Nate Belcher

So I'm not discounting that.

So yes.

And that's the whole point of a patent.

Just like in drug companies, like we're going to,

we're going to burn 10 years, you know, five to 10 years of cash.

And then we want some protection after that to reap some of our money back.

And I, you know, there's, that's fair.

I'm not saying that's wrong.

I think there's some fairness to that because sometimes you could crash and burn and, and those five years of development come up with nothing new.

Um, but the problem is like, at what level does it just become, I don't even want to call it greed, but maybe, uh,

a disadvantage to the farmer of, of reaping those costs back.

And at what percentage do you need it back?

I mean, do you need a 5,000% return?

I don't know.

I'm not here to argue that, but what I will say is kind of like you mentioned, there's new genetics coming out all the time, but so much of it is focused on the new trait packages, the new technology tied with it.

not quite as much as like the base genetics of what really bring yield, right?

Traits don't bring yield.

They may protect yield, right?

You may protect against rootworm damage, weed pressure, whatever it may be, but they really have yet to have yield enhancing traits, truly yield enhancing traits.

And the other thing is like, you can have different combos, right?