George Staphos: Thanks, Mike. I appreciate the color on that. And then my next question is around guidance. And to some degree, you’ve already covered this with the overarching organic revenue trend commentary. But looking at some of the industry data that we received recently, there had seemed to be a fairly sharp drop-off in foodservice and bleached late in 2Q. If I heard you correctly, and I think it was answering Mark’s question, you said the low watermark was in May. So can you sort of help us square that circle if, in fact, those trends were what you saw in the market as a whole? And then relatedly on guidance, you took the price cost guidance up. Pricing doesn’t seem like it’s heading higher from an index standpoint. So is that more the resets or is that cost that’s been trending more favorably for you relative to your last commentary? Thanks and good luck in the quarter.
Mike Doss: Thanks, George. I’ll take the first part of that. So specifically in the month of June, we had a very long outage at our Augusta mill, which really had a big impact on the numbers that you saw. So that’s a pretty simple explanation in terms of kind of the quarterly cadence of that, and I’ll let Steve take the second part of the question.
Steve Scherger: Yes. On price/cost, George, the $200 million improvement there, two things. One is exactly what Mike talked about earlier. We continue to have very good outcomes from a commercial excellence perspective on overall net framing now moving into the $500 million to $600 million range for the year with a continuation of some positive pricing here in the second half of the year. And then as we’ve talked before, the mark-to-market on commodity input costs have been at the low end of our earlier estimated range. We’ve now moved them down into that range such that the relationship on price cost is up $200 million and consistent with our prior conversations. And if you do the second half of the year, in the second half, we still have positive price cost, some continued positive price execution and then a very benign inflationary environment, roughly zero at the midpoint.
And so that, as Michael was talking earlier, kind of then starts to transit into 2024 with both of those categories being reasonably in it kind of March out of ‘23 and on between the 2024 on a mark-to-market type basis.
George Staphos: Thanks very much, Steve.
Steve Scherger: You bet, George.
Operator: Our next question comes from Mike Roxland with Truist Securities. Your line is open.
Mike Roxland: Thank you, Mike, Steve, Melanie. Can you just talk about how you weigh economic downtime against maybe pulling forward some of the closures that you have planned for your mill system in terms of like Middletown, Angus – at East Angus excuse me?
Mike Doss: Yes, I’m happy to take that, Michael. I mean, as you can appreciate, like in Kalamazoo, what we would do is we would run K2 and we run K1 and we do a win outage on K3. It’s the highest cost machine you saw it there. And so that actually is how we actually look at that if we don’t have the demand for what we’re capable of producing there. The other action we talk, as you know, as we announced at the last earnings call and through the quarter, we took down the same mill. So it’s another 80,000 tons came out of the market. So we’ve been pretty aggressive in terms of how we are moving to match our supply and our demand.
Mike Roxland: No, thank you, Mike. But just in terms of if you’re now in a more challenging environment where the demand is not there for CRB or for some of the other substrate, why not move those – why not move to close Middletown or East Angus sooner rather than later?
Mike Doss: Yes. Well, our forwards would suggest we’re going to need those tons for growth. But you’re right, if something was to change, we obviously have those levers that we can pull.
