Serge Saxonov

Thanks, Cassie, and good afternoon, everyone. Revenue for the third quarter declined 1% year-over-year, in line with our preannouncement. Our results this quarter fell forward of our expectations. This was primarily caused by more disruption than we had anticipated from the sales restructuring we implemented this quarter and by cautious customer spending, particularly around capital purchases as we continue to navigate a challenging macro environment.
While these changes in our commercial structure are necessary to drive our growth and strategy, we expect to see continued headwinds and also expect cautious customer spending to [preserve].
We now expect full year revenue in the range of $595 million to $605 million. At the midpoint of the range, this implies flat fourth quarter revenue compared to our third quarter results and represents a 3% decline from the prior year. Adam will talk through more of the details of our updated guidance range shortly.
There is no question our revenue growth in 2024 has been disappointing. The year has had a number of moving pieces that have made it particularly challenging. We initiated major product transitions across all of our platforms and significantly involved our sales organization. All of this with a backdrop of a difficult macro environment and changing competitive dynamics across the portfolio.
Despite these current headwinds, we continue to believe we're on the path to the most significant transition in the tool space since the introduction of MTS. We have the leading portfolio of single cell and spatial technologies and we envision a world in which most issues will be analysed using our products.
The strategies we're pursuing to accelerate the staff way are first, to evolve our commercial structure in order to foster widespread use of our technologies.
Second, to create increasingly accessible price points, so that we can drive ubiquitous use of our tools across all samples. We tend to be a leader on price. And with our new product launches, we believe we now have the best cost structure for customers across a wide range of experiments. We have shown over and over our ability to extend our technological leadership and push frontiers. With these new offerings, we believe we are now the leader in both technology and cost.
And third, to advance our capabilities with new products, workflows, and software in order to enhance ease of use and drive more adoption.
Finally, we tend to accomplish these objectives with a diligent approach to investment in cash management. I'm confident that the steps we are taking will enable us to reach more customers execute consistently across the portfolio and drive the broad democratization of our technologies to reach the full potential of the large opportunity ahead.
For the rest of the call today, I will discuss what we're doing to advance our strategies and why we're confident they will set us up for future long-term growth. Adam will then provide more detail on our third quarter financials and specific impacts to our outlook for the rest of the year.
Let's start with the changes we've been making to our commercial organization. As we shared on our last earnings call, we re-architected our commercial infrastructure from the ground up making foundational changes to transform how we engage with our customers.
We sell to a diverse set of customer types and research segments. And we designed our new sales structure to focus our team to better serve all their distinct needs, whether in academic or biopharma settings, scaling up top-tier customers, driving more adoption among converting users or bringing new researchers into the ecosystem.
To accomplish this, we added specialization to key areas by creating a distinct capital equipment team exclusively focused on driving new instrument placements creating a distinct biopharma organization, which is focused on better serving the unique needs and expansion opportunities in that sector and adding a dedicated team to nurture new and emerging accounts, the next generation of 10X customers.
In addition to this specialization, we also recalibrated territory sizes to make a territory more manageable and to drive more efficient utilization of our sales force. While these changes were necessary, they did cause more disruption than we anticipated.
Ultimately, this is the largest disruption in the areas where the sales structure changed the most. For example, over 40% of customer accounts in the Americas sales coverage within the quarter. And our new biopharma and capital equipment teams still have a large number of open roles.
Our teams now have an improved focus and more defined roles with targeted incentives. I'm confident these were the right changes to make and see them already creating more clarity and rigor in our processes. There is still work to do to realize the full potential of our commercial organization. We're working fast to fill our open head count.
Our account executives are still onboarding and getting up to speed with the new customers and territories. We expect it will take time before we see the full benefit and impact from our new approach. We're confident these changes will help us deliver the best experience to our customers open up new opportunities and drive efficient growth across the portfolio.
Turning to our Chromium portfolio. As we have been communicating for some time, driving into price elasticity has been a particular focus for us. We recently took another step in this direction by launching new products and capabilities aimed at lowering the cost and ultimately expanding access of single cell analysis. First, we're setting a new standard for the cost per cell for researchers with the launch of GEM-X Flex. Customers can now run millions of cells for less than $0.01 per cell and over fivefold reduction compared to previous products.
We're bringing our highest performing and most flexible assay to our new GEM-X technology architecture. GEM-X Flex enables broader opportunities for mega scale CRISPR screens, cell avastin projects and multisite translational studies, among others.
Second, to decrease their cost per sample, even in a small scale, we launched GEM-X Universal Multiplex. For this product, researchers can batch and run four independent samples up to 5,000 cell lease for approximately $560 per sample.
This is a new multiplexing capabilities for a flagship GEM-X universal brand gene expression assays, which we launched in March of this year. Furthermore, even while we're lowering cost barriers for our customers, these two products have comparable gross margins to our current consumables.
Finally, to address CapEx areas, we launched Chromium X, a most affordable single-cell instruments, at a US list price of only $25,000. Chromium X serves as a budget-friendly and trade point into routine high-performance single cell analysis. XO enables researchers to generate high-quality data with less handle time, labour and experimental costs compared to non-tenant workloads. Our GEM-X Universal 3-prime single plex and multiplex assays are available on the X.
With these launches, we're addressing a primary bottom line for our customers, price. At the same time, we have also delivered new protocols, capabilities, and software to enhance ease of use and drive more adoption.
Chromium plex for example, should be uniquely suited to open up more translational research. It is the only commercial single cell assay compatible with FFP samples, which are open constrained by limited cell quantities. With GEM-X plex, we've delivered a fourfold reduction in required sell input, significantly expanding the opportunity to include vast amounts of biobank clinical samples that were previously oplimit for single-cell research.
Another example is the unique on-chip multiply workload built into [GMAC] Universal Multiplex, which is an efficient and elegant way for restress to analyse more samples in a single run. On-chip multiplexing eliminates the need for upstream sample tagging, simplifying the process and reducing hands-on time compared to other sample multiplexing methods. And we have introduced new solutions for upstream sample fixation to improve the workflow, whole block fixation to expand sample compatibility and library prep automation to enable greater throughput.
On the software side, we delivered automated cell annotation, taking it easier and faster for researchers to go from experiment to Insight. Cell annotation is a fundamentally hard problem and a critical part of most types of single cell analysis.
With this new capability, we're addressing one of the biggest challenges in data analysis for our customers. Altogether, we're excited about the strength, differentiation and leadership of our single-cell portfolio and deliver new products, workflows, and software we've introduced will enable more research to adopt single sub methods for more studies more often.
For additional product information, we'll encourage you to refer to the supplemental materials we posted on our Investor Relations website and along with earnings. As we continue to execute on single cell, we are also motivated by the immense potential of our spatial platforms. We were encouraged by spatial consumables usage this quarter with the continued adoption of Visium HD and Xenium facade.
Within the Vinzenplatform, we're seeing the majority of labs order busily see -- and now that the initial wave of customers are starting to move past evaluation, we're beginning to see good reorder trends. In addition, we are seeing the majority of new Visium customers start with HD, an encouraging sign of the benefits this product brings to researchers.
Adoption of our busing side of system instrument continues at a solid pace. Our experience over the years has made it clear that an instrument like CytAssist is key to delivering a complete solution for customers. CytAssist is critical for enabling a robust and straightforward workflow, one that allows customers to use standard histologists lines. Additionally, by ensuring consistency, precision and preservation specialty, CytAssist is integral to high-quality data and more accurate scientific results for our customers' experience.
Within the Xenium platform, we saw continued adoption of Xenium 5K in Q3, leading to overall Xenium consumables revenue growth sequentially, and we continue to see encouraging utilization trends with sequential growth in the number of runs.
We consistently hear very strong feedback from our customers on these products on the data quality and on their ease of use. These complementary spatial platform support a broad spectrum of customers' use cases and accommodate the ways their research and research questions may well over time.
As we look forward, I'm encouraged by the underlying progress we're making and motivated by the immense opportunity IT ahead. understanding biology requires measuring molecules, cells and tissues at large scale and high resolution. Our technologies are delivering these fundamental capabilities to researchers around the world. But these are still very early days.
My conviction is fuelled by our customers, both the work they're doing today and their visions for the future. I came away from last month's Human Cell Atlas General Meeting energized by the community's plans to think a larger more complex studies, two margin high-impact translational projects and to explore new single cell and spatial applications that could transform the world's understanding of health and disease.
Conversations like these reinforce my belief that single cell and spatial continue to be some of the most exciting and game-changing opportunities in the life sciences. While we continue to see strong adoption with cutting edge [genomics researchers] we believe there is an even larger opportunity across the broader space of academic research weather in basic science or in translation obligations.
This opportunity spans across many different fields, including oncology, immunology, neuroscience, metabolic health, women's health and such disease aging and multiple others.
We know that opportunities exist because we see early interest and use for many new kinds of customers, just not yet routinely or at scale. Even among our well-established academic customers, easing interest in running large-scale experiments, whether moving towards translational applications, analysing large patient cohorts, or embarking on massive cell screening campaigns.
In biopharma, there is increasing interest to apply single cell and spatial technologies across the entire continuum of the drug development process. For example, many groups are focused on applying single cell and spatial tools for target identification and drug discovery, especially in the context of large-scale CRISPR experiment or combinatorial drug screens.
In preclinical work, the emergence of organized as a superior [reach] bottle should open up a broad range of use cases, including characterization of disease development progression and therapy mechanism of action.
We believe cell therapy development is another exciting opportunity as our tools have the potential to accelerate biomarker discovery and screening enhance cellular environment profiling and support drug product characterization.
And there exists an even larger space of translation applications to apply our technologies to clinical trials, which in many ways is only now becoming possible. We have built a sizable franchise with single cell and a solid foundation in spatial. And while this year has certainly had its challenges, we firmly believe there is a vast opportunity ahead and that we're the best company to deliver on it.
Before I turn it over to Adam, I'd like to officially welcome him to 10X . On our last call, we announced he would be joining us as our new CFO, and I'm really excited to have him on board. With that, I'll turn it over to Adam.

Adam Taich

Thank you, Serge. It's great to be here at 10X working with such a dedicated and resilient team. I'll start by reviewing our financial results for the three months ended September 30, 2024, and will then provide further details on our updated outlook for 2024. All growth rates provided will be on a year-over-year basis unless otherwise noted. Total revenue for the quarter was $151.7 million, down 1%, driven by weaker instruments revenue primarily Xenium instruments, offset by stronger contributions from consumables.
Looking at our revenue breakout, whole consumables revenue was $126.2 million, up 10%. And Chromium consumables revenue was $96.5 million, down 4% year-over-year, driven primarily by lower average prices, offset by increased consumables volumes.
Spatial consumables revenue was $29.7 million, up 111% driven primarily by continued demand for the new spatial consumables products introduced this year. Visium HD and Xenium 5K.
Moving on to instruments. Total instrument revenue decreased 45% to $19.1 million. Chromium instrument revenue was $7.6 million, down 38% driven by fewer units sold. Spatial instrument revenue was down 50% to $11.4 million driven by a lower number of Xenium instruments sold. Services revenue was $6.4 million, up 48%.
Looking at our revenue by geography. Americas decreased 11% to $87.8 million. EMEA grew 18% to $37.9 million and revenue in APAC increased 15% to $26 million. The most significant changes in our commercial reorganization were in the Americas, which contributed to the regional disparities.
Turning to the rest of the income statement. Gross profit for the third quarter was $106.4 million compared to $95.5 million for the prior year period. Gross margin increased to 70% from 62% the year prior, driven by change in product mix, which was predominantly fewer Xenium instruments.
Total operating expenses for the third quarter decreased to $147.9 million compared to $190.3 million for the prior year period. This decrease was primarily driven by a $41.4 million in-process research and development expense related to an agreement to acquire certain intangible and other assets in the prior year period.
R&D expenses decreased to $66.2 million compared to $66.5 million for the prior year period, primarily driven by lower personnel expenses, including stock-based compensation expenses, partially offset by higher laboratory materials and supplies.
SG&A expenses decreased to $81.7 million compared to $82.4 million for the prior year period, primarily driven by lower personnel expenses, including stock-based compensation, partially offset by higher outside legal expenses.
Operating loss for the third quarter was $41.5 million compared to a loss of $94.8 million in the third quarter last year. This includes $33.9 million of stock-based compensation as compared to $40.2 million of stock-based compensation for the corresponding prior year period.
Operating loss in the third quarter of 2023 included $41.4 million of in-process research and development expenses. Net loss for the period was $35.8 million compared to a net loss of $93 million for the third quarter of 2023. We ended the quarter with $398.2 million in cash and cash equivalents.
Turning to our outlook for the rest of the year. As Serge mentioned at the beginning of the call, we now expect full year revenue to be in the range of $595 million to $605 million, representing a 3% decrease from full year 2023 at the midpoint.
At the midpoint, our updated guidance range implies approximately flat fourth quarter revenue compared to our third quarter results. Within Chromium, we are assuming a continuation of decreasing price per reaction while assuming an uptick in volumes.
Within Spatial, we are assuming similar results to what we experienced in Q3. The drivers of our assumptions are first, ongoing headwinds from our commercial restructuring. While we implemented the new structure in mid-Q3, our efforts remain ongoing as we make new hires to fill our redesigned territories and teams, train new sales reps and solidify processes.
And second, the macro environment continues to be challenging. We are still seeing cautious customer spending, putting pressure on both CapEx purchases as well as larger consumables projects. Given this, we are not counting on the typical seasonality that we tend to see in Q4.
While we anticipate these factors will impact Q4 and into next year, I want to affirm that we are taking the appropriate and necessary steps to take advantage of our opportunity. We are taking a disciplined look at our spend in our 2025 planning. We generated $18 million of cash in Q3, but I would note that much of this is due to timing, and we expect this to offset in Q4. We are focused on maintaining a strong balance sheet going forward.
At this point, I'll turn it back to Serge.

Serge Saxonov

Thanks, Adam. The endpoint is clear, biology needs to be analysed at the single cell level and on spatial context. However, as 2024 has shown, the path together is not leer. I'm incredibly grateful to the 10X team for staying focused on our mission and our customers as we navigate this period of change and push through these challenges.
I have strong conviction that the actions we're taking now are necessary to deliver our long-term opportunity and fulfil the promise of single cell and spatial biology. We will continue to execute with urgency and excellence as we work to foster widespread use of our technologies and create value for all stakeholders.
With that, we will now open it up for questions. Operator?

Question and Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions) Tejas Savant, Morgan Stanley.

Tejas Savant

Perhaps maybe I'll start with one on the quarter in the outlook here -- so EMEA and APAC held up a lot better for you in the quarter relative to the Americas and you highlighted the bulk of the commercial restructuring was focused on the Americas. So that makes me feel that it's mainly the commercial reorg that was the driver of the $50 million cut versus incremental macro deterioration relative to your prior guide. So can you just confirm that.
And then the second part of my question is, how should we be thinking about gross margin dynamics and your prior target of being cash flow positive here over the next few quarters? -- because there's a few moving pieces, right?
So you've got the meaningfully lower price points on the premium that you're enabling for the customer base, but then you've got the macro stuff. And you also surged, I think in your prepared remarks, talked about GEM-X Flex and Universal Multiplex having comparable gross margins. So just trying to put all of that together in terms of gross margin and free cash flow dynamics.

Adam Taich

Let me take a stab at it. So on the Q4 guide, a couple of things to consider. And the way we're sort of thinking about the incremental call down is it's about half from the macro environment and half of it coming from internal commercial organization work that we're doing. The reason -- so the commercial one, and I think we talked about in search cut into -- in the script, what I would mention around the macro is we've historically seen a step-up from Q3 to Q4.
And we were still even in the prior guide, anticipating that type of seasonal step up, even if it was a bit muted perhaps in prior years, but we're still expecting some of that. And I think as you can see from what we've guided here from Q4. We're anticipating that doesn't occur.
We don't see a step up from a CapEx perspective and even some of the larger consumables projects that we would tend to see in Q4 also not anticipating that to be the case. So you end up with, but about half of that guide down coming from the macro. And then on the internal side from a commercial reorg, we still have a significant number of open requisitions filling those roles with top-notch talent, but that certainly continues to be an impact for us here in Q4.
The other piece of your question or the other question that I'll answer on gross margin dynamics, it's important to note that the products that we've launched are actually at comparable gross margins to our existing portfolio.
So part of the innovation engine here at 10X , and it's part of the reason that we're -- as we're trying to democratize single cell, get products into the hands, expand the market to the market opportunity, we're able to do that actually at comparable gross margins as to the existing sort of base consumables business.
The last thing, just the sort of second part, related part of your question around cash flow positive. Yes, we talked about that in Q3. I did mention just now here on the call. From a working capital perspective, we expect that to flip a bit.
But as we noted in Q1, we had a roughly $20 million payment that we made that was sort of an unusual payment related to an asset acquisition. And so absent that, we're still pretty darn close to being cash flow positive for the year. And that's still the way that we're thinking about our business is really being mindful of our cash balance along the way.

Operator

Tycho Peterson, Jefferies.

Tycho Peterson

I'm going to start with instrument. You said a couple of weeks ago, I think that Xenium and Visium missed equally, and that was part of the reason that you're not losing share, that seems different than what you're seeing now. So I'm wondering if you can clarify that.
And then as you work through the sales transition, do you have a sense of what percentage of orders that dropped out of the funnel are likely to be just pushed out versus unrecoverable. I guess how do we get comfortable that there's not share loss underway and things are dropping out of the funnel.
And then, Serge, I want to push you on pricing because you've gotten more aggressive with the Xenium promotion and Chromium XO and GEM-X. Just can you give us a more co- get us more comfortable that the elasticity is actually there and that the funding for larger projects is materializing.

Serge Saxonov

Yes. Thanks, Tycho. So maybe on -- first of all, the Visium kind of dynamic. -- just wanted to clarify. We have said before, the Xenium instruments, in particular, got affected by the macro environment more so in an outsized way relative to the rest of our product portfolio. But once you take that out of the equation, all the products were similar relative to our expectations.
So -- and yes, as we've been saying all along Xenium has been affected, particularly acutely by sort of the macro headwinds and the funding pressures of customers because this is the big -- sort of big price instruments and such.
As far as sort of pricing action, so there's different elements to this. I mean you mentioned promotions we've been running on some of our products on Xenium instruments. There's nothing I would say here is still extraordinary relative to just the normal course of business that we do. We have ongoing promotions and different products, and there is some happening this quarter as well.
And as far as more general sort of pricing, especially as it applies to kind of on the single-cell side, we -- as we've been saying for a while, we believe there is a tremendous potential in single cell to grow and a big barrier to further growth is price.
And that's price, it can be a very along multiple dimensions, whether it's price per sample, price per cell, or price entering kind of the minimal size experiment. And we've been addressing those throughout the year, and our strategy -- overall backdrop challenge is to drive these prices down over time.
We do have strong conviction in elasticity. I mean we have seen -- we are seeing some volume growth already relative to despite average -- a longer price decreases. We have seen, based on sort of geographic price actions that we've taken in the past, you have seen that resulting in volume growth.
And over time, over the course of a few quarters, actually, growing substantially enough to drive incremental -- substantial incremental top line revenue. We have also see examples of customers who have adopted flex, which if you kind of adopt it in a sufficient scale of (technical difficulty) you can drive down substantially your price per sample.
And we have seen the dynamic with the customers that as they adopted the greater stem there volume increase, then over time, those volumes drove substantial expansion and top line revenue as well. It's not an unusual dynamic. It's actually quite common in the history of our industry, and we expect it to play out here as well. And we now have the empirical evidence to support that view.

Operator

Doug Schenkel, Wolfe Research.

Douglas Schenkel

So as many of you know, I'm a New England Patriots fan. They're a historically great franchise that's having a really, really bad season. I don't expect them to win, but I do want to see progress. I want to know things at bottom and that they're on track to improving.
In some ways, I see parallels to how I'm looking at 10X right now. So with that in mind, how do we know you're making progress and have the right plan in place and that you're not going to be mired in last place for years to come? What metrics can you share that can demonstrate you've learned from some of the mistakes, some of the things that you've miscalculated over the last several quarters.
And really what can you share that assures us that you're tracking to become a winning organization again? And specifically, what should we look for in the fourth quarter that would resemble a win? Because clearly, if you just meet guidance, that's not going to be good enough. What should we be looking for that actually suggests that you're on the verge of turning this around?

Serge Saxonov

Thanks, Doug. So I mean, first of all, as I mentioned in my call, I think in my remarks earlier in the call, 2024 has been disappointing. And it is also the case that over the past couple of few years, while there has been there has been progress and really exciting milestones that we have met and achieved.
We have got our challenges for sure. In particular, we identified several years ago that we needed to scale our organization to reflect the growing complexity of the products and our markets and our segments in customer base.
And the short story there is that the changes that we had tried to make over the course of the last couple of years has just not gone deep enough. It's clear we've learned from those changes from the incremental adjustments we try to make. And it's the big driver, the big rationale for going through the commercial transformation right now.
It's taking those goals that were identified early on and executing on them now in a comprehensive manner. We believe we're on the right track. The overall approach we take as a company is like once it's clear, what decisions need to get made. We move fast. And I appreciate again that we're going through a period of disruption on (technical difficulty) right now. I do have conviction we're on the right path.
You can look to see that specifically in the regions where the disruption has been leased. We are actually performing relatively well in some cases quite well. We're looking forward to continuing on these changes. And yes, it's going to take some amount of time for them to work through the system across the company, across all the regions, across all the product categories.
As we look to Q4, we certainly -- we do expect to see some improvements, but we have to be guarded in our suction surface point. We are still going through the -- we still have a lot of open roles. We're still building out and filling out the commercial organization. And we're still in a very challenging macro environment. But I am confident that we're on the right that, and we're going to start seeing sequential improvement.

Operator

Dan Arias, Stifel.

Dan Arias

Serge, maybe more on the commercial fixes going forward. How much of what you need to do here relates to filling those open sales roles that you mentioned, which is pretty straightforward versus implementing discrete changes in processes and just ways of going about thing, which is harder.
And then relatedly, what in your mind represents sort of a line in the sand drop that time point when it comes to your expectation for the company being fully on track driving the level of visibility and the level of execution that you need to be successful here.

Serge Saxonov

Yes. So (technical difficulty) as well, so first of all, a big part of what we need to do is still in open roles. As we mentioned, we do have a lot on the call. We have a lot of open roles on our Xenium CapEx team. We have a lot of open roles in the biopharma teams and other teams are also not fully staffed yet.
So that is a big part of what needs to happen over the coming quarters. At the same time, you are right that there is also a big element of working of trading people and having people kind of grow into the new structure, new ways of working together, clarity around interactions between roles and getting used to the new process. That is also a work in progress.
I'm seeing lots of improvements on upfront, consistent improvement on pretty much a weekly basis, but it does require adjustment in how people work. And so we have to be cautious in assuming sort of immediate changes here.
And so when I kind of put this together, when I think about filling an open role and having the new salespeople having the time to ramp up, which usually takes on order of a couple of quarters, after them coming on board, should start, you should look at sort of the middle of next year as the time frame to -- for all of these changes to be in place and for the organization to be really [long]

Operator

Dan Brennan, TD Cowen.

Daniel Brennan

Maybe just on pricing in single cell, Serge, if you don't mind. There's a lot of different permeation of your products. So the thing we're trying to get a sense of is the investments that you made in price? Are they more niche? Or are they more expensive?
So is it possible to zoom out and just give us a sense, if we look back, say, a year ago, what your like price per se would be across like all your volumes, kind of where that stands today? How much have you invested in price? And now where does that gap stand today, do you think of your own price, say, versus where kind of the competition stands and do you need to further invest in price?
And then finally, like with this investment in price, do you think now like you're growing above market in line with market? Or just how do I think about your growth versus the burdensome market growth?

Serge Saxonov

Yes, Dan. So yes, good question. Unfortunately, the answer is actually somewhat complicated because there's lots of different types of experiments that our customers run. There's lots of different types of customers and different things matter to them, right? And so that's why we talked a lot about price per sample, but there's other metrics as well, like price per cell, price per experiment and price per sample in different contexts.
We are cognizant of those sort of all those different dimensions. And as we've been saying for a while, key to -- one of the keys major key to locking the single-cell market is to drive down these price barriers over time, which is what we have been doing over the course of the past year.
Certainly, the introduction of the GMX architecture earlier in the year was one step in interaction was a 10% drop in per sample pricing there, but over 50% of our tax dropping per cell pricing. We further launched this quarter, a product of GEM-X Flex that really increases the scale of as possible with single cell being able to run really, really large mega-scale experiment and also now setting a new standard for price per cell, drawing down to one cell per cell.
We've also -- we're also in the process of launching our new product (technical difficulty) multiplexing for our universal assays on GEM-X, 3 prime and 5 prime also addressing specifically addressing the for example, price getting down to under $600 a sample relative to well above 1,000 for other assays.
And so we're kind of making changes across a number of variables. And I think we're driving -- we're in a good position now to address a lot of these bottlenecks. This is not the loss of it, as we said before, or down, we do expect to drive down prices of these products further.
We -- as we've done here, we like to do it by launching new products and new configurations. And also -- this will drive the expansion of the market and that's a primary goal here. As far as market share is concerned, there has been certainly competition in single cell since sort of the beginning of these segments. This has been a competitive segment, especially a little bit in the last couple of years.
I would say there hasn't necessarily been a market change in the dynamic in the last quarter. There's maybe more aggressive presence in some of the new entrants going out to our customers, putting pressure on price creating some distractions, elongating sales cycles, adding some friction to the process.
But fundamentally, we keep hearing from our customers that they really appreciate we have the best products, the best quality, the best workflow the best breadth of applications, the best service. And so by and large, customers keep coming back to us for all those reasons.
And of course, now with all these new products that we have been releasing we are also setting new standards on price, so that customers really don't need to compromise on that front together. We -- again, we always take competition seriously. We will continue to be continuous, but we're very confident in our strategy to be able to both address competition and grow the market.

Operator

Mason Carrico, Stephens.

Mason Carrico

On the new chromium products and the pricing headwinds that are associated with them, could you just walk us through your expectations around customers converting over to these assays, how it will impact growth over the next several quarters. At what point do you think we largely lap these headwinds? And really, ultimately, is it possible we have another year of chromium revenue flat or declining? Or is your baseline expectation that volumes next year offset that pricing headwind

Serge Saxonov

Yes, I mean good question. So clearly, we are launching new products right now. And as with lower prices, the pattern that we have seen with our products with other products is that usually takes some of the time or the elasticity effects or higher volume growth of higher volumes to kick in. And compensate for the decreases in price.
So over time, and that time frame is typically three to four quarters you expect to see incremental growth in top line revenue from pricing changes because of elasticity. But in the meantime, you do expect to see some pressure on the top line. Some out of headwinds. So that's kind of -- that's how we're thinking about it.
Now again, these are products that are to kind of transition customers gradually until these new price points, but we do expect there to be some near (technical difficulty)

Operator

Puneet Souda, Leerink Partners.

Puneet Souda

Yes. Serge, wondering if you can seize the sales force and give us an idea of how many positions are still open I mean my question is, why wouldn't this take six to nine months from now to -- for the sales force challenges to normalize, you have new people coming in, new relationships need to be built plus all the challenges that you pointed out with the end market and you have new products launching into the market as well. So could you elaborate a bit on that?
And then my second part of my question is, when you look at the Xenium installs, can you clarify where they landed versus the 40 to 50 install expectation? Because clearly, that's a new product in the market. It's been gaining ground. It's one of the leading products.
Clearly, numbers of papers are growing. -- grants are growing. So -- just trying to understand what's holding that back? Is it just largely capital equipment sales force that you mentioned? Or is there anything fundamental that's happening with the spatial already at this trajectory in the trajectory of this market at this point?

Serge Saxonov

Yes, Puneet, let me take the Xenium question first here. So I mean, first of all, kind of zooming out we do -- when you look at the -- the indicators of demand, fundamentally, there's lots of interest from our current customers in doing more. When you talk to them, there's an interest in doing more in the near term. There's new customers kind of being intrigued by the technology. And there's a lot of interest in kind of looking out to scaling up significantly for the future.
The same sort of data you see in general surveys of customers in terms of the expectations of growth, you also see funding signals that are quite strong, quite robust going forward. And then also, when you look at our kind of utilization times that we have been installing that has also been quite healthy, which is also an indicator of kind of down the line demand and to bode well for future installed as our existing customers kind of drive discoveries and publish the findings and develop the market.
So we also know that CapEx environment has been particularly challenged recently, particularly on kind of higher-priced items, like Visium and as we've been saying, we are going through a major commercial transformation that in part is focused on precisely this issue is kind of creating the right focus and the right sales force to sell this kind of product.
And between those two areas, yes, that has quite a bit of pressure on our Xenium sales. This quarter certainly was a disappointment. Q3 was disappointing in that regard. But again, I don't think -- given those two factors, you really need to resort to any questions around the fundamentals for demand. We absolutely strong ability in this franchise in its potential and absolutely still see the potential to be the largest revolution in Lifesciences since NGS.

Operator

Rachel Vatnsdal, JPMorgan.

Rachel Vatnsdal Olson

Great. So I wanted to dig into spatial assumptions in the performance this quarter. So first off, can you give us placements for Xenium and Visium in 3Q? We're getting roughly 30 placements for Xenium. So is that the right ballpark for what you guys did in and then in terms of 4Q guidance, you mentioned in the prepared remarks that you're assuming spatial to be similar to what you saw in 3Q.
You're not assuming standard seasonality in that 4Q time frame. So how should we think about placements for Zenium and Visium next quarter? Are you expecting this to grow sequentially?

Adam Taich

Rachel, it's Adam here. Yes, I mean, I think you're about right as it relates to Q3 in terms of the Zenium placement number that you quoted there. And that is what we're anticipating for Q4, again. Absent -- in different macro environments, we would have anticipated a Q3 to Q4 bump from a CapEx perspective that isn't what we've factored into the current guide.
And then I think as Serge just mentioned on the prior or even one of the earlier questions, utilization perspective, we're continuing to see really nice growth. And so from a consumables standpoint, we anticipate the number will be pretty similar to where we were which would be really nice growth over prior year.

Operator

Kyle Mikson, Canaccord Genuity.

Kyle Mikson

Serge, I think you mentioned it's going to take until mid-next year for the benefits of the commercial regularization to fully take shape. How much like visibility or confidence do you have that there's going to be this like inflection point in middle of next year? -- with the CapEx and China headwinds potentially kind of abating by that time, is it fair to say you could kind of return to like revenue levels or growth rates that you're happy with by the second half of next year?

Serge Saxonov

So look, on the commercial side, I think it's fair to expect that there should be -- these time lines are pretty firm. We do have plans and we're rapidly filling in open reps and given enough time to kind of do for people to get used to working in the new environment. I think we do feel optimistic about that time frame getting through it.
In terms of -- yes, as we look to the second half of the year, that's only going to be a significant factor. As far as macro is concerned, I don't know that it would that one can say at this point that it's going to get better, right? So our baseline assumption is that macro situation is going to stay similar to what it has been so far.

Operator

Patrick Donnelly, Citi.

Patrick Donnelly

Serge, maybe just one on the expense side. I mean you guys are talking a lot about filling a lot of open spots in well into next year. And at the same time, you're talking about disciplined spending and focusing on some level of profitability -- can you just talk about, I guess, the balance between those two, where some costs are coming down, what some the hiring going up? Or is that just kind of replacing?
And then the second one is just on the competitive landscape. It seems to be coming up a little bit more tonight. Can you just talk about what you're seeing there? Is it some of the home brew stuff we've seen from some papers on over the past couple of months? Is it other players, bigger players that may be acquired smaller assets it would be helpful just to talk through what you're seeing on the competitive side?

Serge Saxonov

Yes. So on the cost side, I would emphasize, yes, on -- as we go through this commercial change, we do have a lot of open roles and we're adding headcount in those areas. But at the same time, the new structure is going to be substantially more efficient than what we had before where we had broad redundancies and oral lays and overlaps and so while there is a modest investment that we're making in terms of kind of increasing headcount, I actually expect it to be materially more efficient.
And set us up really well to grow efficiently and gain a lot of leverage, which, again, in the context of our strong balance sheet and the focus on cash management should set us up really well into next year and beyond.
As far as competition is concerned, the dynamic again hasn't changed on the spatial side, let's say, in the last quarter. We've been -- we've been doing well in winning based on the performance of our products. It's been a consistent theme this year. No issues, I don't think there's been a change in dynamic this past quarter.
On the single cell side, again, there's been more players and arguably are acting more aggressively out there. The net sales for the most part, is related to kind of the smaller companies that have been doing that. And I don't think the overall dynamic has really changed what you don't.

Operator

Michael Ryskin, Bank of America.

Michael Ryskin

I want to follow up on an earlier point talking about spatial and just some of the trends you're seeing there. And I want to drill in on the consumable side of things. I think you touched on this in some of the earlier questions, but frankly, I just want to make sure my math squares out.
So if I'm looking at our model and I'm looking at consumables revenue for spatial overall, I've got you at 26-and-change million in 1Q, 29% in 2Q, and 29.5% in 3Q. So I know you've had a number of product rollouts, both on the Visium side and on the Zenium side.
But if I look at your installed base now it's 50% higher now for Xenium instruments than it was at the end of last year. So to your comment on utilization and just sort of demand for the instruments. I can see how Xenium demand could be lower because of the macro, you still think that the consumables would have ramped up just because the installed base is higher.
So is that a matter of timing, people drawing down inventories, maybe reordering trends? Anything you can talk about? And just where I want to lead with this question is, where do you think that spatial consumables could grow next year going forward? Just looking at the trends over the last couple of quarters, it's flatlined a little bit more than we would have thought.

Serge Saxonov

Yes. So I think it's probably important to kind of ease up or sequential kind of dynamics versus year-over-year comparison. When I think about sequential, there's been kind of a number of more pieces because of the new product launches, in particular, and kind of the poles, for example, bus customers that are coming in initially and getting them and kind of getting through the polos similar sort of dynamics on Union 5K when you have an initial customer interest and -- there's always some amount of pent-up demand in the early quarters and then which comes smoothes out subsequent, which is why we kind of pointed to a good nice progress on reorder rates and kind of those dynamics on bus now coming in into play.
On the Xenium side, we're seeing kind of some of the underlying data coming through on the utilization toiletry theater gaining that looks encouraging and is showing consistent growth. So yes, the underlying dynamics are encouraging, but they will get somewhat sometimes by these kind of product launches and sequential dynamics.
I would also point to that the consumables gross entire product line were kind of -- were affected in Q3 by the same sort of commercial transformation headwinds that we saw across the board. And so you have to also take that into account. And that's why you kind of want to go back and also look at year-over-year comparison and there, you do have very encouraging trends.

Operator

Subhu Nambi, Guggenheim Securities.

Subhalaxmi Nambi

So that's the--

Serge Saxonov

Subhu, not sure it's your us, but you're not coming through clearly.

Subhalaxmi Nambi

Can you hear me now?

Serge Saxonov

Yes.

Subhalaxmi Nambi

Guys, what are the applications where you believe the cost of single cell sample prep is the biggest gating item to driving volume growth? And how would you characterize your ability to drive elasticity given that sample prep is only one component of the cost equation for users?

Serge Saxonov

Yes, I mean, good question. So in terms of why pricing be, first of all, there hasn't been a home with our customers systems almost the beginning of single-cell. And that team has been growing more and more as you talk to customers as you look existing customers, you look at what prevents them from using more when you go to surveys of potential customers that are looking to adopt single cell the number one theme and it just comes up over and over and over again is price.
It is also kind of when you look at how customers actually make decisions as to how much to allocate the single cell experiments versus others.
The decision like the marginal decision is really about price in some sense, is the inside per dollar. right? And we see this again and again, again, whether it's applied for grounds or designing less experiment. Customers have to think hard about whether to allocate the next marginal dollar to single cell or not.
In many cases, we have a strong preference to running single sole routinely on all their samples, but they end up compromising substantially allocating it only to a small production or samples in a small production, but a budget because of price. So lots and lots of evidence from sort of customer behaviour and customer feedback that price is a bit as (technical difficulty)
We've also now seen examples where in the past, in a geographically targeted way with specific customers where we have had experience of reducing prices and then seeing volumes pick up on the time line roughly as you would expect based on general experience in our space, how well it takes for people to design experiments and maybe get into small grants to do more. And we have seen consistently with experience without the three or four quarters to volume more than it takes the had been some price entry, a lot more demand and more revenue.
Now as far as kind of our part of the workflow being only a part of the overall cost equation, that is true. That said, the way the dynamic has worked over the past several years is that sequency prices have been coming down. been coming down a lot, especially recently.
And at this stage, it's really the price of our part of the workflow that largely determines the oil cost of the experiment, and that creates the opportunity for us, particularly in this moment of time to really drive into realistic.

Operator

Matthew Larew, William Blair.

Matt Larew

You mentioned that single cell volumes grew in the quarter and Proman consumables have been up sequentially in the last two quarters. Could you maybe frame for us what (technical difficulty) volume growth was in the quarter?
What it looks like year-to-date and perhaps how it compares to where you were at a year ago -- and then maybe those numbers within the context of market growth? In other words, is your volume growth starting to return to market growth.

Serge Saxonov

Well, so as far as volume growth is concerned, this is -- we're referring to here to reaction kind of reaction metric, which we share on an annual basis, and we'll share that kind of little bit when we are doing our Q4 call. We -- another sort of kind of indicator to maybe keep in mind is that you can look at the volume growth in terms of reactions, you can also look at volume growth in terms of the numbers of cells that are analysed.
And on that account because of the new products that we've been launching that can accommodate higher throughput, the actual growth in Solar has been really robust and significant as well. So again, indicating directional at least overall growth in the market and particularly robust growth when it comes to the fundamental unit of sort of analysing biology.

Operator

Matt Sykes, Goldman Sachs.

Matt Sykes

I just want to go back to the commercial changes just given the impact that you saw in this quarter. You've outlined your timing for the new hires and when they can potentially ramp their productivity? But just on the existing sales force who also saw very significant changes in their territories and accounts I guess just two quick questions. One, are you confident that they've bought into these new changes from a morale and motivation standpoint.
And two, how should we think about those existing sales folks re-ramping their productivity, given all the changes they've experienced. Do you think it will coincide with the potential time line for new hires? Or could they adapt more quickly over the next maybe two to three quarters versus sort of 6% to that line for new hires?

Serge Saxonov

Yes. So I mean, a couple of things. First of all, like we do have a lot of really, really talented people on the team. And in fact, we -- a lot of the changes that we've been making is specifically to help them unlock their full potential, right, to give them a clear focus, clear direction, so it can really, really perform in this new, much clearer, much with that simple structure. And I'm personally excited but I think a lot of people on the team are really excited about it, and we see there's a lot of positive momentum on the team.
It has been a top transition, and I do recognize and a lot of them, like I really, really appreciate strongly how much they have worked away through the transition oftentimes driving sales when they might not be come to the same extent that they would have been in the past that we're making sure that the customer is really, really served well despite like not knowing precisely how the new structure is going to settle them.
And going forward, different people are going to be adopting different parts of the organization on different time frames. I do think some people are already on a really, really kind of good trajectory and operating really well. Other people will take a bit longer to adopt. But ultimately, the bottom line is that, yes, as expected by -- by the middle of next year, the whole team will be in a really good shape and working very well together, executing and driving.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.