To simplify - you took the annual estimate of consumable revenue for all Revio instruments in the field, and tried to make that number fit with the Q3 consumable revenue (which is only ~25% of the consumable revenue for the year).

The 21.3M is just for Q3 - you'd need to add up consumable revenue from Q1, Q2, and estimate for Q4 to get an annual estimate of consumable revenue.

The estimate of annual consumable revenue of 236k per Revio system x 310 systems = ~73M, but we know utilization differs across users.

I don't think any Vega consumable numbers were included here, but I could be wrong. It might be that Vega estimates will be given after this year, giving a bigger time window to measure various metrics following the launch of the platform.

I'd argue that:
"PacBio sequencing ** has historically been** done by large service centres with large queues and substantial turnaround times"...

but that's starting to change now.

You are waiting for evidence that Vega is driving that, and that's a fair point.

Revio is a great product - it dramatically increased throughput over Sequel II (3x more data per cell, 12x more data per fully loaded run) and dropped the cost substantially. It's been the most successful instrument launch for the company, and now PacBio sequencing is at an all time high.

I'd encourage you to listen in on the PacBio Q3 results, which can tell you more about instrument sales, consumable usage, etc.

investor.pacificbiosciences.com/news-release...

I'm still only talking about PacBio here, not other technologies.

PacBio sequencing is now available in individual labs (not just sequencing cores), and does not require months of waiting.

You can continue to advertise other technologies if you'd like, but it's a distraction from the main point.

Hi David, I'm discussing PacBio here.

Vega solves the problem you stated:

"PacBio sequencing is typically done by large service centres with large queues and substantial turnaround times, often measured in weeks or months."

Getting a machine in the lab means HiFi data in a day.

Cost can be measured in many ways, not just cap-ex and consumables. There is compute time for processing (base calling for some reads is expensive), some reads need post-hoc error correction, etc. If you are paying for HPC resources, that adds up too, even before secondary analysis.

Fair, but we can agree it's a lot cheaper than Revio and avoids consumables markup from core facilities.

Everyone still needs to choose the right tech based on their resources and goals, which always seem to be changing too.

David have you heard of the PacBio Vega system? I think you are perpetuating an outdated view, now that the bench-top sequencer is available.

www.pacb.com/vega/