Tom Bailey: Yes, thanks Edmond for the question. Yes, our ASPs were up a bit in Q3 over Q2, so we’re up just over $230 million on ASP. It’s a little bit less than we had originally expected and I wouldn’t say that’s necessarily, due to any sort of overall broad pricing pressure, that’s just how the shipments that shook out during the quarter. It is a little bit lower than, what was originally planned. We would still continue to expect those to rise in coming quarters, as there have been rising list prices across all of the competitors in this marketplace, as well as the continued popularity, of these products puts us in a position, where pricing isn’t really the key driver for these instrument. So, I think as we get into next year, it probably should go up, but if I were modeling based on ASP alone, I think you could use $230 million, as a good number where we were in Q3, for your models for next year.
Unidentified Analyst : Hi. Got it. Super helpful. And then on switching gears a little bit to looking at your CosMx panel, I was wondering if you guys could provide some color on the mix of health or how your users are deciding which panels to use? I know you guys have the 1000 panel, you guys have a human IO 100 plex panel and a mouse panel. I guess I’m trying to figure out with the upcoming 6000 panel next year, what are your expectations for 1000 panel usage?
Brad Gray: Yes, what we’ve seen every time, Edmond, that we provide a new panel of higher plex is that it does tend to cannibalize, the lower plex panels. And that’s consistent with my prepared remarks, where I characterize scientists as having a huge foam, or fear of missing out. Scientists are paranoid that if they don’t include a gene in their panel, they’ll somehow miss the most important insight. And as a result, more plex is generally better. So just to take the couple of panel that you mentioned, when we initially developed a 100 plex IO panel, we thought there would be great demand, for that on the system, it could run a lot faster than the 1000 plex, and it’s more cost effective. There’s been virtually zero demand for that panel.
The 1000 plex human panel today is by far our most popular panel followed by, I’m sure what will be good demand for the mouse panel as it’s coming to market. Human accounts for the majority of the type of science that most of our customers do because they’re focused on human translational biology, so that’s most of it. But I would expect that as we bring the 6000 plex to market, we may very well see a rapid transition towards that higher plex panel, even at a price premium, because customers are interested in making sure they’re not missing important biology.
Unidentified Analyst : All right. Super helpful. And then, Brad, it’s good to hear a strong early feedback for your immuno-oncology Proteome Atlas for the GeoMx. What are your contribution expectations for this in ’24? And how should we be thinking about, I guess, GeoMx consumable revenue growth in the upcoming year?
Brad Gray: Yes, it’s a really good question, Edmond. I think we’re going to hold off on providing quantitative feedback on that until we do our 2024 guide. But I will say, protein is a very popular application for GeoMx. Historically, it’s been half of our samples, but much less than half of the revenue, because the average unit price of a protein panel at 50 plex, is less than the average unit price of our Whole Transcriptome Atlas. That will change with the IO Proteome Atlas. It’s priced at a premium to our Whole Transcriptome Atlas, because there’s really nothing like it in the world. And so, I think that bodes well for the potential pull-through on our existing installed base and I’m excited about the early resurgence and interest, in acquiring GeoMx instruments that, has resulted from this new capability. But it’s a little too early to quantify that. We’ll provide an update, on our February call in more detail.
