Shawn O’Connor: Yes. Look, I mean, we’re talking about basically two segments of the marketplace here. Small biotech, which we’ve certainly talked about for multiple quarters, for maybe eight quarters since the funding cliff occurred in that segment. And so the disruption to that segment of the market has been long term here now. Based upon input I’m getting from people such as yourself, there seems to be little bit of an uptick in terms of biotech opportunities and funding thereof, but it certainly has not gone back to where it was eight quarters ago, two years ago. So hopefully, we see that on the upswing in the future. But business as usual there as it has been for the last eight quarters. Large Pharma as well, I mean, we saw that in their budgetary cycle of October, November of last year that for different reasons, not their funding necessarily, but macroeconomic conditions causing them to be more cautious and prudent in terms of their budgets coming into fiscal — their calendar year, fiscal year of ’23.
We saw that began to slow at that point in time and hence our reduced guidance at the beginning of the year. Renewal would be a challenging market. I don’t think it’s changed here as we — our third quarter of the fiscal year is sort of midpoint of the calendar year, that’s played out as anticipated. I think the next stalking the ground will be as we see them start to prepare their budgets in October and November for the following year and see how those fallout will be the next opportunity to see whether that dynamic will change near, medium or long term. We’ve been operating in this environment for a couple or three quarters and I’m very proud of the team. They’ve delivered in a more challenging environment to our expectations here this year.
And while we’d like to see them — the results a little bit more robust, they are as we anticipated. And I know in the long run, the impact of the biosimulation has in the industry is not one that is going to go by the wayside, and we’ll continue to grow. It’s growing today, albeit at a lesser pace, and the opportunities for it to grow into the future are very strong.
Matt Hewitt: Thank you. That’s very helpful. Thanks.
Shawn O’Connor: Take care, Matt.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of David Larsen with BTIG. Please proceed with your question.
David Larsen: Hi. Congratulations on the good quarter. Can you maybe talk a little bit more about Immunetrics? Based on our channel checks, we’re hearing that oncology could be a good opportunity area for Simulations Plus. Obviously, there’s a lot of investment into the oncology space. Just any color around sort of like the different areas of oncology that Immunetrics focuses on or any thoughts around or anything that you can share around, like, how much revenue Immunetrics brings annually or maybe how many customers they have? Any more color there would be very helpful. Thanks a lot.
Shawn O’Connor: Sure, David. Yes, Immunetrics is a real strength, and it’s just — based upon its name, it’s been focused in areas of immunology, oncology and for its long tenure. And so these models that they’ve built large mechanistic QSP models are well tuned over many years of data flow and client engagement with these models. Oncology is a fast growing area in the industry. And QSP development or the acquisition [and build] (ph) of QSP models, the acquisition by clients in this space are most relevant in areas where clients have ongoing multiple drug programs. And oncology certainly fits the bill in that characteristic. It’s not a — it’s typically a focus of an entity, and typically not just a single drug candidate. And so that is the environment in which an investment in a large mechanistic model that can guide their development program over a longer-term period of time makes the most sense.
