Dr Megan Baldwin [00:01:05] Thanks, Rob.

Robert Klupacs [00:01:06] Let’s start with your area of expertise. Can you explain to our listeners what the field of angiogenesis is and how you became interested in developing therapeutic strategies based on modulating this phenomenon?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:01:18] Yeah, sure. So angiogenesis is really the study or the, the, the process of blood vessel growth and blood vessel proliferation. And so when we study the field of angiogenesis we’re studying the process of the blood vessel development. But we’re also studying ways of inhibiting that process so that we can impact disease as well. And so in that context, we’re often studying the molecules, the signals that are actually driving the process and thinking about developing drugs or inhibitors of those molecules so that we can impact and have a benefit for for patients that have various diseases, diseases such as cancer or solid tumours that are really characterised by the growth of vessels into them. In the case of Opthea, obviously we’re now focussed on eye disease and inhibiting blood vessel development in wet AMD, for example. So if we can do that, we can impact disease and improve outcomes for patients as well. So it’s really about studying those processes, studying the molecular mechanisms that drive them. I think one of the key things that attracted me to this research field was the fact that it is so, I guess the scientific rationale for actually targeting this, this kind of process and the understanding of how we can actually impact disease. It’s it’s so simple. It’s so elegantly simple. Right? We can inhibit the processes of blood vessel development. It makes perfect sense. And we can actually have a very understandable impact on disease. If you shut down blood vessel growth in tumours for example, we can actually reduce the ability of the tumour to grow. If we shut down blood vessel development in the back of the eye, which is characterised in wet AMD, we can reduce those lesions and actually restore the architecture of the eye, the tissue of the eye, so that patients can see better. I was always very attracted to the fact that the understanding of how we can impact disease through studies and research on this pathway was always very, very obvious. And it’s that translational research piece that I think attracted me to this particular field of science.

Robert Klupacs [00:03:26] Yeah it’s interesting because I know you worked at Genentech for six years. I think.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:03:30] Yeah, it was about five years, yes.

Robert Klupacs [00:03:31] And they were sort of pioneered the approach and were the first class of angiogenesis drugs came. You worked on some of those, didn’t you?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:03:37] So I as you know, I did my PhD at the Ludwig Institute and the Ludwig Institute had discovered VEFG through the work of Mark Ashton and Steven Stacker at the Ludwig Institute. After I did my PhD, I then went to Genentech, and Genentech had a very, at the time, a very prominent researcher called Napoleona Ferrara, and he had discovered the first member of the VEFG family, which we can talk about in more detail. But he was a very and continues to be a very prominent pioneer in the field of and angiogenesis and VEFG biology. I was lucky enough to do a postdoc in his lab and to join Genentech when the development programs for therapies targeting angiogenesis for the treatment of cancer was actually just starting to come to the fore. It was 12 months later when their drug Avastin actually got approved. So it was really an important part of my career to join a company where the science was so fundamental and so very, very interesting. And then 12 months later, you can see the application of targeting that pathway, translate into the approval of a drug that then went on to be used, and be a multi-billion dollar drug that saved patients lives – literally saved patients lives. And I think that to be part of that story and part of the excitement of a biotech company at that stage is something that kind of really triggered my interest in wanting to see basic research translate into drugs that help people. And that’s why we go to work every day, right?

Robert Klupacs [00:05:04] Always been always wanted to ask you this question because you came… you finished a PhD at the Ludwig.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:05:08] Yep.

Robert Klupacs [00:05:09] And then you found yourself going to San Francisco to work for a company. Most people don’t do postdocs that way. How did you find your way to Genentech rather than an Australian or an international university as a postdoctoral scientist?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:05:21] It’s a really good point. I think I was always interested in the translational, piece. So really the translation of basic research into medicines, I knew that there was… I wanted to be really close to that process and that there was obviously a biotechnology sector. I interviewed in both academic research labs, but as an academic researcher, I was very much aware of Napoleona Ferrara’s research work. And so I knew that he worked at Genentech, and I literally sent emails and letters and got an interview at Genentech. And I also interviewed at research institutes as well. But, I will say that, you know, the laboratory that I worked in, Ludwig, which, as I mentioned earlier, was headed up by Mark Ashton and Steve Stacker. I came back from that trip and talked about what my next options were, and they were always very encouraging of the biotechnology sector as an opportunity for young researchers and scientists and as a postdoctoral opportunity, particularly at Genentech. Genentech was set apart from many other biotech companies in the sense that they had a postdoctoral program. So there were very academic research based, even though it was in the context of a drug development company. And I think the fact that both Steve and Mark were very supportive of that being an option for a young career scientist, that that helped guide me into what I truly wanted to do, which is get into that side of things.

Robert Klupacs [00:06:46] I waited 15 years to ask you that question. Great,thank you. Just changing a little bit. So Opthea is now known to be at the forefront of developing novel therapies for eye diseases, such as wet AMD. I thought it was great treatments for wet AMD already, so why is there a need for better treatments? And can you tell us why your treatment OP2303 might be so significant?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:07:06] Yeah, absolutely. So for the treatment of wet age related macular degeneration, or wet AMD, there is a class of therapies that are approved. Now I say a class because what that really means is that all of them to have a very similar mechanism of action and the way that they work is by blocking one member of the vascular endothelial growth factor family, which is the first member of the pathway to be discovered, which was VEGFA. And it is true that those, those therapies, drugs like Lucentis and Eylea, more recently Vabysmo, those, those drugs, by targeting that part of the pathway can actually improve visual acuity in many patients, the majority of patients, actually. But the reality is that the improvement is not optimal. So there’s still further room for improvement and optimal vision gain that’s just not achieved by the current treatments that are currently available. There are many patients that will go on to have regular treatment with drugs like Lucentis and Eylea, but actually over time, their vision will decline. They never have an optimal visual acuity response. So there’s still this still got impaired vision, even though they have had an improvement. And for many patients, they continue to have safe fluid and the lesions still persisting at the back of the eye, which ultimately affects their visual acuity. So that indeed is an opportunity for us as Opthea where we have a very strong intellectual property position around novel members of the VEGF family that are not targeted or inhibited by the existing drugs. Our drug targets a novel part of the pathway by hitting VEGFC and D, which in their own right actually impact the disease process. But really, we are developing our therapy to work alongside those standard of care treatments so that we get a broader inhibition and a much more profound and effective blockade of a pathway that then can actually further improve vision for patients and actually have patients do better and and further gains in visual acuity. That’s just not achievable if you only take the current standard of care treatments.

Robert Klupacs [00:09:13] And I know you’ve taken this all the way into phase 2b clinical trials with some pretty stellar results, and now it’s in phase three. Can you tell us what the results were like in the phase 2b.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:09:22] Yeah, absolutely. So our phase 2b was a very large, randomised controlled clinical study of 366 patients in the context of a phase two study that was a very large wet AMD study was statistically powered. And what we demonstrate started in that study was we showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful superior gain in visual acuity in those patients that received our therapy, OPT302, or sozinibercept as it’s called now, together with ranibizumab versus ranibizumab or Lucentis alone. So we showed greater visual acuity outcomes when patients received our drug, together with the standard of care, compared to the patients that only received the standard of care. We showed over a line gain a visual acuity in the vast majority of patients, patients that actually had particular types of lesions that responded best. And across the total patient population we also showed a meaningful clinical superior gain in visual acuity. So better benefit and also a consistent improvement in a number of anatomical measures as well. So we reduced the size of the lesion, reduced the disease burden, reduced the fluid, reduced swelling at the back of the eye, all of those things that then converge on visual acuity and actually can improve outcomes. So we’re the only company now with a late stage asset in clinical development.

Robert Klupacs [00:10:44] Fantastic. You’re really unique – Opthea is very unique in the Australian setting. Most companies don’t get to phase two B and actually most biotech companies don’t get to phase two B with results like yours or partner with a large pharma because large pharma take so much money, you’ve had to raise over $500 million to actually do the phase three studies. They’re enormous 2000 2000 patients you obviously very confident in two B. But how did you do? It must have been extremely hard because it’s unusual for an Australian come to do it. I think you’ve actually had to get most of the money from sources around the world. I know our listeners would love to hear what was the process? How did you go about it? Why did you choose that strategy rather than licensing it to a farmer and do want to be other Australian biotech company does?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:11:28] Yeah, we are unusual. I agree with you. I think that it’s a it’s a unique thing in Australia. And actually I think a little bit of a sad thing that there’s not more companies that have actually been able to retain 100% of the economic value of their asset. I think many companies in Australia do choose to partner early, and perhaps sometimes too early. They lose a lot of that, that economic value and potential because they’ve, they’ve sold off or they’ve got a partnership very, very early in the process. We’re in almost a unique position, I think, that we’ve been able to attract, institutional investors and had very, very strong support from our retail investors as well. We’ve had great support out of Australia. There is no doubt about that. But along the way and we’ve done a number of financings, as you well know, along the way we’ve been able to attract institutional investment interest from the United States, from Europe and from the UK, but also from Australia as well. How do you do that? I think you need to have a really clear vision and a really good, well articulated business case for your asset that you want people to buy in and see the vision, that the company has and have the same conviction that you have when you lead a company. Right. You’ve got to believe in the science. You’ve got to believe in the commercial potential of the asset. And I think you have to be able to bring investors along for that with that belief and for that ride as well, because in biotech nothing is done quickly. It’s a long it’s a long path. Right. And so you’re asking them to trust you and you are asking them to invest for the long haul. The trade off. The trade off is obviously that the upside is huge if you hit there. But along the way, you’ve really got to articulate and communicate the potential of the asset, have a clear business plan, have a good management team that your investors actually have an appreciation that they know what they’re doing and that they can actually deliver. And then you need to deliver on what you say you’re going to do.

Robert Klupacs [00:13:28] You made a really good point – how long it is. Just for our listeners, the first time you saw a result with your lead in an animal model and you said, “this is something I want to develop” – my understanding, that was about 2009, 2010. Is that about right?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:13:43] The in preclinical work in animal studies? Yeah, absolutely. It was before because we started our phase one with the asset OPT302, sozinibercept – we started that phase one in around 2015. Yeah.

Robert Klupacs [00:13:57] So yeah, just for our listeners, you think about biotech in 2009. It’s now 2024 , read out in 2025, 16 years. And that’s pretty fast.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:14:07] It’s yeah, it’s not bad actually. You’re right. I mean I think people think it’s a really long path and what have you been doing. But the reality is it’s in many years pre-clinically just getting enough understanding and data around the efficacy of your molecule. But of course you need to understand if the molecule’s safe in animal models, you need to do all of that work before you put it into a human. Then you’ve got to do early-stage safety studies in a human. Then you’ve got to do proof of concept studies in the phase two, so that you can show that there’s enough potential for this drug to impact disease. And then, of course, you’ve got to raise enough money to do the trials in the phase three program, which the regulatory agencies around the world, they need to be of sufficient size. You need to expose enough patients so that they’ve got enough confidence in the safety profile of the drug. And then, of course, you need to have it powered sufficiently that you’re confident that the effects that you’re seeing are real and that they’re impacting truly impacting disease. So it’s it is a long path. But I am glad you pointed out I think we’ve done we’ve been quite efficient and we’ve had a very clear regulatory path and clinical development path right from the outset, which I think helps to encourage investment into your program.

Robert Klupacs [00:15:18] And I think the thing about what this whole podcast is about innovation, development, the interesting thing, which is chatting before we got on air, the discovery of the molecule behind OPT302 was first patented in 1995. It really and it went through a lot of testing and playing with it, and not only when it landed in your hands, what 2007, 2000 and 2008 really is when it started to be developed.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:15:40] I mean, that’s right. It was a research tool for many for many years. The, the the soluble form of the receptor, the first forms of that receptor came out as, Talos group at the University of Helsinki, who did a lot of really important research with the molecule. It came into what was Circadia at the time it became Opthea, obviously, when we became focussed on eye disease, but we optimised the molecule. It improved its manufacturability. It gave us new patent protection around the optimised form of the molecule. And that’s the form that we’ve now got as sozinibercept OPT32. That is in phase three clinical development.

Robert Klupacs [00:16:16] Yeah, it’s an amazing story. One of the things on this podcast, we really love people listening. I want to listen to aspiring want to become leaders themselves. So the best thing to do is listening to people who have done it. And your story is pretty remarkable. But so I want to tease that out a little bit about your journey. Because we said at the beginning, University of Melbourne graduate., PhD at Ludwig, went across to San Francisco for six years. Came back to Australia then jumped from being Head of Pre-Clinical Development to a CEO of an ASX listed company. Huge clinical trials, and I don’t think people are quite aware the amount of time Megan spends outside of Australia is enormous to get this done. I know I would love to know how you how you came about this. How do you live your life now? And if you think about when you came back to Australia, did you realise the next 16 years would be what you’re now living through?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:17:08] Not at all. And I don’t think… It’s often difficult to, I guess, envisage or predict kind of where you’re going to land in your career, right? You know, at Circadian. You gave me a lot of opportunities, and there was a lot of opportunity to roll up your sleeves and actually get experience across the board. No, I would not have thought that I would have ended up leading the company, ASX listed company at the time, developing and selecting the asset to take forward, raising the amount of capital that we have and and then listing the company on Nasdaq as well. That’s a great set of experiences, right. It’s it’s it’s not easy. And so I don’t think if you had have said you’re going to go through this entire path, you’re not going to get a lot of sleep, you’re going to be on a plane most of the time, there’s a whole bunch of stuff you’re going to need to manage. You’re going to need to learn a whole bunch of stuff that you didn’t learn at university that that are going, that is going to challenge you along the way in terms of how you navigate networks and relationships and governance and the investment world – all of those things. I’m not sure that people would ever be really comfortable saying, you’ll take that on, thanks, but but you do, and you surround yourself with the right people and you dive in and you work hard and you focus and you make sure that you surround yourself to learn. Right.

Robert Klupacs [00:18:25] It’s interesting, the demographic of our listeners. We’ve got a lot of late 20s, early 30s type people. They’re thinking about this and they’re about to have a young family just for you. When I first met you, you had young two young boys. And look at now you’ve you’ve got.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:18:41] One young boy.

Robert Klupacs [00:18:41] And that’s what you’ve got to. Well, not young, not young anymore, but you like a lot of younger people who want to be entrepreneurs. Part of the things that holds them back is, oh, I’ve got a mortgage to pay. I’ve got kids to look after. How did you deal with that? Because this is a really difficult job you’re doing.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:18:57] It is. And I think you have to be kind to yourself. And I think that you have to give yourself licence or permission. Maybe it’s permission to have times where you dive in. And the reality is you’re probably going to get the balance wrong. And then there’ll be other times where you step back and you say, okay, I’m going to give my permission to kind of focus over here. I think it’s super important for people that embark on these kind of journeys and find themselves in this situation where work is all consuming and it always is. And if you have got certain personality types, it becomes really consuming. I think it’s making sure that you and I’m not saying I do this adequately all the time, but you can’t lose sight of what’s really important. I’ve always had a great support network with my husband, who’s a scientist as well, who’s an incredible father and very much self-sufficient on the home side. So I think I’ve been very, very fortunate that I’ve had that support and the confidence to know that he has always encouraged me to go out and do whatever, just go out and do what you need to do and get it done. Get it done was always what what he would say, and I think there’s a great teamwork there. I think it’s really challenging for people if they don’t have that to be, to be frank with you. But I think my advice would be to, not lose sight of the fact that the thing that keeps you going is really family and and making sure that that that stays solid.

Robert Klupacs [00:20:29] That’s great. It’s quite interestingly, you spent six years at Genentech, you came back and you’ve been working supposedly in Australia for 16 years, but it’s been backwards and forwards to the United States and Europe extensively. One of the things about this podcast is all about innovation, development and what it takes. Everyone points to the rest of the world does innovation development better than Australia. Having been part of both ecosystems, what do you think we can do better in Australia to to get more Optheas?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:20:58] We do need a critical mass, of companies. If you look at a market or the, you know, the US just in general, there’s I think at a society level, there’s a really good understanding, generally speaking, of what science is and what i-tech is and there’s a knowledge base there that they understand companies and that encourages investment into the sector and creates new companies. I think there’s a cultural piece to that as well. In the, in the US, for example, that entrepreneurship and innovation is encouraged. And so people that go out on their own. And take early stage research and start companies, even if they fail, they’re still a success in the US market. I think what we can do better here in Australia is to appreciate that. people that go out and start new companies or really back science and want to take it forward, need to be encouraged. How do we do that? Culturally, we need to reward those people that are going out in the sector and not actually strip them down if it happens to not work out, because not all science does work out. Even if you go in with the best intentions and the best understanding. We need to encourage investment into the sector and make sure that they are well supported, and that they are well funded to do things the right way. You can’t take a lot of shortcuts. You can do things efficiently, but you can’t take a lot of shortcuts and only half do what you need to get a drug to market. The reality is, it’s a recipe for disaster. You’re not going to get it approved if you start doing that. So I think government has a role to play. I think investors in general, mums and dad investors, institutional investors, high net worth, family offices all have a role to play in getting behind our science that is Aussie and born and bred here, backing those companies so that we can fuel the ecosystem, build more companies, actually encourage more investment. What’s going to encourage more investment? Successful companies; where people can view a few companies that have started here, remained here and commercialised here and brought it back in. And investors see return on their investment. That’s only going to happen when we get enough money.

Robert Klupacs [00:23:16] True. Have you seen that? Do you think that’s changed in the last 10-15 years?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:23:19] I definitely, definitely think various elements of it have changed. I think that there is a strong desire, even at government level, to support innovation, and to foster the sector through programs, directed to our universities. And, there’s a very good appreciation that we probably need to develop in a country in Australia, the understanding of how to translate research into drug development candidates and then into clinical and approved therapies. How we actually catalyse that to the point where we start to see it with, with more CSLs, you know, and more Cochleas. That’s a different question. It’s it’s probably something that’s still we’re on a road to. But there’s definitely been change. I think in general, even in the investment community now, there’s a much, much more savvy. And, I guess they can appreciate the potential of investment in the sector because the payoff is is huge. If we get it right and we we can commercialise these therapies.

Robert Klupacs [00:24:27] We’ve got we’ve got that taped that’s going to be the headline on our LinkedIn update.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:24:30] Well, what particular bit.

Robert Klupacs [00:24:32] The one you just said about success breeds success. Effectively.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:24:35] It does. Absolutely. I think investors want to see, they want to see successful companies if we go out, if we had another CSL, imagine what that would do for the investment into the sector.

Robert Klupacs [00:24:47] God.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:24:48] It doesn’t even have to be a CSL. I mean, that’s a it could.

Robert Klupacs [00:24:50] Could be an Opthea.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:24:51] It could be another Opthea.

Robert Klupacs [00:24:53] Well interestingly, there’s Opthea and Mesoblast two companies who are at similar stage. Mesoblast is a little bit older than you, but it’s same stage now. They’ve looks like they’re going to – fingers crossed – though second time around. In the next while, they’ll have the FDA approval, but they’re not that far ahead of you. They’re a 20 year journey as well. So similar.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:25:07] It needs that appreciation that, it takes a while.

Robert Klupacs [00:25:10] On our podcast, I think, you know, this mentorship is one of the key themes that we’re talking about and finding role models, because I think one of the things you’re talking about is building a critical mass. So you got people to talk to, have done it before, and can help you through the stuff that you don’t know, what you don’t know. What do you think. I know you do a lot of mentoring yourself. What do you think makes a good mentor. And how do you think people should go and find them? Because at the end of the day you need someone to give you some advice.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:25:37] Yeah. I think at the end of the day, you need people to sound be a sounding board. And I think it’s really important that you have those people that are outside of your really close contacts, so that so that you get an impartial, unbiased and, you know, impartial point of view. Right. And you need to be able to tap into people that have been there before, or at least encourage you to open your eyes and see things from a different perspective. So sometimes the best mentors, I think, are not necessarily the people that are exactly, you know, doing ophthalmology or doing exactly what you’re doing. They’re the people that are good business people in general, or perhaps just really good at reading people and understanding human behaviour. Sometimes they’re great mentors as well. So, you know what makes a good mentor? I think a being a good mentor is someone that you resonate with, and you have a very open, transparent dialogue with. Ultimately, the advice or the guidance that you want from your mentor is has got to be constructive. I don’t think there’s a lot of point sitting down with a mentor that just tells you what you want to hear, but I do think that there is a lot of value in someone providing you with that constructive guidance and actively listening to you to really understand and tease out what is it exactly that you’re seeking your guidance on. And sometimes the guidance is not necessarily on the fundamentals of drug development. It’s on, oh my God, I’ve got these ongoing pressures from various stakeholders and how do I how do I manage that? How do I make everyone happy? Which of course, you know, is impossible. But that’s the kind of that’s the kind of thing that I think your mentor can help. How do you find one? I’m strongly in the camp that your mentors emerge from your network. I’m a big believer in you can’t force mentorship because I think the thing I value most about my mentors is the natural, the natural dialogue that comes with deeply respecting someone and their point of view and the relationship that builds over time. Some of those people you might talk to once a week, some of them you might talk to once every five years, they can still be a mentor. That said, I think if I was a younger, a younger researcher in the industry, there’s a lot of really good mentor programs that are out there. IMNIS is one of them, and I think it’s a really great thing. Early in your career to tap into those programs, you’re likely to be assigned someone that is probably going to be perceived to be a good fit. Some of them will work out, some of them won’t. But I would encourage that. Those programs are a really good resource for people to tap into, because you’re going to get access to people that otherwise perhaps are not yet in your network, or you that you don’t know would be necessarily willing to mentor you. So they can be a really great platform for people to explore mentorship.

Robert Klupacs [00:28:19] Always. The next question is, who have been your favourite mentors? There’s a lot of people to take credit for, you know, Megan.

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:28:25] Well, I’m not going to name names because, but I like I said, my mentors, I think early on, I think, you know, as a researcher, my mentors were, you know, my PhD supervisors, they they mentored me in many different ways. They had the formal role of a PhD supervisor, but they were mentors just the same. I had a number of mentors at Genentech that were not in the research division that I naturally had gravitated to, because they came from different angles of drug development, clinical, business development, regulatory. They were naturally evolving because I was naturally interested in learning from them. As my career has evolved and I’ve become more exposed to the investment financial sector. I’ve had several mentors that have either led funds or I’ve been in that investment scene that I’ve very much valued because they don’t necessarily have a science background, but they come with economics degrees or accounting degrees or investment banking. And and they’ve been able to guide me along the was well. So look at the many and varied. Like I said, some of them of people that you tap into and speak to often, others that you only talk to infrequently. And then there’s the people that pop back into your life as as you kind of evolve. And it’s amazing how there’s a big circle of contacts that they keep coming back.

Robert Klupacs [00:29:48] Last question for you. So your career is still growing and growing. It’s got a long way to go, but can you just just reflect for us? And if you look back, the 18 year old Megan Baldwin, to add to that, what would you say to her?

Dr Megan Baldwin [00:30:02] I would say, hang on and, back yourself. I would say maybe I’m not saying this to Megan, but I would say to people coming through early in their careers that you do need to develop a little bit of a hard exterior. You have to let things wash over you. Probably didn’t do that well enough, but over many years of being in industry, that. That is difficult. It’s a long time frame and you have to kind of fight off many kind of different pressures day to day. And a lot of, frankly, as a public company, a lot of criticism and opinions and people that can… people, everyone that wants to tell you how to how to do things. I think it’s about I think the advice would be to surround yourself with good people, the people that you trust, listen to them, but to back yourself as well. Because if you don’t have the conviction in yourself and you’re not driven to actually dive in and really understand every element of what you’re doing, then ultimately you will fail. So I would say dive in. Be on top of the detail. Surround yourself by really good people that you know. Be prepared to let things wash over you a little bit as well.

Robert Klupacs [00:31:16] Oh, what a fantastic way to end. Megan, I’ve been wanted to have this chat for a long time. Thank you so much for giving us your time. I know how busy you are at the moment, and thank you so much for all that you’ve said today and sharing your insights and how we can improve innovation in Australia, and particularly that last comment. A lot of Australians, I think, don’t realise how good they can be and they often don’t believe in themselves enough. And you’ve been exposed to a lot of people in America who’s the complete opposite. To our listeners. I hope you’ve enjoyed listening and I look forward to introducing you to our guests in future podcasts. There are links to everything we talked about in the show notes, and we look forward to welcoming you next time.