Michael Cherny: Hi! Good afternoon, and thanks for taking the question. If I can dive in a little bit more, when you think about as we move past the analyzation on the grocer side, how do you think about the implied revenue per MAC that you’re seeing in the model and especially given what appears to be as you’ve said, a strong kick off with Express Scripts, how much of that revenue per MAC and what we should think going forward, as well as some of the dynamics you have on the direct contracting gets adjusted as some of the contracts that you’re bringing to market would express with the direct pharmacies evolved and become a bigger piece of the total revenue pie.
Trevor Bezdek : Sure. Thanks for the question. I think there are a couple of pieces in that. Sort of revenue per MAC generally as well as revenue per MAC and the impact on it are some of the things that we’re doing, including for example, the ESI Cigna initiative that Doug talked about. I think taking those in reverse order, first of all the ESI Cigna initiative, that business looks much like our traditional business does from our side and from a revenue per MAC perspective. Meaning, it flows through our existing business model and marketplace associated with all the PBMs we have in our backline. So the revenue per MAC and our ability to generate revenue off that looks identical in all material ways to our normal business. I think what it really does for us is it creates an incredibly, very obliged and efficient way to have incremental distribution, particularly into as Doug reference in the prepared remarks, the 70% of consumers who aren’t actually aware that prescription prices might vary widely and that they could save money on them.
So massively SAM expanding is a portion of the TAM. Since those sources automatically benefit from GoodRx and we automatically pick up revenue. So from a PTR per MAC perspective, we get more max that way. Those max in terms of the amount of the amount of PTR they generate. It’s a little early as Doug said, to speculate on exactly how that will look relative to other max, but early signs are clearly promising. With respect to PTR per MAC more generally, as everyone’s probably calculated on this call, we’ve seen that flux a little bit, particularly associated with the impact of the grocer issue last year. There is a slight over index of the €“ indexing of the amount of volume per MAC at the grocer versus other places, in part because the grocer’s pricing was lower.
So because of that you saw some volatility during the year 2022 in particular. We could see some continued modeled declines as a percentage or in dollar terms on PTR per MAC, but we’re not seeing any or anticipating any non-linearities there at all.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. It will come from the line of Craig Hettenbach with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.
Craig Hettenbach: Yes, thank you. I had a question just on top of the funnel conversion, just as you look to get deeper with consumers, any update there? And then a longer term question on just getting back to 30% plus type EBITDA margins and how you’re thinking about whether it’s the revenue growth you’ll need to get back to or any other operational efficiencies that might help you get there over time.
Trevor Bezdek: Thank you for the question. One of the areas that we have optimized is sales and marketing. We’ve been very focused this year as we talked about on prioritizing sufficient growth and margin expansion, and we’ve made significant progress there. Sales and marketing is one of those areas, we have found a lot of ways to optimize that. The other area I think we’d like to talk about briefly is engagement, you know that’s another piece of that. And so I’ll have Doug speak to that and then I’ll have Karsten to answer the last part of your question.
