Robin Farley : Okay. Great. So you understand you’re not guiding for Q3, but you’re definitely not saying that it can’t be above yield in ’19, right? I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. And then also just wanted to — you talked about your price being higher for the year, and in the release, you give the expression that like adjusted for FCC discounts. I think elsewhere, you said pricing per diems will be up 3% to 4% for ’23 versus ’19. When you say that pricing will be adjusted for FCC, are you suggesting that if you include the FCC discount in that, that you would not be above ’19? Because I would think that FCC discount would only be a percentage point or so. So I’m just wondering why you’re sort of calling out that it’s higher if you adjust for the FCC? In other words, I don’t know if I’m asking…
Josh Weinstein : Yes. No problem, Robin. Just to be clear, we are projecting net per diems up 3% to 4% for the year, and that’s inclusive of FCC drag. So without that drag, it would be even higher.
David Bernstein : It would be up either way. We just — we’ve been calling that out every quarter going after the last couple of years. So I guess we continue to call it out, but it’d be up either way.
Robin Farley : And is the FCC drag, is that right thinking that it would only be about 1% — somewhere in the 1% range or…
David Bernstein : Yes, 1% on total net yields for the year. A little bit higher in the first half and a little bit lower in the second half.
Robin Farley : Okay. Great. And then by next year, by ’24, is it fair to assume that there wouldn’t be any FCC use after ’23?
David Bernstein : Less than 0.1 point. It’s minimal. It’s just a few left over.
Operator: Next question from the line of Ben Chaiken with Credit Suisse.
Ben Chaiken : On the last couple of calls and this one, you’ve spoken about higher advertising expense. Are you able to ballpark either on net cruise cost, basis points or absolute dollars, what this incremental spend is? And then is it the right run rate? Or does it normalize in the future? And then I’ve got one quick follow-up.
David Bernstein : Yes. So the net — on a net cruise cost basis, it’s about versus 2019, 1.5 points, of net cruise cost increase. And as far as the run rate is concerned, Josh?
Josh Weinstein : Yes. So we’re up 1.5 points, which means we’re still spending less than others in the cruise space on a per ALBD basis. We’re very pleased with the results because by very nature, we can throttle up and throttle back. We can literally take it quarter-by-quarter and work with the brands to understand what’s working and what’s not, some things. Frankly, didn’t work as well as we had hoped. And so the brands have stopped doing it and they’re leaning into other things. So it will be pretty fluid as what it should be. But what I can tell you, if you take a step back and you think about the results that we’ve experienced really over the last six months and accentuated over the last quarter, we think that’s a significant tailwind for what the brands have been able to achieve.
Ben Chaiken : Understood. And then on the last call, you provided a fuel FX impact for 1Q relative to ’19. You said it was 150 million. I think subsequent to that, it kind of moved to 181 million. What does it look like for 2Q at the moment? And then any color on 3Q, 4Q?
David Bernstein : So let me get the detailed numbers for you. You’re talking about versus 2019?
Ben Chaiken : Yes. On the last call, you mentioned that — you mentioned on the 4Q call, for 1Q, you said there’d be $150 million headwind relative to 1Q ’19 for FX and fuel.
David Bernstein : Yes. Okay.
Ben Chaiken : I’m saying what does that look like for 2Q at the moment? And then what — any color on 3Q, 4Q would be very helpful as well.
David Bernstein : So Q2 would be about $75 million of fuel and currency headwinds. I don’t have Q3 and Q4, but I can give you the full year. Let’s see. For the full year, fuel and currency is — let’s see, it’s $430 million, call it.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Brandt Montour.
Brandt Montour : So just starting with yields, the fleet overhaul that you guys did in during the pandemic hypothetically would have a large positive mixed impact for net yields now versus ’19. It’s a little hard to see that in your guidance, but there’s plenty of residual drag in ’23 and obviously much of the book was put in place before the advertising push, right, in last year. So I guess when you adjust out all of the drags that you have this year and maybe take out Australia and Asia and Eastern Europe, are you seeing — do you feel like you’re seeing a tailwind — a material tailwind from that overhaul?
Josh Weinstein: So, the answer is yes, we do. And one of the difficulties of looking at a four-year period and trying to piece together everything that builds up to where we are, I mean there’s a lot that’s happened over a four-year period. You think about, when you just say exclude Asia and exclude Australia’s restart and then exclude St. Petersburg, and which was 7.5% of our business in 2019 Q3, there’s quite a lot that we have overcome in order to be able to deliver higher per diems as we get to close the gap. So, we can probably banter you and I, I see you enough Brandt, we can banter about all the bits and pieces that go in different directions, but I think we’ve tried to boil it down to what we think are the real drivers of the business.
