Ryan Daniels: Okay. That’s very helpful. And then as my follow-up, this one is for John. As you discussed your 4-pillar playbook, one of the things you mentioned, and you discussed this in the Q&A already, is optimizing rebate dollars across benefits. And I think in the context of lower potential MA rate increases for 2024, that becomes even more important. So I’m curious just how you think about that maybe specific opportunities there, especially given what might be lower rebate dollars given the rate outlook for ’24. Kind of what is the organization really focused on there? Is it going to differ market by market? Or are there certain benefits that you really want to push the pedal on because you’ve seen more engagement with consumers, et cetera? Would love some color there.
John Kao: Ryan, of course, great question as usual. I think just the general increase in standards across the board from CMS on star ratings — in terms of increased cut points, in terms of reimbursement — I actually think it will be a strategic advantage to us in the long term. And we’ve kind of reiterated that theme for many of you, and the company was built on ensuring that we had high quality at a low cost. And that ultimately will be the formula for the highest value creation for consumers. I think that given some of the — kind of the — call it, COVID-related artificial metrics in stars — the past several years and some of the reimbursement for the past several years, I don’t think we’re sustainable. I think it’s going to — the market is going to start rationalizing to our favor.
That’s what I think. And again, have this kind of sustainable benefit design, sustainable coverages, sustainable supplemental benefits and some of the crazy stuff that we’ve seen is not going to be sustainable. And I think the tightening is going to be impacting people that have been relying on some of those short-term subsidies, so to speak. So I think that we’re waiting — we’re all waiting for the final notice. And I think it’s going to be a really interesting bid cycle this year. I think it’s going to be a lot of strategy with respect to how aggressive people are going to be in sustaining those rebate dollars and the benefits, how much people are going to pull back. But at the end of the day, if you got the best cost structure, you ought to be in the best position to still add the most value.
And you can combine that thought with Whit’s question, you say, we just — we got to continue to get better in stars. We got to get — continue to get better in — MLR, medical management. And we’re good. I’m not saying we’re not good. We’re good. We just have to get better. That’s what’s going to drive that incremental rebate value to consumers. And I think a lot of these artificial kind of engineering strategies are going to go by the wayside.
Ryan Daniels: And I think your color on using AVA and the results you’re achieving, not only in existing markets but new markets, is a pretty powerful testament of how you can do that.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Michael Ha of Morgan Stanley.
Michael Ha: And maybe just to come back on the last question, piggybacking off of that one. And the advance rate notice, slightly lower than expected. And I just wanted to expand on your thoughts on competitive positioning into ’24 because like you said, my thinking is — when other MA plan may need to slow down or toggle down their benefit to mitigate potential MA rate pressure, this — I feel like this presents a golden opportunity for the higher-quality MA plan to thrive in. So your superior star rating care delivery model, do you think that presents a stronger possibility for alignment to in ’24 perhaps to gain market share, see outsized growth? And just general thoughts around that or expanded thoughts on that?
