Nick Zangler: Got it. Helpful. And then obviously, Hulu goes to Disney, and this was pretty much expected. I’d imagine maybe just a relief in general, so it doesn’t go to Comcast, but any benefit that you could point to that you might see as Hulu gets fully brought in by Disney going forward? Thanks.
Michael Barrett: Yes, Nick, I think it’s — you’re right. We anticipated Hulu stay in the Disney family. And I think that it’s more business as usual than that presenting a huge opportunity. But again, having a service that large and the idea that there possibly could extend the brand globally, and this is just my conjecture. I have no inside information as it relates to Disney, but there’s upside to the extension of the Hulu footprint and the bundling of it with other properties that could lead to more ad opportunities for us.
Nick Zangler: Great. Thank you very much and good luck going forward.
Operator: The next question is from Shweta Khajuria with Evercore ISI. Please go ahead.
Shweta Khajuria: Okay. Thank you. Let me try one for Michael, please. Michael, what do you think would drive inflection. Is there a flection point that you think could drive the gap between ad spend and revenue narrower? And what would that be? What should we be looking out for that gives you confidence that outside of macro, all else equal, this is what’s going to help narrow that gap? Thank you.
Michael Barrett: Yes, I think I just want to macro definitely plays enrollment as we kind of had said, especially last quarter that this kind of product mix shift wouldn’t be nearly as severe in a normal spend environment because media plans will be more diversified. There’d be a lot more CTV native-first publications, OEMs on the buy. And they use that different product than, say, a direct sold programmatic by one of the plus services. So, — so I think that macro helps for sure. But I do think that it’s a buyer intention. In an environment when spending is down, every dollar can bring with it so much more cloud from an agency standpoint and they’re universally spoke to us, spoke to our partners and the publishers at about a desire to do much more biddable, much more data targeting and much more programmatic.
And so I think that it’s just — again, the buyers have a lot of cloud in the market where dollars are in short supply to go around. And I think that, that’s probably an inflection point, whether that’s in the near and not-too-distant future.
Shweta Khajuria: Sorry, let me follow up on that. If that’s the case, why would you not be seeing that happening today?
Michael Barrett: Well, keep in mind, upfronts are just now being placed, right? And you have this paucity of content that because of the strikes. So, I think in terms of — again, it’s another kind of macro challenge, but a lot of those dollars are on pause right now. So, they’ve been talked about to be executed programmatically, but there’s not really any home to put them in to execute programmatically. So, I think that, that’s part of the lag, if that makes sense, Shweta.
Shweta Khajuria: Okay. Thanks Michael.
Operator: The next question is from Matt Swanson with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.
Matt Swanson: Yes, thank you so much for taking my question. I kind of touches on point that we’ve heard quite a bit here. But I guess when you’re thinking about the FY 2024 guidance framework around CTV growth — can you just kind of help us think about what your assumptions are for take rates in 2024? Like, is it assumed no change? Does it assume lower? Does it assume higher as we’re kind of trying to think of that two variable model with that and the volume growth, which remains really strong.
