We need to complete this sale of the travel health business to Bavarian Nordic as we said. There are a couple of product initiatives regarding securing the next procurement contract for ACAM, as well as executing on the NARCAN nasal spray OTC switch later this year. And then finally, completing this AV7909 transition during 2023. I think all of those will be really important. In terms of kind of post 2023, once these balls have landed, I think we will be in a better position, Brandon, to comment with more certainty about what the financial profile of the business looks like post-2023 and kind of going into 2024 and 2025. But I think the potential profitability and earnings profile of the business is not too dissimilar to what we saw in 2019.
It’s just that we are pivoting now coming out of the pandemic and it will be really important, as Rich described, to operationalize these investments that we have made in our manufacturing network and make sure that any underutilized facilities are more fully utilized going forward. That alone will potentially improve gross margin and adjusted EBITDA going forward.
Brandon Folkes: Great. Thank you very much. I appreciate you taking all my questions.
Bob Kramer: Sure.
Operator: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Boris Peaker with Cowen. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Boris Peaker: Great. Thank you very much for taking my questions. A couple of questions here. First on NARCAN, you mentioned that you will be competitive in the retail space, assuming approval late this year. Just curious, why won’t the generic pressure you in the OTC space and also why haven’t we seen significant generic pressure in the public interest market?
Bob Kramer: Yeah. Boris, thanks for joining the call. So we will see what happens and what develops when and if NARCAN is approved to go OTC. Our belief is that the brand awareness and the brand recognition and the brand value of NARCAN is very strong. We have had really positive conversations with a number of the nation-wide pharmacy retailers that are anxious to get the product into their stores. So we think there’s a real opportunity to compete for some of the retail space that we lost when the generics was so actively introduced 18 months or 15 months to 18 months ago. With respect to the public interest market, I think, there’s strong stickiness factor with NARCAN, including in part due to the fact that, as you probably know, that market had already had a fairly heavily discounted price per carton of about 40%.
So the economics were a bit different already in the public interest market versus the retail space. And I guess, secondly, we have had a five-year or six-year head start in establishing really strong relationships with a rather fragmented public interest market that allows us to respond and to deliver on service commitments in a very meaningful way that has allowed us to kind of keep that customer base intact. So I think it’s the combination of those two, Boris, that allowed us to be really competitive in the public interest market.
Boris Peaker: Got it. And I just have a question on, my last question on 7909. Can you just discuss how this transition may occur? The reason I asked you, 7909 is only two doses per patient, while BioThrax was three. So I mean do you anticipate either the government to buy more 7909 than BioThrax or maybe price it at a significant premium on a per vial basis versus BioThrax? Just how does this two to — two from three doses impact revenue going forward?
