Tim Burns: Yes. And we actually issued some videos and application notes here just recently for the technical audience, and we’ll continue to expand the amount of information we have on the website to support, for instance, sales through distribution. .
David Williams: Okay. And one just last one, if I may. On the test and evaluation program, is there a way to think about the magnitude of customers that are coming to you outside of that T&E program? And just kind of trying to get a sense of what that interest is outside of that captive T&E audience.
Tim Burns: Yes. So I would say the interest outside of the program is probably roughly equivalent to the interest in the program. So there’s various reasons why someone might not want to sign a test and evaluation agreement or prefer to receive SymCool power modules rather than our B-TRAN test kit, right, particularly if you look at solid-state circuit breaker applications as an example. So we haven’t specified who those customers are or even providing necessarily kind of similar detail that we do with the test and evaluation program, but that’s just our approach. If we don’t have a signed agreement, we generally try to avoid talking about those opportunities with any form of specifics.
David Williams: Fantastic. Well, keep up with good work gentlemen, and looking forward to the continued success.
Dan Brdar: Thanks, David.
Operator: Thank you. I will now turn this call back to Jeff Christensen to read questions submitted through the webcast. Thank you.
Jeff Christensen: Thank you, Matt. And gentlemen, our first question is, can you please explain how B-TRAN fits into applications? Is it different for each application? And how do you think about that for production of B-TRAN?
Dan Brdar: Actually, for us, it’s one of the advantages of our technology is that it’s the same node regardless of the application. Whether it’s packaged a little bit differently, what we’re actually going to make in the wafer fab is the same, whether it’s going into an electric vehicle, a circuit breaker or an energy storage or solar installation. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks, that might change over time. We’ll see as we continue to make improvements in the B-TRAN technology. But for now, it gives us a lot simpler approach to ramping production because we don’t have to be too focused on — is the — are the wafers being made going to go to electric vehicle application or a solid-state circuit breaker? They’re all the same for us.
Jeff Christensen: [Operator Instructions] We have several questions in here. Next question, gentlemen, is considering the vast interest in silicon carbide and GaN, how does B-TRAN performance compare with these materials? And do you see B-TRAN topology being applied to these materials in the future?
Dan Brdar: Yes. They were each really targeting different things. GaN really started where you need very, very fast switching. So some things like radio frequency. It’s been moving into power applications. And if you think about your computers, your laptop chargers, those are probably GaN-based devices. They’ve been trying to get to higher and higher voltage. There are — a, there are some limitations in terms of what you can do with GaN that come from the nature of the material and the technology. And both GaN and silicon carbide are expensive. We actually have the ability to take our technology to silicon carbide, for example. But we haven’t really been too focused on that yet, simply because of the fact that silicon carbide needs to come down significantly in cost, it needs to improve in quality and it’s not trivial.
For example, if I go buy a silicon wafer, it costs me $60. If I go buy a silicon carbide wafer, it’s $800. And part of what’s driving some of the things you’ve seen like Tesla announcing they want to reduce the amount of silicon carbide by 75%. It’s all about how do you get the cost down but still improve performance. And that’s what really creates the opportunity for B-TRAN. Now as silicon carbide and materials — wide-band-gap materials improve, you’ll see us make a silicon carbide device in B-TRAN, but we think that’s still a few years away just because there’s such a big gap in terms of what silicon carbide and wide-band-gap materials bring for the performance level. So it’s — there’s a lot of excitement around it, but it really needs to be used in places where you need the ability to go to much faster switching speeds, or much higher temperature or much higher voltages than what you can do with a silicon device like B-TRAN.
Jeff Christensen: Thank you. Another question regarding silicon carbide is, for the future EVs that will utilize silicon carbide platforms, are the enhancements to range with B-TRAN similar to — in the silicon carbide platform versus non-silicon?
Dan Brdar: Yes, it’s a very similar kind of improvement because it’s really the nature of the architecture itself. One of the other things that can be done that we see an opportunity. If you look, for example, what Tesla is doing, rather than going to all silicon carbide MOSFETs, they’re going to a hybrid module that includes a silicon IGBT with low-voltage silicon carbide MOSFETs to handle the switching. You can do the same thing with B-TRAN. You can make a silicon B-TRAN with low-voltage silicon carbide MOSFETs to give you the really fast switching. So there’s a lot of steps along the way that I think you’re going to see in terms of how new semiconductor devices get adopted while everybody’s working on bringing down the cost of silicon carbide and improving its quality.
Jeff Christensen: Thank you. Our next question submitted into the ask-a-question button is, can you talk about the interest level or make additional comments about the interest level among Tier 1 auto suppliers?
Dan Brdar: Yes. We actually — we’re engaged with literally one of the world’s largest auto suppliers. And we started with a discussion about B-TRAN for the drivetrain, but they’re one of the companies that I was referring to that have come back and said, there’s a whole bunch of other products that we make that could use B-TRAN. So it’s become a much broader discussion. And what we’re finding is the Tier 1 suppliers are now starting to engage with us because they’re trying to figure out with the automotive makers having built these EV teams in-house, they want to be part of that. They want to be embedded into these designs, and they have a lot of ability to innovate themselves. So B-TRAN gives them the ability to innovate designs for circuit protection, for quick disconnects on the batteries, for the drivetrain itself that they actually want to come up with so they can propose them to the automakers and give them a differentiated solution.
Jeff Christensen: [Operator Instructions] Our next question is, can you talk about other companies developing this bidirectional power switch? And who are your competitors?
Dan Brdar: Yes. We really don’t see anybody else that’s developing an inherently bidirectional device. All the bidirectional switches that we see people putting together are combination of conventional technologies. They’re putting IGBTs back-to-back, which doubles the losses or they’re putting MOSFETs back-to-back. And we keep a pretty close eye on what’s going on both in the technical literature, things that have happened in the patent office. And for example, our team is at the Applied Power Electronics Conference this week where they’re specifically going to be looking at what’s going on with others in bidirectional switching. We really are competing against the IGBT makers of the world. So it is the Infineons, the Onsemis, Fuji’s.
The advantage with us really is as we ramp up in volume and as we have customers, like the automakers who are going to want a second source of supply, we actually would license our technology to them so they can leverage their own investment in their fabrication facilities, their sales and support organizations. So while they are competitors, we think at some point in time, there’s going to be a couple of them that are actually really interested in collaborating with us. In fact, we had one of them reach out to us here just last week, wanted to explore collaboration. So we know we’re definitely on the radar screen, and we’re trying to make sure that we’re creating a pathway for partnerships rather than just pure competition.
Jeff Christensen: Thank you. It looks like there are no other questions at this time. Dan, do you have any closing remarks?
Dan Brdar: I just want to thank everybody for joining our call. We made great progress here on our path to commercialize our technology. And our talented team is on track for a very successful 2024. So we look forward to commercial announcements in advance of our next call. Thank you everybody for joining us.
Operator: Thank you. This concludes today’s conference. All parties may disconnect, and have a great day.
