Wade Miquelon: Probably, if I had to just kind of swag it, I’d probably say about 30% to 40% is kind of macro. These are those spot markets moving. It doesn’t mean it’s just going to hand it to you. There’s still a lot of work — and then even on the COGS side, right, why you’ve got input cost and other things moving. There’s a lot of work to do there to open up new bidding sources. So that probably you might have your own math. But I probably would say 40% kind of macro, 60% heavier lifting than that.
Scott Sekella: Yes. I would agree. This is Scott. I would agree with the 40%. A big chunk of this is going to come from the product cost side, which is a lot of individual negotiations and discussions as well as just attacking our cost structure overall.
Laura Champine: And is it fair to say that those cost cuts at this point, you don’t expect those to lead to lower pricing?
Wade Miquelon: I mean we are separating the two. I think right now, we feel that we’ve been — we are pretty competitive out there in terms of our offers and we make adjustments where it need to be, but I don’t feel right now that we feel that we are not competitive. So I really kind of separate A from B. We have incurred over the past 2 years on an annualized basis over $200 million of incremental costs, if you add it up. And now at least relative to our business, all the kind of core underpinnings all the input and feedstocks are moving in a deflationary manner. And so we are going to go clawback.
Laura Champine: Thank you.
Operator: Your next question will come from Cristina Fernandez from Telsey Advisory Group. Please go ahead.
Cristina Fernandez: Good afternoon and thank you for taking my question. I wanted to ask on the $200 million. Are there any savings related to stores that have changed your plan to open stores or take on remodel projects or any changes in labor as it relates to store base?
Wade Miquelon: Yes. So two things, and Scott can go into more detail. we are going to have a capital and working capital cash savings apart from the $200 million over and beyond as well as the dividend over and beyond. So the $200 million is a component of the total cash that we will be driving. We are going to adjust the number of stores and we do, although we are not turning the engine off for example. I would say there are some — we say that everything is on the table, but one of the things that’s very sacred to us is making sure they have a great in-store experience. So we are not going to do anything on our store labor front that’s going to compromise where we are right now, which is kind of actually in some of the for that customer service metric. It doesn’t mean there might be some opportunity there, but that’s something that we are going to protect at all costs.
Scott Sekella: Hi, Cristina, it’s Scott. Just to reiterate Wade’s point, part of our initiatives, looking at how do we optimize store labor without sacrificing that in-store experience. And that could mean reducing, that could also mean increasing to drive incremental top line. So we will be taking a look at all of that.
Cristina Fernandez: And then my second question is in relation to the debt balance. So I understood your point that with lower sales there’ll be — and the timing of the inventory, you won’t get to that 800 to 850 target. But when do you think you can get there? And do you have any target you can share as far as reducing debt in the next 12 to 18 months.
