Craig Pommells: So in the back half of the year, we are carrying about 10% less coverage than we did last year at this time. And that’s a function of the — while spot market prices are coming down, but the spot market’s a little different from your contracted price. And because the spot market is coming down, it’s coming down off of highs. So as a result of all of that, we have not — it hasn’t seemed prudent to us to lock in to the degree that we have traditionally. So there are — and that really extends across a variety of areas of our market basket. So less coverage than normal but the rationale behind that is spot market is coming down, but it’s still high. And there is a lot of risk aversion with the suppliers. They do not want to provide a degree of coverage at the premium that they traditionally would.
So that math is starting to change but it hasn’t changed as yet. So I would say, as you know, we carry a fairly broad market basket in terms of our concentration in different areas. And there is exposure, that exposure to market forces is higher than it’s been really across most of those. We do have fair amount of coverage, but less than we normally would. We also have some formula prices out there, and those formulas have some exposure. So it’s probably not as black and white as an answer as you would like. So more exposure than normal, but the underlying environment is also starting to look more favorable from a commodities perspective.
Jake Bartlett: Great. And then last question. Within COGS, there’s been — for the last four quarters, there’s been a big bad guy in there, something that’s causing your COGS to be higher. So if I look at in the second quarter, 9% price, 12.5% commodities, there was more pressure on COGS. Basically, there’s kind of an unspoken for kind of 3.9% “inflation.” So it’s been a bad guy. I think there’s freight in there, mix. Does that switch to become a good tailwind in the next couple of quarters as that — as some of those normalize? Is that how we should think about it?
Craig Pommells: Yes, we had about roughly 60 bps of menu mix and that menu mix is coming from some of the work that we’ve done to really provide guests more options to upgrade. And those have come with a higher check in the form of mix, but it’s also come with a higher COGS percent. So it’s margin favorable but the cost percent has increased as a result. And as you noted, we started seeing that play out to some degree in about Q3 of last year and it got increased a little bit further in Q4 of last year. So we’ll be comping on that. I do not anticipate a major tailwind in that regard. But I also do not anticipate the headwind to the same degree. But having said all of that, really, we are providing a — we continue to give guests flexibility in terms of how they choose to use us, and we’re keeping our lower entry price points.
And to the degree that guests opt into things that have a higher price. Those items typically come with a higher cost of goods sold, that’s fairly normal. So to the degree that, that continues to happen, I wouldn’t be surprised that, that is a COGS headwind but as of this point, as you noted, we will be comping over when that started in Q3.
Jake Bartlett: Great. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from Andrew Wolf with CL King. Please go ahead.
