Peer Schatz - CEO Roland Sackers - Chief Financial Officer Dr. Sarah Fakih - Member of IR team

Vijay Kumar - Evercore ISI Steve Beuchaw - Morgan Stanley Scott Bardo - Berenberg Doug Schenkel - Cowen and Company Jack Meehan - Barclays Brian Weinstein - William Blair Isaac Ro - Goldman Sachs Dan Arias - Citigroup Bill Quirk - Piper Jaffray Peter Welford - Jefferies Jan Keppeler - HSBC [Abrupt Start] …..welcome to all of you for joining our conference call today, as well. Our speakers today are Peer Schatz, the Chief Executive Officer of QIAGEN, and Roland Sackers, the Chief Financial Officer. Also joining us today is Dr. Sarah Fakih, a member of our IR team. On Slide 2 you'll see the customary Safe Harbor statement explaining that the discussion and responses to your questions on this call reflect management's views as of today, July 29, 2016. We will be making statements and providing responses to your questions that state our intentions, beliefs, expectations or predictions of the future, and these constitute forward-looking statements for the purpose of the Safe Harbor provisions. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. QIAGEN disclaims any intention or obligation to revise any forward-looking statements. For more information please refer to our filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Also during the call we will be referring to certain financial measures not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. You can find a reconciliation of these figures to GAAP in the press release and the presentation for this call. I also have these quick points. First, we're providing a new level of disclosure with sales figures by customer class and regions and percentage changes at actual and CER rates. Historical data is available in the appendix to the presentation. Second, we are planning to hold an analyst and investor day in New York on Tuesday, November 15, which will be a few days after the annual Association for Molecular Pathology meeting in Charlotte. We will provide an update on the time and location for this meeting later in the quarter. With that, I would like to now hand over to Peer.

Thank you, John. And I like to welcome all of you to this conference call. Our performance for the second quarter of 2016 shows the significant progress QIAGEN has been making to advance our position as a leader in molecular testing solutions. The results also confirm QIAGEN is at an important inflection point and is now setting a new sales growth trajectory. Let me go through our key messages. First, we had a very strong performance in the second quarter. These results were actually ahead of our targets and this was due to the solid volume expansion across our life sciences and molecular diagnostics customer classes. Net sales rose 6% at constant exchange rates, which was ahead of our outlook of 4% constant exchange rate growth. Sales at actual rates rose 5% to $334 million, and this included 1 percentage point of currency headwinds. Adjusted diluted earnings per share were $0.24 at both actual and constant exchange rates and ahead of our target for $0.22, while free cash flow rose 75% to $78 million. Second, QIAGEN is at an important reflection point and setting a new sales growth trajectory. As I just mentioned, the sales performance for the second quarter of 2016 was an important step up from the 2% constant exchange rate growth in the first quarter of this year. Most important, the 8% constant exchange rate and ex HPV underlying sales growth in the second quarter is comparable with our target growth rates for the second half of 2016, and this charts us on a solid trajectory to achieve our full-year sales growth target. Our focus is also on achieving the full-year targets for higher adjusted EPS and to build on the sales acceleration while intensifying our focus on managing costs to improve operating leverage. Our growth drivers…

Thank you, Peer. Good afternoon to everyone in Europe and good morning to those of you joining from the U.S. I am Slide 11 to review our financial performance for the second quarter and first half of 2016, as well as our outlook for the third quarter and the full year. As Peer mentioned earlier, the results for the second quarter were actually ahead of our targets, and the performance of the first half of 2016 has strengthened our confidence in achieving the goals we have set for the full year. For the second quarter, net sales grew 6% at constant exchange rates, and this was faster than our target for 4% constant exchange rate growth due in particular to the high single-digit constant exchange rate growth in our three life science customer classes, especially pharma at 9% constant exchange rate, and applied testing at 10% after rebounding from a weaker trend in the first quarter. About 1 percentage point of total constant exchange rate growth came from the late 2015 acquisition of MO BIO, but the rest of the portfolio provided 5 percentage points. This was an important step up from the 1 percentage point of the year-on year organic growth seen in the first quarter of 2016. At actual rates, net sales rose US$334 million based on one point of currency headwind. Moving down the income statement, adjusted operating income declined 12% in the second quarter. As we set out for this year, we plan for significant incremental investments during the first half to enhance our mid to long term growth prospects. This was expected to weigh on the adjusted operating income margin for the first half of 2016, which was 19% of sales compared to 24% in the first half of 2015, but we expect to see…

Thank you, Roland. I am now slide 18 for a summary before we move into Q&A. Let me review what we have announced. First, we had a solid performance in the second quarter, exceeding our targets for net sales and adjusted EPS, while also generating a 75% increase in free cash flow. Our sales results for the first half of 2016 present the same distribution of sales as they have for the first half of 2015. And we are also on the right path to achieving our adjusted EPS targets for the full year. Second, our results for the second quarter show QIAGEN has reached an inflection point for a new sales growth trajectory, and we're determined to improve profitability as this momentum gains traction. We are moving ahead on initiatives to continue this acceleration. Third, we have increased our commitment to now return $300 million of capital to shareholders. This reflects our conviction that we are facing an attractive trend change and significant value creation opportunity. And as a last point, we have updated our full-year 2016 guidance for the addition of Exiqon to our portfolio. We continue to expect a record year of net sales and adjusted earnings per share at constant exchange rates estrogen prepares for more growth and 2017 and the coming years. With that, I'd like to hand back to the operator for the Q&A session. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from the line of Vijay Kumar of Evercore ISI. Please go ahead sir.

Hi, guys. Congrats on a nice quarter. Maybe one big picture question and one follow up on the financial piece. Peer, it looks like the language around GeneReader, it seems to be a lot more positive. If I just look for the last few quarters, every quarter I feel like you guys are coming in ahead of plan internally. That's what it feels like to us. I just wonder, what is driving that enthusiasm around GeneReader? And any comments, I know you have an ongoing IT dispute or any update on when we can get a resolution or what it means.

Sure. Our customers are seeing in the GeneReader sample to insight workflow, a truly differentiated solution. It differentiates in terms of the way the content has been designed, the way the system is integrated from sample to insight, with all components and reagents coming from one source. this is embedded in a support and service system that allows customers to meet their highest demands in those regards. And a very attractive economic model, the price per insight model. As we can combine all these workflow elements, we can therefore offer the PPI -- price per insight-- model that is also being seen at customers as very attractive. We have seen this resonate very well with customers. And you have probably seen first customer statements out there and first presentations being made at conferences where this is also being reiterated by customers. We will see more of that going forward. We have prepared this very carefully and we are very diligently rolling this out, and the trajectory is very exciting and one that we will continue to comment on going forward. In terms of the other topic that you mentioned, obviously next-generation sequencing is an area where a lot of intellectual property comes to play. There are many lawsuits in this space, as well. Obviously you are familiar with the lawsuits that resulted out of the Columbia lawsuits against Illumina that also now impacted us as a collateral. This is something, obviously, in an ongoing intellectual property lawsuit. We would not want to comment in a more detailed way. The date and the motions for preliminary injunctions are publicly available. But, remember, we are very confident about our position. And this litigation is also limited to the United States. We have very proudly launched the system and are very confident about our position to market it very aggressively going forward and around the globe. And we're looking forward to report on this trajectory as we move forward.

The next question comes from the line of Steve Beuchaw of Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Peer, as we reflect back on the quarter, you entered the quarter with a view that we should see steady progress throughout the year. It seems like what you saw here in the second quarter was a bit surprising on the positive side to you. So, I wonder, as you look at the matrix of products and execution, if you could spike out for us the one or two things that you thought in the quarter were the most material upside surprises. And then for Roland, just a couple of clarifications, on Exiqon, the 10 million impact for the second half of the year was a little smaller than I might have expected. Can you walk us through how we get to the 10. And then any commentary on forward expectations for improvement in working capital would be really helpful. Thanks so much.

Thank you, Steve. I think to the first question, before I hand over to Roland, clearly over the last few years we focused very heavily on building a very exciting portfolio that included next-gen sequencing. We built up the QuantiFERON franchise and a lot of other things, in particular, as you now see, in the life sciences. We are moving through the pipeline and there is more to come. Starting about a year ago, we significantly increased our efforts on commercialization of some of the existing growth drivers and also the infrastructure around the GeneReader launch. This clearly moved our operating expenses up as we were boosting the revenue trajectories. In the second quarter we now saw that those revenue trajectories are building. We had projected them, we were planning cautiously, and they came in very well in the second quarter, and especially also with a very strong foundation for the second half of the year. This was one of the great highlights for us because, clearly now, we are focused on making sure that the operating expenditures as a percentage of sales are going to start seeing more operating leverage as that trajectory continues and we can go from boost mode to maintenance mode, admittedly at a high growth rate at the top line. So, this is probably one of the highlights I would point to in the second quarter. And we were cautious about that. We had been building it and planning it for quite some time, obviously, and this was part of our guidance early in the year. But to see that flow through is definitely something I would point to at this point. Roland?

Yes. Thanks. The two question -- Exiqon, the $10 million for the roll out, this was half and half in the third and fourth quarter. It might be a bit lower, as you have expected, because a significant part also of Exiqon business is actually a service business, like service businesses, and we are focusing on what again they are bringing to QIAGEN, especially around the product. And that is something which makes a difference. And have in mind what we are expecting for 2017 is actually double-digit constant exchange rate growth, also, from that business, so I think is impact around the service business. On the working capital side, we still expect a further improvement going forward. Clearly the 75% improvement in the second quarter, I think, was a very good indication on what is possible. DSO, I think being now below 70 days is a comfortable area. I would rather expect also, on the inventory side to see here some further improvement. We were clearly building up, as we talked about, some increased, additional inventory for certain product launches we did, but also for certain product tranches we did from site to site. I think we can now phase it down over the time, so that should have some impact, as well.

Your next question comes from Scott Bardo of Berenberg. Please go ahead.

First question just relates to some of the novel launches that you highlight for 2016, the digital NGS and some of the cell single analysis work, which look interesting. What I'm trying to understand, actually, is how reliant, so to say, are these new launches on the patent estate that is being questioned or under litigation. Are the potential growth contributions from these areas subject to the existing next generation sequencing biosynthesis, which you saw in this legal discussion of the moment? Or are these completely separate IPs that you will still be able to actually commercialize regardless of that outcome? That's a long winded question, number one, please. Question number two just relates to the companion diagnostics part of the business. I think I remember back three or four years ago this business growing very nicely, 15%, 20% plus. But the last couple of years, all of a sudden, the end of last year and this year -- has been a bit disappointing. And I appreciate there's some volatility in these milestone payments but that does not correlate necessarily with the success you have had there. So, can you give us some midterm outlook, the way you see this business growing? Has growth materially slowed or are we back to historic levels?

Sure. The first question, very easy answer. No dependency on any intellectual property that is currently under dispute. I would like to highlight, that is a very small area of intellectual property that is under dispute. So, it is not impact in any way, either on our revenue outlook or on new product introduction capabilities. Number two is, the personalized healthcare franchise, again the companion diagnostic service revenues, which is basically a CRO and we disclosed the number now for last year was about $35 million in sales that we had last year. That comes from dozens of programs that we're doing with pharma companies, multiyear programs typically. As we are increasingly moving earlier into the pipeline we're getting more volatility on these milestones, meaning that there is more attribution. We have seen more attrition, actually, in the first half of the year. You probably saw a lot in the news, as well of programs that we are associated with. As companion diagnostics typically require, in most cases we are associated in some way or the other. This is an area where we, in terms of revenue, are not really so focused on this being a contributor of profitability because it is profitable. We can match it with the expected expenses in a very short timeframe and have a full pipeline of projects. But going forward we would not expect that piece to grow materially. It will probably broaden in the portfolio, it might grow a little bit, but I wouldn't put a lot of strategic or value on that. It's valued at as a CRO basically and as risk mitigation that we ask for when we go into these partnership for pharma, as we're taking risk for their pharma drugs. Going forward, we're focused on the revenue from the kits. And that is, obviously if we believe in personalized medicine, which we clearly do, this is a very attractive area and we are seeing a pretty good pipeline. We might actually see first products come through later this year, certainly in 2017.

The next question is from Doug Schenkel of Cowen and Company. Please go ahead.

Okay, thank you very much. Good day, gentlemen. Peer, my first question is for you and it's on core sample prep. Commentary in your prepared remarks was a bit better than we have heard from you for a while. I think you talked about sample prep technologies growing at a solid single-digit pace in the quarter. I think it is fair to say that this has not grown a whole lot faster than low single digits over the last several quarters. I am just wondering if you could talk about what your expectation is for the full year, and, maybe more importantly, how we should think about this significant portion of your portfolio in 2017 and beyond. You clearly have some very exciting growth drivers. That said, two-thirds of your revenue or so is still legacy products. If sample growth picks up, that could really move the needle, I think in a big way. So, I'm just wondering if you could comment on how you are thinking about that. And then, sorry for the long one there, a quick second question for Roland. Keeping in mind the share repurchase program and the Exiqon deal, I just want to make sure that I heard you right when you said you expect net leverage to remain below 3 times through the end of 2017. I just want to make sure we have that right as we think about your appetite for additional potential strategic activity over the next one to two years. Thank you.

Sure. Sample technologies are an integral part of what we call the sample-to-insight experience that we give to customers. And we are increasingly seeing that being used in an integrated way, starting from a sample and then ultimately ending up with an insight that can be generated using our bioinformatics capabilities. The sample technologies per se are a cross-section across all customer classes. I often see that misinterpreted as a pure life sciences area. That is definitely not the case. Our sample technologies are used in diagnostics and used in -- take, for instance, NIPT, where we have very strong positions in sample technologies. It is a smaller market segment but that is clearly a more clinical application where a sample technology solution is being used. We're getting growth. It was always a growing franchise. We have now over the last few years rejuvenated the portfolio, created a lot more products, similar to what we saw today with the sample technologies for cell-free DNA but also the microbiome technology single-cell sample technologies that are in areas that are getting a lot more research. Starting 2011, what we saw was basically a significant shift of the applications. If you go through the NIH grant profiles you will see that the shift was away from more traditional research into next-generation sequencing and clinical research. That is a shift that we followed and prepared. And some of the things you are seeing now is the fruit of these initiatives that we created as the shift became more and more visible. It actually happened very quickly and you see that also in the growth profiles of some of the other companies in this space. We are well-positioned with a nice portfolio now, focusing on clinical applications and even traditional product, what you call legacy product. They are very often improved with new protocols and new white papers that provide now capabilities and proof of principle, or validity, even, for some of these newer fast-growing segments. Roland?

Yes. The question on [indiscernible] I think what we said, what you got right in terms of ratios on adjusted EBITDA. But I think what is important for us, I think is an extension of our commitment that we allocate our profitability fairly between the return to shareholders and at the same time keeping flexibility also for bolt-on acquisitions for QIAGEN. I think looking forward now, on the basis of Q2 is I actually feel very comfortable that now in 2016 and also especially in 2017 our profitability, also cash flow generation, goes in the right way. And we will give you more insight on that probably on our analysis day. That is something which we do believe, this is $300 million we have, we are doing exactly that, giving us allocation on keeping the flexibility where, at the same time, stepping up returns to shareholders.

Next question comes from the line of Jack Meehan from Barclays.

I have two questions on QuantiFERON. Could you just give us an update, timeline, which you anticipate for warning letter in ideation? Do you believe the issues have been addressed with the new manufacturing in-house and the quality systems? And then, just as you look through your end in the U.S., what are some of the puts and takes on the growth rate with the salesforce and the USPS DS decision? Thank you.

Sure. First of all, we are taking this very seriously. I would like to point out that we have not received a FDA warning letter in the last at least decade in this space and FDA issues about 100 a year to this industry. That said, that was under the QIAGEN quality system. As we are now moving over the QuantiFERON portfolio to the QIAGEN quality system, as that has now happened, we feel a lot better about that. Nonetheless, we're working very diligently to also deliver the respective requirements. We believe that this will be concluded at some point possibly later this year. But, remember, very often these processes don't have an official closing. But we think we are on a good path and we have all of the resources on it to make that happen as quickly as possible. In terms of the QuantiFERON commercialization, you clearly see that customers are very excited about this product. And we have seen growth rates spike actually considerably, in particular in North America. This is also where we significantly increased the commercialization efforts are putting this in a more long term trajectory. Remember, when customers adopted these technologies, they typically try and adopt it at a certain run rate, and then the standards are validated within such an institution, you get into a more long term growth rate. And this is something we're starting to see now with the first institutions and moving it forward as aggressively as possible. The trajectory is very exciting for QuantiFERON around the world, I have to say, also based on some of the new evidences that we were able to demonstrate in scientific publications.

The next question comes from the line of Brian Weinstein of William Blair. Please go ahead sir.

You had some upside that developed this quarter but you left the total range the same, outside of actually first. So, can you talk about, was there anything that was pulled forward a little bit in the quarter? Is there a different outlook somewhere or are you just being conservative? And then a second question financially is, at what point of CER for you guys do we really start to see leverage? Is it a consistent 7%? Is it 8%? I think it used to be 5%, 6% but we haven't seen that leverage yet. At what point of CER do we really start seeing some leverage?

The question, if we look at 2016, it is really slowly where we want to deliver on the full-year numbers. This is why we keep on pointing to the full-year targets that we set. They are the same that we set at the beginning of the year, the same that we reiterated at the end of the first quarter, and we are continuing on this path. We were able to show that the path is a doable path. 47% of revenues came in, in the first half of 2016 comparable to what we had in the first half of 2015. So, from that perspective, our focus is really on the end of year number, and this is why we are maintaining that focus also in terms of our guidance at this point. Roland, do you want to take the second?

Yes. The second is actually an easy answer. You will see that in the third and fourth quarter already. As I said, we clearly were very straight earlier this year when we gave also guidance for 2016 as we said that we had incremental, on what we wanted to do incremental investments the first part of the year. That is done and we have seen the impact of that already quite early now already in the second quarter. At the same time, now, we are expecting leverage to come back to that inflection point on profitability, and going to start most likely in the third quarter on the move from there. The margin side, I think we gave a clear indication of what we said before. But you will see the sequential improvement coming up.

Next question comes from line of Isaac Ro of Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. Thank you. You didn't spend a lot of time in the prepared remarks on informatics, bioinformatics. I was just curious what the growth was in that business this quarter and in the outlook for the back half.

Sure. Obviously we wanted to focus on a few of the other things, as a lot happened in some of the other portfolios. We did have some interesting launches in RNAseq in the second quarter. This is a very important area of research and also increasingly clinical use. In this franchise our focus this year is on the QIAGEN Clinical Insight's rollout. We are seeing very good adoption and some also great expansions in terms of networks that originally adopted this technology. What we are currently focusing on is the integration of that into GeneReader and sample to insight workflows. So, that business, which, as you remember, is somewhere in the range of 4% of our sales, is developed on plan in the first half of the quarter, and we have a solid outlook.

The next question comes from Dan Arias from Citigroup. Please go ahead.

Thanks for the question. Roland, maybe just clarifying on your OpEx comments, what percentage of the incremental investments that you're making for the year were made in the first half? It sounds like it's a vast majority but it would be great to put a number around. And then if we think about the profitability step up in the back half, do you see margins being relatively similar in 3Q and 4Q, or do you think we should think more about a sequential ramping for the end of the year?

You will see also a ramping over the quarter of year, so I would probably, again, if you look on the guidance and what we said for the third quarter, that probably converts in an adjusted EBITDA margin around 24 for the third quarter and probably going up to the 30 percentage ratio for the fourth quarter. And that is clearly the way we look at it right now. And on the cost side, as we said, the incremental costs we launched was heavily loaded, as you said, in the first two quarters. The larger part of them will just not re-occur on launch events we had on internal trainings, we had certain things which in that regard will not re-occur in that magnitude given all the launches, for example, we had end of last year, earlier this year. So, you will see that absolute dollar cost for certain operation expenses will even decrease in the third and the fourth quarter. And if you just do the calculation on more or less taking the expected revenue growth in the third and fourth quarter, a slight improvement, as we indicated, on the gross margin side, and put in a slight reduction, even just a slight reduction operational expenses, you will see that EPS is falling nicely through.

Next questions from the line of Bill Quirk of Piper Jaffray. Please go ahead.

Great. Thanks, good afternoon. Two questions. First off, I would love to hear your thoughts around Japan and specific to the academic and pharma side of the business. And then, secondly, on QuantiFERON -- what is the status of the U.S. federal penal system? I know they were looking at IGRAs as a potential alternative to the skin test. Thank you

Sure. The second question -- definitely the correctional system was an area of prime target of ours that we talked about a few conference calls back. That remains a very attractive area for us. We have been able to penetrate that area in many different institutions and we are seeing a very good uptake of this technology, interestingly enough, because you can test for latent tuberculosis when you have suspects coming in or convicts coming in. And they are, interestingly enough, moved around in the system very quickly thereafter. So, having a test that you can actually do on the same day in a few hours is a big advantage over having to go back to the person two days later to do an inspection. So, from that perspective we are seeing quite a good uptick. And the first question was -- again?

The first question was just to comment on Japan with specific to the academic and pharma markets.

Japan -- thanks for pointing this one out, though -- is, indeed, an extremely difficult market at the moment, and one where most industry players are seeing a significant decline, even, in their business. We saw about also in the second quarter. There is an outlook for that to improve over the next 12 to 18 months. We think we have put this on a better footing, now that we have found somewhat of a floor in the second quarter. But the industry is still very wobbly. Despite all these stimulus packages and everything that was talked about, it remains a very difficult market. A lot of these stimuli did not really go into areas that had direct implications for molecular biology, or at least the research of the clinical applications that we are working on. We are seeing some light at the end of the tunnel based on country-specific and company-specific activities that we did. But it remains a market that is definitely dilutive to growth, top-line growth, probably for the course of this year.

Next question comes from the line of Peter Welford of Jefferies.

Thanks for taking my question. It's actually on the capital return program. I wonder if you could outline whether you specifically cited that the extra $200 million will be returned as a share buyback, or are there other options also on the cards, either potentially a Dutch auction tender process, or even a special dividend or other process? Or is this very definitely a share buyback program that will be executed in a similar manner. And then, secondly, as a follow-up to that, also I was wondering what was it that particularly drove this decision now/ Perhaps you can comment on what you're seeing now in the M&A landscape at the moment in terms of deal values, valuations and your feeling on how that's panning out at present. Thank you.

To answer the second part of your question first, I don't think it has to do with anything what you see right now, the landscape on valuation, on targets available or not. I think it just fully to do with that we are seeing a significant step up for us in the second quarter in cash flow generation, giving us confidence for the second part of the year and also for 2017. Again, we are giving you more insights on our analyst day around that. And therefore we saw it the right time to stick to our commitment, what we have given earlier, which as I said, is also a allocation part within our profitability. And that is exactly what we are doing here. So, we think it has been also our obligation to say that we are going to again give $300 million incremental back then to our shareholders for the end of 2017. We have not decided yet exactly how we want to do it. As you know, under Dutch law there is a certain, different opportunities, there's different limitation, so we have to regular onset. We clearly do have a preference around share buyback right now.

To the first part of the question, Peter, we believe that we have a lot of things organically currently that are very exciting. We did two acquisitions, one in the life science area. Actually the last two years there were four acquisitions in this space. The pipeline is really good internally organically. And in addition to that we filled a few very nice additional pieces in. Our focus is really on executing and pulling that through into also operating leverage going forward and that remains the focus. Definitely there are always attractive opportunities out there, but if you look at the trajectory over the last few years, it has typically been in the sub $100 million space. The Company continues to have firepower to do these types of transactions but we are definitely more focused now on organic execution on the portfolio that we have.

The last question comes from Jan Keppeler of HSBC. Please go ahead sir.

Only a quick question on the QuantiFERON business. I think the last time we have touched on the topic of potential additional competition for this franchise. You mentioned that you do not have any indication that someone is currently working on anything competitive, which basically means then that any potential market entry is built on what longer down the road, maybe a couple of years. I think I am just looking for a confirmation of that. Is this still the case or has changed anything in the meanwhile, given the increasingly attractive market?

I think latent TB testing is, indeed, a very attractive market. And certainly other technologies are being looked at to be able to identify, for instance, gene signatures or other patterns that could be related to latent TB testing. But for screening assays, it takes a very long time to validate these things and there is just phenomenal data on QuantiFERON, looking at the data points that we have. And it is just a very slick and very cost effective and efficient assay that we have. Therefore, I think there are a lot of benefits that customers see in our product that make this one that is very competitive in the long term. Yet, we are in a high technology space. We are definitely also monitoring other areas and looking at other approaches to this and adjacent assays, and building the overall QuantiFERON related franchise in addition to just focusing on TB.

Peer, thank you very much. Also to Roland and all of you for your participation today. I would like to close this conference call and wish you all the best for the weekend. If you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to give Sarah and me a call. Thank you very much.

Thank you.