and thanks for taking the questions. Maybe the first one, following your success with the gram-scale and you obviously got the presentation at TIDES. But as we look to the back half of the year and after you started to get this into the hands of some potential customers, what are your thoughts as far as the model? Will you kind of stick with a standard upfront milestone sales-based model? Will it depend upon the potential customers? Are you hoping to standardize those contracts across the number of customers that you ultimately sign up? Just how should we be thinking about the ECO Synthesis sales model? Thanks.
Stephen Dilly: So great question, Matt. And it actually does segment with the category of customer. One of them is, the one we’ve been talking about for a while, which is the CDMO, where we’re enabling them to supply multiple customers. Kevin can talk about that. The other one is looking at the innovative pharma where they’re looking at a single product that they’re trying to scale. The other one that’s become apparent recently is enabled by the new ECO Synthesis lab, which is our ability to directly supply siRNA, GLP-grade at sort of multiple gram-scale. And that enables them to go through their early development steps, and then we talk about how we scale. And so what we need is a template that fits each of those and some of it is going to be upfront, some it’s going to be about licensing for the technology, but some is also going to be sharing the assets. Kevin, do you want to take all that.
Kevin Norrett: The only thing I would add is, then, of course, there – as part of that, there’ll be the sales of the reagent and materials to support those licensees on an ongoing basis. So I think Stephen hit the nail on the head. One of the things that the ECO Innovation Lab really offers now is the ability to hit this small and medium-sized pharma segment that was going to be difficult because they wanted a path from preclinical all the way through to GMP. So I think the ability to do that now and to be able to sell actually full-fledged product out of that, not just reagents and materials to be able to support that really opens up this whole other customer segment.
Matthew Hewitt: Got it. Got it. That’s helpful. Thanks. And then maybe just a balance sheet item. Cash balance today, if I’m running the math right, so you exited the year with $65 million, $29 million from Innovatus, $5 million from Nestle, I don’t know, $1 million, $2 million from Roche. So you basically have a $100 million minus whatever you’ve burned so far this quarter. Do I have the math right there?
Sri Ryali: Yes, that’s pretty good. One thing on Roche, I would just clarify that, we’re expecting a mid-single-digit millions in terms of combined upfront from the technical, but your math still checks.
Matthew Hewitt: Okay, great. Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Dan Arias with Stifel. Please proceed with your question.
Evan Stampler: Thanks for the follow-up. I just wanted to make sure I had a couple of things right. And this is particularly related to the Aldevron and the Roche deals. So for Aldevron, I just wanted to make sure I understand. So you had roughly $5 million of the upfront payment. I think you said mid-single digits. And did you say that there is a high double-digit royalty on sales? And whatever the number is, are those royalty payments? Are those – or sales-based payments? Are those – is there any of that baked into the guidance? And then on the double-stranded ligase, just to make sure I understand exactly how this deal works, you – it does sound like you’re monetizing the assets, but you are – will also be generating product-based revenues on it going forward? Can you just explain how that’s going to work? Just so I have it straight in my head. Thanks.
