Joey Levin: Okay. So first question, Dan, it is – this is so far a win-win, meaning when we are matching homeowners with more service professionals, we are driving homeowner satisfaction, meaning Net Promoter Score and we think, ultimately, repeat rate. And we have been seeing ROI for pros increase. And while we can’t measure this exactly, our thesis on this is more jobs are getting done on the platform as opposed to off platform. So while there may be more competition within our platform, meaning if we were previously matching with less than one, and now we’re matching with more than one, I think monetized transactions per SR was 1.27 in the last quarter. While we’re matching with more and there is, therefore, more competition.
We think more of that is staying in our platform as opposed to the kind of unknown competition, for that same job that was previously happening off platform. So, we want to keep driving that number up, and we want to keep giving both homeowners and pros a better chance of success on the platform. And we can see that play out in the numbers so far. So that is – that balance that you’re asking about is we want to continue pushing it up. We can’t push it up forever, but we want to continue pushing it up, because we think it’s a win for all on the platform. In terms of verticals, the short answer to your question, I think, is no. But again, the things that we’re trying to do are focused on certain user paths and user experiences. So where a user comes in from and then what we do with that user as they move through our ecosystem.
And that’s kind of how we’re organized is thinking about each of those paths into our ecosystem and making sure they deliver a winning consumer experience and a winning pro experience. And a lot of that, as you’ve seen in our revenue, is modifying those experiences, to reduce some revenue. But we are – as I say, if we want to talk about a region confident, Europe did that, and Europe has had real success. So that’s the path in the U.S.
Christopher Halpin: Dan, thanks for the question on margins. You can see the scale in our margin structure by the incremental margins across ’23 and particularly in Q4 of ’23, where we were at basically 90% incremental adjusted EBITDA margins on digital. For ’24, if you think about it as 10% plus, but just for simplicity, say 10% digital revenue growth that, would be $89 million of incremental revenue. If you pick the midpoint of the $280 million to $300 million adjusted EBITDA guidance and you said that is equivalent to digital EBITDA, you’re talking about $47 million of adjusted EBITDA uplift. So there, you have north of 50% incremental margins. Our investments in cost in digital are really content, especially video, which is performing well for us.
And frankly, our partners want more video out of our brands, also performance marketing and then investments in D/Cipher. And we can fund those in part through reallocation of costs from historical activities that are less strategic. So, we feel pretty good about our ability to continue to manage our cost structure and feel good about incremental margins. We’ve said, we expect 50% to 60% incremental digital EBITDA – adjusted EBITDA margins in this business. And we may be able to do better, but we also want to keep the growth momentum going.
Daniel Kurnos: Thanks guys, appreciate it.
Christopher Halpin: Thank you, operator. Next question.
Operator: The next question comes from Eric Sheridan with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.
Eric Sheridan: Thanks so much for taking the questions. Maybe two, if I could. First, just following-up on John’s question earlier around Dotdash Meredith. In the letter, you talked about the aspects of the business through the lens of premium programmatic and performance marketing. Can you talk us through some of the key learnings from 2023, and how you’re thinking about the opportunity set through those three prisms for the business, looking out to 2024 and beyond? And then second, turning to Angi, you talked in the letter about transacting SPs declining, but improving from a second derivative standpoint, and you’re still shrinking the sales force. Can you talk about the balance between driving efficiency and return in the sales force and aiming that towards the optimized level of service provider growth? Thank you.
Joey Levin: Yes. I’ll do the last one first before I forget it. This is – so we – you’re right, we have been reducing the size of the sales force over the last 18 months. And the main thing is driving our productivity by eliminating unproductive calls. I think we were making a lot of phone calls to a lot of pros that in the end didn’t really make economic sense. So, we’ve cut back on that meaningfully. That is a driver of the retention gains that we’ve seen, and that’s a driver of the efficiency gains that we’ve seen, too. We’re also prioritizing prospects more smartly now. So, we have data. We built a system last year to deploy against this. We have data now to rate prospects that we call and make sure that we’re focusing the effort of the sales on the best prospects that are most likely to impact our business for the better.
Meaning most likely to stick with our platform, and most likely to get jobs done well for our homeowners. That’s also the type of offer we’re pushing to our sales force. We’re focused on higher commitment offers that – we’ve known this for a long time, but I think there was a period where we deviated from it. But we really have to give pros a chance to succeed. And so that means getting them to a higher commitment, so that they can see enough volume through our platform to see the positive ROI. That’s a little bit harder in the beginning, because you’re not going to make as many sales, but it’s long-term better, because those sales are going to be more valuable, and those pros have a better chance of succeeding with the platform. I think those are the big ones on the sales force.
