Laura Martin: Okay, that’s super helpful. And I have 10 more, but I’m going to sort of take it into two. So, upfronts were really weak for my traditional media companies. And so what I’m wondering is it a weak upfront where people didn’t commit to as much — advertisers didn’t commit to as much in the upfront is good for you because that frees up more money and scatter that you guys have an option on, and I’m going to tie it into this Amazon ads to your question. So, Amazon, as you know, on January 1, is going to start adding ads sort of against your willingness, the consumer pays an extra $3 a month to not have that. Is that good for you? Or is that bad for you since Amazon sort of a log guarded, Does that take share away from you? So sort of those two things that aren’t really related, but I didn’t want to ask three questions.
Michael Barrett: Yes. So, on the first one, I think in a normal marketplace, the assumption that advertisers withholding from the upfronts committed dollars in having dollars that they have at their leisure, they can go in to the spot market. That probably would be a net benefit for streaming and for Magnite. I think that what you’re seeing is the loss upfront necessarily wasn’t folks reserving dollars or spot, it was folks not having dollars to commit because of the macros. So, I think it was a lousy upfront across the board. That said, programmatic played such a big role front and center with all the upfront presentations that I think that distinction between upfront being bad for streaming and spot being good is starting to very blur.
So, let’s just see how that plays out when the ad spend engine kicks back in from a macro standpoint. Amazon Ad here, I think that they’re going to — in a market like this with the muted spend world, those dollars are going to be firstly fought for. And it’s possible that those dollars come at the expense of Paramount or a Disney or an NBC Universal. But I do think that, generally speaking, if you look at it in a slightly longer timeframe, having another AVOD mass global service out there is nothing but good for Magnite. The whole idea that you can’t be successful in this environment without having an ad peer at scale is just music to our ears. So, we think in the longer term, it’s going to be fine. And Amazon isn’t exactly completely out of reach for us.
We’re able to work with them when partners like a Disney distribute programming on an Amazon, we’re able to take their share that they get from an ad sales standpoint and help them monetize it. So, on the margins we can work with Amazon.
Laura Martin: Thank you very much. Very helpful. Thank you.
Michael Barrett: Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from Nick Zangler with Stephens. Please go ahead.
Nick Zangler: Yes, hey guys. Good to see the upside for the quarter. Just curious on — last quarter, as you pointed to 3Q, you called about managed service you got out the mix shift to premium services, and you called out soft [Indiscernible] spend as I guess, pressure points in CTV for 3Q. And I think it was in that order. Curious on the guide for 4Q, down 4%. Are these the same pressure points? And is it again in that same order?
David Day: Yes. I think Yes, I think it’s — I mean, we’re — so let me — I think it’s an interesting dynamic in Q3 to Q4 in CTV first to call out. The midpoint of our guide, as you mentioned, 4% down in Q4 versus a 6% down actual in Q3. If you take out the political comps from 2022, we had a 3% impact in Q3 and actually a 6% impact in Q4. And so if you factor those out, the CTV growth goes from sort of an adjusted 3% down in Q3 to actually a 2% up in Q4 on kind of an apples-to-apples taking out that comp basis. And so the comps masked, I think, a little bit of the actual growth and acceleration that we’re seeing in that CTV business. And as far as drivers, I think the — yes, I think all of those drivers in about the same order are fairly accurate.
