Invecta at Goldman Sachs Conference: Strategic Growth Amid Challenges

On Tuesday, 10 June 2025, Invecta Corp (NASDAQ:EMBC) presented at the Goldman Sachs 46th Annual Global Healthcare Conference, outlining its strategic direction post-separation from Becton Dickinson. The company emphasized its successful financial performance and future growth strategies, despite facing operational challenges like pharmacy closures and inflationary pressures.

Key Takeaways

• Invecta exceeded initial spin-off financial targets, maintaining EBITDA margins above 30%.
• The company plans to reduce debt by $450-500 million between 2026-2028.
• Future growth will be driven by new product revenue, particularly in the GLP-1 market.
• Invecta is working to diversify its supply chain and maintain stable operations.
• The company is committed to keeping insulin affordable and improving cost efficiencies.

Financial Results

• Annual revenue stands at approximately $1.1 billion.
• Revenue distribution: 50% from the US, under 30% from EMEA, under 20% from APAC, and about 5% from Latin America.
• Exceeded initial spin-off targets with a constant currency revenue CAGR of 1.3% and adjusted EBITDA margins of 31.4% from 2022-2024.
• Core business growth is 2% to 2.5% annually.
• Cumulative free cash flow generation is expected to reach at least $600 million from 2026-2028.
• Gross margins range from low to mid-60%, with US margins slightly above the corporate average.

Operational Updates

• Successfully established a new ERP system and 16 distribution centers across 140 countries.
• The GLP-1 market is anticipated to become a $100 million+ revenue opportunity by 2033.
• The US syringe business is declining, with expected revenues dropping to $35 million in 2024/2025.
• Contract manufacturing revenue is projected to decline from $20 million in 2025 to zero by the end of the long-range plan.
• Working to qualify alternate suppliers for cannulas, currently sourced from Becton Dickinson.

Future Outlook

• Projects a flattish constant currency revenue CAGR from 2025-2028.
• Anticipates a low single-digit decline in the US business, with international markets driving growth.
• Incremental tariffs and increased R&D spending are expected to slightly reduce operating margins.
• Aims for net leverage levels in the low to mid-2s by 2027 and slightly below 2x by 2028.
• Planning multi-year arrangements to secure larger customers and maintain volumes.

Q&A Highlights

• GLP-1 Market: Considered the single biggest growth opportunity, with potential revenue exceeding $100 million by 2033.
• Pharmacy Closures: Temporary headwinds in FY25 due to store closures, but seen as a transient issue.
• Capital Allocation: Plans to pay down $450-500 million in debt between 2026 and 2028.
• Inflation: The company has factored in a 4% global inflationary impact.
• Pricing Strategy: A conservative approach to pricing for multiyear arrangements with large customers.

In conclusion, Invecta is positioning itself for sustainable growth and improved profitability, with detailed plans to navigate current challenges. Readers can refer to the full transcript for more insights.

Full transcript - Goldman Sachs 46th Annual Global Healthcare Conference:

Phil Cooper, Part of David Roman’s US MedTech team: The following session is not open to the press. All right. Great, let’s get started. So my name is Phil Cooper. I’m part of David Roman’s US MedTech team here.

We’re pleased to be joined by management from Invecta. We have Jake Elguise, SVP and CFO. And then in the audience, we also have Pravesh Candleval, who’s the Head of IR. So I thought we’d start, since we’re less familiar with the story, with a brief overview of the company, its history, separation, and then recently had an Analyst Day. So maybe set out where we are in your phased evolution of the company.

Sure. So off, really appreciate the invitation and really good set of very quality conference and very good set of meetings. So really appreciate you having us here. So for those of you who may not be as familiar with Invecta, Invecta is the spinout of the legacy Becton Dickinson diabetes care business. So we spun out from BD a little over three years ago.

It was around the April first of twenty twenty two timeframe. And VECTRA generates around $1,100,000,000 in revenue. We have three main product categories we provide essentially all of which are in some way focused on single use disposable products that are used to inject insulin into the body for people with diabetes whether they’re type one or type two. Our three main product categories are pen needles, conventional syringes, which is sort of a legacy technology, as well as then safety products associated with these safety pen needles and safety syringes. Essentially if you’re not injecting yourself and you’re having a caregiver do it, there’s some safety features that are added to that as well.

So pretty geographically, we are very diverse. We generate around 50% of our revenues within The US, a little less than 30% of our revenues in sort of the Europe, Middle East, Africa area, a little less than 20% of our revenues within Asia Pacific, including China. And then lastly, we generate around 5% or so of our revenues in Latin America. So pretty product diverse, pretty geographically diverse. Obviously, we’re not involved in sort of elective procedures.

It’s something where there’s a pretty sustainable, stable, recurring revenue base. Okay, great. That’s a great overview. Maybe before we go forward in the recent Analyst Day, you can give us a quick look back, kind of a summary of how things have gone as we think about this phased evolution of the company. Sure.

So spins and separations are very, very unique. I think in our case, the Becton Dickinson, obviously a very, very large global multinational company. And certainly for us, we inherited a footprint in which we operate and have a sales presence within close to 140 different countries. So that made the spin very complex. Post spin we had around a two to two and a half year period of time that TSAs, the transitional service agreements covered.

And we had to do some pretty complex things. We had around 11 major separation programs. Probably some of the more complex had to do with the creation from scratch of a brand new ERP system to service those 140 different countries as well as to create our own distribution network. So we had to create 16 distribution centers from scratch and transition that over from BD. So as you can imagine, needing to do that in a very, very short two and a half ish year period of time took a lot of effort.

And I’m really pleased to say we sort of took the approach of during the couple of years post spin, we want to separate ourselves as quickly as we possibly can and avoid as much disruption as possible and keep the business as stable as possible, which I think because of the manner in which we were able to go through a separation, we certainly did things like phased implementation approaches of ERP, which really sort of minimized the risk there. And we didn’t see any disruption at all when we went live in all of those countries. In fact, India is the very last country that we’re going live with now, any day now, and things continue to go quite well there. And just generally speaking, would say we’ve probably, at Spin, this was sort of a company that was kind of a flattish revenue growth profile, but very profitable and very cash flow generative. And one that had a fair amount of leverage that was put on it at Spin and also had to go through obviously some pretty complex separation programs requiring us using somewhere between, let’s call it 400,000,000 to $450,000,000 in cash over the last three years to try and stand ourselves up.

So that’s sort of masked, would say, the true free cash flow capabilities of the company, which is I’m sure if we get into some questions regarding the LRP, one of the things that we really highlighted in the LRP was just the future free cash flow capabilities. And if I recollect, were able to either achieve or exceed most of the targets that you put out at the time of spin. Maybe remind us of those and then we’ll transition over to the recent analyst thing. Sure. So at the time of spin in March of twenty twenty two, just before the spin, we sort of did an investor event where we put out a longer term outlook for the company and two kind of financial main financial metrics, one being what we thought our constant currency revenue CAGR would be.

And then the being what we thought our adjusted EBITDA margins would be as a standalone entity. And I am pleased to say that we were able to exceed both. We from 2022 through 2024, we had initially called for a constant currency revenue CAGR of relatively flattish. Ultimately, we did around 1.3%. And within that I would say 85% of our revenue tends to be generated in sort of the two main categories being pen needles and safety products.

Those products had tended to grow somewhere between let’s call it 2% to 2.5%. I did mention we have sort of a legacy conventional syringe business and that business particularly in The U. S. Had actually been declining. But when you put it all together, overall, our constant currency revenue growth were somewhere around that 1.5% level.

So a little bit better than what we had initially indicated. Likewise, I think from a profitability standpoint, we had called for EBITDA margins of approximately 30%. We ended up coming in closer to like 31.4%. So sort of a similar drop through if you will in terms of exceeding the EBITDA margins. And candidly that came when we had put out those targets March of twenty twenty two, inflation was nowhere near what it ended up becoming over that period of time.

We probably absorbed close to 400 to 500 basis points of incremental inflationary pressures that were unforeseen at the time that we put those targets out there. And yet through pricing and cost cutting initiatives, we were still able to exceed it. That’s great. I think that sets the play well. So what were the primary motivations of the Analyst Day?

What were you trying to kind of message big picture? And then maybe you can bridge us from the financial targets you set out at the initial Analyst Day and now to this Analyst Day. How does that compare big picture? Sure. So generally speaking, I think we called for an overall kind of flattish constant currency revenue CAGR from 2025 through 2028.

So similar to the prior that you said. Similar to the prior, but I would say the components are a little bit different. So we called for that and we called for relatively flattish operating margin somewhere to 30% in terms of operating margins. We also talked about free cash flow generation of cumulatively of around at least $600,000,000 of free cash flow generation from ’26 through ’20 And then we talked about essentially using that free cash flow in two main areas. One, delevering.

So we talked to the investment community about reducing our debt by somewhere between $450,000,000 to $500,000,000 during that period of time. And then also continuing to pay a dividend and returning capital to shareholders in that way. Okay. Maybe you can help walk the difference in the complexion of that flattish for revenue growth. Sure.

So of all, again, those of you who don’t know us as a company or a management team, I think we’re always going to error on the side of being a little bit more cautious or conservative, Certainly when we’re putting out there multiyear financial targets, we certainly want to on the side of having a high likelihood of candidly not just meeting those longer term objectives, but hopefully exceeding those longer term objectives. So I think that’s always the framework that we’re sort of going to start with. In terms of the revenue growth, we sort of called for around a 1% to 2% headwind in terms of revenue on kind of the core businesses, sort of getting offset by around a 2% type growth in terms of new product revenue contributors. So from the kind of core business, I would say despite 85% of our revenues growing 2% to 2.5% and our overall constant currency revenue growing around 1.5%, we had called for the 1% to 2% decline. And that’s really due to two main things.

We have I talked about our conventional syringe business. In The U. S, this business in 2019 was sort of in the, let’s call it $90,000,000 revenue range. By 2024 into 2025, that’s going to be around a $35,000,000 business. So there’s been a pretty significant shift, if you will, in terms of that revenue base to either our pen needle products or other types of therapies like pumps.

So in terms of that, coupled with the fact that we have, we continue as part of the separation, as you can imagine, BD had different plants. We have three main manufacturing facilities and we actually continue to manufacture and sell some non diabetes products back to our former parent, relatively small revenue base. But the combination of sort of The US syringe business around $35,000,000 coupled with our contract manufacturing business, which in 2025 makes up around $20,000,000 Through the LRP, we sort of assumed that that would either go down in half, leading to around a 1% constant currency revenue CAGR or maybe on the more conservative side that it would actually decline to zero. So that was sort of the working framework regarding what the drivers were of the 1% to two percent decline. And despite our pen needle business and our safety product revenue sort of historically growing in that kind of 2% to 2.5% range, we sort of took the view that that would remain relatively flat throughout the LRP.

Now offsetting that is some of the new product revenue contributors that we have and I’m sure we’ll go into the impact that GLP-1s for one, I think will certainly be is certainly the single biggest revenue growth opportunity that we have in front of us. And our pen needles, given some of the market shares and the strong market share that we have in the pen needle side, as GLP-1s begin to sort of transition from a mode of administration, which is today predominantly single use auto injectors, in the future we expect that to actually transition into multi dose pen injectors that are going to require our pen needles. There’s a real nice revenue opportunity for us there. Okay. And you said the legacy 2% to 2.5%, but you’re assuming flattish for that core business.

What bridges or explains the delta in your assumptions? Yes. So historically that 2% to 2.5% has sort of been basically a combination half and half price and volume. We took the approach that our products tend to be higher priced products for purposes of the multi year LRP. We did not factor in an ability to continue to try and drive increased price.

Now obviously, we’ll do our best to try and increase list prices, but the underlying base case assumption was that pricing in sort of the pen needle and safety products would remain relatively flat as was the case in terms of volumes largely seeing a slightly lower growth rate if you will internationally. And again, that could very well prove to be somewhat conservative. Okay, and can you frame the impact that conversion to insulin pumps has had on your business in terms of eating into the pie and the outlook on what is now an accelerating type two adoption and insulin pumps seemingly on the come? Sure. So if we sort of step back and look at what our business has done, whether it’s globally or particularly in The US where I think most of the historical pump adoption has occurred.

From 2018, I think through 2023, our U. S. Business has grown somewhere in the magnitude of around 1.3%. So very similar to our overall kind of constant currency growth rates, very stable and I would say pretty predictable. And that comes to your point despite seeing really significant increases in terms of pump adoption, particularly in the Type one space.

I think we sort of saw pumps go from around a 30% penetration level around 2019 up to around let’s call it 40% or so today and it’s kind of hovered in or around that area. And despite that and despite alternate types of therapies like GLP-one drugs, our base business in The US has remained relatively consistent. Now I think our thought moving forward is that our U. S. Business largely because of some of the declines I mentioned in terms of syringe is going to be, let’s call it low single digits down.

So very representative of what we’re kind of calling for in terms of kind of the core base business. Okay and what’s the state or the impact of formulary changes for patients? Is that an accelerating headwind? Is it a decelerating headwind? Is it a headwind at all?

I mean generally speaking I would say anything that makes insulin more affordable for someone with diabetes should be a good thing for us and for our business. Okay, all right, that’s helpful. And then if you provided it, what’s sort of the geographic complexion of the growth algorithm or outlook in your view? Sure. So again, kind of 50% of our business in The U.

S. Over the LRP, we’re talking about low single digit decline somewhere in that kind of 1% to 2% rate. Internationally, that’s really where we would expect there to be more outsized growth. Today around 20% or so of our revenue come from emerging markets. Historically, that’s sort of been growing kind of mid single digits and that’s something that we would expect to continue in the future.

Okay. And China, how material is it for you? Is it a still a good guide? So China is an important market for us. Okay.

And if you think about if you sort of think about kind of the revenue growth profile as well as the profitability profile of our regions, we at a consolidated level, we tend to have gross margins sort of in, let’s call it, low to mid-sixty ish percent range. Our U. S. Business is slightly above the overall corporate averages. Our business in Europe, Middle East and Africa tends to have a profitability level at the gross margin side that is slightly lower than the corporate average.

America, different market for us. It’s more of a distributor market, but those margin profiles tend to be a little bit lower. And coming to your point on sort of Asia and China, Asia and China actually have the highest gross margins for us, well in excess of 70%. So very profitable in terms of our business in both broader Asia Pacific and China. Historically, those businesses combined again sort of represent a little less than 20% of our overall revenue and had been growing sort of in that kind of mid single digit range.

Okay, great. Maybe see if anybody in the audience has any questions Was gonna move to the GLP and kind of the future growth opportunities next. All right, I tried. For us that aren’t on the pharma side that hear about it, but don’t have a great frame, how do you frame up the GLP-one opportunity and sort of what is embedded in your forward guidance, that LRP guidance we should know about? Yeah, so if we were here maybe two years ago, I think GLP-1s, the conventional thought at that point in time was that GLP-1s were almost gonna make medical devices as we know it sort of irrelevant.

Obviously that hasn’t happened. Mean it certainly had impacts if you will on improving obesity levels and whatnot. But I think there’s lots of information out there in the markets regarding the fact that GLP-1s may slow down someone’s need or becoming insulin dependent, but it’s not going to reverse those trends and it’s not going to eliminate the need for insulin. I mean, that’s certainly our thought sort of moving forward. For us GLP-one is the single biggest growth opportunity that we have.

And I think that may be somewhat of a surprise to people when they think of GLP-1s and what impact it might have on a company like ours, someone that manufactures devices that are used to inject insulin. But if you think about the way that GLP-1s are sort of predominantly administered today, it’s largely through single use auto injectors. We do not manufacture those auto injectors today, although it’s something that in the future we’d certainly consider sort of broadening out the product portfolio into. However, we’ve been having conversations with somewhere between I would say 20 to 25 different generic pharmaceutical companies over the last fifteen to eighteen months to varying degrees, several of which we’ve already signed arrangements with. And as they come to market, they intend to come to market instead of going to market with a single use auto injector, they plan to come to market with those GLP-1s via a multi dose pen injector, which given the significant market share that we have on the pen needle side, there’s a high likelihood that we’ll have a pretty strong attachment rate with our pen needles getting used with those pen injectors.

So again, we sort of frame that as at least a $100,000,000 market opportunity by 02/1933. Think that that could prove to be highly conservative, particularly once sort of The U. S. Market kind of comes play in sort of that 2031 timeframe. But this could be something that begins to add revenue to Invecta’s business as early as 2026, as early as next year.

And certainly we’ll continue to ramp up through the LRP timeframe. And then as The U. S. Portion of the market goes generic in around that 2031 timeframe, that’s where we could see a pretty significant inflection. Okay.

So over the LRP, you have a paints your downside 1% to 2.5%, it sounds like headwind from US syringe, predominantly US syringe and your contract manufacturing Agreed. Still doing for Becton. And this GLP opportunity that you’re baking in over the LRP essentially offsets that to get you back to flat? Correct. That’s the way to think about it.

There are some other new product revenue streams that we’ve also added into our business in terms of distribution agreements. So we continue to really be focused on how do we continue to broaden out the product portfolio. And we’ve entered into several different distribution agreements, all of which are really meant to try and leverage our commercial channel internationally given that we’re in 140 different countries. We’ve signed some distribution agreements for products like BGMs, for products like insulin pumps, for ultrasound products. And that also in addition to the GLP-one is to help offset some of our kind of core assumptions.

Okay, so some benefit from it, but not near to the magnitude the GLP-1s in your conception. Agreed. Yeah. Were you precluded from being able to do that previously for some reason by the nature? So somewhat yes.

So as we were going through the separation, again, the focus was let’s separate as quickly as we can and keep the business stable. As part of that, we were sort of prohibited from putting in new product SKUs into the pre existing ERP system. So it wasn’t until now that we’re through that separation and we have our own ERP system and distribution network that now that we can sort of add those additional skews and kind of broaden our portfolio. Understood. All right, so in part explains the timing of the Analyst Day moving on beyond that and now able to look at new opportunities and new growth drivers.

Okay, all right. Maybe if we zoom into FY twenty five, ask you to talk a little bit about the pharmacy closure impact that drove the guidance reduction So for us, we go through obviously the retail pharmacy channel for our products domestically, internationally we go through a combination. Some of our products are used in retail pharmacies, some of them are used actually in the hospital setting depending The impact that we ended up seeing typically store closures are nothing new in terms of retail pharmacy store closures over the last several I think the thing that sort of differed here was just the magnitude of one particular customer’s retail pharmacy channels, the amount of store closures that they were expecting to occur during the course of 2025. And as a result of those store closures, they really needed to sort of figure out where are those patients going?

Are they going to go to existing stores? Because the patients aren’t going away. It’s a demand Those patients aren’t going away. They’re still going to require the product. It’s sort of just a temporary pause, if you will, until they figure out where those, now that they’ve determined the stores, where are those patients going?

What is the existing inventory? Where is that existing inventory of those stores? Where is that going to move to? And that sort of just caused this one particular retail pharmacy player to sort of then put a pause in terms of how much inventory they’re purchasing from distributors, which then impacts the amount of revenue for us as well. Okay.

And so I imagine the transient nature of that in part explains how you walk back up to your LRP for the remainder of the forecast. Exactly. So for us, we saw more significant headwinds, if you will, in terms of kind of constant currency revenue growth rates in the half of the year, largely because of some of the ERP implementations that we did in 2024. And in the back half of the year, we would actually expect to see flat to low single digit positive constant currency growth in 2025. And that still includes this impact, if you will, from the pharmacy store closures.

Okay, all right, that’s great. When you talk bigger picture about operating margin aspirations, you could help us maybe decompose a little bit and talk about the gross margin element of that separately from the below them. Yeah, so today we have gross margins that are somewhere around, let’s call it around 63% at the midpoint. Now we didn’t specifically provide gross margins at longer term gross margins at the Analyst Day. We talked about operating margins sort of being in that kind of 28% to 30% range.

At the midpoint, the operating margins today for us are around, let’s call it 30%. So essentially around 100 basis point or so decline midpoint to midpoint from 2025 through 2028. It’s really focused on two things. One, thoughts on tariffs and two, a slight increase in terms of R and D expense. So right now we are factoring in some incremental tariffs largely associated with The U.

S. And China. They have been temporarily put on pause, but we’ll have to see exactly what happens. If they were to go back into effect, we’ve sort of factored in that headwind. That’s causing about half of the decline from 2025 levels to our thoughts on 2028.

If that were to go away, we’d obviously see a margin uplift there of somewhere between 50 to 60 basis points. The additional item is just an increase in R and So today we only spend around 1501.5% or so in terms of R and D. We anticipate taking that up into sort of the two ish percent or plus type level. And that’s really focused primarily on trying to qualify another supplier or suppliers to provide the cannula or needles that go into our product. And if you sort of step back at the time of spin and at the time of separation, Becton Dickinson provides us with all of our cannula or needles today.

We probably purchased somewhere between 9,000,000,000 to $10,000,000,000 cannula. We’re the biggest customer of BD in terms of cannula today. And obviously that’s a sole source arrangement for us. And there have been some more significant markups, if you will, that BD has put on those cannulas sort of post spin that’s kind of negatively impacted our gross margins. One of the things now that we’re kind of we have the ERP system and we’re fully separate, one of the things that we’re sort of working on now is trying to qualify one or more alternate suppliers of those needles, which will sort of help I think in two different fronts.

One, it’s always good to have alternate suppliers. And then two, hopefully that introduces some price competitiveness now that BD would have to that we have an alternate supplier for that product. Now, so we’re factoring in essentially, we’re factoring in the incremental costs associated with that through 2028. However, any of the margin benefits most likely would come after the 2028 timeframe. So assuming that we’re able to qualify one or more alternate suppliers, hopefully we would actually see some gross margin uplift as a result of that moving forward.

So if I can frame up gross margin, historically you’ve seen positive price that’s no longer assumed in top line. That could be a driver of gross margin upside over the LRP if it’s realized. Tariffs taking a conservative approach if that alleviates at all, that could be a driver of upside. And then this transitioning from sole to multi source will most likely not be a positive driver over the LRP, but beyond that could potentially be another area of potential upside. Think that’s fair.

Okay, all right, great. We haven’t touched on capital allocation yet, which you put out there earlier. And so maybe just frame it for us again, the aspirations you have from a debt pay down standpoint, remind us where your leverage levels are today, where you aspire to get to and what that’s going to afford you on the future. Sure. So I think the leverage levels at Spin were relatively high.

That coupled with the fact that we needed to incur a fair amount of expenses and cash usage associated with standing up the organization really then temporarily actually drove leverage levels even higher. So right now at the end of our fiscal second quarter, our net leverage was around 3.7 times. By the end of this year, we committed to paying down at least 110,000,000 in debt. I think we’re well on our way to doing that or hopefully even a little bit better by the end of twenty twenty five. And our net leverage levels are expected to be somewhere around that three times mark by the end of our fiscal twenty twenty five.

Now moving forward, we do expect to generate somewhere in the magnitude of at least $600,000,000 in free cash flow, pay down somewhere between $450,000,000 to $500,000,000 in debt. Assuming that that sort of occurs ratably, I think it’s probably reasonable to think that our net leverage levels could be sort of in the low to mid-2s by 2027. And then by 2028 could certainly be slightly below two times. So another turn and then another maybe half a turn beyond that. Agreed.

I think it’ll really now that we’re through separation and through all the cash usage there, it’ll really allow us to sort of create some additional balance sheet flexibility that we can continue to sort of build this business out and diversify that product portfolio in the future through either organic or inorganic means. Okay. You brought up the inflationary pressures that you experienced over the prior LRP period. What is the nature of the status of your forward view on inflation embedded in your operating margin guidance? So we sort of factored in around a 4% inflationary impact kind of cost of living impact globally depending on markets.

Some may be lower than that, some may be higher than that, but that was sort of the overall amount that we kind of factored in. And then our team does a really great job considering that our products are really pennies on the dollar and the costs are pennies on the dollar. I mean, team does a tremendous job in trying to drive cost reductions each year to the tune of at least a 1% level per year. Okay. It kind of harkens back to the pricing comment that you made earlier at such a low expense level.

Is there anything that you’ve seen that informed that decision to take a more conservative view on price? So I think we have some larger customers obviously, particularly in The U. S. And trying to make sure that we lock those customers up into multi year arrangements. Our prices again historically have sort of been on the higher end.

So we certainly want to just take a balanced approach to make sure that we maintain those volumes, maintain those customer relationships over the LRP. Okay. All right. In the last minute, I thought I’d maybe open it up to you to characterize or describe what maybe has been misunderstood or the nature of your investor conversation since the Analyst Day to maybe clarify what you want to get out there to the market? So I mean, think we’ve had a lot of good reception with investors over the last couple of weeks.

A lot of interest in the company. I think following Analyst Day, I think that we’re always going to on the side of being a little bit more cautious with the understanding that we want to create a multi year set of financial projections that we have a high degree of probability and not just meeting, but hopefully exceeding. I do think that the free cash flow characteristics of the company post spin have really been masked because of all the cash flow needs towards separation and that will become very, very apparent very quickly here. Okay, all right, that’s great. Thanks so much for being here.

We really appreciate it. Yeah, thanks for having us. Thank you all for interest.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.