Kyle Mikson : Okay. And then — and Jeff Hawkins, you talked about last quarter how you — there could be a potential inflection in orders and shipments and revenue in the second half of this year. I guess it sounds like that’s not really expected anymore, but could you just provide some thoughts and maybe Jeff Keyes as well and welcome to the call. Maybe you could provide some thoughts on how to think about, I guess, shipments and revenue and utilization, things like that in the second half of the year as we sort of think about modeling.
Jeff Hawkins : Yes. So I’ll start and Jeff Keyes can add any color he’d like to add. As I mentioned in the prepared remarks, Kyle, we’re going to keep the sort of the controlled launch in place through the end of the year. That doesn’t mean that there might not be some uplift in revenue in a given quarter, but we don’t expect sort of a rapid acceleration in the second half, a much more sort of controlled launch in the second half with the growth. Jeff Keyes, anything you want to add to that?
Jeff Keyes : No, I think that about sums it up. Jeff’s comments are consistent with my thoughts as we work through this process, the R&D realignment and deployment, we’re going to continue to have this controlled ramp. But we would expect that we might see some uplift over the next couple of quarters, but I think that’s going to be dependent on our customer base and how we interact with them for the rest of the year.
Kyle Mikson : Okay. And then on the strategic R&D realignment, it sounded like just Carbon for now. I mean maybe Jeff, just can confirm that. I feel like maybe there were probably some chips in development that were higher density, maybe like that’s affected. And with Carbon, like was that critical to any orders like were they contingent on Carbon being launched and perhaps that was like a guaranteed bundle? I’m just kind of curious about that. And then overall, again, not — I’m just not totally certain on this right now. What was the purpose of the strategy kind of underlying the review? And kind of like what’s the end game here? And how would you — what would you deem as a successful outcome for that?
Jeff Hawkins : Yes. Kyle, let me take a shot at those if I miss one, let me know. First, on the Carbon front. So there are — there were no deals in the pipeline that were contingent upon a Carbon. We didn’t have any sort of Carbon bundles as you described it. Really, the assessment of Carbon was about is a cartridge-based sort of solution, which can be very elegant, but has a lot higher sort of development sort of cost and time lines to adapt it to all of these different sample types and sample methods is that the best way to approach sample prep or is more of an open platform, one of the commercially available liquid handling platforms. Might that be more flexible to sort of range of sample types and methods we’re seeing. So that’s really that what that evaluation is about.
And that’s the only program, as you mentioned, that we’re stating right now is on hold. We’re obviously though, reviewing, Kyle, the totality of the R&D investments and really looking at driving the investments that really unlock the full potential of the Platinum device and the existing consumable. What we’re seeing is there’s a lot of growth potential for that existing platform in chip. And it’s really about enabling applications. It’s about enabling additional sequencing capabilities as we expand coverage and other things like that. So really, that’s how we’re looking at it. And then the end game is ultimately that we have the right level of R&D investment into those core areas that will really drive the adoption and that we have that sort of process that allows us to generate a consistent sort of release of improvements throughout a given year.
