Nate Jorgensen: Yes, Kurt, it’s Nate. Just maybe the other thing to think about is, as we described in our opening remarks is that, I think, as a channel in the marketplace continues to work its way through the year-end, and it’s early next year, I think, the importance of the dependence on out-of-warehouse support continues to be high, unit business, job packs and pieces. So as you think about margin profile and EBITDA margin for that segment – for those services are generally a little bit higher as compared to the direct. So I think that’s probably the other component to think about is that mix of direct versus to warehouse. We like both, obviously. And obviously, given where we are at this time of year, seasonality, that out-of-warehouse component strengthens and we’re well positioned to support that.
Kurt Yinger: Got it. And is that out-of-warehouse mix, do you almost think that’s kind of countercyclical to where in a weaker environment, people are more closely managing those inventories and more relying on you guys versus feeling great about the end markets and that’s less of a requirement. So, in a softer demand backdrop, that’s actually kind of a maybe a tail – continues to be a tailwind on the margin side?
Nate Jorgensen: Yes, I think so. I think you said it well. I think people say look at risk reward, both on demand and as well as on realizations pricing, I think, that the dependence and importance of two-step distribution remains very high. Probably the other component that, I think, we’re excited about is we think about, especially from some of our general line partners as they introduce new products and services generally, there’s – that is a bit of a transition in terms of people getting new SKUs. And I think in terms of the growth opportunity, that represents, again, I think, a margin opportunity for us largely based upon customers wanting to again be served and supported on units, and job packs and pieces versus on a truckload kind of direct basis.
Kurt Yinger: Got it. Okay. Thanks for that Nate. And then just on the wood products cost side, I mean I imagine web stock costs could be a bit of a headwind as higher OSB prices flow through. But we’ve also seen a fair amount of pressure on Western log prices? So, how do you see those kind of items coming together in Q4? And where does that set you up at least at this stage going into next year?
Mike Brown: Yes, Kurt, it’s Mike. So I think you are correct around web stock costs. And as I think I’ve mentioned previously, the way we cost our web stock into the finished product is not on a spot basis. We use a 13-week rolling average. So, there is some buffering to the ups and downs that occur on the indices that you see every week. So, clearly, over time, if the trend is up, then there is a bit of an impact, but it’s not a tremendous impact immediately. As it relates to log costs, I think, that’s a geographical issue more than anything else. I would tend to say that the log cost profile in the Southeastern United States in general is sort of flat, so flat to flat. And then in the Pacific Northwest, we’ve had some ups and downs of recent times, it’s been on the way down, and you can see that in our data.
I would say that generally speaking, between now and the end of the year, we’re in a very good position in terms of availability of logs. So, we’re not concerned about that. But at the same time, there has been a bit more pressure in general because of the lack of availability, particularly from federal lands. And so as I’ll say the industry looks to put itself in a position to be able to have logs available we’ve spent a few extra dollars for buying logs that would be available over the longer term, a bit higher than the average that you see on a quarterly basis. But at the moment, I think, you are very well aware that log costs have come down. And at least between now and the end of the year, we don’t see any massive increases coming on log costs in the West.
