Next presentation. Very pleased to welcome John Sheridan, President and CEO of Tandem, and Leigh Vosseller, Executive Vice President and CFO. Very timely to have you here coming off ADA. I thought that maybe that'd be a good place to start, just to maybe talk us through your reflections on-
Yeah.
On the conference key themes, both from a market perspective, what you heard walking the exhibit floor and talking to customers, and what you thought the big takeaways for Tandem were.
Yeah. It was a great conference for us. You guys probably know we received CE Mark for our pregnancy indication just a few days before the conference started. We had a symposium on Saturday morning in which we actually went through and presented the data to a pretty large group of doctors, and that went over very well. Pregnancy is a really important indication for us. People who are pregnant that have type one is not necessarily a large audience, but when you consider it's people who are considering pregnancy. It's really anybody who's in childbearing years, they're really the market for this. Because you want to be on the product before you get pregnant and you can use the exact same product during pregnancy. Important population. I thought the data was excellent. Really well-received. That was a big part of the day, or the weekend.
The other thing that we did is we actually had an innovation suite set aside. In that suite, we basically took 20 doctors at a time and let them get up close and personal with Tandem Mobi's tubeless system, which I thought went over incredibly well. In fact, David was in an afternoon session of that with a number of sell-side investors. He did pretty much the exact same thing. I will say, when we actually just put it on and showed people how easy it was to do that, there were absolutely gasps in the audience, which I was pretty surprised to see that. That was a total awesome response. Similar behavior from the physicians. I think a lot of excitement about it.
The thing that's really important about the tubeless version of Mobi is that the basis of competition four or five years ago was primarily therapeutic outcomes. With Control-IQ, I think we dominated the market at that point in time and did quite well. Over time, that's changed, though. It's not only therapeutic outcomes, it's also form factor and market access. Over the last year or so, we've been working on all of those elements. We're really now in the execution phase of the pharmacy transition. We're making good progress. I'm sure we'll talk about that in a few minutes. Then we're also just about ready to commercialize our tubeless version of Mobi. With that, we have addressed the elements of that competitive situation that we didn't have.
We now have pharmacy, we have form factor, and we have the best algorithm. As a result of that, we expect to see double-digit growth. We expect to see significant growth in MDI starts, and we expect to see competitive conversions go up as well. We're very excited about that. Like I said, it went over very well. We had a number of papers or posters that were presented on just the ease of use of using the economic and, I think, the experiential benefits of using Control-IQ over large pediatric populations. Things like that went very well. I would say for us, it was a great show. It just confirmed the strategy that we're working on.
Maybe just one kind of market-related question. It feels like it's hard to talk about diabetes or ADA without sort of facing the GLP-1 question. If you think about the past three ADAs, it's really, I think, been an evolution of the conversation of GLP-1 versus diabetes technology, whether that's pumps for CGM, to kind of question marks to the GLP-1s with some of these technologies to augment it. You kind of walked away from ADA feeling like where are we with kind of the GLP-1 discussion?
I think we've kind of gone past that hurdle last year. I will say two or three years ago, certainly a great deal of anxiety about the impact that that may have on people with Type 2. Maybe it's going to slow the progression of Type 2 and reduce or limit the growth in the insulin-intensive Type 2 area. What we've done is we've done several clinical studies, and in those studies, we've had a significant portion of the group. In fact, our pivotal study was roughly 300 people, and half of the control group had used GLP-1s for at least three months before the study started. These are modern GLP-1s. They had to remain on the GLP-1s throughout the study. When you look at the A1Cs of that group before the study started, they had very high A1Cs.
They may have been losing weight, but their diabetes was in very poor control. Like high single digits, low teens. It was problematic. When they went on to Control-IQ, we saw a substantial reduction in A1C. I think the conclusion from that study, as well as several others before that, is that it's a complementary situation where you need both of them, really, I think, to manage the weight and diabetes control. I think that's pretty much. I think our competitors have been saying the exact same thing. It's a complementary situation, I think now it's been confirmed in multiple clinical studies. I think it's no longer the risk that people had perceived it was, like I said, two years ago.
I want to dive into your portfolio, but one more kind of broader question to ask, which is, you talk about form factor meeting one of the unmet needs for Tandem in the marketplace. We go to an ADA.
Yeah.
There's so many different presentations about time in range up from 66%-67%. Okay. You hear about form factor, and then you hear about closed-loop algorithm. There are a lot of features.
Yeah.
That can inform patient and physician decision-making around prescribing.
Yeah.
..a technology. How do you think those kind of rank in terms of? How do you think about the interplay between those different features, and are there different things that matter to different populations?
Well, it's a very segmented market. People have different opinions on how they want to wear, control, interact with the device. That being the case, we believe that you have to have choice in the market. Just having a single pump with a single sensor, it's just not going to work because as I said, people really want to have differences and they want to have choice. I think that as I said, form factor is a significant issue these days, and I think the patient population, there's definitely a market for form factor, for a tubeless form factor out there.
I think physicians, when they have a patient that comes in that's using pens and needles and they ask for a patch device, if it has an AID system on it, which of course one of them does, they're going to put them on that product. I will say that one of the things that I continue to feel very good about is when you talk to the general physician community, they will tell you and tell us that we have the best algorithm on the market today. I think that again, we're going to eliminate that form factor advantage here in the not-too-distant future. In that case, it comes back to the algorithm. I think our system has better control. There's this immediate and sustained improvement in that control over time.
Again, I think that when you look at the tubed market today, the tubed market is growing slowly. It's growing maybe mid-single digits. If you look at the tubeless market, it's growing in excess of 20%. We want to participate in that market and take advantage of that opportunity, which I think we're going to do in the second half of this year.
Have you filed Mobi Tubeless?
Well, you know the answer to this, what we have said is that we will file in the second quarter. We're not going to tell people exactly when. I will say absolutely confident that we will file in the second quarter. I think we'll probably talk about it on the second quarter call.
Okay. Not going to. Fair enough. transition, which is obviously a huge part of not just 2026, but sort of your commercial strategy going forward. I thought, Leigh, on Saturday, you provided some very helpful perspective on just the mechanics and flow to the pharmacy. Maybe you just kind of update us on where we are and maybe just reiterate some of those comments you made.
Sure. Absolutely. For us pharmacy this year is a race and restart. We talked a lot last year about launching into the pharmacy channel, where we started with just the Mobi pump and supplies. We went in with a business model that looked very similar to what it looks like in the DME space. This year when we started the year, we decided that the best approach for us to maximize the pharmacy opportunity is to launch with a pay-as-you-go model. What that meant was when we came at the beginning of the year, we really had to restart. While we had contracts last year with formulary coverage, we had to go back and renegotiate every single one of them for the new pricing structure.
The first quarter for us was really about building up the opportunity, getting that formulary coverage to get us started, and it was also about the operations. It was implementing the system that we needed to launch pharmacy at scale with a model of this sort. We did a really good job, I would say, outperformed our own expectations in terms of market access. We had a goal this year of getting to 40%-50% formulary coverage. As we exited the first quarter, we were already at 40%. That's really important too, because we were able to do that off cycle from the normal formulary. When we talk to payers and PBMs today, they're already thinking about 2027, and we brought them back to this year, and we were able to make this change at a pretty rapid pace.
We're not done. I would say there's still a great chance we'll be at 50% by end of the year. We have a number of things in the works we're still looking at. Mobi Tubeless, with approval, will give us another chance to talk to people this year that can also help with growing that formulary coverage. When you turn to the operations side of things, it's not as easy as just turning on a switch, you have access. There's work you have to do. It's not insurmountable, but maybe underappreciated operationally, how this changed every one step in the process. It changes how we engage with the patients. When we talk to them now, we have to talk about two different benefits and help them understand the value of each and which one might work best for them.
It changes how the physician writes their prescriptions to us. There is a way they can do it in DME, which was a little bit more flexible with a lot of engagement with us. In pharmacy, it's a little bit more rigid, if you will, very structured in the type of information they have to share. It may result in some back and forth with the physicians as they're getting used to the new way to prescribe. It changes how we engage with our distributors. It's the same distributors that we use for DME. They also have a pharmacy capability. How we operate within our own system and how we hand over referrals to them to process, all changed.
That's what we were working on in the first quarter, and we were fortunate to have everything in place to kick off a launch in March. We started with only the month of March. We started with just less than 5% of our shipments going through pharmacy for that free pay go pump, and then less than 5% of our customers ordering through pharmacy in our install base. That number of customers was relatively the same in Q4 and Q1 because we were focused on the operations piece of it. We weren't really trying to drive that throughput. That's what the coming months and quarters are about. It's about continuing to iterate on our learnings from the process and to drive more volume. You can expect to see month-over-month, quarter-over-quarter, an increase in the throughput.
For us to achieve the goals that we laid out at the beginning of the year.
If I'm a Tandem user and I come up for renewal and I'm ordering supplies. If I'm already ordering through DME, I would call to order supplies. You would check my benefits. If I can order through the pharmacy, you go contact my physician to rewrite the script. Is that a digital engagement? How seamless is that engagement on the script amendment?
Yes. I would say when the engine's running smoothly, it's going to be pretty seamless. Today, it does require another prescription from the physician. This is at a point when they don't normally have to write a prescription. That's where there's just this new interaction that physicians aren't necessarily prepared for. They're used to focusing on the pumps and the therapy, getting patients going. Once they've gotten them on the supplies, it's not something they have to ordinarily reconsider. We're reaching out and asking them to engage in the process. It creates a little bit of extra work for everybody in the whole channel or the whole work stream. That's why it's not necessarily something that you can just flip on overnight. Again, not insurmountable by any means, just behavior change that we have to manage through.
Okay.
We do have examples, though, of patients who express interest in a pump and they don't interact with Tandem at all. They get the prescription, it goes through this channel, and they get their pump in a couple of days with zero. That's kind of the model we are working to get to. Not there yet, we definitely know it. We've proven it now many, many times, and there's learning curve issues we're dealing with on a general basis, which I think are all tractable. When you look at the market, people have been there and they've done that, and they're in the channel. We expect to be there just as successfully as they have been.
I think we always get a lot of questions on price in the pharmacy. I think when you introduced the $350 number, you were very clear about the reason why you want the $350 number is what you represented in guidance, but was not necessarily your go-to-market pricing strategy. Can you just sort of clarify how you're thinking about pricing and what you're seeing so far as you work through the transition?
Yes. As we thought about, we had to look at the array of contracts that we signed with different rebate percentages across them. We also had to anticipate what we think might be required from a copay assistance perspective. You have to think about from the copay assistance, we're not just competing with others and what their out-of-pocket is. It's actually competing with our own DME channel. What we want to make sure is that for the patient, it's the lowest out-of-pocket if they were to shift into the pharmacy channel. Without any history to show evidence of how these might even out over time in a sustainable trend, we gave a modeling assumption. It's not meant to be the price point. It's not our goal pricing.
It was just to say, while we're getting started, as we're learning, this is a good baseline to think about what the average monthly rate would be for supplies in our business. As we continue to gather more information, again, we're still actually measuring our time in pharmacy in really weeks, barely months at this point. As we move through this year, we'll continue to inform you more regularly at what that might look like and how to think about the future. It's really just about us as we're taking these initial steps, making sure that we have everyone grounded appropriately.
Very helpful. Then as we think about just the evolution, I think there are kind of two pieces too, right? There's the new patients going through the pharmacy, but then there's also the existing installed base converting that. I think you said existing installed base potentially to be 80% converted by the end of year three. Is that right or wrong? How should we think about those two moving pieces?
Actually, the other way around. This year, we expect for pumps going out the door that about 20% will go out in the pharmacy model, so for free, basically. Starting low, as I mentioned, first quarter, less than 5%. Obviously, we have to exit above 20% to average that for the year. In two to three years, 80% of pumps could be going through that channel. In the meantime, what we'll be doing is building up the install base who's ordering in pharmacy through the pay-as-you-go model as they get a pump, but also converting customers over time. As patients come up for renewal, we'll check their benefits, as we said earlier, and we'll encourage them to shift over to the pharmacy channel.
The key metric we'll really be looking for the future is not the individual parts and pieces, but just pharmacy sales as a percent of U.S. sales. This year, we expect it to average 15%. In two to three years, we expect to be around 70%. Because of the pricing power there, that does not mean 70% of customers have to be ordering through pharmacy. It's much less than that, and that gives us the opportunity to continue to drive that installed base over the next couple of years as we build out formulary access.
Okay. Maybe we could turn back to kind of just the pharmacy business and the interplay with actual performance of the pump franchise. It's a little bit hard to necessarily get a great view of market share because each of you provide different KPIs and metrics. It's pump shifts or new patient starts. We're getting a lot of different data points from you and your competitors. What do you think is happening in terms of underlying market share for Tandem, both in terms of new patient starts and also the renewal population?
Yeah. I think that the fact that now one of our competitors is now public and we can actually see the data, it'll be a lot clearer because that's something we haven't been able to see. We haven't had to estimate that over the last couple of years. I would say that we've had the first quarter data, and I think there was some concern that the market's slowing down based on the first quarter. I would say it's just not enough data to make that assertion. If you look at 2025, I think all of the pump companies did quite well. There was growth. I think we saw the penetration rate increase. If anything, when you look at 2026, there's more technology coming to market that's going to reduce the burden. It's going to make it easier to use. It's going to enhance the performance.
I think those are the factors that drive growth as well as, I think, reducing out-of-pocket. All of these things are happening in 2026. I anticipate that we'll continue to see growth in 2026 and beyond, I think that there's seasonality that's impacting the first quarter. We saw seasonality in line with the way we normally see it. There was no surprises for us. I do think that there's some macro factors that could be impacting the performance in that quarter. Certainly, people are concerned about cost of gas and inflation. I think they're being more cautious when it comes to spending. That's why moving into the pharmacy channel right now is so important, because we can significantly reduce their out-of-pocket and really offset that concern.
As you take a look back at the past couple of years, have you gained share, lost share, held share in each of those categories, whether it's new patient starts or renewals?
I think our renewals have done quite well. We continue to see greater percentage of people renewing in time, and now it's over 70%. One of the things I'm very proud of is when you look back at the most competitive period, when one of our competitors came to market with a patch, you would think at that point we would've lost people. In fact, if anything, we saw people renew faster and more people renew. I think once you become a member of the Tandem family, you stay with it. That's because we do things like we give away technology for free if you're in warranty, and we also provide excellent service. I think on renewals, we did see continued performance. I think on new starts, certainly we did see a reduction in MDI during that period.
I think over the last couple of quarters, we're starting to see improvement. We're still losing share, but we're losing less share. As we move into the second quarter of the year, we expect to see growth there again. Then on competitive conversions, I think that most of the competitive conversions we've had over time have come from Medtronic, but Medtronic's now doing a much better job of retaining their competitive conversions. On the new start side, we've lost some, but we expect with the things that we're doing now, our strategy is intended to get back to the point where we see double-digit growth. We see growth in new starts, and that's primarily where we want to see it.
Retention should be a big opportunity if you go back and trace your trajectory to when, you go 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, you had a period of really strong.
Massive growth. Yeah.
Outside performance.
Yeah.
All of those patients, and some of them have already passed renewal, but some of them are still.
Yeah.
On the forward in the renewal pool.
Yeah.
converting them to pharmacy.
Yeah. Exactly
Is a big opportunity.
I think that we're going to certainly try to convert people who are, just as they come up to purchase supplies to pharmacy. Once a person is renewing and they see the opportunity to renew for zero out of pocket, that $1,000 during DME has been a problem. By taking that away, I think if anything, we'll see the renewal-
Out-of-pocket costs rank in terms of either barriers to renewal or barriers to pump adoption in general.
I'd say, I can't tell you where it is, and I'd say it's a significant concern.
It is. Okay.
Yeah. I think that people are always thinking about it. I think that's why we have seasonality, because they wait until the fourth quarter when their deductible has been met, and that's why we see the lion's share of purchases in the back half of the year.
How are you going to handle for the Mobi to tubeless handoff? Are you going to be a period of time where patients who, if someone gets Mobi today, but you get approval for tubeless in two weeks, you're going to let them swap it out. How are you thinking about-
Mobi Tubeless is the exact same pump that's on the market today. There's a significant number of people out there that have Mobi today. What they do today is they buy a cartridge that works with a tube, and then we have the infusion set. It's the cartridge and the infusion set are the supplies people purchase today. With Mobi Tubeless, we'd have a different cartridge, and we have an infusion plate. The infusion plate has adhesive on one side, and it has an inserter on the top. You would put the adhesive on your body, you would insert the cannula, and then you'd take the cartridge that is the tubeless cartridge, put it on the same Mobi pump, and you slip it in to the plate. That's how it works.
It's about providing new supplies to an existing Mobi user, or it's about having somebody purchase a new Mobi with the tubeless supplies. We expect that a significant portion of people in the marketplace will be interested in trying out the tubeless option. I would imagine that some people would want to have both tubed and tubeless, and they can because that's the way this thing works. There's really nothing on the market that's going to give people the opportunity to try. When it comes to wearability, there's nothing like it on the market today. I think that the other benefit of it is that infusion plate, it's the infusion plate that uses the SteadiSet technology. It's an extended wear infusion plate. It'll last for seven days, which reduces the amount of time you have to insert a cannula.
It doubles that amount of time. What you do simply is you just take the pump off, you change the cartridge when you run out of insulin in your cartridge, and you fill it back up, and then you put it back on. That's one of the great things about the product is you can just take it off when you want to. You could charge it. You can do all sorts of things. Again, it's a great variety of options when it comes to the wearability.
Is there any, I don't know, Beth's asked this question. Sometimes any of these product transitions, there's some sort of weirdness in the gross margin as you ramp a product. Are you selling more pieces? Are there any of the investors need to just be aware of just from a mechanic standpoint when you launch tubeless Mobi?
Yeah. You're right. We typically do see some level of headwind when we launch a new product until we get to a level of volume and scale to leverage all the benefits on the fixed overhead. We had something similar with Mobi, what you may remember is we didn't go backwards. It really just, I guess, kept us about even as we got through the early parts of the launch. I would say Mobi Tubeless was a similar expectation. It might initially have a little bit of a buffer on being able to increase gross margin, but it shouldn't necessarily drive it backwards.
Very helpful.
We saw an awesome year.
Yeah.
Our first quarter was awesome when it came to gross margin, and we also saw a positive EBITDA.
Yeah.
Which is the first time we've seen that in quite a while.
Maybe it's a good segue to talk a little bit about the P&L implications of the pharmacy transition, because there's a lot to it. There's the pricing piece and the revenue, but it's a very different profile P&L for a set sold to the pharmacy if you think about the fully loaded P&L versus what is sold through DME. Because I would think that the incremental SG&A and R&D allocated to that, or needed to support that, is almost nothing. Maybe just talk us through kind of the broader P&L implications as we think through the pharmacy transition.
Yes, it is a very different infrastructure. For the DME business today, because of all the labor that goes into getting someone prescribed and on the technology, we have hundreds of people in the organization, customer service folks that are supporting doctors and patients through that journey. For this year in particular, we're still supporting primarily a DME base, at least right now, and we've built the infrastructure to support pharmacy, which is more technology-based.
There will be some incremental variable costs, but it will be nothing like the DME space. We'll be able to grow and scale pharmacy with little incremental cost. As we transition more and more out of DME, we'll start to get leverage on that side as well. This year you can think about it in SG&A, those costs are almost, we're doubling up to some extent. In the next couple of years, you'll start to see more leverage in SG&A.
As you generate some of that incremental profitability, where are you thinking about putting it from an investment standpoint? I appreciate that there's a degree of profitability you want to achieve, but that'll create a lot of room to redeploy resources. What's on your mind for where you think that might go?
I think we have opportunities to continue to invest in the commercial team. I think that advertising marketing dollars are something that we don't have the benefit some of our competitors have when it comes to the ability to do that. Certainly, I think we'd like to, and I think we would use that just to make increased awareness in the market. Certainly on technology. We're always looking for additional technology for the company, and while there's no silver bullets out there that are really opportunities for us right now, over time that may change. I think having additional cash on hand to enable us to take advantage of that is something we're certainly considering.
Maybe it's a good opportunity just on the commercial side to touch on two things. One is that international doesn't get a lot of air time, but.
Yeah.
It is a nice growth driver for you. You're also going through a transition OUS from distributor to direct. Maybe you touch on the OUS commercial dynamics. Also maybe talk about Chief Commercial Officer transitioning.
Yeah.
Sometimes when those things happen, people want to read into it as an indicator of something from an underlying business basis. It didn't sound that way from your comments.
Yeah. I don't think it is.
Over the weekend, but maybe you could just address both.
Sure. Well, first of all, over the last year, we've definitely invested in sales and commercial. Specifically last year, we added to the sales organization. We've been working on improving the systems that they use to manage how they interact with physicians, to prioritize, to keep track of the interactions that they've got, and just make them more efficient in the field. I think that these productivity improvements are in process of being implemented right now. They're significant and again, it really automates a great deal of the stuff that they used to do on paper. By doing that, I think we expect to see benefits from that. The other investment was really in going direct OUS. In 2025, we really spent the entire year developing the systems necessary to run a business direct.
We were depending entirely on distributors at the end of 2024, and we had to put in the infrastructure to basically supply chain, to manage customer service. All of that stuff has been done. It was a pretty heavy lift in 2025. In 2026, we've gone direct in three countries. In the first quarter, we went direct in Switzerland, Austria, and the U.K. We have another country we're planning to go direct in at the end of this year. We have several more that we plan to go direct in in 2027. The process is in place. We've got almost like a cookie cutter that we can use to go from country to country. We've expanded the sales organization in the countries that we are direct in.
We're planning on doing that right now with the sales organization that is in the back half of this year. I think from an operational point of view, the team has done an excellent job. I think having our own sales team, having our own operations in the OUS countries, there's two benefits. One is you have closer relationships with the HCPs. You can help them understand the technology better. You can interact with patients more than we have in the past. We have a great deal of technology that we've developed that's now available in the U.S. With our own team in-country, we can do a more effective job at getting the technology into the OUS markets faster, and we think that's very important.
When you think of the OUS markets, the type 1 diabetes community is twice the size or more than twice the size as it is in the U.S., and it's much less penetrated. I think there's huge opportunity there. We definitely want to continue to invest, bring technology, grow our own capabilities, and as a direct operation. Makes sense to go direct, we'll probably exist in a hybrid format for quite a while. I think we're looking to take advantage of the big opportunities first.
Maybe just cover the CCO transition also.
Yeah, sure. We hired a CCO, Mark Novara. He's a very good person, capable guy. We hired him about two and a half years ago. I would say his strength is, in particular, in strategic planning and decision making. He really helped the team come up with the strategy that we're employing right now. I think if you look at what's happened over the last two and a half years, I think it's now moved from developing a strategy to execution. I think that execution is something that was not necessarily a strength of his, we've just decided to move on. I think that if you look at the team he has right below, he's got a number of executives that are VPs or senior VPs that are all quite capable and doing an excellent job.
There's definitely been some shuffling of the deck, but we do have executives that report to me that have experience in sales, market access, all of those areas. We've realigned the team. We still have high confidence in executing, and there's a great deal of focus on executing. We feel like doing it this way, we're going to continue on the plan. We'll probably do things faster than we were before. We have a high degree of confidence in where we're going. I'll just say that in terms of bringing somebody else into the team at this point, we kind of want to wait till we get past this heavy execution phase, because if we bring somebody in now, they're going to want to do things differently or change or they're going to question stuff. We don't want that distraction, honestly.
let's get through this period of time, maybe later in the year we'll start to look for a replacement.
The other area you talked about, incremental investments, is on technology. It seems like just walking around ADA, the theme of the meeting seemed to be very much automation, automation.
Yeah.
Maybe give us some perspective on your view on what fully closed loop means, what your fully closed loop algorithm, how what's the ?
Yeah. Well, I'll say that everybody knows that we partnered with them back in the 2015 timeframe. We licensed Control-IQ from a company called TypeZero, which was a spin-out from UVA. We've now employed that and improved the technology. We continue to work with them. One of the reasons that we went with Control-IQ to begin with is that they had the most significant amount of clinical data on the algorithm, and it was excellent. Today, we find ourselves in a similar situation where they have an algorithm that's called AIDANET. It's been tested in feasibility studies quite a bit in the last year or two, and that's what we're working to implement right now, AIDANET. It's basically a system that is you can set it and forget it.
You can basically turn it on and not interact with the system at all, it'll control your blood sugar just as effectively as the system we have today does. However, if you feel like you want to interact with the system, it will allow you or the physician to go in and make changes to optimize the system. I think that's a very important part because I know there's systems in the market that don't allow you to do that today, and I know physicians and patients find it very frustrating. That's something that we intend to initiate our pivotal study for here in the second half of this year. We're very excited about that.
In addition to that, there's also optimization of the interface on the mobile app, which I think simplification is something that makes a great deal of sense to do in line with having the fully closed loop system on the market. That's certainly happening, and we have a very capable team of mobile developers that are working on that right now, it's really exciting to see the work that's going on there. Finally, if you look at the product, the hardware, we have Mobi 2 that's coming to market right now, but a couple of years ago, we acquired Sigi. Sigi has a number of very interesting technologies that we're employing, I think that the way to think of Sigi now is it's not going to be a Sigi product, it's going to be the next generation Mobi.
I think we will bring that to market. We think Mobi 2, as it is today, will be very successful in the market for a few years. Now we have time to go ahead and optimize the next generation Mobi, which will be smaller, and it'll employ a number of differentiating features in addition to this optimized mobile app that we think will really make it a killer product in the market.
Excellent. That's a great place to wrap up. John, Leigh, thank you for.
Yeah.
Making the trip to Miami. We look forward to getting the next update in early August.
Good to see you, David. Thank you very much.
See you.
Thank you.