Brian McKeon: Yes, so good morning. Thanks for your question. On the pricing front, first, I just want to reinforce we have a consistent outlook for the second half of 2023 for 6% to 7% overall net price improvement related to CAG diagnostic recurring revenues. We’re not prepared to share our plans for 2024. What I would note is that we’ll have, as we’ve had in the past, a very thoughtful approach that’s aligned with long-term sector development in the value that we deliver through our solutions and our innovations, and we’ll evaluate and incorporate inflationary dynamics as part of that approach as we get closer to next year.
Jay Mazelsky: Yes, just a couple of words about pricing. To Brian’s point, from a philosophical standpoint, we want to make sure we continue to deliver really strong value. And we think that our pricing reflects the fact that we continue to do that. We see really very high retention levels in our business. We see an increase in adoption and utilization. So from the standpoint of, I think, customer receptivity, we think our pricing is appropriate given the circumstances. If you think about our latest baby release and reference labs, it’s a great example of how we add value that we’re increasing the menu. 2 million patients on a global basis, annual global basis are going to benefit from this. We’re not increasing the price of those panels.
I think it’s just a great example of how we try to keep that value equation appropriately aligned to what our customers need. In terms of corporate versus independent practices, a couple of dynamics to keep in mind. Largely, we don’t see big differences, obviously there’s differences in things like the size of the practice, corporate practices tend to be a bit larger. There are more specialty practices owned by corporates. They’re focused, I think, increasingly on growth. We’ve seen nice interest, not just in our solutions, like in-clinic premium analyzers, but also software solutions, as they really try to operate the businesses in a more standardized way. They’re interested in the same type of diagnostic solutions that independent practices are.
We see a lot of interest in things like preventive care, for example, because it’s a great way of, I think, continuing to engage pet owners and clients, really uncover, I think, a disease that may be otherwise subclinical or hidden that drives the medical services’ envelopes. Very similar profiles between the two with some small differences that I just mentioned.
Unidentified Analyst: Thank you so much.
Operator: We’ll move to our next question from Michael Ryskin with Bank of America. The floor is yours.
Michael Ryskin: Great, thanks for taking the question. Two quick ones for me. First, could you expand a little bit on what you saw in a quarter between wellness and clinical and especially as it touches on preventive care in the United States? Just wondering if you’re starting to see, or if you are seeing any separation there, just given the price increases between last year and this year, and just thinking about wellness to spend, consumer sensitivity, if you’re seeing any impact on demand from that side of things. And then have a follow up.
Jay Mazelsky: Yes, good morning, Mike. It’s not unusual to see some variability in a given quarter between wellness and let’s say non-wellness or sick patient visits. When you take a look at Q2, on a two-year basis, they were very similar growth profiles between the two. So it’s small things that can account for some variability, whether more people are traveling, whether, what have you. What we tend to look at is we tend to look at those diagnostic parameters or menu that are used in wellness areas like 40x plus, for example. And that was very strong growth. So we really haven’t seen any drop-off.
