And they have largely rejected these other robots that were kind of brought on to the market. And we’re looking at that. I mean, I’m a surgeon. Like I know what helps me in the operating room. I know what my colleagues are talking about and what helps them. And so we’re really, really sensitive about not just putting another robot on the market and thinking that surgeons will see it as equal to everything else that’s out there. That’s just not the case. So, we are working on a product that is really going to, as Ben said, drive better patient outcomes, but also be a product that a surgeon wants in their hands. It’s a product that actually lowers their blood pressure, makes their day go easier and faster. And that ultimately is how these things get adopted and have staying power.
So–
Benjamin Sexson: Thanks Doug. Yes. So, again, there’s risk. Capital is tight, but we think we have a plan to execute and we’re focused on execution and doing all we can. So, Kamran, this one is for you, will the software be upgradable to add an AI element when AI technology matures to more. So, maybe you can talk about AI and–
Kamran Shamaei: Sure. Yes. So, our software already has AI components integrated in its pipeline, we extensively use them. And that’s one of the benefits of our system where we don’t need like an individual to sit back there and just generate whatever data the robot needs to operate in the OR. We already have those. But yes, our software is, I could say, not only software, but also our hardware is designed from the ground up to be upgradable and to be modular and to support multi-application. Just imagine how many years we have spent developing this robot to the level of maturity that it has right now. Now, imagine if we wanted to develop another robot for, let’s say, spine. Then we had to go back to like the first step and spend like we can spend around like five, six years, four years, how many years to get to where we are right now and develop a spine procedure.
But our system is not like that. Our system is already upgraded. In a matter of months, we can convert this for a different application, integrate AI modules in it and so on and so forth. Like the mVision ambition that I mentioned, that’s very much AI-driven and our engineers here already run it on our system for their proof-of-concept, for the prototyping, and all the other for the current version that we have in-house. So, the answer is yes. It’s already — it already has AI elements and is fully integratable and the software is fully much [Indiscernible]. So, any component that currently — any module that is currently potentially not AI-driven if — or when we have the AI base version of that, we can easily replace it.
Doug Unis: There are so many places in our pipeline and in our technology where AI can be plugged in. Kamran just touched on some of the technical stuff. But even on the clinical side, while I was talking earlier about just aligning knees and figuring out if everybody doesn’t get a straight knee anymore, like what’s the right target. And there’s a lot of discussion about that, like what — where should you put an individual’s knee if not like in this straight line that we’ve always done. An AI can really be used in that sense to figure out like to drive where do we — looking at a particular patient, where do we — what’s the right target for that patient? I think the — it’s a very rich environment for using AI in that sense and something that will get better as we do more cases, and as the technology matures, as we get more CAT scans, more imaging, more surgical data, et cetera. Really exciting opportunity.
Benjamin Sexson: Yes, this is an interesting one from Stuart [Indiscernible] but he says there are people who want to see it fail. They have deep pockets and then they pick up the IP in a fire sale. I — Stuart, I know I’m an optimist. I know Doug is an optimist, I know Kamran is too, I know — we really believe in trying to — we believe that the standard-of-care in orthopedics that if you look at the market, right, and this is true of any oligopoly. What happens with oligopolies, it can happen is you can really have two things that I think are not positive. One is you really basically have no new market entrants, right? It’s very difficult for new market entrants. And you can start to have, in our view, over time a complacency where the — these incentives to actually try and change things and make things better and try and really push the ball, the economic incentives start to not be there anymore, right?
Is it really — is there really an economic incentive to take away the barriers to entry for new players, right? We actually had just-in-time implants. Is that really what’s best for incumbent players that already have billions and billions of dollars to fund the working capital? So, that’s true. But on the other hand, what we care about and why we’re doing this as patients. So, we fundamentally believe that. And there may be many people who think what motivates us is we’re just trying to get rich or we’re just trying to whatever. And I can tell you right now that, that is not the motivation of this company. The motivation of this company is to try and advance the standard-of-care for patients. That’s really why we’re here, what we’re trying to do.
And failure to me would be we fail to develop a product that does that. And every decision we’ve made from an engineering perspective has been to try and make things more accurate, make things faster, make things easier to use, drive utilization of robotics. We believe that the utilization of robotics will help patients. And I’m going to stick my neck out one level further. Every robot company that we’re aware of on the market has tried to be target-agnostic. So, robot companies have basically tried to say, okay, surgeon, do whatever you want to do. If you want to do a mechanical knee, do a mechanical knee. If you want to do a personalized knee, do a personalized knee. We’re just here selling an instrument. That’s not the view we’re taking.