Jennifer Bath: Yes, no, that’s a great question because Libera Bio is a little bit of a one-off. It didn’t fall into our early adopter program. And it was really an opportunity that came about at a conference that would really just appears to be a very good marriage of capabilities to tackle something challenging. So right now, the actual agreement itself is a little bit different than other agreements that we currently have put forward. The program itself still has the same type of structure with regard to upfront payments milestones and commercial royalties. But with the revenue model that currently exists, all of the downstream financials are split evenly at 50-50. With the initial work that gets conducted, IPA is only responsible for the initial discovery work and the selection of the lead candidates.
And the actual financial details around that have not been solidified, but what has been discussed to date is that Libera Bio would pay the base cost so that there would be no actual cost of IPA for running its portion for the discovery and lead candidate selection. After the candidate selection, it turns over to Libera, who then goes through the process of doing the formulation and then the process of reaching out to some already identified third parties who they believe are interested in the first two initial targets that we’re going after to combine those with an existing monotherapy in the oncology space with the aim that those groups would do any in vitro or in vivo analysis on the quality of the product. If they do not use a third-party, Libera is actually obligated in the current MOU to be the one that carries forward, that in vitro on in vivo work.
So our financial commitments in this are relatively constrained, relatively limited and are really more geared toward of being able to apply our AI and some of our wet lab capabilities that we believe and Libera Bio believes have very unique propositions for being able to accomplish this type of a target, which is not typically or historically been very successful in a traditional laboratory setting.
Michael Freeman: Okay. That’s helpful.
Jennifer Bath: Not clear all those downstream, my apologies in case it’s not clear all those downstream payments milestones and royalties, of which we are collecting and we have the 50-50 split on would come from a third party that would be out licensing the product.
Michael Freeman: Got you. Got you. You guys are taking part of the very early stages of this and then one third party takes the baton, that’s when the — I guess, the more substantial milestones could precept stage.
Jennifer Bath: Exactly.
Michael Freeman: Yes. Okay. And then I also see that Libera Bio has made a very similar type of agreement with another company called EVQLV, I think it’s called in New York. Is there any separation in the type of work that each IPA or Talem is doing versus this EVQLV company? Are these different sort of targets? Or is this sort of a group effort?
Jennifer Bath: So they are different programs and different targets to the best of our knowledge. That being said, there are tremendous differences between the capabilities at EVQLV and IPA. And were short of kind of repeating some of the components or aspects as to why Libera specifically came to us after already having arrangements are things that I won’t get into, but I think overall, the stance is that we are uniquely positioned in a way that other companies they have talked to and/or started collaboration with are not prepared and not situated in a competitive manner.
Michael Freeman: Got you. Okay. And now next question is on — the new clients added during the third quarter, a very high number during this quarter. Could you describe how the sort of type of client, if there has been an evolution in the sort of phenotype of clients that, I guess, this is the core CRO is attracting over the last little while?
Barry Duplantis: Yes, I can jump on —
