Brooks O’Neil: Right. That’s very helpful, thank you very much.
Tim J. Arens: You’re welcome.
Operator: Thank you. Your next question is coming from Mike Matson from Needham and Company. Your line is now live.
Mike Matson: Yeah, thanks. So just wanted to ask one on pounce LP. So can you maybe just talk about the size, the market opportunity, I mean how common are costs in the below the knee area and then the degree of competition here, I think you said that the competitor’s products will work very well there, but maybe just talk about what options are out there, other than LP.
Tim J. Arens: Sure. You know the being of the competitors’ products capital equipment and not on the table solution. And Mike, as you go below the knee. The vessels to put towards the ankle. We are trying to ascertain the market right now. The initial feeling is it’s not a huge market but the reason for that is sometimes they just can’t get there with the mechanical device suction or otherwise. And so the revert to surgical embolic Tani or osteolytic right. So now if you take that potential market. I suspect many times larger, but I don’t want to speculate as to what it is, as we get our bearings on it. So what’s unique about our device. It’s the same techniques that they using above the knee right devices downsized and its downside specifically because we respect the integrity of the arterial wall.
So the reason we designed LP, is you can, you don’t want to shove off a big honking device into very small friable tibial arteries. So we specifically designed LP to get down to two millimeters maintain the health of the vessel wall and pull the crowd out other devices. It’s not disparaging and according to devices but there’s limitations to the technology as you trying to suck for example and you’re trying to suck through a much longer that’s narrowing and tapering. It’s very difficult to generate the power to remove all types of clot down the soft stuff will come out early. The hard stuff, not so much and so what we’re seeing is the lessons learned and the technique above the knee allowing that experience suggest go below the knee and use the same techniques that pull out clots and the physicians.
I personally talk to with this feel that it’s just given them an extra arm with similar techniques and so that’s exciting. Now again we’re just into double figures on it and as you know what my prudent. So I’d like to see quite a few more cases before we restart fist pumping and that’ll be the work on tap for Q2 and then it will also allow us to understand more of the market opportunity by real will experience instead of reading some report that they intend principal in that way.
Mike Matson: Yeah. Thanks.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question is coming from James Sidoti from Sidoti and Company. Your line is now live.
James Sidoti: Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. First question on SurVeil do you expect additional orders in the second fiscal quarter and do you expect Q2 to exceed Q1 will be down from Q1 in terms of SurVeil orders
Gary Maharaj: Yeah. Great, great question. Jim, I’m sure, this is a question that’s on a lot of folks’ mind. Yes. We continue to expect SurVeil orders from Abbott throughout the fiscal year. I will say that typically not always but typically one can expect that the stocking orders will outpace the initial follow-on orders. Our guidance would reflect that meaning you would expect that Q2 would see lower orders and shipments to Abbott of SurVeil you’ll notice that our guidance reflects a sequential decline and you would be right to think that might have something to do with it, totally normal.
James Sidoti: Okay, sir. And then as part of that decline also lower sales on the coatings business because of seasonality, or is it primarily because of the stocking order.
Gary Maharaj: Yeah. Not really getting into a lot of specificity but you would imagine that it’s probably going to be more related to the SurVeil stocking order.
James Sidoti: Okay. And then question your guidance to interest expense balloons around 3 million reported about 400,000 in the quarter is that guidance is that is that, minus the interest income, you expect on the cash you have on hand or would you expect interest expense to pick up going forward.
Gary Maharaj: Interest expense will, is going to remain. You can almost take the 3.5% and just kind of normally distributed across fourth quarters. So, any variability that you’ll see is really kind of going to be the interest income that will be generated.
James Sidoti: Okay. All right, thank you.
Gary Maharaj: Yes. Thank you, Jim. Thank you.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] Our next question is from Mike Matson from Needham. Your line is now live.
Mike Matson: Yeah, I think, sorry I had a couple of more questions I had by forgot where you — just on sublime you didn’t call it out as a growth driver in the product category. So can you give us an update there? And I’m just wondering, is this issue of just market for radial access I guess adoption radial access and peripheral still not really taking off or is there some kind of a competitive issue where your competitors the bigger guys are starting to offer some of this radial access products?
Gary Maharaj: No, that’s a good point. Did actually has nothing to see it actually I don’t want to give the absolute detail here, but it’s actually met our plan in Q1. So it’s just we have to get the micro catheters complete that LME. And that’s when you’ll be hearing a lot more about it because the microcatheters will break open the market in terms of being able to get through difficult deletions from the risks, but no sublime is on track Forest.
Tim J. Arens: And yes, Mike, I’ll just add it did it did contribute growth in the period, but we call out the products that are driving the greatest majority of the growth and that would be of course Pounce, as well as SurVeil and keep in mind as I mentioned I think earlier call from Brooks asked about ASPs, there’s certainly a difference in ASPs between the offerings, which obviously has an influence this quarter in terms of the overall growth profile.
Mike Matson: Okay that makes sense. And then I haven’t dug into model yet, but just looking at the kind of profitability results for the quarter, it seems like there is a bit of a disconnect between the strong results you had this quarter and kind of a guidance, I know you raised the guidance some but were there some one-offs or something this quarter that I know you called out the timing of expenses a few times when it is that, is that just the main issue that you just had some things that just didn’t hit this quarter that we will kind of catch-up later in the year and that’s why you’re expecting profitability that’s sort of worse than over the next couple of quarters.
Tim J. Arens: I thank you for paying attention and catching that yes, what you, what you notice was a decline year-on-year and even sequentially, both in R&D and SG&A expense, as we’ve described in terms of the strategic objectives, you’ll see that we’re focused heavily this year on driving revenue growth from the catalytic products that we’ve mentioned including constant sublime. Gary and I have discussed probably over the last several quarters we’ve got a pretty rich and robust pipeline of opportunities that gone through limited market evaluation is currently and we expect to commercialize during the second half of the year. So as we get closer to those commercialization period you can expect that there would be incremental expense to support that.
