Again, we’ll have to look at the numbers that we get from the customers, if there is substantial change, but as we sit here today and look at what’s out there, we haven’t seen a big drop or change, but we’ll be able to update based on our plans coming back into February again.
James Picariello: Thanks.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll proceed with our next question on the line from Jonathan Goldman from Scotiabank. Go right ahead.
Jonathan Goldman: Good morning, and thanks for taking my questions. Just a quick one on the macro. I believe your previous North American production outlook did not factor in the impact from strikes, so if we strip out the impact that you’re projecting, your underlying production outlook would be up from previous expectations. Can you just discuss what you’re seeing in the macro environment that supports the relatively better outlook?
Louis Tonelli: Yes, good morning. Exactly, so when we guided in August, we guided ex–we didn’t assume any UAW or Unifor issues at 15.2 million units. Our estimate is that we lost 220,000 units as a result of the UAW labor disruptions, which would imply 15.4. Of the 15.4, the 200 increase, that primarily came through in the third quarter.
Jonathan Goldman: Is that more new products or product launches, or market growth? Any puts and takes there?
Louis Tonelli: Can you repeat the question? It just broke up a bit.
Jonathan Goldman: Yes, so the incrementally positive market outlook, can you just discuss any puts and takes that you’re seeing?
Patrick McCann: Just higher volume draws from our customers relative to what we were anticipating.
Jonathan Goldman: Okay, fair enough, and then another housekeeping one. You raised the margin guidance, but it looks like below the line items are flat, so you maintained the free cash flow guidance for the year. Could you just help me bridge the delta there?
Patrick McCann: Yes, I think the simple answer is that it’s just a movement within the range. When you work through the math, we were comfortable holding the range where it was at.
Jonathan Goldman: And there’s nothing particularly going on with working cap or anything else?
Patrick McCann: No, exactly.
Jonathan Goldman: Okay, thanks for taking my questions.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll get to our next question on the line from Michael Glen with Raymond James. Go right ahead.
Michael Glen: Hey, thanks for getting me in. Can you just talk a little bit about power and vision margins? What I’m just trying to understand is the sequential uptick from Q2 into Q3, even excluding the amortization of intangible dynamic. You’re showing a pretty notable lift from Q2 into Q3. Was Veoneer accretive to power and vision margin in the quarter? I’m just trying to figure out exactly what’s behind the lift.
Swamy Kotagiri: Hi Michael, good morning. I think if we look at the first half, we had a warranty item, and there was a negative net commercial item in the Q too and there was higher engineering costs, so that’s kind of the sum in the first half. If we look at the second half–and obviously we also had net input costs which were a headwind in the first half, so if you look at the higher sales in the second half and you take out all the one-timers and the warranty item, the higher engineering costs out, that added to the bottom line and the equity income was higher.
Michael Glen: Okay, and in Veoneer, any comments on the contribution of Veoneer in the quarter to EBIT, power and vision EBIT?
Swamy Kotagiri: I would say the comments that we gave in the last call, that we are in line with expectations that we had during closing with Veoneer, and we continue to have good traction to realize the synergies that we talked about.
Michael Glen: Okay. Then just in terms of North America, I know that this quarter there was the strike and everything like that, but would you say performance this quarter was consistent–like, I’m trying to assess at the platform level, and you identify your larger platforms each year in the AIF, would you say there was a pickup in the quarter across some of the smaller programs that you have in North America, or was it generally consistent with prior periods, as in are the larger and more profitable programs at the level you expected in the period?
