Chris Winfrey: Sure. In broadband, our fundamental view hasn’t changed that in the long term, keeping your prices as low as you can both enhances your ability to grow, and that’s still our long-term objective, it reduces churn, and it reduces the likelihood that somebody views you as an attractive overbuilt candidate. So, our fundamental views haven’t changed. Having said that, we’ve had inflationary pressures, and we’ve been passing that through to the best of our ability. To the extent that our pricing is lower and it is for the most part across the industry, I view that as a positive long-term capacity question and from an ability to grow. But it doesn’t mean that we’re immune to inflation. It doesn’t mean that we’re not willing to pass-through increases as we need to.
And there’s a balance here as well that in an environment where we’re investing so much into expansion and making sure that we do maintain EBITDA growth rate so that we can keep that engine going, it matters to us and it matters to our shareholders, and we’re focused on that in parallel. So, there’s a balance that’s taking place. And I think we’re in a not only in a good position overall, but I think a very good relative position. In terms of the overall market, you’ve seen different operators across the sector moving their prices up over time as well. And I think that demonstrates that there’s real value to the product, and there’s a need to recover cost along the way. It’s a capital-intensive business. And then, your last question on — John, is mobile churn.
The contribution of mobile to the broadband business, the biggest factor so far as you highlighted really has been a significant and a very material amount of churn reduction that takes place on those customers who attach mobile, as I mentioned, it’s only 13% of our base today. And I’d offer you two pieces. One is on the positive side, it is dramatic, the churn reduction. On the — just to be balanced, there’s still self-selection that exists inside that base. So, I want to be careful that we don’t overplay the benefit there on what’s still a relatively small portion of our Internet base and growing and has big upside. The new connects, those new Internet connects who take mobile, a percentage of our mobile acquisition mix that comes from new customers has risen over the years.
Is that because we do a better job of selling it to call center and attaching or is it because mobile is actually driving gross adds? In this environment, we have so many different moving parts. I’m not comfortable telling you that it’s been a big driver as of yet of new sales. But I think that’s the opportunity, not only for churn reduction, but as convergence continues to take hold as these products work together in a way that our competitors can’t replicate, the ability to use Spectrum One, a combination of broadband, Internet, WiFi and 5G is our backup radio. It’s the slowest portion of our network, and have the fastest overall connectivity service and seamless connectivity, I think, it’s powerful. And I think it has the ability not just to reduce churn, which it’s already doing today, but to actually drive acquisition over time.
And so, we’re early on, but still very exciting.
John Hodulik: Okay. Thank you.
Stefan Anninger: Thanks, John. Luke, we’ll take our next question, please. Thanks. Luke?
Operator: Our next question will come from the line of Peter Supino with Wolfe Research. Your line is now open.
Peter Supino: Good morning. I have a couple of questions on the subject of growth investment. Slide 11 discusses cost per core passing in your forecast of $2,000 to $2,500 and that struck me as high relative to historical core passings and even relative to fiber expansion. So, I wanted to see what you could share about your assumptions for penetration and ARPU in that footprint. And then, on a related note, again, on core growth investment, but moving over to BEAD, we’ve seen big increases over the last couple of years since the money for BEAD was allocated in the availability and uptake of fixed wireless services over midband. We expect more increases in the availability of LEO satellite services, not just Starlink, but Amazon’s product. And so, I’m wondering if your outlook for penetration in that potential BEAD footprint is moderating and if that affects your appetite at all. Thank you.
Jessica Fischer: Yeah. So, I’ll start on the cost per passing question. What you see there is related to the mix between commercial and even enterprise passings and residential passing. So, the cost per resi passing that lives inside of that is closer to $1,500. What’s happening is that there are, I’m going to say, a smaller number, but a larger dollar amount of commercial passings that are included in the mix that drive the average cost per passing to be a little bit higher. And we’re just trying to give enough information there to get you to a reasonable passings estimate so that — so you can model off of that what gains you would generate from the build.
Chris Winfrey: And then, in terms of the penetration, Peter, there’s very different types of build that sits in there. I mean, serviceability, which is where a customer calls us effectively for a one-off or two or three additional line extensions, the penetration on that is 85%, as it should be. And other areas where greenfield or market fill-in where penetrations can range anywhere between 45% and 70%, at a lower cost per passing, as Jessica highlighted, than some of the other extension build that we do. So, the returns are very, very attractive. They always have been. There’s nothing really new there. And somewhat tied to that, you asked about our views on penetration generally, but in the context of BEAD with fixed wireless access or low Earth orbit satellite, LEO.
