Juho Parkkinen: Okay. Good question. So I’d have to — I think we need to look at your model effort. But the short answer is that we disclose both in our release and the Q and the supplement, the Baker Hughes RPO, the RPO is $188.5 million. So we’ve got to maybe check on offline as to what does that mean for your model. As it relates to the results in the quarter on the face of the income statement, we showed a related party amount for Baker Hughes this quarter was $28.9 million.
Michael Turits: Okay. Great. And does it extend the amount of time? I think you said it extended the dollar amount maybe I missed it, but is it extending the period over which it’s being paid also so adding through the same length?
Juho Parkkinen: Actually, one of the really exciting seas part of this extended agreement is that we accelerated the payment schedules. So we’re actually collecting cash faster from Baker Hughes. And then as it relates to the transaction price, so the accounting transaction price increased by $32.5 million because the variable consideration was eliminated as part of the expansion deal.
Tom Siebel: And I think it might have — I might be in a source of a little bit confusion there, Michael. Another term of it is they have a unilateral option to extend the agreement, okay, should they choose to do so. That doesn’t mean to extend the period of the payment terms. That means add more years to the agreement for pre-existing predetermined amounts of cash.
Operator: Thank you and one moment for our next question. And our next question comes from the line of Sanjit Singh with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Sanjit Singh: So, if I take the comments from Tom in his script and Tom’s like notable that you are speaking to a better demand environment and I think the rest of software is still pretty gloomy. And then I sort of Juho’s comments around the consumption actual versus predicted sort of coming in line with what you thought, I try to put these pieces together revenue is declining year-over-year right now, obviously, because the business model is going through some transition. And so I guess the big question is, what — where does revenue growth go to? I know you guys still have another quarter to go before your Q4, but The Street is sort of expecting 20% revenue growth. Is that something that seems achievable from your line of sight and more optimistic view? Is it something better than that, below that? I’m just trying to understand like where the business is.
Tom Siebel: Juho will this Sanjit, but just for the record, if I’m not mistaken, our revenue for fiscal year ’23 will be greater than fiscal year ’22, not less. Okay? So year-over-year our revenue will increase, not decrease. So, I just want there to be any misunderstanding about the listing. Juho, why don’t you take the rest of it?
Juho Parkkinen: Yes, of course, yes. So thanks, Sanjit. The — let me try to recap your question. So first of all, as Tom mentioned that the annual guide would be a year-over-year increase on the total annual results. And then on the quarterly basis, yes, we’re seeing very promising signs that our model assumptions are good. We’re seeing actual results that are at the model or even better. And previously, we have provided some really early onset outlook that 24% would be around 30% growth. I know that the Street expects around 20% growth, I’d say that it’s achievable at least to what the Street is saying and we certainly are interest — we certainly are targeting a higher growth so our model actuates as we plan it to actually.
