Normal view

Received today — 31 July 2025

Wall Street analyst expects Apple to hike the price of some new iPhone models by $50

30 July 2025 at 16:43
iPhones on display in an Apple Store
The iPhone 17 might cost more.

Adam Gray/Reuters

  • Jefferies analysts predicted a $50 price increase for the iPhone 17 Pro models.
  • The price hike would aim to offset tariff costs, likely affecting Pro and Pro Max models.
  • Analysts expect Apple to beat estimates coming off a surge of iPhone demand in May and April.

iPhone panic buyers might've been onto something in April.

If Apple maintains its tradition of introducing a new iPhone lineup in September, Jefferies analysts expect the mysterious iPhone 17 will cost more than its predecessors. In a note published on Wednesday, the analysts predicted a $50 price increase — a 4% to 5% jump from 2024 — to offset the impact of tariffs.

The price hike would likely exclude the base model, Jefferies said, and affect the Pro, Pro Max, and the rumored slimmer iPhone model.

As of Wednesday, the retail price of the iPhone 16 Pro Max starts at $1,199.

Jefferies assumes 40% of the iPhone 17 will be made in China for US consumers. If the average cost to build it goes up by $20 to $25, a $50 bump in price "may barely cover the above cost increases."

During its last earnings call, Apple told investors to expect a $900 million tariff hit for the June quarter

Despite the expectation of a price hike over tariff costs, Jefferies analysts expect Apple to report a strong June quarter on Thursday. They think increased demand for iPhones from consumers who feared price hikes drove higher sales.

However, the spike in demand sparked by tariffs in April and May seemed to cool in June, UBS analysts estimated. They expect a softened demand for the iPhone 17 in September.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Received yesterday — 30 July 2025

Ultra Clean Posts Q2 Revenue Beat

Key Points

  • Revenue reached $518.8 million, topping expectations by $17.97 million and matching analyst EPS estimates.

  • Non-GAAP gross and operating margins declined year over year in Q2 FY2025.

  • A $151.1 million goodwill impairment led to a significant GAAP net loss in Q2 FY2025.

Ultra Clean (NASDAQ:UCTT), a supplier of engineering and manufacturing solutions for the semiconductor industry, released its second quarter 2025 earnings on July 28, 2025. The company’s GAAP revenue surpassed analyst expectations in Q2 FY2025, coming in at $518.8 million (GAAP) versus the $500.8 million estimate, while non-GAAP earnings per share (EPS) landed squarely in line with forecasts at $0.27. The overall quarter was marked by weak profitability, as the company recorded a large non-cash goodwill impairment that swung its GAAP net results deeply negative. Despite matching non-GAAP EPS expectations and slightly beating GAAP revenue forecasts, the results reflected ongoing challenges in demand and operational efficiency.

MetricQ2 2025Q2 2025 EstimateQ2 2024Y/Y Change
EPS (Non-GAAP)$0.27$0.27$0.32(15.6%)
Revenue (GAAP)$518.8 million$500.8 million$516.1 million0.5%
Gross Margin (Non-GAAP)16.3%N/A17.7%(1.4) pp
Operating Margin (Non-GAAP)5.5%N/A6.9%(1.4) pp
Net Income (Non-GAAP)$12.1 millionN/A$14.4 million(16.0%)

Source: Analyst estimates provided by FactSet. Management expectations based on management's guidance, as provided in Q1 2025 earnings report.

Business Overview and Strategic Focus

Ultra Clean is a manufacturing and engineering partner for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) in the semiconductor industry. The company is best known for building and servicing essential components and sub-systems used in semiconductor manufacturing, providing both products and services to many of the industry's biggest names.

The company’s main focuses currently include managing its customer concentration, deepening its strategic position in the semiconductor supply chain, and maintaining flexibility by operating manufacturing and service sites in multiple regions worldwide. Ultra Clean also continues to invest in innovation and technology development, aiming to stay aligned with evolving customer requirements while pursuing cost efficiency through vertical integration and strategic acquisitions. Key success factors for the company include maintaining strong relationships with several major customers, executing on supply chain localization initiatives, and controlling costs as the demand environment fluctuates.

Quarter Review: Revenue, Margins, and One-Time Items

During the quarter, Ultra Clean generated GAAP revenue of $518.8 million, nearly flat sequentially. Products, which include gas and liquid delivery subsystems essential for semiconductor manufacturing, contributed $454.9 million (GAAP), while the services business, focused on specialized cleaning and analytics for chipmaking tools, brought in $63.9 million (GAAP). Services revenue (GAAP) showed a modest sequential uptick but was also largely unchanged year over year.

Non-GAAP gross margin fell to 16.3%. The products segment recorded a gross margin of 14.4% (non-GAAP), while the services segment’s gross margin was 29.9% (non-GAAP), underscoring the higher-value nature of cleaning and analytics compared to core product manufacturing. The operating margin on a non-GAAP basis dropped to 5.5%.

The quarter was heavily affected by a $151.1 million goodwill impairment (GAAP), a non-cash charge (GAAP) reflecting a downward revision in the anticipated future value of prior acquisitions. This pushed the company’s GAAP operating margin to negative 27.3%, leading to a GAAP net loss of $162.0 million, or $3.58 per share. Without adjusting for this impairment, the company’s bottom line (GAAP net loss) would have shown much smaller losses.

Segment performance showed little change in either direction. While gross margins in the segment slipped, services provided stability, aided in part by expanded engineering support in areas such as lithography and sub-fab systems. Overall, the lack of revenue growth alongside shrinking margins highlighted the ongoing challenges the company faces in lifting its earnings profile absent a broader recovery in industry demand.

Balance sheet management was a priority. Cash and cash equivalents (GAAP) increased to $327.4 million, and spent $7.8 million on research and development (R&D) (GAAP), but did not announce any major new capital initiatives.

Key Business Drivers and Ongoing Risks

Ultra Clean’s most notable business risk, customer concentration, continues to loom large. No segment revenue was broken out by customer this quarter, but prior disclosures show that two customers, Applied Materials (NASDAQ:AMAT) and Lam Research (NASDAQ:LRCX), historically contribute more than half of total sales. Revenue with its largest customer was described as flat quarter-on-quarter, with its second largest customer’s revenue was slightly down. The company remains focused on solidifying these relationships while seeking incremental diversification where possible. Customer concentration risk means that any slowdown, loss, or renegotiation with a key account can have an outsize impact on the company’s results.

Strategic initiatives to localize supply chains and adapt to changing global trade policies continued this quarter. Ultra Clean’s multi-region manufacturing approach remains a hedge against policy shifts and tariffs, though no new factories or major reductions in footprint were announced this quarter.

On the technology front, the company increased its R&D spend to $7.8 million (GAAP). Investment continues in new products for critical subsystems and cleaning technologies. The company emphasized ongoing engineering collaborations, notably in lithography portfolio expansion and services aimed at supporting advanced chipmaking, but did not attribute revenue growth to these activities so far.

Cost-cutting and efficiency improvements remain a high priority, with actions under way to realign operating expenses with current demand levels. Headcount reductions, ongoing review of manufacturing footprint, and broader expense discipline were reiterated. The benefit of these steps is expected to be realized later in the year rather than providing an immediate improvement to margins or profits in the quarter. UCTT does not currently pay a dividend.

Outlook and What to Watch

Looking ahead, management guided to revenue in the range of $480 million to $530 million for Q3 2025 and a non-GAAP EPS between $0.14 and $0.34 per share. The midpoint of this outlook suggests continued revenue stagnation with profitability under pressure. The company expects to start seeing the benefits of its cost reduction program later in the year, but did not project a near-term uptick in demand or clear margin recovery.

Management commentary remained cautious, noting that the industry remains “highly dynamic.” The ongoing dependence on a handful of major customers, sector-wide slowdowns in semiconductor capital spending, and policy-related uncertainties such as tariffs all continue to shape the landscape. Should the broader semiconductor sector rebound, management believes Ultra Clean is positioned to capture renewed growth, but for now, underlying trends remain steady and unremarkable.

Revenue and net income presented using U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) unless otherwise noted.

Where to invest $1,000 right now

When our analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,039%* — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500.

They just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now, available when you join Stock Advisor.

See the stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025

JesterAI is a Foolish AI, based on a variety of Large Language Models (LLMs) and proprietary Motley Fool systems. All articles published by JesterAI are reviewed by our editorial team, and The Motley Fool takes ultimate responsibility for the content of this article. JesterAI cannot own stocks and so it has no positions in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Applied Materials and Lam Research. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Seagate (STX) Q4 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Tuesday, July 29, 2025 at 12:00 a.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

Chief Executive Officer — Dave Mosley

Chief Financial Officer — Gianluca Romano

Need a quote from one of our analysts? Email [email protected]

TAKEAWAYS

Revenue—$2.44 billion for the June quarter, up 13% sequentially and 30% year-over-year.

Non-GAAP Gross Margin—37.9%, expanding 170 basis points sequentially, described as a record high for the company.

Non-GAAP EPS—$2.59 non-GAAP earnings per share.

Fiscal Year Revenue—$9.1 billion in revenue for FY2025, representing nearly 40% growth.

Non-GAAP Operating Profit—$2.1 billion in non-GAAP operating profit.

Annual Non-GAAP EPS—$8.10 non-GAAP EPS.

Mass Capacity Revenue—Over $2 billion, up 40% year-over-year.

Nearline Shipments—137 exabytes shipped for nearline products, representing 91% of mass capacity exabytes shipped, up 14% sequentially and 52% year-over-year.

Total Volume Shipments—163 exabytes, up from 144 exabytes in the prior quarter.

Legacy Segment Revenue—$270 million in legacy market revenue, up 6% sequentially; other product lines contributed $163 million, up 3% sequentially (component figures do not sum to total revenue).

Adjusted EBITDA—$697 million, up 24% sequentially and 73% year-over-year.

Non-GAAP Net Income—$556 million in non-GAAP net income.

Operating Expenses (GAAP)—$286 million, up 4% sequentially.

Capital Expenditures—$83 million in capital expenditures for the quarter and $265 million for FY2025, or 3% of revenue.

Free Cash Flow—$425 million in free cash flow, nearly double the prior period's $216 million.

Shareholder Returns—$153 million returned via dividends, with nearly 75% of annual free cash flow distributed to shareholders.

Cash and Liquidity—$2.2 billion in cash and equivalents, including a $1.3 billion revolving credit facility.

Gross Debt—Approximately $5 billion at quarter-end; debt reduced by ~$150 million in the quarter.

Net Leverage Ratio—1.8x, with further reduction anticipated as profitability expands.

Sequential DRIVE Revenue—$2.3 billion in DRIVE revenue, a 14% sequential increase led by nearline cloud sales and seasonal VM market strength.

September Quarter Revenue Guidance—$2.5 billion plus or minus $150 million, reflecting a 15% year-over-year increase at the midpoint.

September Quarter Non-GAAP Operating Expenses—Approximately $290 million (non-GAAP), with the period including an extra week.

September Quarter Non-GAAP Operating Margin Guidance—Expected to reach the mid- to high-twenties percentage range.

September Quarter Non-GAAP EPS Guidance—$2.30 plus or minus $0.20 GAAP EPS guidance, based on a 16% tax rate and 221 million diluted shares.

HAMR Ramp—Mozaic 3+ products progressing in volume, with three major cloud service providers qualified and broader qualification advancing as planned.

Product Transition—Qualification for the 4 terabyte per disk platform has begun, with volume ramp targeted for the first half of calendar 2026.

Contracted Capacity—Build-to-order nearline capacity is largely booked through mid-2026, with visibility building into the latter half of the year.

Pricing Strategy—Chief Financial Officer Romano stated, “our like for like pricing will continue to slightly increase every time we negotiate a new lead to order.”

Capital Allocation Plans—Share repurchases are expected to resume in the current quarter.

SUMMARY

Seagate Technology Holdings plc(NASDAQ:STX) reported record-setting revenue growth and non-GAAP gross margins, driven by demand for higher-capacity drives from cloud and enterprise customers. The company is executing a technology transition to HAMR-based products, with significant customer qualification and a clear timeline for ramping advanced platforms. Build-to-order contracts secure nearline capacity through mid-2026, with further visibility into the second half of the year. Shareholder capital returns remain a core focus, with nearly three-quarters of free cash flow distributed and a plan to restart buybacks. Capital expenditures are projected to rise but remain within the 4%-6% of revenue target as production shifts to next-generation technologies.

Chief Financial Officer Romano stated, “Demand is strong, it's above supply,” attributing guidance constraints primarily to production capability and customer qualification needs rather than market weakness.

Gross margin gains (non-GAAP) are attributed to improved product mix, stronger pricing, and advancing manufacturing efficiencies, with further benefits expected as HAMR contributions scale.

Free cash flow is projected to expand further in the second half of the fiscal year, despite anticipated higher variable compensation outlays.

Beginning in FY2026, Seagate will be subject to a global minimum tax rate in the “mid-teens,” with both GAAP and non-GAAP tax rates aligning at 16% as specified in the outlook.

Long-term demand forecasts remain intact, with mid-twenties exabyte growth and top-line growth in the low- to mid-teens anticipated as customers shift toward higher-capacity, HAMR-enabled drives, as discussed at Seagate's Analyst Day.

Seasonality is described as diminishing in importance due to the ongoing transition toward mass capacity products, according to management’s commentary during the Q4 FY2025 earnings call.

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

HAMR: Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording, a next-generation hard drive technology enabling higher storage density per platter.

Exabyte: One billion gigabytes, used as a metric for large-scale data storage capacity shipments.

Nearline: Hard disk drives designed for high-capacity, high-availability storage in data centers, typically used for secondary or archival data.

BTO: Build-to-order; contractual arrangements with customers that determine production and allocation of product capacity over a specified time frame.

PMR: Perpendicular Magnetic Recording, a legacy drive technology preceding HAMR in high-density storage applications.

TCO: Total Cost of Ownership, reflecting combined capital and operational expenses associated with deploying storage solutions.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Dave Mosley, Seagate's Chief Executive Officer; and Gianluca Romano, our Chief Financial Officer. We've posted our earnings press release and detailed supplemental information for our June quarter and fiscal year-end results on the Investors section of our website. During today's call, we'll refer to GAAP and non-GAAP measures. Non-GAAP figures are reconciled to GAAP figures in the earnings press release posted on our website and included in our Form 8-K. We've not reconciled certain non-GAAP outlook measures because material items that may impact these measures are out of our control and/or cannot be reasonably predicted. Therefore, a reconciliation to the corresponding GAAP measures is not available without unreasonable effort.

Before we begin, I'd like to remind you that today's call contains forward-looking statements that reflect management's current views and assumptions based on information available to us as of today and should not be relied upon as of any subsequent date. Actual results may differ materially from those contained in or implied by these forward-looking statements as they're subject to risks and uncertainties associated with our business.

To learn more about the risks, uncertainties and other factors that may affect our future business results, please refer to the press release issued today and our SEC filings, including our most recent annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly report on Form 10-Q as well as the supplemental information, all of which may be found on the Investors section of our website. Following our prepared remarks, we'll open the call up for questions. In order to provide all analysts with the opportunity to participate, we thank you in advance for asking one primary question and then reentering the queue.

Dave Mosley: Thanks, Shanye, and hello, everyone. Seagate closed out fiscal '25 delivering strong financial results for the June quarter marked by 30% year-over-year revenue growth and record gross margins, which improved for a ninth consecutive quarter, a trend that is set to continue as HAMR adoption gains momentum. We achieved non-GAAP earnings per share near historic highs and generated strong free cash flow. For the fiscal year, revenue increased 39%, non-GAAP gross profit dollars nearly doubled and operating profit more than tripled, demonstrating our focus on supply-demand alignment and ongoing cost discipline. Our execution resulted in one of the most profitable fiscal years in the company's long-storied history.

The structural changes in our business model and strong product pipeline make Seagate well positioned to deliver improving profitability and cash generation in fiscal '26. Reflecting our confidence, we expect to resume share repurchases later this quarter, enhancing capital returns to shareholders. Operationally, in fiscal '25, we started the high-volume ramp of two new nearline platforms, including the industry's first heat-assisted magnetic recording hard drive, an engineering feat more than a decade in the making. These new cost-effective and energy-efficient platforms aligned well with data growth driven by traditional compute workloads and increasingly from AI-supported applications. Looking at the current end market dynamics, we see a continuation of strong global cloud demand for our nearline products.

The visibility afforded by our build-to-order strategy indicates our nearline exabyte production capacity is largely spoken for through the middle of next calendar year with visibility building into the second half. We believe BTO contracts are also beneficial for our customers by providing predictable assurance of supply. With installed data center capacity expected to more than double by 2029 on a gigawatt basis, these contracts support the CSP's efforts to keep pace with end-user demand. Within cloud data centers, we see an evolving diversity of workloads and applications addressed through a combination of storage media, optimized across a multitude of factors, including performance, cost, floor space, and energy efficiency.

The diverse solutions that emerge are shaped by how these factors are prioritized and the scale that is required. For instance, one of the world's largest cloud service providers recently developed a tiered storage solution to support an application for a widely used social media platform. Leveraging hard drives for both mass data storage in addition to a caching layer to enable fast, repeatable data access, this customer was able to realize significant cost savings and efficiency gains compared with alternative storage solutions. In today's data-driven world, the growing need for mass capacity storage extends beyond the cloud to edge data centers. There are multiple trends that underpin this view.

First, as more data is created at the edge, it will be replicated and retained across multiple locations to capture actionable insights through AI models. To preserve the integrity of these models, large volumes of data are being retained longer to support checkpoints and inferencing. Additionally, today, roughly 50% of the world's data centers are concentrated in just 4 countries. As data sovereignty regulations evolve and proliferate around the globe, we expect a growing demand for localized data storage. In this context, mass capacity hard drives will be critical from a footprint, efficiency and TCO perspective, ensuring data is safe, secure and compliant.

For data centers at the edge, we expect enterprise storage demand will mirror the trends we've seen in the cloud, where upfront AI infrastructure investments led to increased demand for mass data storage over time. Supporting this point of view, a leading enterprise IT infrastructure provider is introducing new tiered storage system solutions later this year for AI applications designed to optimize their end customers' TCO and data utilization requirements by integrating high-capacity hard drives based on HAMR technology. While momentum for our high-capacity HAMR drives builds, we also have continued to increase exabyte shipments of our PMR 24 to 28 terabyte platform to address demand.

In fact, in the June quarter, we achieved record quarterly sales and volume shipments for any nearline product with this platform. Leveraging the commonality across our PMR and HAMR platforms, we are executing the volume ramp of Mozaic 3+ products. We are tracking to plan with shipments expanding to additional CSPs in the September quarter. Across the board, qualifications are progressing exceedingly well, and we continue to expect the key global CSP customers to be qualified by mid-calendar 2026. Our progress in bringing HAMR-based Mozaic drives to market at scale strongly positions Seagate to address the significant opportunities we foresee in the cloud and at the edge.

The top priority during fiscal '26 is executing our 4-plus terabyte per disk qualification and volume ramp. This product will support cloud workloads with capacities of up to 44 terabytes and also supports lower capacity drives ideal for edge workloads. As planned, we recently started qualification with a global CSP on the 4 terabyte per disk platform and expect to begin volume ramp in the first half of calendar 2026. This timeline is consistent with our target for exabyte shipment crossover on HAMR-based nearline drives in the second half of calendar '26. Ongoing investments in innovation such as granular on platinum media and breakthrough photonics technology are critical to delivering our aerial density roadmap.

We continue to make steady progress with 5 terabytes per disk technology, aligning to our goal of introducing it into the market in early calendar 2028, a time frame when we also expect to demonstrate double that capacity, 10 terabytes per disk in the lab. To close, I believe this is one of the most exciting periods in Seagate's history. Recall at our Investor and Analyst Day in May, we discussed how Seagate is in the right markets with the right technology and the right execution to enhance shareholder value. Demand for mass data storage is expected to grow as our cloud and edge IoT customers continue investing in AI-driven strategic imperatives to unlock and protect data value.

Amid this strong demand backdrop, we are mindful of the evolving trade policy landscape. Based on our current outlook, we expect minimal tariff-related impacts to the business. We will continue to closely track developments and stand ready to deploy mitigation strategies that minimize potential future impact to Seagate and our customers over the long term. In this dynamic environment, our HAMR-based technology roadmap makes us uniquely positioned to capture these growth opportunities in the cloud and at the edge as we push forward aerial density gains to efficiently expand exabyte output. While enabling our customers to benefit from the improving total cost of ownership.

As a result, we are confident in our ability to produce compelling growth in revenue, profitability, and cash generation in fiscal twenty-six and beyond. I'd like to thank our global teams, my partners, and customers for your contributions to a strong fiscal year and to Seagate's ongoing success. Let me now turn the call over to Gianluca.

Gianluca Romano: Thank you, Dave. We capped fiscal twenty-five delivering strong double-digit and bottom-line growth, and achieving record gross margin levels. June quarter revenue came in at $2.44 billion, up 13% sequentially and up 30% year over year. We expanded non-GAAP gross margin by 170 basis points sequentially to 37.9%. And we increased non-operating margin by 270 basis points to 26.2%. Our resulting non-GAAP EPS was $2.59 as a high end of our guided range. For fiscal twenty-five, we grew revenue by nearly 40% to $9.1 billion. We achieved non-GAAP operating profit of $2.1 billion marking one of our strongest annual performances. And recording non-GAAP EPS of $8.10.

These results underscore our solid operational execution and the ongoing momentum for data center demand particularly among global cloud customers. Spent from nearline cloud sales, along with seasonal improvement in the VM market, led to a 14% sequential increase in our DRIVE revenue. Reaching $2.3 billion. Volume shipments increased to 163 exabytes from 144 exabytes in the March quarter. Mass capacity revenue topped the $2 billion mark. Up 15% sequentially and 40% year on year. Husqvarna shipments 151 exabytes compared to 133 exabyte in the prior quarter. The airline shipments into cloud and edge data center made up the vast majority of mass capacity volume.

In the June quarter, New Airline represented 91% of mass capacity exabytes, with shipment of 137 exabytes. Up 14% sequentially and 52% year on year. Our 24 and 28 terabyte PMR products have been widely adopted by global cloud and enterprise data centers. To support their massive data workloads. At the same time, we are ramping our HAMR-based Mosaic products which continue to build customer momentum. Three major cloud service providers are qualified on our Mosaic products. With additional qualification proceeding extremely well. On top of strong payment growth from cloud customers, the airline sales into the enterprise OEM market show a modest sequential improvement in the quarter and we expect stable demand over the next few quarters.

The remaining 80% of revenue came from legacy and other product lines. Based on the legacy market, totaled $270 million up 6% sequentially while revenue from our other product lines increased 3% sequentially. To $163 million. Starting the September quarter, we plan to adjust how we discuss our end markets. We will focus on two main areas, data center and edge IoT. The data center market accounted for about 75% of our fiscal twenty-five revenue. And include the airline products and systems sold into cloud and enterprise customers, as well as cloud-based via application. Edge IoT include consumer and client-centric markets. Along with network attached storage.

We believe this new framework is better aligned with industry practice and reflects the AI-driven market we serve today. Moving on to Celestia, of the income statement. Non-GAAP gross profit increased to $926 million up 19% quarter over quarter and 59% compared with the prior year period. Our resulting non-GAAP gross margin expanded to 37.9%. We continue to benefit from a favorable mix including increased adoption of our latest generation products and ongoing pricing adjustments. These factors combined with a strong demand environment for data center products supported non-GAAP gross margin for the enterprise business above the corporate hedge. On GAAP operating expenses, totaled $286 million up 4% for quarter and in line with our expectations.

Other income and expenses, decreased 9% sequentially to $73 million due in part to the over net interest expense during the quarter. Adjusted EBITDA was $697 million up 24% quarter over quarter and up 73% year on year. Non-GAAP net income was $556 million resulting in non-GAAP EPS of $2.59 per share. Based on the diluted share count, of approximately 215 million shares. Turning now to cash flow and the balance sheet. We invested $83 million in capital expenditures for the June quarter and $265 million for fiscal twenty-five. Which equates to 3% of revenue.

Looking ahead to fiscal twenty-six, we anticipate capital expenditure to be inside our target range of 4% to 6% of revenue while we continue maintaining capital discipline. Free cash flow nearly doubled in the June quarter to $425 million up from $216 million in the prior period. Based on our current outlook, we expect free cash flow generation to expand further the second half of year twenty-five, compared to the first half. Even accounting for a substantial variable compensation payout in the September quarter, which is consistent with our strong performance. In the June quarter, we returned $153 million to shareholders through the quarterly dividend. And we returned nearly 75% of free cash flow to shareholders for the fiscal year.

Demonstrating a strong commitment to our capital return strategy. Cash and cash equivalents increased 9% sequentially close the June quarter with ample liquidity of $2.2 billion including our Androna revolving credit facility of $1.3 billion. We reduced our debt balance by approximately $150 million during the quarter, including retiring $505 million through a new $400 million notetations and cash on hand. We exited the quarter with gross debt of approximately $5 billion. The combination of lower debt and strong profitability resulted in net leverage ratio of 1.8 times with further reduction anticipated. In the coming quarters as profit expands. Turning now to September quarter outlook.

From a demand perspective, the visibility gained through our BTO strategy instilled confidence in sustained demand trend for our high capacity nearline drives. We support both revenue and margin expansion in the September quarter. As previously communicated, starting in fiscal twenty-six, we will be subject to a global minimum tax rate in the mid-teens. Accounting for factors and for the fourteen-week period, we expect September quarter revenue to be in a range of $2.5 billion plus or minus $150 million. As a midpoint, this reflects a 15% improvement year over year. Non-GAAP operating expenses are expected to be approximately $290 million replacing the fourteen-week period partially offset by lower variable compensation as we reset the annual plan for fiscal twenty-six.

Based on the midpoint of our revenue guidance, non-GAAP operating margin is expected to expand into the mid to high twenties percentage range. And on GAAP EPS, it's expected to be $2.30 plus or minus $0.20. Business sixteen percent tax rate. And non-GAAP diluted share count. Of 221 million shares. Our EPS guidance reflects estimated dilution from our twenty-eight convertible notes, and equity compensation. Allusion to non-GAAP earnings from the convertible notes of course, when the volume weighted average price of SEG stock trades above approximately $108 during the period. We target to partially offset the dilutive impact of the convertible notes through share repurchases. Which we expect to resume in the current quarter.

To close, see a strong June quarter performance. Underscores our continued focus on driving growth enhancing profitability, and optimizing cash generation. We are executing our strategic objectives underpinned by structurally changed business model and leading technology roadmap. To deliver on our financial targets enhance value for both customers and shareholders. Operator, let's open the call up for questions.

Operator: We will now begin the question and answer session. If you have further questions, you may reenter the question queue. And your first question today will come from Erik Woodring with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Erik Woodring: Super. Good afternoon, guys. Thank you very much for taking my question. So, Luca, I just want to kind of ask you about the maybe implied growth margin guidance for the September quarter. Over the last eight quarters, you've expanded gross margins by over 200 basis points sequentially on average. I believe at the midpoint of your guide, depending on the interpretation of mid to high twenty percent operating margins, you're guiding to something of, like, 20 basis points of sequential margin expansion.

Can you maybe one just to confirm that math and then two, just help us understand the puts and takes and maybe why we're not seeing that gross margin imply gross margin expansion in September, you know, despite the confidence that we're hearing from you guys about getting to 40% gross margins in a few quarters. Thanks so much.

Gianluca Romano: Thank you, Eddie. I would say your estimate is a bit low. Actually, I say it's significantly lower than what is implied in the guidance. So we have just achieved a new record high in our history in terms of gross margin and having a very high operating margin. But we are guiding up revenue. We are guiding up gross margin and operating margin, I'll say, significantly more than what you are modeling right now. So our path to achieve the milestone or the fourth milestone that we discussed at our investor day just a few weeks ago is intact. Now we are going exactly in that direction. I think we can be there fairly soon.

Operator: And our next question today will come from Asiya Merchant with Citigroup. Please go ahead.

Asiya Merchant: Great. Thank you for taking my question. If you can tell a little bit on the AI inference edge demand, both on the cloud side, maybe also on the edge side. You know, what are you seeing perhaps in the customer commentaries that you're having that would suggest that, you know, there is an uplift here from AI? And sort of what's kind of your as you look ahead into the next few quarters, what are you implying or what are you seeing in terms of AI exabyte demand just specifically from inferencing? And workloads that are sort of baking you know, workloads that you're expecting for your guidance. Thank you.

Dave Mosley: Thanks, Asiya. Yeah. It's a fairly complex space a lot of different things being called AI. What I would say generally speaking in the cloud it's about video properties. We've seen this for many quarters in a row now. Where video is actually stored in the cloud and the diversity of video that's actually coming in from all parts of the world that gets stored in the cloud, those are tremendously rich data sets for us to ultimately store on hard drives.

As far as edge goes, you're starting to see all kinds of different applications, whether they're video applications themselves, factories, safety, factory efficiencies, hospitals, there's a lot of big data sets that exist, especially video data sets that exist at the edge. Some of those applications are taking lots of call inferencing, but they need a lot of data to be fed with at the edge. And then there's also just the normal growth of, I'll call it, data and analytics text data analytics still. But interestingly at the edge, starting to crossover from a point where you maybe treated data as something that you had to sort through and then delete. Now it's just snapshot set.

Snapshot just keeps saving lots of snapshots at the edge because you might wanna go back and look through it. So those are actually driving from the edge the edge growth that we've made reference to as well.

Asiya Merchant: If I may just you know, how does that affect kinda what you guys shared? I'd be analyst event in terms of you know, exabyte CAGR as you kind of look ahead? Thank you.

Dave Mosley: Yeah. I think the biggest wildcard in that, it was still sticking to the same and y keggers that we talked about, you know, mid-twenties that we're comfortable with that. But there are we are watching some of these new applications that people talk about viral applications that happen to be very data dependent or very interesting to us. And most of those are edge applications because there's a lot of data at the edge that ultimately gets just thrown away. And so if it could be processed or stored longer, it's more interesting to us. So I think the cloud knows how to deal with the data that actually ultimately resides on the cloud very well. Great.

And especially big sovereign datasets. Sorry. Especially sovereign datasets. Where people are wanting to keep the data locally like we made reference to in the prepared remarks. I mean, those are interesting as well.

Operator: Thank you. And your next question today will come from James Edward Schneider with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

James Edward Schneider: Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. Maybe if you could talk a little bit about the HAMR contribution you saw in terms of revenue in this quarter and whether you expect how much you would expect that to increase if at all in the September quarter? And then maybe, you know, following on to that, any kind of impact you expect that would have on, gross margins either positive or negative in the out quarter? Thank you.

Dave Mosley: Yeah. Thanks, Jim. So, the HAMR is growing steadily, and we're very happy as we get more people qualified like we talked about, then we'll continue to ramp. What we're very focused on in the company right now is getting to the four terabyte per plat platform. And we're, you know, sit in some sense winding up for that, which you know, we'll expect that ramp early in calendar twenty-six, like we said in the prepared remarks. As far as gross margin, the current product sets are still accretive to gross margin. As we get higher and higher, we expect it to be more accretive, but Gianluca, do you want to give some more color on that?

Gianluca Romano: Yeah. No. We are ramping HAMR. Highest quarter over quarter and we have already three major cloud customers that are qualified on Mosaic three. And we are starting Mosaic four terabyte per disc. So we are executing our roadmap. One of it, you know, we recently discussed at our investor day. And we expect Q1 to be another step higher in thermal volume and, of course, in terms of revenue. And as we discussed, because HAMR is higher capacity drive, and lower cost per terabyte, we expect a positive impact to our gross margin.

James Edward Schneider: Thank you.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Wamsi Mohan with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Wamsi Mohan: Yes. Thank you. Yeah. You had a strong quarter, clearly, but you guided revenue slightly below consensus for the September quarter, and your DSO also jumped up. So I was wondering if you could clarify if there was anything that you would point out in linearity in the quarter. And I guess the question is, how well is your HAMR capacity ramp aligned with qualifications and demand? Like, are you tracking better on production versus demand because of qualification, which could maybe potentially drive some catch up in the in the December quarter. Thank you so much.

Dave Mosley: Yeah. I'll let Gianluca jump in here, but relative to the HAMR ramp, sorry. Let me just talk about this quarter versus last quarter. Last quarter, obviously, the planning for these quarters is six months, nine months ago with build to order or more. In some cases. And so have to look at what is qualified exactly to your point and then what's going to be qualified in six months or nine we're leaning into the product transitions that happen along the way. If anything, we could make more product of any time, we would make it, but we're also trying to incentivize these product transitions to three plus and then four plus as well.

And we're consuming a lot of our operational efficiency that way. Maybe there was a little bit of an over poll to your question last about last quarter and that's indicative of strong demand. I mean, the demand may be stronger as we get out to the back half of the year. We certainly see fairly strong demand right now. We're trying to balance our manufacturing capability and that planning that we've done long term, what we had promised people nine months ago. We're trying to balance all that together, but also prioritizing the product transitions.

Gianluca Romano: Yes. No. Once you said, well, we had a very strong June quarter. We now achieved better results than also what we were estimating at the beginning of the quarter. And we are guiding a better quarter in September. Demand is strong, it's above supply. So our guidance is mainly based on what we think we are ready to supply during the quarter. And that volume of exercise, they will be fully sold. We also need to dedicate a little bit of our production to qualification. So some of our volume is dedicated to call, and as you know, we are qualifying a big number of customers on HAMR.

And so now, of course, we are slightly impacted in the volume that we sell. Because now we need to keep some volume for a for customer call. But we are going in the direction that, you know, we recently discussed is another step further into our improvement in not only revenue, but even more importantly in profitability. And when you look at our guidance, of course, you need to remember that starting this quarter, we will be subject to the global minimum tax. So when you look at EPS, of course, there is an impact from the tax expense. And there is also an impact from an iron number of share outstanding because of the convertible and equity compensation.

So when you model all those things correctly, you will see actually a fairly good improvement in both gross margin and operating margin.

Wamsi Mohan: Thanks, Gianluca. Just to clarify that one last point you made around the capacity ramp and some of the capacity being tucked away sort of for these calls, would you say that's something that just continues to roll forward as you're qualifying more customers, or do you have a potential for really meaningful step up once you get into December because now you've got these CSPs called on Mosaic three. Thank you so much.

Gianluca Romano: We don't guide December, but as I said before, we are going into the direction of continuing to improve revenue and profitability and, of course, part of this revenue now is coming from having a little bit more supply available. So we are executing our plan now. We don't see any major constraint right now in achieving what we said recently. We are very, very confident.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Thomas James O'Malley with Barclays. Please go ahead.

Thomas James O'Malley: Nice. Thanks for taking my question. On the HAMR side, I'll ask a different way. I don't think you guys wanna give out the exact percentage of revenue over the next couple of quarters. I think you did a good job at the Analyst Day of showing where the crossover point was in the first half of fiscal year twenty-seven. But maybe from a customer perspective, like, a large part of the ramp thus far has been with a single customer. You're talking about multiple customers qualified. At this point, are customers two, three, etcetera, outside of customer one, making up a significant portion of the ramp. Like, ten percent or more, let's say.

I just been trying to get an understanding of the adoption outside of the first guy. Thank you.

Dave Mosley: Thanks, Tom. Yes. Simple answer to your question is yes. The other customers are starting to ramp as well, and the pull is pretty strong. Also, depending on who's called where, they may ask for more of the last generation product or may wanna wait till the four terabyte per floater, but everybody has pretty good visibility, and we have multiple customers pulling our And that's indicative of the exabyte demand. Maybe to the earlier question that Wamsi was asking, you know, we add exabyte capacity by getting through these transitions. And so that's been our move is we're not really trying to add gross capacity of number of drives.

We're trying to, you know, get through these transitions as fast as we can to be much more efficient with the exabytes.

Thomas James O'Malley: Oh, cool. And in terms of that transition, I think you guys previously said on the mass capacity side, like, where you kind of ran into a wall in terms of where you were willing to produce with, like, a hundred and sixty exabytes. On the mass capacity side. Is that still the right way to think about where things are stopping before you get just the growth from the technology side, or are you looking at in any different way Just wanted to see if there was an update there.

Dave Mosley: With continued ramp of MOSAIA three plus platforms, we could continue to grow. But, you know, four plus allows significant growth above that. Yeah. So it's not a wall so much anymore. You know, it really was when we were stuck in the middle of two terabytes per plat or product, but, you know, but we're way past that now.

Thomas James O'Malley: Super helpful. Thank you.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Amit Jawaharlaz Daryanani with Evercore. Please go ahead.

Amit Jawaharlaz Daryanani: Thanks a lot. Good afternoon, everyone. Dave, as you think about the LTAs that are giving you visibility sounds like into early twenty-six right now. Can you just touch on what pricing assumptions are you seeing embedded on an exabyte basis in these contracts? And, really, as you think about the HAMR products are the ramp up over the next twelve months. You end up in a pretty good cost advantage, I think, on a per exabyte basis on HAMR exabytes. Do you think these LTA will enable you to keep those cost savings for Seagate or would you see a bigger drop in price per exabyte that you have to engage with the customers with at that point?

Dave Mosley: Yeah. No. We don't have to incent it's a good question. Don't have to incentivize the transition. I mean, there's a significant TCO benefit of running these new products in your data center. So if you think about a forty terabyte versus a thirty terabyte to for example, and you're gonna run that for six or seven years. That's a huge TCO benefit. So there's an incentive baked in right there. You know, we know what our costs are going to be and we know what pricing we want to incentivize and we know what margin would that we need to be able to go back and refeed our R&D and our supply chain and everything else.

So we're balancing all these things in the planning that we're doing. Gianluca, do you wanna talk about pricing?

Gianluca Romano: Yeah. We are not changing our pricing strategy that we have started more than two years ago. So our like for like pricing will continue to slightly increase every time we negotiate a new lead to order. Of course, the mix is going into more higher capacity drives, so but it's also that part also set. But again, everything is aligned to how we are executing our plan that we presented just a few weeks ago.

Amit Jawaharlaz Daryanani: Perfect. Thank you.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Aaron Christopher Rakers with Wells Fargo.

Aaron Christopher Rakers: Yep. Thanks for taking the question. I wanna ask a little bit about free cash flow generation and how we think about share repurchase. So I think in the prepared comments, you had pointed out that you should be in your CapEx revenue or CapEx spend range of 4% to 6%. I guess the first part of this is that would seem to apply, you know, apparently healthy, you know, uptick in the CapEx spend. Year over year for fiscal twenty-six versus fiscal twenty-five. And I guess why would that be?

And then the second question is, you know, kind of tied to that is that as we see the generation of free cash flow, you've hit the sub $5 billion gross debt level. You know, how do we think about the right level of cash operationally you're willing to hold or how maybe in the opposite way we should think about excess cash, you know, being built and capacity for share repurchase. Any thoughts around that would be helpful. Thank you.

Dave Mosley: Thanks, Aaron. I'll hand it over to Gianluca in just a second. But just to handle from an operations perspective, I mean, obviously, given what we've been through in the last few years, we were pretty tight on CapEx. So I'm not sure that looking at a year ago or two years ago baseline is a great way to think about it. Some of our gear needs to be replaced. There's a small pickup for that, but then there's also us looking forward into FY twenty-seven and FY twenty-eight and saying how do we make sure we stage for four terabytes a platter and five terabytes a platter make sure we have the right gear for that.

There you know, that may drive CapEx a little bit. We'll still be well within our range though. And then Gianluca on the Yes, Aaron. So free cash flow is improving a lot. Now you have seen already in the June quarter a major step up. This will continue, as we said, during the second part of calendar twenty-five, and we'll also continue for the second part of our fiscal twenty-six. We have reduced our debt, as you said, at the target level. We were targeting since more than a year at this point. And Dave just announced that we are restarting share buyback.

So again, we are executing our plan I think, obviously, it's a good time to restart the share buyback. And in terms of liquidity, you were asking and excess cash flow, or excess cash We don't have excess cash right now. I think we can maybe still increase a little bit our cash position, but the vast majority of our free cash flow of course, will go back to our shareholders through the dividend and through the share buyback. Thank you.

Aaron Christopher Rakers: Thanks.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Ananda Prosad Baruah with Loop Capital. Please go ahead.

Ananda Prosad Baruah: Thanks, guys, for taking the question. Dave, just going back to your prior remarks about the AI drivers that you're seeing in your business. And this is this would be sort of not at the edge of the data center remarks. And did you actually make mention that you're seeing multiple types of AI video drivers And if you are, could you do you mind just sort of speaking to those again? I just wanted to get clear on those. Thanks.

Dave Mosley: Well, yeah. I would say, Ananda, there's the video properties that I call them, the things that are storing a lot of video on the cloud and then sharing that video across many users around the world. Right? So we all are familiar with those and use those every day. There's also just unstructured data that's coming into the cloud for processing. Could be video content as well. And then there's video generation from some of the newer AI applications also that, you know, some of those are starting to go viral as well. That's a small trend so far.

So the video processing, the unstructured data processing is big and then the video properties, as I call them, is just huge. Creating, you know because humans are creating all kinds of diverse content and then storing them through these applications.

Ananda Prosad Baruah: And are you seeing from the autonomous sector anything starting to happen with generative AI? Any visibility into that? And that's it for me. Thanks.

Dave Mosley: That's an interesting question. So we do have some partnerships with people that are making autonomous vehicles. Typically, so far, the data is actually gathered in the field and then processed in a local cloud. And it's fairly data rich. But so far, there hasn't really been a generation of data at the extreme edge and then monetization somewhere else besides just teaching the car how to drive better. Should that ever happen, you know, so that the cars themselves become units that are actually picking up a lot of data and then sharing it some other way. That could be a huge opportunity. So far, we haven't seen that.

It's more about training and inferencing just to make sure that the vehicles are driving right and staying safe.

Ananda Prosad Baruah: Got it. Thanks a lot.

Operator: And your next question today will come from C.J. Muse with Cantor Fitzgerald.

C.J. Muse: Yeah. Good afternoon. Thank you for taking the question. So I was hoping to better understand your ability to drive revenue growth both short term and longer term. So the September quarter, you're guiding up 2%. You have an extra week, but you talked about select HAMR bits. Know, going to qualification. So I would have thought perhaps with the extra week, maybe you could have had more output. So is there something else going on there? Is there a mix issue? Would love to have help there. And then for fiscal twenty-six, you know, at your Analyst Day, you talked about longer term growth of low to mid-teens top line.

And I'm just curious at what point in the HAMR ramp do you think you'll have capacity to support that type of growth? Thanks so much.

Dave Mosley: Yeah. I'll let Gianluca deal with the longer term period. But, you know, obviously, as I said before, the quarter of quarter stuff was a lot of the supply perspective on these quarters was dictated six months ago or nine months ago under build to order. And I don't think our customers look at it as fourteen week or an extra week or whatever. So if there happens to be a little bit more demand at the end of the quarter, you know, maybe it'll come our way. It you know, there's maybe some evidence that it did last quarter. I don't really get into the, you know, what happened in one week period.

From our perspective, the way we put more exabytes online is to go through the product transition, not necessarily by capital to try to, you know, build more for demand because that would be a long, long lead time anyway. So we're actually very focused on getting the new products in, qualified, up the ramp, so on and so forth to and that'll help build our margins.

Gianluca Romano: Yes. The mix is going in the right direction. So we are increasing both mosaic, so the HAMR product, and the last generation of PMR product. So you will see the increase in exabyte that are not implied in our guidance and also what we have done in the most recent quarter. We are increasing exabyte. We are not increasing unit. So this is all technology transition. So more and more, we move customers to HAMR. More and more we have the opportunity to increase the exabyte and, of course, that will result in higher revenue. In terms of what we said at our analyst term of revenue growth. So the low two meetings regarded next quarter at $2.5 billion.

If you look where we were a year ago, I think it's probably 15% higher. So I don't see any you know, anything different compared to what we were saying a few weeks ago and what we are executing, of course, every quarter is different, and as I said before, we guide based on what we think we are producing in the quarter. If we will produce it to be more, we will be able to generate a little bit more revenue. But right now, this is a visibility.

C.J. Muse: Very helpful. Thank you.

Gianluca Romano: Thanks, C.J.

Operator: And your next question will come from Krish Sankar with TD Cowen. Please go ahead.

Krish Sankar: Hey, guys. This is Eddie for Krish. Just a question on the guide. It seems that your guidance implies incremental gross margins about, like, 50% Even though we are still below the $2.6 billion revenue baseline, you outlined on the Analyst Day. I wonder as you go from the $2.5 billion in September to $2.6 billion and above, why would your incremental gross margin not be better than the 50% number you guided at the Analyst Day? Like, are there some headwinds in the near term? It's just, like, a little bit puzzling, especially given that the HAMR ramp is still in very early stages.

So someone should expect, like, revenue gross margin accretion above the 50% you guided, but I so any color on that regard would be helpful.

Gianluca Romano: Yes, guys. I think you need to look at your mods a bit deeper because they implied gross margin as a guidance is way higher than what you are saying. Again, look at your model, look at the impact of the increase in the share outstanding, the increase in the tax. But the gross margin in our guidance is much higher than 50 basis points sequentially.

Krish Sankar: Sorry, Gianluca. I meant 50% incremental gross margin. Not 50 basis point.

Gianluca Romano: Okay. Perfect. Well, no. I'll say that now every quarter will be a bit different depending exactly from, you know, the mix that we change quarter over quarter. But I'll say our first goal is to achieve a $2.6 billion in revenue and the 40% gross margin. And I think we are trending well in that direction. And after that, our goal is to continue to increase revenue in the not the low to mid-teens as we discussed, as the analyst Dave and increase our profitability for incremental 50% gross margin. So I would say nothing changed in only the last eight weeks. So I think the plan is ongoing, and we are executing well.

Krish Sankar: Got it. Thank you.

Gianluca Romano: Thank you.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Timothy Michael Arcuri with UBS. Please go ahead.

Timothy Michael Arcuri: Thanks a lot. Dave, you made a comment I haven't heard you make before. You said the capacity is booked out to mid twenty-six and visibility is extending into the back half. What does that mean? Because build to order I mean, the lead time to build to drive is a year. So if you place an order now, you're not gonna get the drive until this time next year anyway. So sort of by definition, you have a year, you know, worth of visibility. Are you changing how you book that? Capacity? And I guess part of that is, what does that really give you? Like, do you know exactly what's gonna ship in December?

I know you don't wanna give us guidance, but can customers push out, like, if you wanted to guide December, could you tell us what you're gonna ship in December? You know, I'm just wondering if something changed for you to give that comment. Thanks.

Dave Mosley: Nothing's really changed. So you're and you're somewhat right. Remember, we're leaning through these product transitions. So we have customers who are driving us to not only start the ramp of Mosaic three plus, start the ramp of Mosaic four plus and so on. And they're working with us on qualifications. And that's some of the stuff that we talk about visibility. They generally want exabytes. They don't want specific boxes, but they want the most efficient boxes they can get. And so do we have pretty good visibility into that? Yes. And we have long lead times you know, some of the components, so we have to make sure we start those components right now.

If that helps you comment, Tim.

Timothy Michael Arcuri: Yeah. I guess I'm just trying to figure out, like, do you know exactly what you're gonna ship in December? I know you don't wanna give guidance, but, I mean, could December be down potentially, or do you visibility to say, look, we know exactly what we're gonna ship in December and, you know, we don't wanna tell you, but we at least know what's gonna be.

Dave Mosley: Right. I would say we know what the customers want. And, you know, demand is very strong. That's why we made we you know, as far as what else might happen in the world, I don't know what else might happen in the world. But, you know, from our perspective, demand is still strong, probably stronger than what we have capacity for. And even though we're building capacity as we get through some of these transitions, via exabyte capacity via the transition.

Gianluca Romano: And Tim, we said previously also in prior calls, we expect calendar twenty-five to sequential increase revenue and profitability. So we continue in that direction. So December will be higher revenue and higher profitability.

Timothy Michael Arcuri: Thank you.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Steven Bryant Fox with Fox Advisors. Please go ahead.

Steven Bryant Fox: Hi. Good afternoon. I was just curious if there's a seasonality we have to think about as we figure out the full fiscal year quarters. It seems like there's a lot of positive quarter on quarter. You know, tailwinds as you go through the year. What kinda seasonal warnings would you throw up Gianluca?

Dave Mosley: The season is starting to really diminish in our business. So, you know, if the legacy and other businesses are still have some seasonality. And then VIA is interesting because as time marches on Vias, some of the Vias workloads are moving to the cloud as well. And so we're seeing not the typical seasonality that we would have seen in the via markets. Is more muted now, but I think the bulk of our business, there really isn't any seasonality anymore.

Steven Bryant Fox: Thanks. And just real quickly know what that Again, sorry.

Gianluca Romano: Sorry. In total, I would say mass water is usually our lower quarter in terms of revenue. But as Dave said, that season nineteen, but every year becomes a little bit smaller.

Steven Bryant Fox: Thank you. And just real quick, if I could squeeze one in. Know someone asked you about receivables. I'm not clear on the answer in terms of why the receivables were up so much the quarter. Thanks.

Gianluca Romano: Oh, there's nothing strange. As you know, in the past, we did also some factoring, and we didn't do any factoring this quarter. And that's because now our free cash flow was really strong already. So nothing unusual, I would say, in the business. Bed drive. Receivable higher. Yeah. I'd say we're back to running the business the way we want to and, you know, we've got the supply chain moving the way we want to. So we're, you know, very pleased with the progress in FY twenty-five.

Steven Bryant Fox: Great. Thank you.

Operator: Your next question today will come from Tristan Gerra with Baird. Please go ahead.

Tristan Gerra: Hi. Good afternoon. High level question. It looks like NAND hasn't been cannibalistic to HDD demand for some time. Each storage type has their own respective market. And there's been so much in terms of capacity cuts in NAND recently that has precluded any production cost down. So as eventually NAND capacity normalizes and production costs return to a normal curve. Should we view this as a potential pressure HDD demand in certain end markets or the dynamics such that, notably with HAMR, your density versus production cost may the gap with NAND.

Dave Mosley: Yeah. It's a complex question, but I would say that your last point is the way we think about it. We're continuing to increase the capacity point per drive and also, you know, keep our costs in line. We have a great value proposition for customers, and so therefore, in the markets that we that are really material to us, like the cloud markets, the interface between NAND and HDD is not really changing that much. And when I say interface, keep in mind, there's a lot of NAND in the cloud. Right? There's a lot of front end memory in these application spaces and in some cases, some are very memory dependent.

But when it comes to mass data storage, the interface between all demand that's being used and all the hard drive bits that are being used is changing that much. And because of the economics that you talked about, because of the like we've talked about in the analyst day, the total amount of capital that would be required to replace the bytes in that are HDD with NAND. So NAND's a great technology. It's got a lot of interesting applications on the edge. They need to manage the business well.

That may be the result that may be what's resulting in some of the behaviors that you made reference to, but in the bulk of mass storage application certainly in the cloud, the architectures are not changing.

Tristan Gerra: Great. Thank you very much.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Vijay Raghavan Rakesh with Mizuho.

Vijay Raghavan Rakesh: Yeah. Hi, Dave and Gianluca. Just first question on the gross margin side, assuming your margins, you know, go to, like, like, 38.7, 38.8, 3.8% in the September quarter, is that pickup coming from pricing, utilization, the HAMR mixer? Can you give us some attribution? Like, what person goes to from the pricing improvement versus utilization versus the HAMR mix? And then I follow-up.

Gianluca Romano: And you're talking about the SAP Yeah. September quarter. Sorry. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yes. Oh, I would say all those factors that you mentioned. So HAMR volume will be higher and VCs of course, a good add to our gross margin. And the pricing strategy, as we said before, is not changing. So for the few contracts that we will have in the September quarter, we will have a little bit better pricing. And we are selling all our production. So of course, also on the cost side, we are getting fairly good cost per terabyte decline. So I would say not differently from the last few quarters.

We are trending in the same direction, and we are continuing this sequential improvement.

Vijay Raghavan Rakesh: Got it. And Dave, you mentioned three customers on HAMR now. And I think you guys have said five customers by the end of fiscal twenty-six. Can you talk to what the how the other two are going and how you expect the number two and number three ramps to progress, I guess? Thanks.

Dave Mosley: Yeah. So earlier, I talked about the fact that there were more people ramping the product. So that is relative to the three customer comment. We haven't really set five yet, but we've said major customers will be qualified by early twenty-six. That's what it said in the prepared remarks. And we actually talk about that at Analyst Day as well. So we're still on exactly that path to your question. About how are the calls going. They're going very well. I think as customers need more advice, they see that as they get through qualification, they see that an option and then they're creating that demand.

Obviously, we, with the build order, we have to be very prescriptive of it. So we know exactly what we're gonna be able to build. We know which wafers are flowing and we know what heads of media capabilities we're going to have to hit those things. We'll be as predictable as we can for them. But the progress on the qualifications is going quite well.

Vijay Raghavan Rakesh: Alright. Thank you.

Operator: And your next question today will come from Mark S. Miller with The Benchmark Company. Please go ahead.

Mark S. Miller: Yeah. I'm trying to get my arms around the impact of this global minimum tax, which kicks in fiscal twenty-six. Believe you said the non-GAAP tax rate will be sixteen percent. Can you give any insight what the GAAP tax rate will be with this global minimum tax?

Gianluca Romano: Yeah. It will be very similar. So, like, whatever minimum task is impacting us on both GAAP and non-GAAP.

Mark S. Miller: Okay. Thank you.

Dave Mosley: Thanks, Mark.

Operator: This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to management for any closing.

Dave Mosley: Thanks, Nick. Thanks everyone for joining us today. Fiscal twenty-five was an incredible year for Seagate and I'm really proud of our team's execution. We are operating in a strong demand environment, driven in part by advancements in Gen AI and the march towards all these agentic models. These breakthroughs have solidified data as one of the world's most critical resources. Hard drives are a key component in powering businesses to harness the full value of their data. And Seagate's leading technology roadmap makes us uniquely positioned to capture value from those growing opportunities.

We appreciate the ongoing support of our customers, our suppliers, our employees, and the shareholders, and we look forward to sharing our progress in the quarters ahead. Thank you.

Operator: Conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.

Where to invest $1,000 right now

When our analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,039%* — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500.

They just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now, available when you join Stock Advisor.

See the stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. Parts of this article were created using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on The Motley Fool's insights and investing approach. It has been reviewed by our AI quality control systems. Since LLMs cannot (currently) own stocks, it has no positions in any of the stocks mentioned. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Beta Bionics BBNX Q2 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Tuesday, July 29, 2025 at 12:00 a.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

Chief Executive Officer — Sean Saint

Chief Financial Officer — Stephen Feider

Head of Investor Relations — Blake Beber

Need a quote from one of our analysts? Email [email protected]

TAKEAWAYS

Net Sales: $23.2 million in net sales for Q2 2025, representing 54% year-over-year growth, driven by increased patient adoption.

New Patient Starts: 4,934 new patients adopted the islet in Q2 2025, a 57% increase in new patient starts versus the prior year; 71% of new patient starts originated from multiple daily injection users.

Pharmacy Channel Penetration: High twenties percentage of new patient starts were reimbursed through pharmacy in Q2 2025, up from mid-single-digits in Q2 2024 and low twenties in the previous quarter.

PBM Access: As of July 1, Beta Bionics has formulary agreements with all major pharmacy benefit managers in the U.S, facilitating broader pharmacy channel access.

Gross Margin: 53.8% gross margin for Q2 2025, up slightly from 53.7% in Q2 2024, reflecting cost discipline and increased manufacturing scale.

Operating Expenses: $32.4 million in total operating expenses for Q2 2025, an increase of 63% compared to $19.9 million in Q2 2024; growth primarily came from sales force expansion and R&D associated with Mint and bihormonal projects.

Cash and Investments: $281 million as of June 30, 2025, supporting operational and pipeline initiatives.

Full-Year 2025 Net Sales Guidance: Increased to $88 million–$93 million from $82 million–$87 million previously for full-year 2025 net sales guidance, incorporating higher pharmacy mix expectations.

2025 Pharmacy Mix Guidance: Increased to 25%–28% of new starts via pharmacy, up from prior guidance of 22%–25%.

Gross Margin Guidance Raised: Now projected at 52%–55% for the year, compared to the prior 50%–53%, due to increased scale and higher-margin pharmacy recurring revenue.

Bionic Portal Update: Launch in the quarter enabled healthcare providers to access real-time outcomes, receiving positive initial feedback and accelerating adoption among clinicians.

Sales Force Expansion: Added 20 new territories in the quarter for a total of 63 sales territories.

Product Pipeline Progress: Mint patch pump remains on track for commercialization by 2027, and bihormonal PKPD bridging study dosing completed in July 2025, with results expected this year.

Type 2 Diabetes Patient Uptake: Over 25% of new patient starts were type 2 diabetes patients, reflecting growing off-label physician use.

CMS Payment System Proposal: Proposed shift to pay-as-you-go rental model for insulin pumps and competitive bidding to start as early as 2027, with only 10%–15% of users directly affected.

SUMMARY

Beta Bionics (NASDAQ:BBNX) enhanced pharmacy channel adoption, and increased full-year guidance, demonstrating expanding market reach and operational scale. Management expects higher recurring revenue and margin resilience from the pharmacy mix, while maintaining robust cash levels and advancing multiple pipeline programs toward key milestones. The company anticipates adapting effectively to potential CMS reimbursement changes and sees increased engagement among healthcare providers, as evidenced by new digital tools and strong feedback. Significant new patient starts originated from the multiple daily injection segment, and prescription trends indicate material off-label use in type 2 diabetes. CMS regulatory timing could begin impacting payment methodologies in 2027, but leadership believes the changes will not have a material adverse effect on the business model.

Sean Saint said, "the islet delivered an average baseline A1c to follow a GMI decline of 1.6% in the real world." highlighting clinical differentiation among insulin pumps.

Stephen Feider noted that increasing pharmacy channel adoption creates a short-term revenue headwind, but a cumulative multi-year revenue tailwind, with a $1 million headwind to 2025 revenue potentially turning into a $9 million cumulative tailwind through 2028 if pharmacy mix remains elevated.

Mint's commercial launch remains targeted for 2027, with features designed to blend best-in-class user experience with over-the-air updates and enhanced flexibility.

Management stated, "we expect the pharmacy channel's gross margin will consistently outperform the DME channel's gross margin." anticipating improved profitability as the business scales.

Preliminary results for the bihormonal PKPD study are in line with expectations and support continued development.

Operating leverage is expected as sales and marketing and G&A cost growth moderate, with future R&D spending described as "lumpy" as clinical programs progress.

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

DME: Durable Medical Equipment; refers to long-lasting medical devices, such as insulin pumps, typically reimbursed on an upfront purchase model via healthcare payers.

PBM: Pharmacy Benefit Manager; organization that manages prescription drug benefits and negotiates pharmacy contracts for insurers and employers.

PKPD Study: Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic study; evaluates a drug's absorption, distribution, metabolism, and physiological effects.

GMI: Glucose Management Indicator; an estimated A1c derived from continuous glucose monitoring data.

505(b)(2) NDA: A regulatory pathway for new drug applications in the U.S. that allows sponsors to rely in part on existing data for previously approved products.

ACE and IAGC 510(k)s: Abbreviated FDA clearances for insulin delivery pumps and control algorithms.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Operator: Good afternoon, and welcome to the Beta Bionics Second Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speakers' presentation, there will be a question and answer session. Instructions will follow at that time. As a reminder, please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Blake Beber, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Blake Beber: Thank you. Good afternoon, and thank you for tuning in to Beta Bionics' Second Quarter 2025 Earnings Call. Joining me for today's call are Chief Executive Officer, Sean Saint, and Chief Financial Officer, Stephen Feider. Both the replay of this call and the press release discussing our second quarter 2025 results will be available on the Investor Relations section of our website. Replay will be available for approximately one year following the conclusion of this call. Information recorded on this call speaks only as of today, 07/29/2025. Therefore, if you are listening to the replay, any time-sensitive information may no longer be accurate. Also on our website is our supplemental second quarter 2025 earnings presentation and updated corporate presentation.

We encourage you to refer to those documents for a summary of key metrics and business updates. Before we begin, we'd like to remind you that today's discussion will include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements reflect management's expectations about future events, our product pipeline, development timelines, financial performance, and operating plans. Please refer to the cautionary statements in the press release we issued earlier today as well as our SEC filings, including our Form 10-Q filed today for a detailed explanation of the inherent limitations of such forward-looking statements.

These documents contain and identify important factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. Please note that the forward-looking statements made during this call speak only as of today's date, and we undertake no obligation to update them to reflect subsequent events or circumstances except to the extent required by law. Today's discussion will also include references to non-GAAP financial measures with respect to our performance, namely adjusted EBITDA. Non-GAAP financial measures are provided to give our investors information that we believe is indicative of our core performance and reflects our ongoing business operations. We believe these non-GAAP financial measures facilitate better comparisons of operating across reporting periods.

Any non-GAAP information presented should not be considered as a substitution independently or superior to results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Please refer to our earnings press release and supplemental earnings presentation on the Investor Relations section of our website for reconciliation of non-GAAP measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measure. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Sean for some opening remarks.

Sean Saint: Thanks, Blake. Good afternoon, everyone. And thank you for joining us for our second quarter 2025 earnings call. We're excited to share with you all today our financial results for the second quarter as well as positive updates to our full-year guidance for 2025. Starting with our performance in the second quarter, our team continues to execute at the highest level across all aspects of our business, and we made key advances commercially, clinically, and in our innovation pipeline.

We continue to see robust demand for the islet, and our efforts to expand the islet's commercial reach resulted in a record number of new patient starts in the quarter in both the DME and pharmacy channels, and a record percentage of those new patient starts going to the pharmacy channel. In late June, we hosted our first investor and analyst day. We talked about the islet's place on the continuum of user engagement from hybrid to fully closed loop and the continuum of system adaptation from static to adapted algorithms. The islet demands the least engagement from the user and delivers the most automated adaptation of any AID system, setting a new standard for our industry.

We also highlighted the superior clinical outcomes of the islet with our real-world data to the first two years of islet's launch. We demonstrated that the islet drove meaningful changes from baseline HbA1c to follow-up glucose management indicator or GMI, which is a proxy for A1c, regardless of our user's baseline A1c group, prior therapy, or level of engagement with the islet. We also shared outcomes for users treated by endocrinologists or primary care practices, and the outcomes were virtually the same. We're extremely proud of those data and believe that islet is the only pump in the market that's capable of producing those results across such a wide range of users and clinicians.

It's important to remind you all that if we had a user's baseline A1c and at least three weeks of CGM data uploaded to our cloud, they were included in our real-world results. We've noticed a trend in our industry of subsegmented data in ways that make it appear more favorable, sometimes in dramatic fashion. And we encourage everyone to read the fine print on these datasets to get a better sense of how populations are being subsegmented in a way that skews the results. Beta Bionics is committed to providing fair and honest representations of our real-world data.

And when we do subsegment our data, we do it to highlight the performance of our system in our hardest users, not our easiest ones. In this way, we are not only setting a new standard with our technology but also with our approach to sharing real-world results. In Q2, we also made some key strides in our innovation pipeline, which I'll dive into in more detail later in the call. I've never been more confident that we're building a highly differentiated business that is poised to achieve success over the short, medium, and long term. The team's dedication to our mission of delivering life-changing solutions that simplify and alleviate the burden of managing diabetes is stronger than ever.

And we want to thank our community of users, healthcare providers, and caregivers in our Bionic universe that inspire us every day to achieve our mission. For today's call, I'll cover our Q2 results, which exceeded our expectations across the board. Stephen will provide some additional color on our performance in the quarter while highlighting positive updates to our annual guidance for the full year 2025. I'll discuss the recent CMS proposal for the 2026 durable medical equipment payment system, which has implications for durable insulin pumps and Beta Bionics. Lastly, I'll wrap up the call with key updates across our innovation pipeline, including Mint, which is our patch pump program, and then our bihormonal system.

Starting with a brief overview of our Q2 2025 financial performance, I'm proud to announce that we delivered $23.2 million in net sales, which grew 54% year over year. In Q2, we saw 4,934 new patients adopt the islet, growing 57% versus the prior year. A high twenties percentage of those new patient starts were reimbursed through the pharmacy channel, which is substantially higher than the mid-single-digit percentage we saw in Q2 of the prior year and increasing relative to the low twenties percentage we saw in Q1 of this year.

As a reminder, we believe the best metric to measure pharmacy coverage is the percentage of total new patient starts that were reimbursed through pharmacy, as opposed to percent of lives covered under formulary arrangements with pharmacy benefit managers or PBMs, which doesn't account for adoption by the underlying health plans or the underlying logistics required to utilize this channel. As of July 1, Beta Bionics has effective formulary agreements in place with all the major PBMs that operate in the US. While we're proud of that accomplishment, it does not yet mean that all of those patients are benefiting from the pharmacy channel.

We'll continue to work with the health plans that partner with those PBMs to expand adoption of the islet under the pharmacy benefit. We've been successfully doing over the last two years. Shifting now to gross margin. Our gross margin in the quarter was 53.8%, up slightly relative to 53.7% in 2024. There are a few moving pieces that impacted our gross margin in Q2 that Stephen will address in detail shortly. But overall, our gross margin in Q2 is indicative of our continued cost discipline across the business as well as our ability to extract leverage from our fixed manufacturing overhead as we continue to build scale.

As I mentioned earlier, these Q2 results exceeded our expectations across the board, and I'm proud of what our team's accomplished. There are a number of drivers to point to when it comes to our strong performance, we expect all of them to continue to contribute to our performance going forward. The first driver to call out is the market's deepening appreciation for our highly differentiated, fully adaptive closed-loop algorithm. At the investor and analyst day, we showed that the islet delivered an average baseline A1c to follow a GMI decline of 1.6% in the real world. A result that we believe is unique in the history of insulin pumping and even diabetes management more broadly.

And we're generating those results in our true real-world population, meaning our entire user base for whom we have baseline A1c, at least three weeks of CGM data. This isn't a fractional advantaged subsegment of our data. This is a representative real-world population. With each quarter, we see the islet growing into new accounts and penetrating deeper into existing accounts, and there's still substantial runway. In Q2, we launched an update for the Bionic Portal, our healthcare provider portal, which now allows providers to access real-time clinical outcomes for their patients that are using the islet.

The updated portal facilitates collaboration between providers in the clinic, enhances the connection that providers have with their islet patients between visits, and enriches communications between providers and their patients during visits to the clinic. Initial feedback from islet prescribers has been overwhelmingly positive. And we're already seeing the Bionic portal drive more rapid adoption of the islet at the provider and clinic level. As you may recall, in 2024, we launched three new products, including integration with Abbott's Freestyle Libre 3 plus CGM, color islet, and the Bionic Circle remote monitoring app. These product launches continue to gain traction in Q2, and we expect their contribution to continue to grow in Q1.

We expanded our sales force by 20 territories to bring our total territory count to 63. Those 20 incremental territories began selling in earnest in Q2. The last driver I'll mention is we're continuing to expand our pharmacy channel presence, enabling more people with diabetes to access insulin pump therapy with minimal to no upfront out-of-pocket costs. What I hope you all take away from this is that we're positioning Beta Bionics core business for success today and tomorrow. All while making key advances in our innovation pipeline, which I'm excited to share with you in more detail later on during the call.

But for now, I'll hand the call over to Stephen to provide some additional color on our second quarter results and discuss our increased full-year guidance for 2025. Stephen?

Stephen Feider: Thanks, Sean. Approximately 71% of our 4,934 new patient starts in Q2 came from people with diabetes that used multiple daily injections prior to starting the islet. We look at this metric because it's an important representation of how much the islet is expanding the market for insulin pumps. And the results we're seeing reinforce our confidence that the islet is addressing an unmet need in the market. Let's talk about pharmacy. In Q2, a high twenties percentage of our new patients starts were reimbursed through the pharmacy channel. We're continuing to see great traction from our pay-as-you-go model from PBMs, and the underlying health plans that partner with those PBMs. Turning now to gross margin.

In Q2, our gross margin was 53.8%, up slightly compared to 53.7% in 2024. While gross margin may look very similar between Q2 of this year and Q2 of the prior year, there are two points I'd like to highlight that are indicative of healthy underlying gross margin dynamics. The first to highlight is related to pharmacy. As we've discussed extensively in prior earnings calls, increasing our pharmacy mix is financially accretive over the medium and long term because we are reimbursed for the monthly supplies at a higher rate than in the DME channel.

However, in the pharmacy channel, we forego the upfront payment for the pump itself that we would have received if the pump went through the DME channel. This creates two dynamics. Number one, when we increase the percentage of new patient starts going through the pharmacy in any given quarter, the upfront revenue for the pump that we forego creates a transitory headwind for our revenue and gross margin in that quarter. Number two is our existing pharmacy installed base generates substantially more revenue per month versus the DME channel. Coming back now to Q2's gross margin.

We saw a substantial uptick in the percentage of new patient starts going through the pharmacy in Q2 of this year relative to the prior year. That creates a headwind for revenue and gross margin this quarter, but is great for the business over the medium and long term. In parallel to that, our pharmacy installed base at the end of 2025 was over seven times the size of our pharmacy installed base at the end of 2024.

Over time, as our mix of new patient starts continues to shift to the pharmacy, we believe the high gross margin recurring revenue generated from our existing pharmacy installed base will overpower the near-term headwinds we experience from new patient starts going through the pharmacy channel. Stated differently, in the near future, we expect the pharmacy channel's gross margin will consistently outperform the DME channel's gross margin. The second point that is indicative of healthy underlying gross margin dynamics is manufacturing volume leverage. As production volumes increased in Q2 of the prior year, we benefited from lower per-unit costs driven by a reduced bill of materials and improved absorption of fixed manufacturing overhead.

So in summary, growth in new patient starts to the pharmacy channel caused year-over-year margin compression, which was offset by high-margin recurring revenue from a substantially larger pharmacy installed base and lower per-unit costs from manufacturing volume leverage. The pharmacy installed base and lower per-unit costs are both durable gross margin tailwinds going forward. Shifting now to operating expenses. Total operating expenses in the second quarter were $32.4 million, an increase of 63% compared to $19.9 million in 2024. The increase in sales and marketing expenses relative to the prior year was driven by the expansion of our field sales team, which now stands at 63 sales territories exiting Q2.

The increase in R&D expenses relative to the prior year is driven by the Mint and bihormonal projects. G&A expense increases relative to the prior year are driven by new costs related to operating as a public company. Let's move on to cash. As of 06/30/2025, we have approximately $281 million in cash, cash equivalents, and short and long-term investments. We remain confident in our ability to generate positive free cash flow at an earlier stage relative to our peer group's historical precedent. Here are a few reasons why. Number one, our device is designed to be manufactured efficiently, evidenced by our current gross margin profile.

Number two, our revenue model is shifting towards the pharmacy, which we are confident is financially accretive versus the DME channel over the medium and long term. And number three is our management team's track record of operational efficiency, which is evident in our operating margin at our scale relative to competitive precedents at a similar scale. We know that an efficient operator title is earned, not given, and we intend to earn the public's trust on that with each passing quarter. Now turning to our 2025 annual guidance. We are raising guidance across the board.

We now project that net sales for the full year of 2025 will be $88 million to $93 million, up from our prior guidance of $82 million to $87 million. We now expect 25% to 28% of our new patient starts to be reimbursed through the pharmacy channel versus our prior guidance of 22% to 25%. Allow me to remind you what the increase in pharmacy guidance means for revenue over the next four years. The raise from 23.5% to 26.5% new patient starts to pharmacy, which are the midpoints of our previous and updated guidance, are expected to generate a roughly $1 million headwind to 2025 revenue.

This roughly $1 million headwind is baked into our updated 2025 annual guidance of $88 to $93 million. From 2026 through 2028, we expect that same increase in pharmacy guidance to result in up to a $9 million tailwind to cumulative revenue assuming no attrition. Said a different way, a $1 million headwind in year one flips into a potential $9 million cumulative tailwind in years two through four. We accept that trade-off. In terms of how to think about the revenue cadence for the remainder of the year, we anticipate revenue in Q3 to be slightly higher than Q2, and revenue in Q4 to increase relative to Q3, which is seasonally typical in the diabetes industry.

For new patient starts, we expect Q3 new patient starts to be similar to Q2 and Q4 to increase relative to Q3. We expect the percentage of new patient starts reimbursed through the pharmacy in the second half of the year to increase relative to the high twenties percentage we saw in Q2.

That said, we expect the rate of pharmacy mix increase in the second half of the year won't be as pronounced as the large increases we saw in both Q1 and Q2, which were fueled in large part by the formulary agreement with Therapeutics that went into effect on February 1, and the strong adoption we saw from the underlying health plans that partner with Prime as their PBM.

While we now have an effective formulary agreement in place with all the major PBMs that operate in the US as of July 1, sales cycles of the underlying health plans that partner with each PBM are highly variable, depending on the specific PBM and the specific health plan that partners with that PBM. In the case of Prime, we saw immediate pull-through of the formulary agreement at the health plan level. For our more recent PBM agreement that became effective on July 1, we don't expect to see the immediate pull-through by the health plans that we saw with Prime. Moving on to gross margin.

We are raising our outlook to 52% to 55% gross margin for the full year 2025, versus our prior guidance of 50% to 53%. We are increasing guidance for a couple of reasons. Number one, embedded in our revenue guidance raise and pharmacy mix guidance raise, is a raise in our expectation for new patient starts, and that increased scale should generate a lower per-unit cost through manufacturing volume leverage. And number two, we expect to benefit from our growing pharmacy installed base, with a large bolus of new pharmacy users we onboarded in Q1 and Q2, which produces high-margin recurring revenue for the balance of the year.

So the takeaway here is that while the outperformance in pharmacy is a headwind to our gross margin outlook for the year, we expect to be able to more than offset that headwind, and we are raising guidance as a result. In terms of how to think about the gross margin cadence for the remainder of the year, we expect gross margin to increase slightly from Q2 to Q3 and again from Q3 to Q4. Regarding tariffs, I want to reiterate our prior commentary that custom components for the islet and its consumables are exempt from tariffs under the Nairobi protocol.

Overall, we expect the impact of tariffs on our business to be minimal, and their impact is contemplated in our updated gross margin guidance for the year. With that said, I'll hand the call now back to Sean to discuss the recent CMS proposal and our innovation pipeline. Sean?

Sean Saint: Thanks, Stephen. On June 30, CMS released a proposed rule for the 2026 durable medical equipment payment system, which includes provisions that may impact insulin pumps supplied to Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. To be clear, this proposal only applies directly to traditional Medicare fee-for-service, not Medicare Advantage, which is managed by private plans. Approximately 10% to 15% of our users are Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, so let's walk through the key components of the proposed rule and our perspective on them. There are two major elements in the proposal. First, CMS is proposing to implement a competitive bidding program for insulin pumps.

Under this program, DMEs would submit bids to supply insulin pumps, and CMS would set the reimbursement rate at the seventy-fifth percentile of the accepted bids. DMEs that bid above the price threshold set by CMS may be excluded from supplying pumps to Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries in the bid geographic area. This is new for pumps and is designed to reduce overall cost to the system. Second, CMS is proposing a shift to a pay-as-you-go rental model for pumps, replacing the current model where CMS pays the DME supplier for the pump for a thirteen-month period, after which the patient owns the pump and CMS no longer pays for it.

Under the new model, CMS would pay DMEs a fixed amount each month for the pump for up to sixty months instead of just paying for the pump over the first thirteen months. This is designed to allow patients to switch pumps more easily and to shift attrition risk from CMS to the DMEs. In the new model, if the patient stops using the pump anytime during the sixty-month period, CMS no longer pays for it. Here's our view on the proposal. We support CMS's intent to modernize payment models in a way that better supports people living with diabetes. We believe the competitive bidding may undermine that goal.

The Medicare fee-for-service channel is already the most financially challenging for both pump manufacturers who sell insulin pumps and supplies to DMEs, and the DMEs who distribute those pumps and supplies to patients and collect reimbursement from CMS. The reimbursement amount from CMS is what DMEs would be bidding on if competitive bidding is implemented. In the proposal, CMS is capping the maximum allowable bid at approximately $206 per month. We believe this cap represents a single-digit percentage reimbursement cut relative to what DMEs currently receive from CMS today on a normalized basis across sixty months.

We believe that cap was calculated using lower monthly infusion set and usage assumptions than what users actually require each month, and we encourage CMS to correct this in the final rule. Whether or not the proposed cap stands, we do not anticipate any material financial impact on our business as we are not directly affected by the change. In the unlikely scenario, the DMEs face price compression at or beyond the proposed cap, that could force manufacturers or DMEs to withdraw from the Medicare fee-for-service channel in certain regions, thereby limiting patient access and choice, which is not what CMS intended with the proposed rule.

Regarding the proposed shift to a pay-as-you-go rental model for pumps, we agree with CMS's intent to align reimbursement with the actual therapy use. We were the first durable pump company to implement a pay-as-you-go model to the pharmacy channel. That said, applying this model to the DME channel introduces significant logistical complexity. Insulin pumps are personalized medical devices that are not designed for refurbishment and reuse in the way other DME categories might be. If CMS decides to finalize this model, we'll work with our DME partners to explore safe refurbishment arrangements for our customers and find a path forward financially that ensures our DME partners can continue to supply the channel.

While it's too early to say what that arrangement will look like, we see the shift to pay-as-you-go as a net tailwind for the business. Let me walk you through that thinking. This would be a pretty extreme scenario. But if we hypothetically align the way we receive payments from DMEs to the way DMEs would receive payments from CMS, in a pay-as-you-go model, we would expect that change in revenue recognition to result in a single-digit percentage headwind to our overall revenue in year one, followed by a single-digit percentage tailwind to our revenue in each of years two through five. And cumulatively, it would not materially impact the amount of revenue we recognize over that five-year period.

So how does that become a tailwind? Two reasons. Number one, the same way we see the pharmacy pay-as-you-go model reduce upfront out-of-pocket costs that patients spend on an insulin pump, a pay-as-you-go model in the DME channel could have that same effect. This could increase overall pump adoption by Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries. Number two, by enabling patients to switch more easily between pumps, we believe that benefits a market newcomer with a smaller installed base, rather than incumbents who have more to lose. Plus, easier ability to switch pumps would help a differentiated product like islet gain more share.

So to summarize our view of the CMS proposal, we don't expect to see any material revenue impact from competitive bidding. We expect the potential shift to pay-as-you-go will create tailwinds for the business. And we're ready to adapt with our DME partners to ensure our customers are taken care of. We'll keep you updated as the rule progresses. We anticipate the comment period to close in early September, with a final ruling from CMS in early November.

Stephen Feider: Now let's dig into our innovation pipeline.

Sean Saint: Our goal with our pipeline programs is simple. Disrupt the industry, and disrupt ourselves. At our recent investor and analyst day in June, we unveiled Mint, our patch pump in development, and provided a live demonstration of its features and the patch change process. Mint is being designed to marry the best aspects of fully disposable and partially disposable patch architectures. And every decision we made in the design of the product is centered around the user experience. We believe the Mint wear experience will fit well into a user's everyday life. Mint is being designed so that users won't need their phone to change a Mint.

Users won't ever need to charge a Mint, and users won't need to remove a Mint when they swim or shower. The four and a half millimeter steel cannula is being designed to feel very similar to an insulin pen, which we expect will minimize discomfort during cannula insertion. Said differently, we're seeking to provide a patching experience that aligns well with what patch wearers are already used to and love while also improving upon that experience where we see opportunities to do so. Another great feature is that we expect to be able to roll out firmware over-the-air updates to the reusable controller.

So if a Mint user wants to switch to the latest and greatest CGM and we're integrated with that CGM, it can happen overnight. These expected features are what we believe will separate Mint from every other fully disposable or partially disposable patch, whether they're already on the market or still in development. This is what we mean when we say our architecture is intended to be the best of both worlds. We strongly believe that we've harnessed the best aspects of both one-piece and two-piece architectures all in the name of user experience. Add this to our industry-leading algorithm, and we believe Mint will be a game-changer when it launches.

In Q2, we continued to advance Mint rapidly towards our goal of commercialization by 2027, which we are reiterating as our target, and we remain highly confident in achieving it. Shifting to our bihormonal pump program, in July, we completed dosing for our shelf-stable pump-compatible glucagon candidate's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic or PKPD bridging study. As a reminder, the trial is intended to enable us to bridge all of our previous bihormonal clinical data, including three pre-pivotal inpatient and six pre-pivotal outpatient trials, to our new formulation of glucagon. We expect to have full results from the PKPD study in 2025, which will inform our go-forward development strategy for our glucagon candidate.

Preliminary PD results are in line with our expectations and supportive of continued development of our glucagon candidate per our previously communicated development strategy. While the full PKPD data won't be publicly available, we expect to provide additional updates on the program and our development strategy during our Q3 earnings call. As of now, there is no change to the expectations that we'll conduct concurrent pivotal trials to fulfill the requirements for a 505(b)(2) NDA, a chronic drug indication for glucagon, and the ACE and IAGC 510(k)s, the pump and algorithm, respectively. I want to share a quick thought on the potential form factors for our bihormonal system.

In the past, our bihormonal form factor has been a durable pump with two channels in it, one for insulin and one for glucagon. That form factor seems very acceptable to users who have used it in formative clinical trials. And it's very similar in size to our insulin-only islet commercial launch hardware. However, with the addition of Mint technology to our pipeline, that opens up several doors to us. The bihormonal form factor could be a durable pump with two channels, it could also be the color islet plus a Mint, or it could be two Mints, one dispensing insulin and the other dispensing glucagon.

We have the flexibility to choose, and while we won't call our shot today, we will spend significant time between now and launch investigating our users' preferences so we maximize the user experience of the bihormonal system. It is a core belief of Beta Bionics. However, that plays out, we continue to be extremely excited by the bihormonal program's ability to transform clinical outcomes for people with diabetes. But more importantly, the ability to transform the way people think about managing their diabetes as well as producing a larger lifetime customer value to Beta Bionics.

To briefly touch on the type 2 diabetes label expansion opportunity, in Q2, we continued to see some healthcare providers prescribe islet to their type 2 patients off-label. We estimate that over 25% of our new patient starts in the quarter were from type 2. While we're not committing to a specific timeline, we look forward to pursuing the type 2 diabetes label through the FDA. We covered lots of ground on today's call, so I want to leave you all with a few of the key points that we hope you take away from our remarks.

The islet is continuing to see excellent traction in the market, and we're building the right team and the right tools around it to expand its reach and transform the way people with diabetes, their loved ones, and their healthcare providers manage diabetes. Q2 was an excellent quarter for our business, and we're proud of the results we delivered that also enable us to raise our full-year 2025 guidance. We're confident that our business can overcome any challenges thrown its way, whether that's tariffs, policy changes that impact our partners, or new entrants into the market. We're building the most innovative pipeline in the industry with the aim of disrupting the industry and ourselves.

And we remain as confident as ever in our ability to deliver those innovations to the people with diabetes who need them. This is a business that is set up for sustainable success today and tomorrow. And we're excited to continue sharing updates with you all as we continue to execute against our mission. With that, operator, please open the call for Q&A.

Operator: Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press 11 on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. If you would like to remove yourself from the queue, press 11 again. We also ask that you wait for your name and company to be announced before proceeding with your question. Our first question will be coming from the line of Matthew O'Brien of Piper Sandler. Your line is open.

Matthew O'Brien: Great. Thanks so much for taking the questions. And really nice quarter across the board here, everyone. So congrats on that. I did want to ask about a couple of things that might get a little bit of attention here from investors. The first thing on the pricing side, it looks like the DME ASPs are quite strong in the quarter, but the pharmacy looked like it's a little bit below what I might have been modeling. So is there anything going on in the pharmacy channel specifically on the pricing side of note that we should really be thinking about? And then I do have a follow-up.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. So, Matt, are you talking specifically about the islet pharmacy price or the monthly supply kit ASP or both? Both. But more so on the supply kit side. Yeah. Okay. So on the islet in the pharmacy channel, you did see a downtick. So I'm gonna comment on both. And the first one is on the islet in the pharmacy channel. You did see a downtick in the ASP for that particular channel because we're seeing more adoption from PBMs, which is evidenced by the uptick in the pharmacy new patient percentage of new patient starts. And when that happens, we no longer rebate the or sorry.

We then issue a rebate for the islet, and the ASP in that particular channel then goes down over time. And so you have seen that. That again is indicative of the success that we're having in winning new patient starts and getting more traction in the pharmacy channel with, again, more PBM adoption and more underlying health plan adoption. There actually isn't anything. And moving to the pharmacy supply kits, there's actually nothing about the ASP changing from Q1 to Q2. There is some stocking dynamic that was present in Q2 relative to Q1. That dynamic is probably what's contributing to your numbers there, Matt.

Matthew O'Brien: Got it. Okay. That's good to hear. And then the other piece is just on the churn rate. Looks like it was about 5% in the quarter based on my math, which God knows that could be wrong. But I just want to make sure the numbers are about right there. And then just anything you would call out on the churn side that might be a little higher or lower DME or pharmacy? Specifically, pharmacy, are you seeing a little higher churn rate through that channel? Thanks.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. So while I can appreciate that churn rate or the attrition rate that we have in the pharmacy channel in particular has a ton of impact on your model, and by the way, it's something that we monitor very closely at Beta Bionics. For reasons that are simple, as the industry doesn't or the diabetes industry doesn't report on attrition rates, Beta Bionics is not going to be the first pump company that does. So, again, I understand that it's an important metric that you have in your model, but it's not something that we're commenting on.

Here's what I will say in principle, though, that I think highlights why we have a lot of confidence in our attrition rate or in our retention rate, I guess, to use a more positive connotation. Every single patient that we can send to the pharmacy channel we do. So, how this works logistically is when Beta Bionics gets a prescription for the islet, we check to see if the patient is covered in pharmacy. And if they are, we send that patient in. If they're not, we send them through DME.

What that's really indicative of is that we now, because we know what our retention rate is, the pharmacy channel, we know that it's the most advantaged channel for us financially, which is why we send every patient there that we can. So I'll just again, make that point to emphasize that despite us not communicating our retention or attrition rates numerically, they're very good, and it's why we continue to prioritize pharmacy over DME.

Matthew O'Brien: Got it. Makes sense. Thanks so much.

Stephen Feider: Thanks, Matt.

Operator: Thank you. And our next question will be coming from the line of Travis Steed of Bank of America. Your line is open.

Stephanie Piazzolla: Hey. This is Stephanie Piazzolla on for Travis. Thanks for taking the question and congrats. Maybe just wanted to start out by asking about the guidance. You'd be Q2 by almost $4 million and are raising the guide by $6 million at the midpoint. So maybe just talk about some of the drivers of that increased outlook in the back half of the year and the confidence in those. And then you gave some quarterly cadence commentary, which was helpful. But maybe if you could elaborate a little bit on the underlying assumptions of the Q3 revenue being higher than Q2 and the Q3 new patient start similar to Q2.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Sure. So there's a lot in there. The first question you asked is about why do we have confidence in our guidance for the rest of the year. And, you know, we're raising guidance not just by the amount that we beat in Q2. So my first statement I'll say is we have a high degree of confidence in every bit of guidance that we communicate. So, you know, our revenue guidance for the remainder of 2025 is no different. As it relates to the Q3 new patient starts guidance and the revenue outlook for the rest of the year. I think kind of embedded in your question there, Stephanie, is you're asking, okay.

So why are you forecasting or why are you guiding to a flat new patient start number? When, you know, we're also expecting revenue to grow in the company's grown quarter over quarter. So I guess I'll answer that when I give three reasons for that. The first one is in diabetes, as you're aware, seasonally, we tend to see Q1 being the weakest quarter relative to the other quarters throughout the year and then Q4 being seasonally the best quarter. Whereas Q2 and Q3 tend to be kind of flat or neutral relative to one another. So there's nothing that we're noting about Q3 seasonality in our guidance.

The second is that Q2 was a very strong quarter, which is part of the reason why, you know, for the flat new patient start guidance in Q3. And then the last point, the third point is just a reiteration of what I said actually to start my answer here, which is that anytime we do give guidance, we set it at a level that we have a higher degree of confidence in our ability to achieve. And that new patient starts number is no exception.

Stephanie Piazzolla: Thank you. That's helpful. And then I just wanted to follow-up on the CMS home health proposal for 2026. And maybe if you could just talk about some of the next steps as part of the process. And, I guess, a bit more on the expected timing of how long it could take for some of the things in the proposal to be implemented. Thank you.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Sure. So, yeah, the next steps are CMS will receive comments from companies, DME distributors, in particular to the insulin pump industry. They'll see comments from companies like Beta Bionics as well as DME distributors. I think it's by the August is when those particular proposals or early September, I think, is when those responses are due. So that'll happen, and then CMS will put together whether or not they choose to move forward with the proposal, and, you know, implement if they do implement the competitive bidding process, and then ultimately make a ruling sometime in the future for when the new policy would be enacted. And our expectation is the earliest that would be 2027.

Operator: Thank you. And our next question will be coming from the line of Michael Pollock of Wolfe Research. Your line is open.

Michael Pollock: Hey. Good afternoon. Thank you for taking the question. I'm interested in a generic comment on kind of same-store, new-store dynamics as you assess the sequential growth in starts. To what much would you attribute to kind of increased penetration with existing prescribers versus the sign-up of new prescribers?

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Hey, Mike. Good question. Not gonna love my answer because I'm not gonna answer it numerically. But we're actually seeing the dynamic of both happening. So we did expand our field sales team relative to this time last year. So there is an element of new territories where, you know, Beta Bionics' field sales presence was before this new expansion still had a lot of white space throughout the country. So, like, it's areas that had no field sales presence at all. So there is a new store dynamic as a result of that. But we are seeing, across the board, an uptick in prescriber adoption within territories that we already do operate in.

And, you know, again, we do quantify these things, but they're not KPIs that we communicate externally. But, yeah, absolutely. The message of islet simplicity is resonating. HCPs are seeing good results from their patients and becoming more comfortable prescribing the islet, and I think that's evidenced by our results. So the dynamic is that actually both, Mike, but I'm not gonna quantify them for you.

Michael Pollock: Understood. Thank you. If I can follow-up, I appreciate all the comments on the Medicare proposal. I know the response to this one will probably lean squish, but to the extent this moves forward substantially, as envisioned, and I'm talking specifically about the shift to pay over time, to what extent would this Medicare fee-for-service standard create risk that the commercial DME or Medicare Advantage contracts over time head in this direction as well? How do you assess that path? Thank you.

Sean Saint: Yeah. Good question. Look. Nowhere in that proposal does it mention anything of that nature. And we don't see any associated risk from this particular proposal stemming into commercial plans or within the pharmacy model. I will just highlight that a pay-as-you-go model, like, that's being proposed here in the CMS proposal, which is what this rental model is. As Sean, I think, well outlined in the prepared remarks, that's working quite well already in the pharmacy system. Where Beta Bionics even, you know, and all patch pumps are getting reimbursed through, well, I guess in the case of patch pumps, they're Medicare Part D coverage, which Beta Bionics is or our islet is not.

But we're already seeing in managed Medicare coverage for the islet through a pay-as-you-go model that exists in pharmacy. And so I think in the event that the CMS wanted to shift to a pay-as-you-go model into the pharmacy channel, they would use an already existing infrastructure that's already in place today. So, you know, I guess, twofold to that answer, Mike.

Sean Saint: I think I'd like to add to that one, Stephen. You know, it's very hard for us to assess the risk of that happening. But I think, you know, what we've done is insulate ourselves from it with our preexisting transfer to a pay-as-you-go model proactively. There are reasons that it makes a ton of sense and makes a lot of sense for us as well. And, again, we're already doing that, proactively. So can't speak so much to the risk of it, but I will say that we're preparing ourselves properly for it if it were ever to happen.

Michael Pollock: Understood. I follow. Thank you.

Stephen Feider: Yep.

Operator: Thank you. One moment. And the next question will be coming from the line of David Roman of Goldman Sachs. Your line is open.

Phil: Hi. Good afternoon. This is Phil on for David. Thanks for taking the questions. I thought I'd start with the type two comments that you ended with, Sean. Stronger contributor as a percentage of new patient starts with a much stronger new patient start number overall. I was just hoping you could talk a bit more about the market dynamics going on there, the success that you're having, albeit off-label, and what would kind of act as a trigger or what we'd need to hear for a bigger push towards type two.

Sean Saint: Yeah. It's a great question, Phil. I think what I'll say, you know, given that islet obviously is off-label in that regard, I'm gonna make comments. I'm gonna keep my comments more general in terms of how physicians run their practices. I think it's a true statement that physicians are responsible for understanding the different tools they have available to them and where they can best be used and what they do and with whom. And prescribe them as they see fit. And that's why the off-label rules are as they are. They have every right to do that.

You know, I don't want to get into the specifics of islet, but I think that's clearly being taken into account in the prescribing patterns that we're seeing. As the awareness of islet generally and of other products becomes, you know, more broadly known. So sorry for the slightly vague answer, but yeah. Type two.

Phil: No. I think that's helpful. Thanks. The second one's probably for Stephen. It's a different way of the guidance question, and appreciate that pharmacy mix in a given quarter will matter to this question. But given the growing proportion of recurring revenue that's coming in, it is gonna be the case in this revenue ramp period that if you see a sequential increase in patients, there should be even more so a sequential ramp in revenue to accompany that. Right? Because you have the pump revenue as a supplement to a growing base of recurring revenue.

I guess, said differently, do you have better visibility moving forward into the guidance assumptions you're giving because of the relative scale of the recurring versus one-time only revenue over time here?

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Great question. Both answers are yes. Yes. We see upticks in our revenue if we had flat new patient starts quarter over quarter because we have this powerful install base that's generating recurring revenue in the pharmacy channel. And, yes, our business is more predictable if a higher percentage of our revenue is coming from pharmacy because that's a recurring revenue stream.

Phil: Okay. Great. Just one clarifying one. The pay-as-you-go model, just from a timing standpoint, could go into effect in '26 while the comment on the competitive bidding process not going into place was '27. Right?

Stephen Feider: No, actually. We would imagine that the competitive bidding process would end up dictating the rental or that would end up being a prereq for the rental model going into place. And so my comment on when we expect 2027 being the earliest we would expect this to go into adoption, it means the policy in its totality. Competitive bidding which then leads to a rental model. And then that actually starts selling through that rental model in 2027 at the earliest.

Phil: Okay. Understood. So that's very speculative, but that's what we think.

Stephen Feider: Okay. Alright. That's helpful. Thank you.

Operator: Thank you. And our next question will come from the line of Frank Tatikin of Lake Street. Your line is open.

Frank Tatikin: Great. Thanks for taking the questions. Congrats on the great quarter and the increased guidance. I wanted to start with one more on Type 2s, and I appreciate the sensitivities given it's off-label. But with how good that number has been trending, I was hoping you could help us understand a little bit more maybe where that strength is coming from. Is that the primary care channel? Is that the patient group using the pharmacy benefit channel more? Or anything else specific to call out that has increased the use in that channel?

Stephen Feider: Oh, yeah. Okay. So hey, Frank. We have to be a little careful here as we don't have a type two label. So I don't want to sound like we're promoting the islet for type two use, and I would just reiterate what Sean said about, you know, doctors have the ability to prescribe what they want. So I'm not gonna answer your question too thoroughly, but yes, absolutely, the islet is where when it is being adopted for type two patients, it's happening in both the primary care channel as well as the endo channel similar to how the islet is, frankly, today.

Frank Tatikin: Okay. That's helpful. Understood. And then just secondly, maybe an update on Salesforce hiring. Appreciate the color and update you guys provided today, but maybe talk about kind of Salesforce hiring expectations.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. So we started the year with 43 sales territories. We ended the year with 60 or we ended the first quarter with 63 sales territories, and we still ended this quarter with 63 sales territories. You're not gonna see a massive uptick in our territory expansion for the remainder of the year. We will likely expand again in early next year.

Frank Tatikin: Okay. Thanks for taking the questions.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Thanks, Frank. Good questions.

Operator: Thank you. And our next question will come from the line of Jeff Johnson of Baird. Your line is open.

Jeff Johnson: Thank you. Good afternoon, guys. I think she said Jeff. I hope you're hearing me okay here.

Stephen Feider: You got it. Yep.

Jeff Johnson: Alright. Great. Hey, guys. Hey. Just maybe one clarifying question. You know, you talked about maybe that pharmacy channel mix, not increasing at the same rate in the back half of the year as we saw in the first half of the year. Part of that due just to the strong uptake you saw through the prime contracts started in February. As you have expanded, you know, access through additional payers here, why is the prime contract different maybe than some of those other payers?

Or said another way, if you're pushing as many of your patients who do have pharmacy coverage into the pharmacy channel, why can't that rate of push and kind of that rate of adoption continue to move in the same sequential kind of pattern? Thanks.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Good really good question. Okay. So the prime deal is quite different than what we've seen with other PBM contracts in that when we so let me actually, I'm gonna back up one second. To gain pharmacy coverage and the way that we define coverage is new patient starts going through the pharmacy channel. There's two really important steps that have to happen in order for us to obtain that coverage. The first one is we need the PBM agreement. And then the second is we need the underlying health plans that partner with that PBM. In the case of prime, both step one and two happened at the same time.

In the case of the other PBM agreements, and notably the one that Sean brought up in his prepared remarks that will go into effect, the large PBM agreement that goes into effect on July 1, that is not the case. Step one happened, but the underlying agreements with the health plans are a separate sales cycle that we need to go in and then add at future dates.

Now, for the other PBM contracts that we have that are already in place and have been historically, we continue to tick off underlying health plans that are a part of that step two, which is part of the reason you see the sequential uptick that we've had historically in pharmacy adoption. It's not just because of the prime deal that we had in the first half of the year, but also the other PBMs we continue to layer on more and more underlying health plans.

Jeff Johnson: Alright. That's helpful. That explains it. And then just one other question, I guess, on the competitive bidding and the pay-as-you-go model. One of your competitors out there is talking about potentially as a two-pump getting in Medicare Part D. You guys obviously on the pharmacy channel are kind of taking a monthly on the PBM side. What would it take? Is there any possible way to get into Part D as opposed to Part B? And does your read of the documents, of the CMS documents suggest that Part D will not be subject to competitive bidding? That was our read, but I think there's a couple of varied opinions on some of the wording in that document.

Thank you.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. So what would it take? We've always said that the longest train or the, you know, the big train to turn in order for durable insulin pumps to start becoming reimbursed primarily through the pharmacy channel was Medicare Part D treatment, which today, durable but for those that aren't aware, the islet and durable insulin pumps are considered Part B covered. Jeff, frankly, I don't really want to predict when that train turns, and we start seeing durable insulin pumps be considered Part D treatment. I don't really want to predict.

I think this does maybe start the discussion and maybe move it faster than it otherwise had been because it's clear that CMS is interested in a pay-as-you-go model, which is what the pharmacy channel really enables. But I still do think that there's nothing and so but I don't really want to give a timeline to predict when that happens. I also, by the way, which leads me to actually do your second question, nowhere in that proposal does it mention anything about Part D or insulin pumps, you know, notably patch pumps that are considered Part D treatment. It doesn't mention them at all in that proposal.

So I would have no reason to believe that the proposal is insinuating anything about patch pumps or any Part D treatment insulin delivery device because, frankly, I just don't mention it at all.

Jeff Johnson: Understood. Higher level conversation or comments on that, Jeff.

Sean Saint: I think we have two concepts here, and they overlap they're not the same thing. But they are related. The first is durable versus patch pumps or durable versus disposables if you prefer. We've all come to know and understand what that means. However, there's also the concept of a durable pump model, meaning an upfront payment followed by a smaller supply payment, versus a pay-as-you-go model, traditionally applied to a disposable system, and that makes all sense in the world.

So I think what I'm saying is that as durable pumps get paid more in a pay-as-you-go model, the specific distinction of a durable versus disposable device starts to not matter because that's not really what they were getting at originally. Right? These, the reasons for these statements have evolved over time. The pay-as-you-go model is the original definition of that, I believe. But so what does that mean? I don't know. We'll have to wait and see.

Jeff Johnson: Fair enough. Thank you.

Operator: Thank you. One moment for the next question. And the next question will be coming from the line of Richard Newitter of Truist. Your line is open.

Felipe: Hey. This is Felipe on for Rich. I guess just like, off the last point, I was wondering if you can just help us better understand, in terms of new starts, just your presence in pharmacy is a lot larger compared to some of your durable pump competitors. So I'm just wondering, like, is removing that upfront cost maybe a decision driver for new MDI patients thinking about starting on durable pumps? And then just one follow-up.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Absolutely. If you were to ask me a question why are we seeing such an uptick in new patient starts? Why do we continue to exceed expectation or even our own expectations on new patient starts? I would give you two reasons. One is the islet is absolutely resonating for its highly differentiated characteristics, meaning it's simple to use. The clinical results are fantastic. So as doctors try it, they get great results, and they prescribe more of it. So really simple.

But the other dynamic is that, absolutely, the pharmacy coverage or the availability of the pharmacy reimbursement model for patients makes it so dramatically easier for a patient to purchase the islet either to switch from their other durable pump, by the way, because they're not locked into a four-year warranty period, or just simply because the out-of-pocket is so much less than it would be for the islet and DME, that it does create a tailwind for new patient starts, and that's a large driver of our new patient start success.

Felipe: And then just on the gross margin guidance, you're upping your pharmacy contribution. So I'm just wondering, like, what's the main driver of bringing your gross margin guidance higher with that headwind?

Stephen Feider: Yeah. We continue to see benefit from a lower cost per unit with scale. And so we just we have a really strong sense of what's what our cost per unit's gonna be for the remainder of the year and confidence in our ability to continue to increase it. Thanks.

Operator: And our next question will be coming from the line of Jeffrey Cohen of Ladenburg Thalmann. Your line is open.

Jeffrey Cohen: Oh, hi, Sean. It's Steven. Just one from our standpoint. You talked about the field sales reps and territory coverage. When you think about the back half, could you kind of walk us through how you may expect the OpEx to look as it relates to Q3 and Q4 relative to the first half?

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Sure. So with G&A expenses and sales and marketing expenses, you won't see a big uptick in OpEx the rest of this year in Q3 or in Q4. With R&D, you may see an uptick in Q3 and Q4 associated with the Mint program as well as the bihormonal project. So, again, we'll get we'll start to get more and more leverage out of our sales and marketing costs as well as the G&A costs, but there'll be some lumpiness to bihormonal or as a result of bihormonal and the Mint projects.

Jeffrey Cohen: Okay. Got it. As it looks over the next two to six quarters, would you expect the R&D to be lumpy?

Stephen Feider: Yes.

Jeffrey Cohen: Got it. Okay. That does it for us. Thanks. Nice readout to the quarter.

Stephen Feider: Yeah. Appreciate it. Thanks, Jeff. Thanks, Jeff.

Operator: Thank you so much. There are no more questions in the queue. And that does conclude the presentation for today. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.

Where to invest $1,000 right now

When our analyst team has a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,039%* — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500.

They just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now, available when you join Stock Advisor.

See the stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. Parts of this article were created using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on The Motley Fool's insights and investing approach. It has been reviewed by our AI quality control systems. Since LLMs cannot (currently) own stocks, it has no positions in any of the stocks mentioned. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Boeing faces fresh delays to new versions of its wildly popular 737 Max as it doubles down on its safety focus

30 July 2025 at 12:03
The first Boeing 737 MAX 7 aircraft sits on the tarmac outside of the Boeing factory on February 5, 2018 in Renton, Washington. The 737 MAX 7 will have the longest range of the MAX airplane line with a maximum range of 3,850 nautical miles.
A Boeing 737 Max 7 jet outside the factory.

Stephen Brashear/Getty Images

  • Boeing said it will further delay the launch of two new 737 Max variants to 2026.
  • The delays come as the planemaker wrestles with a potential issue regarding the plane's deicing.
  • "We're going to have to back up and make some additional design changes," said CEO Kelly Ortberg.

A pair of upcoming variants of Boeing's most popular plane, the 737 Max have been further delayed to 2026, CEO Kelly Ortberg confirmed in an earnings call Tuesday.

Achieving certification for the Max 7 and Max 10 will be a key benchmark for Ortberg, who is approaching one year at the helm and has been leading Boeing's turnaround.

The company had initially hoped the Max 7, the shortest version of the flagship narrow-body jet, would be certified in 2022.

However, it has been constrained by work on the engine anti-ice system, a key safety feature that prevents ice from building up during cold weather conditions and at high altitude.

"Work on the solution is taking longer than expected, and we now are expecting certification in 2026," Ortberg said on the second-quarter earnings call.

The delay was first reported last week by industry publication The Air Current.

Back in 2023, the Federal Aviation Administration warned that the system could cause the engine to overheat — and potentially result in debris breaking off and hitting the plane.

Boeing then requested an exemption, saying an engine breakup is "extremely improbable," but withdrew this request in January 2024 as it faced a safety crisis in the wake of the Alaska Airlines blowout.

Figuring out a solution for the complex system has been far from straightforward.

Ortberg told investors on Tuesday that Boeing has been exploring different design paths.

"We found some issues with the design implementation we had, so we're going to have to back up and make some additional design changes to get through that de-icing requirement," he said.

"Basically, the engineering designs have not yielded in the time frame that we were anticipating, and so we still have work to do."

His comments came after Ryanair's earnings call last week, when CEO Michael O'Leary said Boeing's commercial airplanes chief wrote to confirm the airline's first 15 Max 10s would be delivered in the spring of 2027.

A Boeing spokesperson said: "We are maturing a technical solution that includes design updates. The modifications would be included in the baseline certification of the 737-7 and 737-10. We are finalizing our analysis and will present the information to the FAA. We will continue to work under their rigorous oversight to meet safety and regulatory requirements."

Meanwhile, Boeing is also working to certify the 777X — a twin-engine wide-body jet, also years behind schedule. It's now expected to enter service in 2026 as well.

"Flight testing continues with no new technical issues to report," Ortberg said during the earnings call.

Boeing reported quarterly revenues above expectations of $22.7 billion, with a net loss of $612 million.

It's been ramping up production of its cash-cow 737 Max, reaching the 38-a-month limit imposed by the FAA.

Its share price fell about 4% on Tuesday, but is still up more than 30% since the start of the year.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Is this TV's endgame? A discussion with analyst Rich Greenfield.

30 July 2025 at 10:01
Robert Whittaker and Reinier de Ridder compete at the UFC Fight Night event at Etihad Arena in Abu Dhabi on July 26, 2025.
UFC fighters Robert Whittaker and Reinier de Ridder square off at an event Abu Dhabi. Analyst Rich Greenfield predicts David Ellison, who is about to buy Paramount, will bid for UFC rights.

FADEL SENNA/AFP via Getty Images

  • The TV business has been contracting for years, which is why media companies are trying to sell off their cable networks.
  • But David and Larry Ellison think there's long-term value in Paramount and its TV business, says analyst Rich Greenfield.
  • Greenfield also weighs in on new streaming launches from ESPN and Fox.

The TV business is not slowing down this summer: Any day now, David and Larry Ellison will finally buy Paramount, with its collection of once-storied TV networks like CBS and MTV. A few weeks later, ESPN and Fox — the last two big TV players that haven't launched their own streamers — will launch their own streamers.

But on the other hand, the TV business has been slowing down for a decade: Every quarter, more cable TV subscribers cut the cord, or never sign up for a cord in the first place. The people who own cable TV networks don't seem to have any plan to deal with the issue, other than trying to sell their cable TV networks.

Lightshed analyst Rich Greenfield has been chronicling the industry's massive, internet-driven change for years. I caught up with him on my Channels podcast to talk through the particular challenges — and perhaps some opportunities — facing TV right now. Here's an edited excerpt of our chat.

Peter Kafka: When the music business collapsed back in the Napster era, it happened basically overnight. But TV has hung on for much longer, even though consumer behavior changed pretty significantly over the last decade.

Is there something specific about the TV industry that's allowed these guys to move in slow motion?

Rich Greenfield: There's very few businesses where you can raise the price on a product that consumers are using less and less every day.

The brilliance of the cable TV business model was the big fat bundle. It's a pretty incredible business to put all of these channels together, even if people don't want most of them.

It had everything you wanted and no alternatives, which is very different than where we are today.

One of my soapboxes is when I hear people saying they wish we could go back to the cable days. And I keep saying, that was terrible. You guys forget. Everyone hated that.

I think consumers are pretty adept at managing their services, and I don't hear a lot of complaints. Sometimes it's like, "Where is this game?" Or "How do I find this thing?" It can be a little confusing.

But think about your cellphone. You've had one for quite a while now. Managing the apps and deleting something if you're not using it and adding something —these are all pretty easy functions.

We don't give consumers enough credit. They're pretty adept at figuring out cheaper solutions and ways to manage.

I want to ask you about a few specific companies. The Paramount deal is finally going to close. What do you think the new owners — David Ellison and his father, Larry Ellison — will do once they have control? Will it change overnight, or is this a slow-rolling thing?

It will certainly change.

The juxtaposition is sort of amazing. [Paramount, under current owner Shari Redstone, is a] financially strapped company, with challenged financial ownership.

And you're moving to an ownership team that is one of the wealthiest families on planet Earth.

David Ellison is probably going to be running this company for 30, 40 years. He obviously has a passion for entertainment. He's moving to a much bigger stage.

But this is still a financially struggling company. He can't fix the trends of what consumer behavior is changing. What he can do is invest and really build.

And you saw the "South Park" deal they just cut, where they're spending hundreds of millions of dollars to move the show [exclusively] to Paramount+. I think it's a small sign of the post-merger strategy, which is that David Ellison is not just doing this to cut costs and squeeze more juice out of this existing company. His goal is to build something significant with a very long-term perspective, which is going to require a lot of investment.

What does that look like? Is the new Paramount just a film studio and a streaming service and CBS — and Ellison sells off everything that's not those things?

I think initially they'll say they need the cash flow from cable and will use that cash flow to reinvest.

I would be shocked if you didn't see more sports on CBS. I think they will be a contender for UFC rights. You've seen David Ellison multiple times in the past year sitting in the front row, cage side with Ari Emanuel [CEO of TKO Group, which owns UFC], and with [UFC CEO] Dana White.

And Donald Trump.

I don't disagree there on politics. But I also think he likes the content. I think he's going to spend a lot of money.

He understands the tech North Star — whether we're talking about TikTok, Meta, Netflix, or Spotify — it's all about time spent. I think David gets that Paramount+ needs a heck of a lot more time spent. The only way you're gonna get there is a better product and more content.

Let's move to Disney. Sometime in the next few weeks, before college football and the NFL starts, ESPN will finally be something you can buy as a stand-alone streaming service. If they rolled this out in 2015, we would have said it's a really big deal. Is it a big deal in 2025?

At $30 a month, I don't think this is a huge deal. My guess is it gives them flexibility to start packaging this with other services. They can probably get some subscribers. Not a lot. It's probably low to mid-single-digit millions. Not millions and millions.

Remember, they're giving the new service to everybody who already subscribed to [pay TV]. So 65 million-plus ESPN subscribers are going to get this new ESPN app at no additional cost.

So who is the audience for this? You're not subscribing to the big bundle. You're a pretty passionate sports fan. You're willing to spend $30 a month for sports. My guess is it's just a small number.

It actually makes sense to do it. But I don't think, at the end of the day, it is a huge needle-mover. What's going to matter to Disney stock is their theme park business and their cruise ship business. Those being better than expected — because of the state of the economy and what's happened with tariffs not being as problematic as feared a few months ago — is far more important to Disney than what happens with the ESPN streaming rollout.

We're also close to the launch of Fox's own streamer, Fox One. The main assets there are Fox Sports — which is really the NFL — and Fox News. Do you think Fox thinks this is primarily a product for people who want to watch football, or do you think it's primarily for Fox News fans?

I think this is a pretty limited offering for a sports fan.

So does that lead you to believe that Fox thinks this is really a Fox News product?

I think you'll see more uptake from Fox News viewers.

In the old days, you would have said that Fox News has a very old audience. And the idea that its audience is going to stream it doesn't make sense. But maybe that's not true in 2025?

Streaming's become pretty normalized. When you look at how many subscribers Netflix now has, I don't think streaming is some elitist thing. I think it's pretty normalized.

I think the part you may be missing is that the Fox News audience is also widening out.

And as you make it available to people on streaming, you may pick up some younger people. Maybe it's more interesting during election years. It creates flexibility. And I don't think there's a whole lot of downside.

All the basic cable networks are in freefall. Everyone who owns them is trying to sell them — either directly to another buyer or, in the case of Comcast's Versant, trying to bundle it up as a publicly traded stock. Who is a buyer for cable networks?

I don't think there are enough people talking about this topic. So many of the investors I deal with, or even industry executives I talk to, think you're going to see Paramount do a deal with Warner Bros. Or maybe you'll see Versant merge with some of the Paramount cable networks.

But let's just step back. I think David Ellison and Larry Ellison have a much bigger plan than aggregating more linear cable networks. I would be surprised if that was the strategy. I think there's a much bigger plan that the Ellison family is probably thinking about that goes well beyond just aggregating more legacy media assets.

WarnerMedia merged with Discovery, which hasn't created value. CBS and Viacom became Paramount, and that hasn't created value. Disney bought most of Fox's cable networks, and that hasn't created value. Putting legacy assets together that are in secular decline doesn't work. Maybe it might've been worse [without those deals].

But that's not compelling for a buyer.

It's a reason to be a seller. As a buyer, there's lots of things you could buy and lots of places you could go. The idea that buying more of these assets so that you have more costs to cut doesn't seem really compelling.

Another reason you are skeptical about big media consolidation is politics. You think that either antitrust politics, or Donald Trump's personal politics, make that unlikely. The only media mogul he wasn't complaining about was Rupert Murdoch, and now he's suing Murdoch.

Is there a world where anyone sells or buys a meaningful media asset while Donald Trump is president?

I think it's going to be challenging.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Received before yesterday

Starlink kept me connected to the Internet without fail—until Thursday

25 July 2025 at 22:17

A rare global interruption in the Starlink satellite Internet network knocked subscribers offline for more than two hours on Thursday, the longest widespread outage since SpaceX opened the service to consumers nearly five years ago.

The outage affected civilian and military users, creating an inconvenience for many but cutting off a critical lifeline for those who rely on Starlink for military operations, health care, and other applications.

Michael Nicolls, SpaceX's vice president of Starlink engineering, wrote on X that the network outage lasted approximately 2.5 hours.

Read full article

Comments

© Maxym Marusenko/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Rocket Report: Channeling the future at Wallops; SpaceX recovers rocket wreckage

25 July 2025 at 12:41

Welcome to Edition 8.04 of the Rocket Report! The Pentagon's Golden Dome missile defense shield will be a lot of things. Along with new sensors, command and control systems, and satellites, Golden Dome will require a lot of rockets. The pieces of the Golden Dome architecture operating in orbit will ride to space on commercial launch vehicles. And Golden Dome's space-based interceptors will essentially be designed as flying fuel tanks with rocket engines. This shouldn't be overlooked, and that's why we include a couple of entries discussing Golden Dome in this week's Rocket Report.

As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don't want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets, as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.

Space-based interceptors are a real challenge. The newly installed head of the Pentagon's Golden Dome missile defense shield knows the clock is ticking to show President Donald Trump some results before the end of his term in the White House, Ars reports. Gen. Michael Guetlein identified command-and-control and the development of space-based interceptors as two of the most pressing technical challenges for Golden Dome. He believes the command-and-control problem can be "overcome in pretty short order." The space-based interceptor piece of the architecture is a different story.

Read full article

Comments

© Kevin Carter/Getty Images

Should Netflix Be More Like Walt Disney?

Key Points

  • Netflix is opening Netflix Houses in select U.S. cities, which will bring its popular shows and movies to life.

  • Disney is second-to-none when it comes to physical experiences, a segment that rakes in substantial profits.

  • Netflix dominates the current media landscape, so a major shift in strategy isn’t necessary.

In the past decade, Netflix (NASDAQ: NFLX) shares have soared 955%. Just this year (as of July 23), they are up 32%. With this type of stellar performance, it seems the business can do no wrong.

However, there is one area Netflix has yet to tap: Theme parks. The company has become a dominant media and entertainment enterprise, but it's presence in the physical world is nonexistent.

Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue »

This puts Netflix behind a peer like Walt Disney (NYSE: DIS), which owns and operates seven of the 10 most visited theme parks on the face of the planet. Not to mention the cruise ships that Disney also has. Maybe Netflix is staring at an obvious opportunity here to grow its revenue and fan base.

Should the top streaming stock become more like the House of Mouse? Here's how investors should view this situation from a strategic and financial perspective.

inverted roller coaster during sunset.

Image source: Getty Images.

Creating a flywheel

Disney has unmatched intellectual property (IP), which helps support its flywheel. People might watch a new Marvel movie or series and immediately want to experience these characters in real life, so they visit Walt Disney World to ride the Guardians of the Galaxy: Cosmic Rewind roller coaster. They might also buy merchandise. It's a situation where all the pieces fortify Disney's competitive position, allowing it to develop deeper and longer-lasting connections with its fans.

Creating physical experiences can help Netflix bolster its brand in the same way. For what it's worth, the company plans to launch Netflix Houses in Dallas and Philadelphia this year, and in Las Vegas in 2027. These are permanent, but small-format (about 100,000 square feet) setups located in shopping malls. There are interactive experiences, dining options, and retail stores.

It's encouraging to see Netflix test the waters when it comes to physical experiences. It might not have the breadth and depth of IP that Disney has, especially when it comes to content for kids and families, but it has extremely popular shows and movies that people love. It's probably best that Netflix isn't going full steam ahead with building an actual theme park, as it likely won't be able to compete with Disney's dominance, or with Comcast's Universal Studios.

Financial implications

When making these kinds of strategic decisions, what matters most is the potential they can have for financial success. Disney's Experiences segment is its most profitable. In fiscal 2024 (ended Sept. 28, 2024), this division raked in $9.3 billion in operating income on $34.2 billion in revenue.

Netflix reported $6.9 billion in free cash flow in 2024, with a forecast to bring in between $8 billion and $8.5 billion this year. Investing in building out theme parks would require huge capital expenditure commitments that would certainly dent Netflix's strong financial position. Return on invested capital is a key metric that management teams should think about when allocating cash to its best use. Developing physical experiences at Disney's level would take resources away from creating top-notch content that the company is known for.

In September 2023, Disney announced that it was going to spend $60 billion over the next decade to expand its Experiences segment. That's a massive undertaking that Netflix can avoid.

Netflix is doing just fine

The media industry, which is now being driven by the streaming model, is extremely competitive. There are many businesses vying for viewer attention, so it's always important to figure out ways of standing out. But Netflix reigns supreme, with more than 300 million subscribers worldwide. It's operating from a position of strength with the upcoming launch of Netflix Houses.

Netflix doesn't need to be more like Disney. The former continues to fire on all cylinders. The opposite argument holds more weight, with Disney needing to be more like Netflix -- at least when it comes to the House of Mouse's streaming segment that just became profitable not too long ago.

Should you invest $1,000 in Netflix right now?

Before you buy stock in Netflix, consider this:

The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Netflix wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,063,471!*

Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.

See the 10 stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025

Neil Patel has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Netflix and Walt Disney. The Motley Fool recommends Comcast. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

The Median Retirement Savings for American Households Is $87,000. Here Are 3 Incredible Stocks to Buy Now and Hold for Decades.

Key Points

  • Artificial intelligence-powered drug development isn't a mere premise anymore. Recursion Pharmaceuticals has made it a reality.

  • The next era of e-commerce favors platforms like Shopify's, which allows brands to connect with consumers outside of massive digital shopping malls.

  • U.S. drivers may not be big fans of electric vehicles, but that's not the case everywhere else.

Are Americans saving enough money to fund a comfortable retirement? Probably not. As the Motley Fool's own research indicates, as of 2022 the median retirement savings for U.S. households is a mere $87,000. That means half of the country has saved up more, while the other half has saved less. Even being in the upper half of the crowd, however, isn't necessarily enough.

Committing more of your income to the effort is still only half the battle though. You'll also need to get more out of your money while you're growing your nest egg. This means achieving bigger gains without taking on significantly more risk.

Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Continue »

Here's a closer look at three growth stocks you could buy and hold for decades as a means of supercharging your portfolio's growth. While each of these tickers brings some added risk and volatility to the table that will require regular monitoring, their long-term upside potential is arguably worth the work.

Recursion Pharmaceuticals

While artificial intelligence (AI) still has of room for improvement, the writing is on the wall -- the technology will be tackling complex problems that individuals and institutions just can't. This includes designing and testing pharmaceuticals.

Well, the future is here. Recursion Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: RXRX) has built an AI-powered platform capable of virtually testing a drug rather than requiring a full-blown clinical trial of an idea. Leveraging 36 petabytes (36 million gigabytes) of digital biological and chemical data, its so-called Recursion OS can accomplish what would normally take years and millions of dollars in a matter of days at a fraction of the cost.

And it's no mere theory. The technology is not only functioning -- it's commercialized. A handful of pharma companies including Roche and Sanofi are using Recursion OS to tackle some of their own developmental work, while Recursion is working on some drugs of its own. All of these drug candidates will still need to go through the actual clinical trial process to satisfy regulatory agencies like the FDA. Recursion's software facilitates focus though, by virtue of weeding out less promising drug prospects so more resources can be devoted to more promising ones. That's huge.

It's still relatively early for Recursion, and for that matter, the AI-assisted drug-development industry itself. Recursion Pharmaceuticals remains in the red, and will likely remain there for at least a few more years. This arguably makes Recursion the riskiest of the three stocks being put under the microscope here.

Just understand the potential reward is commensurate with the risk. Recursion Pharmaceuticals is nearing a revenue and profit turning point in front of what Straits Research believes will be average annualized growth of nearly 32% for the artificial intelligence drug-development industry through 2030. This tailwind alone should be enough to push Recursion to profitability. That makes this stock's prolonged and persistent weakness since peaking in 2021 is a fantastic buying opportunity.

Shopify

Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) is in no immediate danger of being dethroned as the king of North America's e-commerce scene. But it's no longer able to simply bully the rest of the industry. Competitors are successfully pushing back... just not in the way you might have expected. Rather than one or two rival names making inroads, brands and merchants are taking matters into their own hands by setting up their own online stores as a means of working all the way around Amazon's domination.

And they've largely got Shopify (NASDAQ: SHOP) to thank for the option.

In simplest terms, Shopify helps companies establish their own in-house e-commerce presence. From websites to payment-processing to inventory-management to marketing, Shopify can do it all, making it easy for businesses of all sizes to stay focused on more important matters (like running that business). Although the company no longer discloses how many clients are using its technology, it does divulge the scope of its business. Last year, Shopify's solutions facilitated the sale of $292.3 billion worth of goods and services, up 24% year over year to extend a long-established growth streak. Shopify collected $8.9 billion worth of revenue for itself in the process, turning a little over $1 billion of it into net income.

SHOP Revenue (Quarterly) Chart

SHOP Revenue (Quarterly) data by YCharts

This growth still only scratches the surface of the opportunity though. Market research outfit eMarketer reports that only a little more than one-fifth of the world's retail spending is currently done online. The rest is still taking place in brick-and-mortar stores.

While certainly some of these sales will never move online, much of it can. Brand-owned and merchant-managed online stores are positioned to capture more than their fair share of whatever growth awaits the e-commerce industry, however, as these players increasingly see the value in establishing their own direct relationships with customers. In this vein, analysts expect Shopify to produce top-line growth in the ballpark of 20% in each of the three years ahead.

Nio

Finally, add Nio (NYSE: NIO) to your list of stocks to buy and hold for decades if you want a shot at building a bigger retirement nest egg.

It wouldn't be surprising if you'd never heard of it. Although it's finding a bit of traction in Europe, the Chinese maker of electric vehicles predominantly serves China itself. It delivered 72,056 electrified cars during the second quarter of this year, up nearly 26% from the year-ago comparison, underscoring production growth that's been in place for some time now.

Think the electric vehicle (EV) market is hitting a wall due to disinterest? Not so fast. That's largely an American phenomenon. Data gathered by CleanTechnica indicates sales of electric vehicles in China soared 25% to 1.1 million units last month, accounting for more than half of the country's entire automobile sales.

A person using a calculator while sitting in front of a laptop computer.

Image source: Getty Images.

That's still just the beginning though. The International Energy Agency expected EVs to account for 80% of China's total car sales by 2030, thanks to supportive policies that encourage the alternative to combustion-powered vehicles. It's making inroads in Europe as well, for the same reason. And, while there's little incentive for the company to make a push into the United States' anemic EV market right now, if and when domestic interest perks up, Nio has maintained tentative plans for that possibility.

It could be a while before Nio works its way out of the red and into the black -- it simply needs more scale. This could make the stock a little less than completely comfortable to own in the interim.

It's making clear progress on the production as well as the profitability front though, and will almost certainly get there sooner or later, and likely sooner. Given how inevitable this outcome now seems, the market's apt to reward the progress en route to fiscal viability.

Should you invest $1,000 in Shopify right now?

Before you buy stock in Shopify, consider this:

The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Shopify wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $1,063,471!*

Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.

See the 10 stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025

James Brumley has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon and Shopify. The Motley Fool recommends Roche Holding AG. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Netflix is quietly searching for an exec to lead its video podcast efforts as it chases YouTube

25 July 2025 at 20:55
Co-CEO Ted Sarandos of Netflix stands in a red carpet.
Co-CEO Ted Sarandos of Netflix, which is said to be exploring video podcasts.

Earl Gibson III/GG2025/Penske Media via Getty Images

  • Netflix is quietly searching for an exec to lead its video podcast efforts.
  • The streamer is chasing YouTube, which has cemented itself as a video podcast titan.
  • Podcast listening and advertising are on the rise, and media giants are investing.

Netflix is quietly searching for a podcast leader as it looks to bring video pods onto the streaming platform, two people close to the company told Business Insider.

Netflix had previously explored potential deals with podcasters as it sought new areas of growth, as BI first reported. The hunt for an exec to lead a video podcasting effort shows how seriously Netflix is taking the space.

The streamer's interest comes as rival YouTube has cemented itself as a living-room fixture and video podcasting powerhouse.

Netflix has also shown interest in creator content more broadly.

"We're really excited about 'The Sidemen' and 'Pop the Balloon' and a wide variety of creators and video podcasters that might be a good fit for us, and particularly if they're doing great work and looking for different ways to connect with audiences," co-CEO Ted Sarandos said on the company's second-quarter earnings call this month. "The Sidemen" and "Pop the Balloon" are two Netflix shows that began in the creator realm.

Netflix has not publicized a podcast lead job opening and declined to comment for this story.

One person who had conversations with Netflix said the company wanted someone who could make video-first podcasts for a big audience.

Many of today's biggest podcasts started as audio-only endeavors and later added video as audience habits changed and YouTube gained prominence. The lines between video talk shows and podcasts have increasingly blurred, and newer podcasts often now start with video in mind.

It's not clear where the podcast role would sit inside Netflix.

A second person who had conversations with the company said they believed it would sit in Netflix's TV and film licensing arm under Lori Conkling rather than the original content side. That could signal that Netflix might look to license existing shows, as it's done with some YouTube creators like preschool entertainer Ms. Rachel, as well as make original shows with hosts. Separate content-side hires could follow.

Edison Research has charted the continued rise of podcast listening. In a new report out this week, the firm said 73% of people ages 12 and over in the US listen to or watch podcasts, up from 55% in 2020.

Video is on the rise, too, with 51% of people 12 and up saying they've watched a podcast, according to Edison.

Podcast advertising grew 26.4% to $2.4 billion in 2024, according to the IAB. EMARKETER projects it will top $2.5 billion in 2025.

Other media heavyweights have made big moves to chase the podcast-listening audience and the advertising that can come with it.

In February, Fox acquired Red Seat Ventures, which produces Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, and others. Amazon paid $300 million for podcast company Wondery in 2020, The New York Times reported at the time, after snapping up audiobook company Audible in 2008.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Welcome aboard the 'AI crazy train'

25 July 2025 at 18:29
Ozzy Osbourne with a bat between his teeth
Ozzy Osbourne with a bat between his teeth

MAGO/MediaPunch via Reuters

There's a fear in investing when a sector swells rapidly. Booming stock prices and aggressive spending feel great, until things inevitably cool off. Then comes the reckoning: Who overdid it in irreversible ways?

Big Tech is in an AI arms race, each company trying to outspend the others on data centers, GPUs, networking gear, and talent. Engineers can be let go. But the infrastructure? That's permanent. If the AGI dream fades, you're stuck with massive, costly assets.

So when Google announced it would hike capex by $10 billion to $85 billion in 2025 eyebrows went up. Most of it is for things you can't walk back: chips, data centers, and networking.

Google is "jumping aboard the AI crazy train," Bernstein Research analyst Mark Shmulik wrote, referencing a song by the late bat biter Ozzy Osbourne.

Meta's Mark Zuckerberg brags about Manhattan-sized data centers. And Elon Musk keeps hoarding GPUs. While Sam Altman is building mega-data centers with partners. JPMorgan dubbed this "vibe spending," warning OpenAI might burn $46 billion in four years.

It's no shock when Elon, Zuck, and Sam flex on capex. But Google? That's surprising. "Google doesn't do this," Shmulik said. The company has been viewed as measured in recent years, prioritizing investment intensity with care. Not anymore.

Now investors want to know: Will these swelling bets pay off?

There are promising signs. Since May, Google's monthly token processing (the currency of generative AI) has doubled from 480 trillion to nearly a quadrillion. Search grew 12% in Q2, beating forecasts. Cloud sales surged 32%. CEO Sundar Pichai said Google is ramping up capex to support all this growth.

But it's still a huge gamble. "Does the current return on invested capital seen in both Search and Cloud hold up at higher [capex] intensity levels," Shmulik asked, "or is the spend a very expensive piece of gum trying to plug an AI-sized hole?" He leans optimistic.

Still, Google shares rose just 1% after these results. Not exactly a resounding endorsement.

Sign up for BI's Tech Memo newsletter here. Reach out to me via email at [email protected].

Read the original article on Business Insider

❌