[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Jon Block.

So Al, previously, the fiscal 2H '26 CVI growth was expected to be up roughly 4%. Now fiscal 2H is expected to be flattish, and you made some comments around consumption. I just want to be clear, is the entirety of that revision inventory related as you did call out consumption of mid-single-digit growth specific to the quarter? I'm just wondering if that consumption assumption was -- also applies to fiscal 4Q. So maybe you can just tease out the plus 4% to 0% in fiscal 2H, how much of that is destock versus underlying fundamentals?

Yes, Jon, it's all destock. So the consumption in the U.S. market here has been running pretty steady all year in the mid-single digits. It was -- it did in Q3, and it did in the first month of this quarter. So I would expect consumption to remain as is. Meaning the entire reason for the reduction in the revenue guidance for CooperVision was tied to just channel inventory. That's it.

Okay. I guess there's just an obvious follow-up, which would be, if you're exiting this year at flat off of pretty modest comps, just any high-level thoughts on 2027 CVI? In other words, do we think it can go back to mid-single digits as it would revert back to consumption? Or should we think, hey, you're going to be below market this year, do we think below market next year really until some new products start to come out of the innovation hub?

Yes. A couple things on that. I mean some of the moves that we're making that you see here in the U.S. with respect to the channel inventory are one that's impacting us. Another one that's impacting us, has been for a little bit and will to end this year, is some of the portfolio rationalization we're doing with our legacy hydrogels. Our legacy hydrogels were down double digit across the board, as we continue to kind of move away from those products. That work we're going to get completed here in our fiscal Q4, and that'll put us in significantly better footing back to kind of CooperVision of old or normal CooperVision, if you will, as we get into 2027.

Your next question is from the line of Jeff Johnson.

Let me just stick on maybe that same line of question Jon was just asking, and then I've got one other follow-up as well. But on the destock itself, Al, you may have just answered the question on some of the legacy hydrogel stuff, but what is actually driving that destock? And how do we think about the risk that, that bleeds over into the early part of '27? Have you ring-fenced that fairly confidently that this is a -- fiscal Q4 should be the last of it? Or how do we think about like the early '27 potential impact? And then one follow-up.

Yes. We have ring-fenced that, so to speak. We have gone through that deep, deeply and dug into all the details and where the channel inventory is and what's happening. A lot of it was tied to Biofinity, but there was other. There was stuff with dailies, and there was definitely, definitely inventory that was tied to some legacy hydrogels and some of those kind of products. But we're going to get that behind us here in Q4, or at least the vast majority of it. Same with the rationalization and the moves in Asia Pac so that we get back in good footing and get back to normal, if you will, in 2027.

Okay. I guess I'll just push you a little bit on that. Just I hear -- by hearing your answer there, the different lines that destocked, but why are they destocking? Has end markets slowed? Did you guys have too much inventory in the channel from past efforts to kind of prop up numbers? Is it competitive new product launches that are just requiring less CooperVision inventory? Just anything there? And then you mentioned APAC there at the end of your answer. I guess my other question was going to be on APAC. Last quarter, you talked about fiscal Q3 being the last of the Cooper-specific issues there, and you felt like the market was kind of flat, maybe down a little bit in Asia Pac and that you could get back towards that market rate in Q4. Has that assumption now changed? And if so, maybe why?

Yes, I'll touch that one first, Jeff. So on Asia Pac, I would say that market is actually stabilizing to getting a little bit better, which is great news. I think I said last quarter, I'd have to go back and look, that we were finishing up the -- a lot of the rationalization work and positioning work and so forth with respect to the legacy hydrogels and clariti entering. So that's what I'm kind of referencing, saying that similar to last quarter, we're going to finish that up. We were probably halfway through it or maybe a little bit more. We took another chunk out of it here in Q3, and we'll finish that in Q4. So I think you'll get Asia Pac being back to -- relatively back to normal like as we start the year off. If I look at the channel inventory in the U.S., we see channel inventory, kind of go up and go down, and we've seen that many times over the years. We did have channel inventory trend higher here, and that's been for a couple different reasons. Some of it was people buying before price increases, some of it's been consolidation activity, some of it's been buying before things like IT upgrades go in. Most recently here in, like, Q1 and Q2, you saw channel inventory move up associated with buying tied to some of the new private label contracts we won, and that was pushing up inventory without offsetting it in a different spot. So this was something that we took a look at, a long and hard look at and said, "Hey, normally, what would happen here and what's happened in the past is that channel inventory would burn itself off over the next 1.5 years or something like that, and you'd move back to normal." And rather than doing that and dealing with that as we have many times over the 20-plus years I've been here, we decided to go ahead and proactively accelerate that and just get that taken care of right now in Q3 and Q4 so that we won't have that overhang at all next year, and we'll go back to growth tied to consumption.

Your next question is from Larry Biegelsen.

It's Lei on for Larry. Can you quantify the impact of the U.S. inventory reduction in fiscal Q3? I mean you talked about consumption being in the mid-single digit. So is that different versus what you reported for CVI? Is that the magnitude of inventory reduction in the quarter? And what's assumed about the impact of the inventory in fiscal Q4? And I have a follow-up.

Yes. So Lei, yes, just to be clear on that, the Americas would have reported growth around 5% in Q3 if we hadn't made the inventory reduction moves. We would envision Q4 is actually going to be pretty similar to what Q3 was, I would say, for the Americas, for EMEA and Asia Pac. So you'll have a similar inventory reduction that'll occur in Q4 in the U.S.

Okay. So the magnitude should be similar, you're saying, for the inventory reduction in Q4?

That's right.

Okay. And then my other question is around the P&L for Q4. So I'm backing into an operating margin somewhere in the mid-20%, just based on your EPS guidance. That would be down sequentially as well as year-over-year. So one, just want to check that. And two, what's driving that lower margin? I mean you have a tariff benefit in fiscal Q3. Is it all inventory related? Or are there other factors in there? And if there's anything in your EPS guide about additional buyback in fiscal Q4?

Sure. So nothing in the guidance with respect to buybacks, answered that one. When you look at your operating margin thinking, you're in the ballpark, and Brian kind of touched on it, the factors being tariffs, being FX is a little bit more negative, and then being investments in CooperSurgical. So we have started that investment activity in CooperSurgical. We started it during Q3, actually. So you're going to -- we're starting to see the impact of that. Now we'll get a return on that, of course, next year, but you're starting to see the impact this year.

Your next question comes from the line of Jason Bednar.

Sorry to hammer here and beat a dead horse, but I'm going to ask another one on the destock. Just a question on your confidence that this is just an Americas issue that won't bleed over to EMEA, and maybe talk about how Americas is benchmarked versus EMEA so we can have confidence that this issue just doesn't extend over to that geography and visibility that you have into the channel there? And maybe why not -- maybe take it from a different perspective, why not make some moves in EMEA so that channel or that geography is on healthy footing heading into fiscal '27?

Yes. So the difference is EMEA is a much greater subscription-based market. We're actually seeing the U.S. move in that direction. That's one of the things I was talking about with the new Puerto Rico facility, is that you're seeing more direct-to-consumer shipping activity. You see that in EMEA right now. That kind of prevents you from having like these inventory -- these big inventory swings and so forth. So we just don't really see that in EMEA. I mean you can get it with customers and so forth, of course, right? But we just don't have that happening in EMEA, so I'm not worried about it in that region. When you look at the U.S., it's centered on a relatively small number of players, if you will, between distributors and some online e-commerce. So it's pretty easy to straightforward tackle it, and that's what we did. And it's pretty easy to get an understanding about how much channel inventory is out there, what levels people need to hold in order to maintain customer service requirements and so forth. And you can look at that delta, and that's how you ring-fence it, so to speak, to be able to say, "Hey, I can do this, and I can quantify it within a couple of quarter period."

All right. That's helpful. And then Al or Brian, I think you both discussed today investments in CVI sales, marketing and R&D. Usually, that type of approach that's needed to accelerate growth comes at the expense of margins, even if temporarily. But it doesn't seem like that's what you're suggesting today. So can you talk a bit more about the investment buckets and then your confidence level in posting margin improvement next year in the face of the spending, knowing that we've already gone through some cost-down efforts coming into this fiscal year?

Sure. I'll take that one. Yes. So the commercial investments in sales force expansion, marketing programs, new product development, those -- the sales force adds tend to be a short-term detriment to margins. As we bring in those sales force, train them up, get them deployed, that will be a short-term detriment for longer-term benefits. So we are addressing sales force expansion across our businesses, across regions. So I'm not going to get into 2027 guidance right now. Obviously, we've been leveraging parts of the P&L, and we continue to leverage that, and you see that drop through in profitability and earnings. But in terms of next year, we'll get into next year in December in terms of how that's going to impact how the moves to drive long-term sustainable organic growth will impact our year, including gating in December.

Your next question is from the line of Robbie Marcus.

Great. Two from me. One, when did you first start the destocking? And where are you now with channel inventory? I don't know if you measure it in days in the U.S. Where was it in the beginning of the year? And where was it last year, just so we could get a sense? And then I have a follow-up.

Yes. So I would say -- well, I don't want to go, kind of, back and like build out by quarter. I don't think that's going to do anybody any good. But I look at it and say that we're, I would say, halfway through it. We did it here in Q3, and we're going to do the other half of it in Q4.

Okay. But you're not willing to say if this year ran at above average or below average or?

Well, this year ran above -- has run above average. As I mentioned, like there was stocking associated with some of the new private label contracts we've won, as an example, that has pushed up distributor inventory that we saw in Q1 and Q2, as an example.

Great. And then I know you're not giving '27 guidance. I think we're all grappling with so much of the movement and changes in guidance throughout the past several quarters. But maybe are you okay with leveraged EPS growth next year and maybe like a 3% to 4% top line, still a touch lower than where the Street is? Or does the step-up in tax preclude the ability to get leveraged EPS growth?

Yes. As for as much as I'd like to give commentary on next year, I'm just not going to get into it right now, not until December.

Your next question is from Joanne Wuensch.

I'm going to try it from a different angle. If the third quarter and the fourth quarter are negatively being impacted by the channel inventory and the contact lens market is growing 4% to 6%, is it reasonable to assume that next year, you can grow within the range of the market?

Yes, that is reasonable. I would say a couple things, Joanne. Let me give just a little color on that because your question is very fair. Like we don't have a manufacturing issue. Our team is strong. We're producing product. We don't have a distribution or logistics issue. We don't have a problem winning contracts. We've won a number of contracts. Where we've struggled is execution at the end of that, is actually executing and delivering revenues. So it's, kind of, like we're moving through this entire process, which is one of the things that's kept me optimistic, but then we're not converting at the very last stage of that. That actual commercial execution is where the struggling has happened. So the sales force execution, this additional marketing, the intensity around that kind of stuff and targeting and so forth, is the key to success for us, right? It's not products. It's not getting customer products. It's not winning contracts. It's executing at the end on the sales. We don't have enough salespeople out there. Like, hindsight 20/20, we should have moved faster on this. Like, we don't have enough salespeople on the street. We have quite a bit less than our competitors have out there right now. So this is a matter of doing that last stage of investing. And we're on top of that. We're moving as fast as we can right now on that. I'm not expecting this channel inventory to bounce back. We're taking it out, and we're going to manage it more aggressively to ensure stability there, but I do expect better execution. We have a long history of strong execution, so I'm confident in the team and that we'll deliver that.

Your next question is from the line of Steve Lichtman.

I just want to switch gears to CSI, and on the decision to keep the business. You pointed to the valuation disconnect. But as you look at the 2 businesses together, coming off of this process, what was management and the Board's ultimate assessment of why the 2 together are stronger than apart? Because, obviously, the lack of obvious synergies has been one of the questions from investors.

Yes. Well, I would say that it's really the P&L at the end of the day because if you take a look at the shared services concept that we deployed, remember, we did the restructuring in Q4 of last year, and you've seen the savings. I mean I know there's frustration over revenues. I have frustration over revenues, but I think this was something like our 11th straight quarter of beating earnings expectations. And some of those quarters, we've beaten earnings expectations by 5%, 10%. I mean we beat earnings this quarter with CooperVision coming in way under what revenue expectations were. So the strength of the P&L, when I look at it from the perspective of operating leverage and being able to drive that and drive cash flow, highest quarterly cash flow we've ever had in the company. And as Brian said, we're going to keep delivering a lot of cash flow. At the end of the day, yes, you're right, we have 2 different businesses. But the back office when it comes to finance, IT, legal and HR, and so forth, can support very effectively both of these businesses so that we can generate good earnings and really strong cash flow. And then we need to deploy that cash flow to stock buybacks, and we did a lot of buybacks this quarter. We're going to generate a lot of cash next year, and that's going to continue to be our focus. So that's where the logic comes in of having the 2 companies together, and proof is in the pudding, which we've done. Now we need to get revenue growth going, and I get that. Within vision, surgical is actually plugging along fine. Even through all these disruptions, I mean, this was an incredibly disruptive process. Like, we thought we were going to sell CooperSurgical. Let's be clear about that. Like, I got on the last call, and I talked about that. Like -- so everybody at this company was working on their normal jobs, on the sale of the business. Every piece of planning that we were doing, every budgeting, every IT plan had to go and have a with and without each of them, and so forth. But we got through that. We got through the exercise, and we still delivered the earnings, and we killed the free cash flow. And now we turn our attention back to where it needs to be, which is driving revenue growth within CooperVision and investing heavier in CooperVision. And that's what we're going to do next. So it's one more box we need to check, and I think that's the last one that we need to check. But that's the logic of having the businesses together.

Got it. Great. And then just a follow-up to that, in terms of use of free cash looking forward beyond stock buybacks, you may have mentioned this in your release tonight, but is it fair to say that relative to inorganic, that vision is going to be a higher focus now than on CSI, all else equal?

100%, yes. The very heavy focus right now on CooperVision organic growth. That's where we need to put our attention. That's where we are putting our attention, and that's where we're putting our money. That doesn't mean that CooperSurgical is not going to do well and get its investments because fertility is very important to us. And we're strong on the med device side, and we're going to continue to invest and grow those businesses. But the number one focus, clear and away, is driving organic growth at CooperVision right now.

Your next question is from the line of David Saxon.

Maybe one on CVI, and I'll ask one on CSI as my second. So just on CVI, a follow-up to the sales and marketing investments. Like, are there specific regions that need those additional resources? Do you need those additional sales reps to get to the mid-single digits next year? And then would love to just get your latest take on pricing and how the markets -- how you're feeling about the market's ability to take price?

Sure. So when it comes to the sales force expansion, I would start that with the U.S. market because right now we are -- we've got consumption growing mid-single digits. That's probably in line roughly with where the market is. We should be doing better than that. Given the contracts we've won and so forth, we should be growing faster than market here. The addition of this direct sales force and the expansion that we're doing right now is going to add coverage for something like 5,000 additional doors. So that's a big deal for us. Do we need to get that sales force in place to get to mid-single digit? No, because that's what we're doing right now on a look-through basis. Should we be accelerating that doing better? Yes, we should be. When I look at Europe, they're in a good spot. I challenged the European team there. We have a great, fantastic leader running Europe over there, and I've challenged him to maybe look at some expansion and hiring some more salespeople. Asia Pac is in pretty good shape right now. I just talked to the Head of Japan, great guy, energized. He's got some really good ideas. I really -- I'm excited about what he's doing. He's doing some hiring over there to focus in some different areas of the markets where we don't currently compete. And he needs to keep doing that. I stressed that to him and the rest of the team, invest, drive growth. We're going to get -- these are all high-return models, like we are going through this from a return perspective. I feel good about that. But -- so anyway, that gives you a little bit of color on the worldwide side. Pricing, I would say, when I look at pricing and when I look at product mix, it's still pretty good in the industry. The higher-priced products are doing better. We see that with our competitors. We see that with products like MyDay MiSight, the MyDay torics and multifocals, and so forth, continue to perform better. So higher-priced products doing better. And there still remains the potential to take price. Like, inflation is still out there. We see that, and there's still the potential for us to be able to take price, and we're actively looking at that right now.

Okay. Great. And then on CSI, maybe just talk about what you're seeing in terms of cycle trends, what the outlook is going into fiscal '27? And then you mentioned Paragard competition in the release. So I would love just an update there. I think that competitive launch was in August, so curious if you're seeing any impact there.

Sure. On the fertility side of things, we are seeing growth in cycles, and that's a positive. The other thing we're seeing is we're hurdling through that year period where we have some consolidation and you're starting to see fertility clinics investing more. There's more capital equipment opportunities out there. Our genomics team is absolutely killing it. They're doing a great job taking a whole bunch of market share. We have somewhat of a new fertility team that started probably 6, 12 months ago that is really doing that. Our new leader, she's just fantastic, and she's doing a great job and killing it. So I'm super optimistic about the fertility market. Anybody who thinks that that's not a good market or that, that litigation settlement is going to disrupt our momentum and progress is just wrong. I just don't see that in the market. When you look at the Paragard competition, we've talked about that in the past. We are the only -- Paragard is the only non-hormonal IUD in the market right now. There is a competitive product that received approval, that was bought, that it closed during this past quarter for us. They started their training, and that product will get launched at some point in the future, and there's concern about that. And at this point in time, I'm going to hold off giving any guidance or commentary above and beyond what we've already given, but we'll certainly have a lot more color to be able to give on the December call.

Your next question comes from the line of Navann Ty.

Just on the CSI post-strategic review, you mentioned some insights from that review. So can you maybe discuss that into more detail and the levers that you mentioned, including investment that you started in the quarter to drive fertility growth? If you could give more details.

Navann, it's a little difficult to hear. I think you were asking for the impact of -- or the -- did you say the impact from the strategic review tied to CSI? Can you repeat your question?

Yes. I think Al mentioned that you gained some insight from the strategic review, and also mentioned some investment that you started in the quarter to drive fertility growth. If you could discuss that into more detail.

Sure. So the insights is an important one because one of the things that the strategic review did was to really drill down into the profitability of our portfolio, all aspects of our portfolio, frankly, and take a look at profitability by product and take a look at profitability by geography and relationship. One of the areas where we've seen significant improvement is the profitability of CooperSurgical, and what it did is it kind of highlighted other areas where there's some opportunity for us to do a better job in terms of driving ongoing profitability improvement. So we're going to learn from that. Like, we learned a lot from the strategic review. It uncovered some different things, and it's going to make us a better company. It is making us a better company today. I mean, right now, we are doing investments within fertility. We've added some investment activity, including within R&D. We have great new Head of R&D who's running that organization and pulling forward some launches. We've got some exciting stuff going in genomics there with some new launches and some expanded products that we have. So I would say we're continuing -- and that's where we're putting dollars. We're putting number one, first and foremost, is CooperVision organic growth. And number two, though, after that, is fertility, where we are continuing to invest. And we believe that those investments are going to drive good fertility growth, and we also believe that some of the stuff that we've uncovered in the insights is going to give us opportunity to continue to drive leverage in that business.

And you also mentioned the -- in the press release, the valuation impact of the fertility settlement. Is that fully settled? Or is there anything else we should know about?

That is fully settled. So there's nothing new on that. There was concern that, that settlement -- you'll remember, that was from an issue we had in 2023. There was a concern that, that settlement would negatively impact our ongoing sales, not our operations. We haven't had any issues since then associated with the media and so forth. So I just don't believe that's accurate, and we haven't seen that. We didn't see it in Q2. We didn't see it in Q3. We're certainly not seeing it as we get rolling here in Q4. But I appreciate whether that was a true concern or a negotiating tactics, hard to tell.

Your next question is from the line of Anthony Petrone.

You have Brad Bowers on for Anthony. Just maybe wanted to ask one about the overall strategy or dynamics underlying the CVI business. Obviously, slowdown in growth is not unique to Cooper, but still growing. Below growth we got into destocking dynamics, but obviously you had also taken some share in some of the wider SKU ranges and, obviously, some of the new products with the MyDay. It sounds like the Americas growth is strong, but you even admit you wish you were growing better. So wanted to hear about some of the more competitive dynamics and the confidence that those remain in your favor.

I would say that those remain in our favor. So nothing has changed with respect to that. I will say that the area where losing share is the wrong word, but where we don't operate is kind of in the super premium segment. There's a part of the market, especially on the daily side, that we refer to as super premium. It's really high-priced products. And that's just not an area that we compete in right now, and that's shown a lot of growth, and it has very high revenue per patient. So where we continue to do well, we continue to win patients. Our revenue per patient is not close to where some of our competitors are, and a lot of the market continues to get driven by that really premium segment. Now we are launching -- we've launched MyDay MiSight into that more premium segment. That's what's being launched into Europe. So I think there's some potential for us to gain some ground there. But that would be -- if I had to highlight 2 things, that would be one of them, is not having products in the super premium space. And then the other one would be the desire to rationalize some of our legacy hydrogel products. Again, we're definitely seeing the negative impact from that.

That makes sense. But obviously, punching above your weight, given the underinvestment in -- not underinvestment, but smaller sales force than competition, obviously, that is a tailwind. But just wanted to hear, maybe remind us, how productivity kind of ramps there. Obviously, the base is now lower, so it does, kind of, imply getting back towards that high -- mid to even high single digits, to your point, getting above consumption. And then also just yen impact obviously apparent, maybe the opportunity that, that would be obscured, if there is strong growth in the U.S. by some of the OUS impacts. Just maybe help us figure that out as well.

Sure. Just one quick point because Brian just said that. I meant MyDay Energys. I think I said MyDay MiSight, but MyDay Energys is the premium product. With the sales force, I would say, if I had to put some parameters around that, we're recruiting now. We'll get people in trained and have them out on the street executing, I would say, probably in early mid-fiscal Q2. So from that perspective, right, they need to visit offices and start doing their jobs and so forth and pulling revenues in. So that's probably a positive impact more in the Q3, Q4 time frame. Now I do think early in the year, we'll continue to have consumption be solid. So we'll still put up good results, but I believe we'll accelerate a little bit off that as we get the benefit from those employees. Frankly, same thing when I look at some of the other markets around the world.

Your next question is from the line of Brett Fishbin.

I have to say, a lot of mine have been asked, so maybe just a follow-up on kind of the last point. I was going to ask about your thoughts on underlying market share dynamics, just given the full year CVI growth guide for the Americas. It sounds like a lot of it has to do with sales force and you're looking at some incremental investment activity. So maybe just the first part, is there anything else that stands out that you think might be driving, call it, full year growth in the Americas below market outside of that? And then the second follow-up question is just how you're feeling about the product portfolio. I think your point about super premium lenses is really interesting. So just curious, like, how you feel about current offerings and maybe how active the R&D pipeline might be in regard to some new ideas or even new brands.

Sure. I would say on the selling side, I would go back to sales execution. Like, we've won some great private label contracts here in the U.S. with a few of the buying groups. We've won some really nice contracts in Asia Pac. Historically, when we win those contracts, we would see the sales execution turn those into revenue growth. And that's what we've expected more of that, right? You've seen that in some of the guidance. You've seen it in some of my commentary. That's where that has not come to fruition yet. And where -- when we looked at it and peeled back the onion and said, "Well, why? What is the difference? What's happening?" We have a full portfolio out there right now. I feel good about the portfolio. It's arguably the most robust that we've ever had, and we didn't build out the sales force and a lot of the marketing support commensurate with the size of the portfolio that we have right now. So we need to do this activity so we can capitalize on these contract wins that we have. I will say with respect to R&D and new products, we have accelerated that activity. We've had a number of meetings with the R&D team and with our commercial team. We are accelerating launch activity that we were looking at in the 2030 kind of time frame and pulling that forward a couple of years. So very, very active on R&D and laser focusing in on some new product introductions that we think are going to be pretty damn exciting. We were a little too broad on some things, so narrowing that down and executing and getting some new products into the marketplace is going to be beneficial for us. And I won't go too far on that yet, but we will spend some time in the nearer future going through some of those details.

And our final question comes from the line of Issie Kirby.

I think most of mine have been asked as well. But just wanted to touch on Asia Pacific and China, in particular, which has been a drag for quite some time now. Can you remind us of the size of that business for you guys in vision and just how you're thinking about it strategically? Like, does it get to a point where it's really, given the dynamics in the market, not necessarily worth you being there anymore?

Yes. Well, China was another struggle this quarter. I mean it was the only market, as an example, where MiSight was actually down. It's not -- it has not been a great market for us. So we are reengineering there. We've got a new team in place. We're looking at some different growth opportunities to see the best way to reestablish and drive growth in that marketplace right now. I do believe that, I will say within the context of Asia Pac, after many quarters of negatives and product rationalization in China and some of the other markets, we are definitely coming to an end with that activity. I know you've heard that before, but I'll just tell you, when you look at the size of the business, I mean, it's gotten to be -- it's just relatively small. I mean, I think it's less than 2%. It is less than 2% of revenues this quarter on a consolidated basis. So the business just is getting smaller over there. So it's a great question and a great challenge, and we are looking at seeing if we can reinvigorate that business to drive success. And I do believe there are some opportunities there in some channels, like e-commerce, where we can play differently and be successful. But we're taking a hard look at it right now because we want to get good revenues, if you will, right, profitable revenues and things that make sense. So doing work on it. That's -- and I'll update you more as we get into December and give guidance on next year.

Can I just really quickly squeeze in a follow-up on what went on with MiSight in China in the quarter?

Sure. We have not been able to gain traction with MiSight in China. And if I look around the world in other markets that have spectacles, we continue to do fine. As a matter of fact, it just grows the overall marketplace. I think the unique thing with China ends up being Ortho-K, probably more than anything. You've had a lot of pricing pressure on Ortho-K because of government pricing policies, so it's really disrupted that marketplace. There's a lot of knockoffs there. There's a lot of disruption around pricing with Ortho-K. There's a lot of knockoff spectacle lenses and so forth there. So -- although there's massive opportunity with the number of children that have myopia, the market itself is very disjointed right now.

And with no further questions in queue, I will now turn the call back over for closing remarks.

Thank you, operator, and thank you, everyone, for taking the time. I know we had a lot to discuss today, and I'm sure we'll have a lot of follow-up calls with details. So I appreciate everyone's interest and look forward to catching up and providing an update on our next earnings call in December. Thank you.

Thank you again for joining us today. This does conclude today's conference call. You may now disconnect.