 So starting here with, I would say, the first team machine that was visible on a global scale because it was used by the FONAC Racing team, back then it was called Team Machine SLT01. It was basically a frame that was innovative back in the days because it was a time where most of the frames they were still made out of aluminum and already this frame started with having carbon seat stays, carbon chain stays, and then there were a couple of iterations made to the point where the entire tubes of the whole frame were made out of composites. So the connection elements, the locks, they were still made out of metal and as you can see, very complex, so parts were forged and welded together, very complicated to make. But this frame was in use, it was in the early 2000s, so let's say from 2003 to 2005. We see here one of the very first FONAC racing bikes which still had alloy, front triangle, the very iconic cross lock back then, I think that was a very visible thing. And then this is kind of the area where racing bikes were developed to be as light as possible and as stiff as possible. And for me the pinnacle of this is this climbing bike that was made for Paolo Savoldelli and he used this in the 2004 Giro d'Italia. I don't know if you can see it, but it has smaller wheels, so 26 inch, clearly with the motivation to be super light. Those tires are 19mm, so something that today looks very weird. But of course the focus of this bike, as I mentioned, was really stiffness to weight. So it was so specific, it even didn't have adjustable seat post, so it was a tailor made seat mast, no adjustability to Paolo Savoldelli's size. The bike was 6.8 kg back then, which was quite remarkable and used only for stages that finished with an uphill climb. So this is kind of summing up, I think the area of race bikes that were as light as possible and as stiff as possible. And then when Cadalevans joined the BMC team, and that was also the time when I started with the company, the focus slightly changed, I had many discussions with him about... 2006? That was 2006, yeah. What should the race bike be able to do? And he clearly said, hey, I have to race this for three weeks and I need to stay fresh, whether it's at the end of the day or at the end of the three weeks. So I need a bike that is not only as light and as stiff as possible, but also comfortable. And this then led to this T-Machine SLR-1. So SLR starts then with the first full carbon bikes. With the famous tuned compliance concept. That was actually the idea the bike architecture developed to combine lightweight, stiffness and compliance. And one of the key recipes to that was dropping the seat stays. Were you the first frame to do that? I think so, I'm pretty sure, yeah. If you are shooting for an optimal frame that covers those parameters, you will automatically find that this frame architecture makes the most sense, because by dropping the seat stays, you allow more rotational freedom in this area, which automatically translates into a more comfortable right feel in the saddle. And what's with the triangle there? This, we call it crosslock back then, was a structural element that is basically putting the forces that comes through the top tube in a smoother way into the seat tube. Let's say flaring the forces on a wider area to have less stress concentration and make a stronger frame. That was a very important project, I think for us, because it brought in the compliance. And for instance here we have one of the race bikes used in 2012, Giro d'Italia by Taylor Finney. He won the prologue and then we made this special version like it or not. Why would you not like it? You can't like it. I would not say the color, but the execution of the color. I have seen a nicer pink bike. The next big step was when we started the development for the Model Year 14 team machine. This is when we introduced computer simulation into the development process. Before it was all, I would say, empirical engineering. I mean, you were looking at physics, you were thinking about how should it work and then trying it out, making a lot of physical prototypes to get to the best performing bike. And then we started systematically with optimizing the design with computer simulation. It's basically an application on top of a standard simulation software that we did together with a high school here in Switzerland. I would say this application on top was actually the optimizer that was choosing the best combination of, I think it was around 30 parameters back then. Some of them were related to fiber angles of the carbon plies. Some of them were related to really bike architecture. So for instance, where should the seat stays join? I mean, the higher up means more torsional stiffness, but less comfort. The lower means more comfort, but less torsional stiffness. Then it was also combining at the same time tube shapes, so dimensions, how big should the tube be, cross-section shapes, things like that. And the result was really a big step in terms of bike performance because we were able to increase the stiffnesses that are relevant for power transfer. So BB stiffness, rear triangle stiffness by 40%. And this, without compromising the so loved and famous vertical compliance, and actually we were even able to reduce the weight. So that was a big step, but also to be expected once you, let's say, turn from experience-based development into really sophisticated computer development. Here we see one of those bikes built for or raised by Richiport. And then if we move further on, the next generation was introduced disc brakes. So disc brakes on this generation, then also integration of the cables. We started this in 2016 with the Road Machine as the first brand on the market for good or bad. Some they hate integration, some they love it. So you were the first brand to bring integration to the market. Yes, cable integration on disc brake bike with the Road Machine Model Year 17, we have been the first one. And was all that developed in impact? Yes, this is typically something that was really born here because we were very, very scared that the steering might be impacted by having cables through the headset and also additional friction in the cables, things like that. In the end actually turned out that the integration of cables brought less steering interference than the outside cables from mechanical, let's say, or mechanical shifting or outside braking. That's also why our design is very narrow, I would say, to keep the cables very close to the rotation axis, which translates into less cable moving, which is a benefit for steering, but also for wear and tear and wear of the cables. Then last but not least, we moved to the current generation of the T-Machine SLR-01, where we added one more parameter to the development list, so before it was stiffness, weight, compliance. And now this bike also includes aerodynamics in the equation. Obviously it was not an easy one because it's contradicting some of the other parameters. Making a bike that is very aerodynamic is easy if you disregard weight and stiffness. I think aero bikes are also not known as being very compliant. For us, T-Machine was always a bike that should score very high in all parameters. So it was not making the most or the best in this, but just a very nice riding package. So we added learnings from aerodynamics, especially on the fork plates and the elements that see the wind as clean air. Clean air, I would say. Which is namely also the down tube and we integrated also the bottle cages into the design that's something we learned from our aero bike that has a significant effect on track. Today, I think it's more making the fork even better. I cannot yet think about the fifth thing. And I should know by now because... Maybe. You know how long development takes, especially of those high-performance bikes. Thank you for your talk. Yeah, you're welcome. It's always a pleasure, especially to talk about T-Machine because it's really a bike I think. Even internally, everyone loves and everyone loves to see the progression of this bike.