Scott Wells: Sure. Thanks, Jonathan. We spent a lot of time in our Q1 call trying to explain what happened in Airports. And I think that I’ll just reiterate it just to be clear. We had a very large campaign move from Q1 to later in the year. And part of what you’re seeing and the strength in Q2 and in our outlook is the benefit of that campaign running through. And that had dropped late enough — that decision had drop late enough that we were not able to backfill because it was a very substantial contract. And so you’re seeing that play out. Airports has a relatively long lead time going into it. It varies by location. It varies by campaign. But people tend to plan fairly well in advance and buy fairly well in advance. And so the guide that we are sharing with you reflects our up-to-the-minute view of that.
And we will see the tailwind of LaGuardia coming online abate as the year goes. And as we get into 2024, the tailwind from Newark coming online will abate. There is still more build-out activity and things like that, and we’ll have the normal puts and takes on contracts. But the New York airports really do exercise a differential impact. And what — the guide that we provide is what we feel very good about as of today.
Jonnathan Navarrete: Okay. Follow-up is on just Latin America. In terms of timing and investing in this asset, how are you thinking about that? Or would you prefer to complete the Europe strategic review first and then focus on Latin America?
Scott Wells: I think, we are, as Brian said, always looking at the market and always looking at where the opportunity is. While there’ll be some overlap in the resources we need to run a process, it wouldn’t be 100%. So it’s not impossible for us to do that. But I think we need to work the timing on that as the market conditions put us in position for that to make sense. I think that’s how I’d characterize it.
Jonnathan Navarrete: Okay. And the last one, and again, perhaps I’m reading too much into the language in the release, but when you guys describe Switzerland, Spain, Italy, to you guys describe it as – sell [ph] right. Whereas for the French business, you guys used the word divest. So I’m just wondering like can this – can this be code for like we’re not expecting any proceeds for the France business or am I reading too much into it?
Scott Wells: I think its code for we’re not done because we are in the midst of the works council review. We’re not done with the process. But I think we have been clear that our expectation is it would be a closure in Q4, presuming that, that works council process goes well. And I think we have to honor that process. And so there’s – we’re not really able to give a lot of detail on the terms at this point.
Jonnathan Navarrete: Okay. Thank you.
Scott Wells: Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from Jim Goss from Barrington Research. Jim, your line is now open. Please proceed.
Jim Goss: Thank you. And I was curious to the extent that Clear Channel would like to be a U.S.-focused operation, but the Northern European operations are doing fairly well. Is there any potential consideration of spinning that off as a separate company rather than selling them individually? And I do have a couple of others.
Scott Wells: Sure, Jim. I mean, I think when we talk about a strategic review, implicit in that is that we’re going to look for the highest and best use for any asset that we’re thinking about separating from. That is not – that’s not a structuring thing or an avenue that I’m in any position to speculate on right now. But as we highlighted in their LTM financials, this is a business that is a business that can sustain itself or we believe can sustain itself. And that would be a possible avenue if that seems like that was the value maximizing avenue, but I can’t really comment on it beyond that.
