Jim Clemmer - President and CEO Michael Greiner - Executive Vice President and CFO Steve Trowbridge - Senior Vice President, General Counsel.

Cecilia Furlong - Canaccord Genuity Matthew Mishan - Keybanc Capital Markets Jayson Bedford - Raymond James.

Good morning. And welcome to the AngioDynamics Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2018 Earnings Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded.

The news release detailing the third quarter results crossed the wire earlier this morning and is available on the company’s website.

This conference call is also being broadcast live over the Internet at the Investors section of the company’s website at www.angiodynamics.com, and the webcast replay of this call will be available at the same site approximately one hour after the end of today’s call.

Before we begin, I would like to caution listeners that during the course of this conference call, the company will make projections or forward-looking statements regarding future events, including statements about expected revenue, adjusted earnings and free cash flow for fiscal year 2018.

Management encourages you to review the company’s past and future filings with the SEC, including without limitation, the company’s forms 10-Q and 10-K, which identify specific factors that may cause the actual results or events to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements.

A slide package offering insight into the company’s financial results is also available on the Investors section of the company’s website under Presentations. This presentation should be read in conjunction with the press release discussing the company’s operating results and financial performance during this morning’s conference call.

I’d now like to turn the call over to Jim Clemmer, AngioDynamics’ President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr.

Clemmer?.

Thank you, Rob. Good morning, everyone. And thank you for joining us for AngioDynamics third quarter 2018 earnings call. With me on the call is Michael Greiner, AngioDynamics’ Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Today, I will provide a brief overview of the operating highlights for the quarter.

Michael will then provide a detailed analysis of our financial performance and an update to affirm our fiscal 2018 guidance. After that, we’ll open the call to your questions. Our third quarter results demonstrate continued execution against our operational goals. We achieved meaningful gross margin expansion. We drove strong profitability.

We delivered positive free cash flow, despite not growing revenue in the way that we had hoped. Our net sales for the third quarter of FY ‘18 were down 2% year-over-year to $83.9 million, as growth across the majority of our product portfolio was offset by pressures in our Venous and our PICCs product lines.

Additionally, we think the negative comparable related to the exit of our RFA product line in Japan which as you may recall was the subject of an inventory write-off last quarter. In January of 2017, we recorded an RFA sale in Japan of $1.7 million.

Subsequent to which, we discontinued the product line in Japan and had no additional sales, which created the negative comparable this quarter. Now I will briefly discuss the performance of each of our businesses during the quarter and what we’re doing to improve our performance in each of those areas.

Our Peripheral Vascular business was down approximately $400,000 due to the previously noted year-over-year decline in our Venous Insufficiency business. This decline is mostly offset by mid to high-single-digit growth in the remainder of the PV portfolio. AngioVac procedural volumes remain strong and were up 17.6% year-over-year in the third quarter.

We continue to make targeted R&D investments in our promise management products while also speaking to identify inorganic growth opportunities. While performance of the Venous Insufficiency business remains the lower expectations due to continued competitive and reimbursement headwinds.

We continue to work hard and returning this business in positive growth. Our Vascular Access business revenue declined during the third quarter. But at a slower rate and we’ve seen in prior quarters. As continue growth in Midlines and other BioFlo related products was more than offset by declines in sales of PICCs as well as our non-BioFlo products.

The ongoing mix shift to BioFlo product is evidence of the value, but this one of the current technology to delivering to our customers. Additionally, our lawsuit against C.R.

Bard is moving forward as planned and we continue to believe that if our PICCs are able to compete on a level playing field, we can grow our business in this market, particularly given the gain that we have seen from our BioFlo Midline ports and dialysis product families. We anticipate hearing from the District Court soon.

Our Oncology/Surgery business decreased 7.2% year-over-year as lower sales related to the discontinued RFA business in Japan. We’re only partially offset by mid-teen growth sales of both NanoKnife and the Solero Microwave Tissue Ablation System. Excluding the $1.7 million Japanese RFA transaction from January 2017.

Our Oncology business grew by 6.7% year-over-year, driven Solero growth of 15% this quarter and that product is receiving very positive response from global positions. We remain focus on optimizing our product portfolio through both organic and inorganic investments in order disperse top-line growth.

We continue to seek out value creating M&A, while also evaluating reshaping our overall product portfolio. As an example of this focus on investing in our product portfolio, we recently introduce the Biim wireless ultrasound with our partner Biim Technology.

And we are excited for the added level of convenience and accuracy that this groundbreaking product will deliver to Vascular Access clinicians. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Michael Greiner, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer..

Thanks, Jim, and good morning, everyone. Before I begin, I would like to remind you that we have posted a presentation on our IR website, summarizing the key items associated with our third quarter results. This information is intended to complement our prepared remarks as we now walk through the quarter’s results.

As Jim mentioned, our net sales for the third quarter of fiscal 2018 totaled $83.9 million, which represents a 2% year-over-year decrease. For the nine months ended February 28, 2018, net sales were $256 million, a decrease of 2.6%, compared to $262.7 million for the same period a year ago.

Our gross margin for the third quarter of fiscal 2018 expanded 300 basis points to 54.2% from 51.2% a year ago, largely as a result of ongoing operational improvements and recently completed facility consolidations.

Based on our performance this quarter, and ongoing efficiency improvement efforts, we remain confident in our ability to end the year with an annualized gross margin approaching 52%. Our R&D expenses during the third quarter of fiscal 2018 were $6.5 million or 7.7% of total sales, compared to $6 million or 7% of total sales a year ago.

We are spending more on R&D year-over-year but our expected full year spend is tracking below what we had anticipated at the beginning of the year as a result of our more disciplined R&D process that we had previously discussed.

Selling, general and administrative expenses for the third quarter of fiscal 2018 decreased slightly to $25.7 million or 30.7% of total sales, compared to $26.5 million or 30.9% of total sales a year ago.

The decrease in SG&A on a dollar basis was primarily attributable to our continued focus on cost reduction as well as the impact of our lower than anticipated sales.

Our adjusted net income for the third quarter of fiscal 2018 was $9.5 million or $0.25 per share, compared to adjusted net income of $6.9 million or $0.19 per share in the third quarter of fiscal 2017.

For the nine months ended February 28, 2018, our adjusted net income was $19.9 million or $0.53 per share, compared to an adjusted net income of $20.2 million or $0.55 per share a year ago.

Adjusted EBITDAS in the third quarter of fiscal 2018, excluding the items shown in the reconciliation table of our presentation was $16.8 million, compared to $14.9 million in the third quarter of fiscal 2017. For the nine months ended February 28, 2018, our adjusted EBITDAS was $41.5 million compared to $44.4 million for the same period a year ago.

Now, moving to the cash flow and balance sheet, in the third quarter of fiscal 2018, we generated $4.3 million in operating cash flow and $3.9 million in free cash flow, the difference being spent on capital expenditures.

As of February 28, 2018, we had $63.6 million in cash and cash equivalents and investments, as well as $93.8 million in outstanding debt, which excludes the netting impact of deferred financing fees that are captured on our balance sheet.

Additionally, our free cash flow generation continues to strengthen our balance sheet and underlines our focus on financial discipline.

Our strong balance sheet enabled us to continue seeking up potential acquisitions that align with our long-term growth initiatives while also empowering us to make targeted investments in new products R&D and ongoing operational improvements. Now on to our financial guidance for the remainder of the year.

We are reaffirming our previously announced financial guidance as we continue to expect our fiscal year 2018 net sales in the range of $345 million to $350 million, and free cash flow in the range of $30 million to $35 million.

This excludes approximately $12.5 million cash payments that we make anticipate making during the fourth quarter related to the previously disclosed legal matters with the Department of Justice. Additionally, we continue to expect our adjusted earnings per share in the range of $0.64 to $0.68.

This excludes any impact on the recently enacted 2017 Tax Reform Act. As previously discussed with regards for the recently signed tax reform, we will see a positive impact to our adjusted EPS, primarily due to the decline of our global statutory tax rate from 36% to 23%.

And as I mentioned, this was not included in our previously issued formal guidance. Including the impact of the Tax Reform Act, we anticipate adjusted earnings per share in the range of $0.70 to $0.74. With that, I’d like to turn the call back to Jim..

Thanks, Michael. Before I close, I’d like to update you on our progress with NanoKnife and with our ongoing dialogue with the FDA. On January 24, 2018, we announced that the FDA granted, the Expedited Access Pathway or Breakthrough Designation to our NanoKnife system and proposed indication for use of the treatment of Stage III pancreatic cancer.

The Breakthrough Designation is designed to help patients gain more timely access to medical devices that may provide more effective treatment of life threatening diseases for which no approval or clear alternative exists.

The recent proliferation of studies published in peer reviewed articles describe the use of the NanoKnife system to treat Stage III pancreatic cancer supported our application for the Breakthrough Designation.

In addition, we made a fundamental switch in our approach to securing an expanded indication for the use of the NanoKnife system to treat pancreatic cancer. After discussions with the FDA, we believe that the PMA pathway will provide a more predictable path to a successful outcome.

In addition, we believe that an ultimate PMA approval includes numerous ancillary benefits not associated with the 5, 10-K approval. We are actively engaged in discussions with the FDA, to develop our data development plan to support the PMA submission utilizing the collection of real world evidence.

We will be initiating a real-world evidence trial to collect rigorous clinical data to address three main goals. First, to secure an expanded indication pursuant to our PMA.

Second, eliminate as many variables as possible to articulate the medical community that the improved outcomes for patients with Stage III pancreatic cancer are directly attributable to the NanoKnife system.

And third, to support payers including CMS, the termination that the use of NanoKnife is reasonable and necessary for coverage and payment purposes. We believe that our current plan provides for the most efficient and effective structure to collect data to support these three goals.

As we finalize details around our plan, we expect to provide additional public comments. In closing, as we look forward to the last quarter of the fiscal year and beyond. We continue to believe that our portfolio evaluation and reshaping efforts, we’ll drive sustainable long-term top-line growth. I’ve been in AngioDynamics for almost 2 years now.

And in that time, we’ve executed against most of the operational goals that we initially laid out. That being said, the one area that still needs to be addressed is our product portfolio, which in its current form remains our largest inhibitor to top-line growth.

During this past quarter, we grew 8 of our 11 product categories and we are addressing the ones that we missed. We remain committed to optimizing this portfolio. We know where the softness lies and we are working to address it. Thank you for joining this morning. And now I will turn the call back to Rob for questions-and-answers..

[Operator Instructions]. Our first question is coming from the line of Jason Mills with Canaccord Genuity. Please proceed with your question. .

Hi. Good morning. This is actually Cecilia Furlong on for Jason. And I was just wondering, could you provide a bit more outlook on the M&A front.

What your current capacity for M&A is, what you’d comfortably be willing to invest? Just your thoughts around current valuations you are seeing across med tech in general?.

Thanks, Cecilia. This is Michael. Great questions. So, as you may be aware we have approximately 55 million of cash on our balance sheet. At this moment in time we have a revolver of $150 million that is untapped. And so, we continue to remain active as we talked about in the second quarter.

But direct to your question on valuation, we have been unable to for a variety of reasons including valuation been able to get anything across the finish line at this point in time. What we are excited about is in the strategic areas that we are focused on we do see a lot of opportunity.

And so, we are confident that over this next 12 months we anticipate closing deals. We are also going to do it with an eye towards being thoughtful around valuation..

And then just turning quickly to NanoKnife.

Could you just provide a little more color around how your interactions with FDA have changed, proceeding the designation versus prior? And just also how this affects and alters your thoughts around your R&D allocation on a go forward basis?.

Sure Cecilia. So, our discussion with the FDA I will describe as being very collaborative. Over the past 12 months, here at AngioDynamics I think you are aware Cecilia, we’ve added some new people towards the end. People have joined us that have good experience in doing projects like this and have done it in the past lives.

So, we added some capability to our team which is helpful. We then engaged in collaborative discussions with the FDA where we mutually I think agreed that the PMA pathway using this new breakthrough designation was really a great pathway for this product because of the unmet need for these patients with pancreatic cancer.

So, you really have two things coming to get at one. The need to treat these folks, a really great device, [indiscernible] get with the FDA and prove that the clinical data is real and we’re working as we do that. So that is great.

Number two, back to your comment on R&D, we are committed as I told you before, Michael has reiterated, to R&D spend at the rate we’ve shown you roughly 7% and 8%. And we mentioned again in FY ‘18 we set aside extra spending. We are spending a little bit under our anticipated rate.

And we are committed to new R&D process that will spend up wisely and blending the R&D process with external M&A and licensing and distribution opportunities are few of the ways that we will grow in the future. .

And if I can just squeeze one more in. Just regarding gross margin expansion, could you provide some additional color around expected impact of the recent facility consolidation, just both near term as well as going forward? And can you walk us through the other primary drivers of gross margin expansion just on a go forward basis? Thank you. .

Yes. So, as we mentioned we this quarter ended up at 54.2%, there is a mix of items that contributed to that. Mostly net productivity and net productivity number where the closures of plant facilities. But that was only a little piece of it this quarter. Because, we just completed in quarter.

So, as we go out, we’ll get to see the full impact then those particular planned consolidation into fiscal year ’19. As we reiterated, we expect approaching 52% for gross margin for the full year, which is doing math means our fourth quarter will be in that 54% to 55% gross margin range as well.

And so, you have six months of year-on-year with six months of 54% to 55%, largely you can conclude that would be the way that we think about entering the full year of fiscal year ’19.

Again, you’re going to start to feel the full $4 million to $5 million of overhead expenses that we will eliminated through the plan consolidation and putting more volume in plans, you’ll see more absorption opportunity as well as just taking a step back and saying are we using the footprint the right way in the plan, that we now have remaining in upstate New York.

So, we’ll continue to move towards that. But we did see this quarter is with the reduction and Venous Insufficiency revenue that is a very attractive gross margin product. So that did provide us a little bit of a headwind related to mix [ph]. .

Our next question comes from the line of Matthew Mishan with Keybanc Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question..

I think this is going to be a multi-part question. But could you give us a sense of the timing and the scope of the portfolio evaluation and kind of the reshaping you’re talking about.

And then what are some of the parameters you’re looking at for businesses that you may add through M&A and then businesses that you currently have that you kind of view as core versus non-core?.

So Matt, good question. About a year ago, we had our first Investor Day, if you go back what we presented there. I think you still with very much aligned with that. I think what we did at that day, which is show you, show everybody that we’re looking at our portfolio in a couple of different ways.

We identified some of the core, as you identified core product categories that we have in our portfolio. And those will probably receive a little less attention and investment overtime. Now that doesn’t mean they can't grow but to give you an example. Our Fluid Management business continues to outperform its market in the safest ways.

This is primarily due to really great execution and to really well managed business, our people inside internally are managing well and the sales forces are executing very well. So that’s a great business, but it’s not going to receive a lot of attention and investment going forward.

I think we identified three or four categories last year Investor Day. But we really like, we’ll invest in and we’ll continue to do so. So, if you’re looking we’re invest in that, it’s probably targeted to the areas that we’ve shown our investors already.

Because we see really more of a rightful reason to win in some of those areas due to existing technology that we feel is exclusive or highly beneficial to our caregiver partners and our patients. So, building around that makes ultimate sense for us..

Also, just add to that and [indiscernible] the facilities question as well. We are going to remain focused in the M&A space on more of a target bolt on type of acquisition.

Those are same strategy to Jim’s point and with an eye towards appropriate valuation and obviously as I think anyone on this call recognized, evaluations are a little [frothy] right now.

So, we’ll remain disciplined there, because we recognize that the long-term story here is around creating value and if we’re going out and obviously paying too much a premium, that just makes it much harder to overcome..

Thanks for that. And then I think maybe you will give more detail on this a little bit down the road.

But on NanoKnife, as your kind of working towards the PMA pathway, other than just having like more data which is clear, can you give us a little bit more color on how you are thinking about organizing, presenting and designing studies a little bit differently this time than from what’s been presented in the past?.

Matt, good question. And it’s Stephen Trowbridge, as you know General Counsel and Head of Clinical Affairs Department has joined us. I’ll have Stephen answer that question. .

Thanks, Jim. And thanks, Matt. I think it’s a good point. We are thinking about organizing our data in a little bit different way than what you’ve seen in the past. Historically we have talked about some investigator-initiated trials that have had great results and have done a really good job pushing this technology forward.

However, in the discussions that we’ve had with FDA it’s become clear that we have to augment the body of evidence that’s out there with some more traditional type evidence that you would expect to see. So as Jim mentioned in his prepared remarks we are having our conversations with the FDA.

We are organizing our trial and our evidence development activities to get to three main goals. One, to get the FDA approval. But sometimes even more importantly, is to organize that data in a way that’s going to be very meaningful to the physicians that haven’t already brought in to the NanoKnife story.

So, we want to make sure that we can continue to build on what’s out there to prove to benefit that NanoKnife provides to these patients. And then third, which is even important than the other two, to make sure that we can articulate the value proposition to the payers, whether those are private payers or CMS.

And so, we are going to after a very comprehensive strategy here to build on the really good evidence that’s already out there..

Okay. Thank you. And then for Michael, how sustainable are these gross margin trends? You kind of exited the -- exiting 3Q at 54% I mean your guidance would imply kind of same rate around 4Q.

As you kind of go into next year, I mean is it seasonality in the back half or do you think that as you kind of get into next year your mid 50s gross margin company?.

So, we are working through our budget process now. So, I don’t have a strongly held view towards next year.

But as I responded to Cecilia, I think if you look at 54.2% this quarter somewhere in that range or higher for the fourth quarter and at some point, you’ll start to realize that you’ve got a cost structure that supports this mid 50% gross margin profile.

Again, a lot of it especially going to next year specific talk than taking out of the system through the consolidation of the two plants. We will have a full year without any of that royalty. So, we had five months this year of the royalty, next year we will have no royalty for the year. That was a specific driver as well.

So, it’s really going to be dependent next year. Quite frankly once we get our kind of our internal budget, is what is our mix. So, if our mix is really attractive with some of our higher margin products we absolutely can see a full year in the mid-50s so it’s may be slightly above that.

If our mix is a little less attractive from a gross margin standpoint, we will probably be more in the 54% 53.5% range. But we have definitely moved out of that bucket of the high 40s, low 50s that we’ve seen for many years. So, I am confident around that. .

And last question just on the guidance, can you help me walk from the 64-68 to 70-74, what piece of that is tax rate going from 36 to 23, what piece of that is the [med device] which was -- the exemption of the [med device tax] which was extended and then is there any piece of that is operational as well?.

Yes. None of the med device tax relates to the difference in 64-68, 70-74 to the med device tax was put into our selling, general and administrative piece of that all offer. So, no tax implications of the med device tax coming off. I know approximately to depending that anticipated as a headwind, assuming it came back in January 1st.

The difference between 64-68, 70-74 is 100% the fact that our blended rate for the full year, which means in our case 7 months of 36% and then 5 months of 23%, we get 5 months of 13% less tax rate, statutory tax rate, it’s a 100% related to that. .

Our next question is from the line of Matt Hewitt with Craig-Hallum. Please proceed with your question..

This is Charlie on for Matt. Thanks for taking my questions. A couple for me. First, the announced launch of the wireless ultrasound device. Should we be looking at this as a meaningful contributor, what's the [plan] here.

I guess how should we be thinking about that launch?.

So, this launch is coming very regular fiscal year 2018. So, we haven't updated into any numbers this year. Our Vascular Access business has launched this product, we’ve got a great partnership with Biim Technology. So, we’re excited for the future, it’s going to do a couple of things for us.

Open up the discussion again around the right product at the right time, help our clinicians understand our product portfolio. Give them access division utilization in the new matter. So, what you’ll see from us, we give FY19 guidance. We will include what we expect for the Biim launch in FY19. I expect the product is going to do a great job.

If you’re looking this past quarter that we reported, our Vascular Access, we grew three of our four product categories in that quarter, they did a great job. As you know, our PICCs were down, we have that competitive pressure from the way that way that [indiscernible] the market.

But with our midline supports and dialyses catheters all three of these were up year-over-year. So, this group is doing a real good executing, I would be expecting nothing last when it comes to the Biim product at this time. .

And then related to NanoKnife.

Have you seen an increase in use from physicians, using the product off label for pancreatic cancer now that we’ve got the Stage III [EAP] designation from the FDA?.

We don’t always know exactly what organ the physician is treating, when they used our NanoKnife. So, we’re not exactly sure which or that they’re treating when the NanoKnife is used..

Yes. And I don’t think this exactly the right way to look at it. The EAP designation was a filing that we made with the FDA that will enhance our communication as we move through the process to try to get this expanded indication, not something that is a promotional piece at all..

[Operator Instructions]. The next question is from the line of Jayson Bedford with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question..

So, I guess the surprising kind of news I guess for us is just the PMA pathway on NanoKnife. This is obviously not the most efficient pathway and PMA is something new to the company.

So, can you give us an idea as to the size for the clinical trial and the cost of running a PMA trial?.

Jay, this is Steve, I’ll jump in again. Thanks for the question. We’re still engaged in conversation with the FDA that nailed down exactly what the size, timing and cost would be. So, once we have finalized that, we will absolutely be making some more public comments.

One of the things that I would say is, although at first flush it does feel like PMA may not be the most efficient, we actually, the work that we’ve done feel that we can do a very effective and efficient way of gathering the data to get the best PMA and given the conversations that we’ve had with the FDA about trying to go through the 510(k) and stand on the existing body of evidence, I can tell you that this new switch is going to be far more efficient than that.

Jim talked about utilizing a real-world strategy to go about gathering the evidence to support the PMA.

We think that, that is a very clear path for us to get exactly the data that we need to do those three things that we talked about, support the FDA approval, convince the medical community as may have not flooded in the Internet yet, and then support our payer strategy, while we get data that, that’s probably a higher level that we’ve seen with some of those ITs before.

Again, those ITs are great, they did a very good job of moving the technology forward. They prove out the benefits of NanoKnife. But we are going to be able to use this new strategy to correlate [ph] and have a more comprehensive approach in getting that data to do all those three things.

Is it going to be a little bit more expensive than we had just stood on the current data to get a 510(k)? Well absolutely, but we’re going to get data that’s going to be far more appropriate and beneficial for us. And again, once we have final details through our conversations with the FDA we will get back to you.

But I wouldn’t think that this is something that’s other worldly than from where we had been before. .

Okay.

When do you expect to get the label?.

Yes, again that’s I think part of the process. Once we have more details we will know. The good thing is that we do feel that we will be able to have additional conversations with your guys as we go through the breakthrough designation process, we can engage in these sprints and give more interactive timely answers back from FDA.

So as soon as we have those, we will do it..

Okay.

But I’d say realistically this is not a label that comes in fiscal ‘19, correct?.

I think that’s probably right. But as we go through this, there’s a lot of things that we are looking for. So, it’s label, it’s payment. As we go through this process we are going to have enhanced [ph] ability to train our physicians which I think will be good for the overall physicians and technology.

So, I don’t know that label in and of itself is kind of the biggest endpoint from how we move technology forward. .

When do you think you can start the PMA trial?.

That we certainly hope is a very early FY ‘19 event..

Okay.

May be just switching gears, what can you do to change the trend in Venous or is it just a matter of waiting for some of these headwinds to anniversary?.

There’s two things Jayson, you just mentioned one of the two. The majority of the loss that occurred this year, we have identified and talked to you about where is that. And that’s going to annualize soon.

But more importantly, beyond that, we are looking at our portfolio, there are things we didn’t have in our portfolio that we are going to add to the portfolio. There’s opportunities for us to grow. As you know we have the world's best laser, number one market share. But that’s not the full portfolio that we desired in the future.

We want to make sure our clinicians have access to other ways to treat patients as technology changes. We also have to make sure that our clinic partners are profitable using our products. So right now, when there’s been some reimbursement headwinds for us, we are aware of those, we’ll address them.

So, I think overtime you will see the folks of that division have a good strategy to have a portfolio of additions process, we will add some technology to our bag..

Okay.

And Jim can you just give us an idea just within oncology, what’s your mix of microwave versus RF today?.

Good question Jayson I will give you the ratio in a second here. .

Just broadly speaking as RFA is about 20% Microwave, 40% NanoKnife, 40% some other stuff mixed in to rounded it up. .

Thank you. At this time, I will turn the floor back to management for closing remarks. .

Thanks Rob. I think what you have seen from AngioDynamics this quarter again as I reiterate 8 of our 11 product categories have positive growth. That hasn’t happened in a long time AngioDynamics. We’ve done really good job executing in the field with our customers and our clinician partners.

We’ve seen products like our Solero tissue ablation system, our new Microwave get widely adopted and we got two really join competitors there with Medtronic and J&J.

Our global sales force did a really good job working with our physicians to trade out the Acculis Systems and get a new Solero utilize and we’re seeing have a response from those physicians.

Walking with our Vascular Access business did this quarter growing three of its four categories is really dynamic special then looking at our PV business, yes, we are struggling Venous, but tremendous growth in our promise category, great position adoption, growth of what’s happening with our AngioVac product line, great growth in our Fluid Management category.

So hopefully you’re seeing those commercial execution wins combined with the backend we talked to you about. We’re operations and quality people are running our systems; our plans and a full supply chain is with the help to add to our gross margin expansion contribute to our overall results and give us a great balance sheet to leap forward from.

So again, we will use the platform, we have here. We’ll make sure AngioDynamics is a stronger company utilizing our current assets, utilizing our new R&D process, looking for partners to either license or distribute products with.

And yes, ultimately with our strong balance sheet and our tools looking to acquire technology that will enhance our overall portfolio. So, thank you for your time today. We’ll speak to you again soon. .

This concludes today’s conference call. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation..