David Keffer: Right. So to that point, among the fixed price programs, where we talked about the 70% of that 2021 backlog having been transitioned into sales by the end of this year, there are no huge individual drivers of the remainder of — the remaining 30%, if you will, and that will gradually translate into sales over the next few years. So a gradual wind down of the remaining 30%, based on the metrics we described earlier.
Jason Gursky: Okay, right. And then I’m sorry to beat a dead horse here on the space margins. But I did find your comment, Kathy, interesting about the potential for the business to operate above 10%, I think you said you want to drive it to 10. But there’ll be opportunities for it potentially to go above that metric at some point in the future. I’m just kind of curious as to whether that is a comment for the broad portfolio of your space programs because when I historically think of spacecraft and space based assets, I tend to think of lower margin rates for that kind of work historically because it’s been a lot of cost plus kind of work. So I’m wondering if this is a comment about the broad portfolio and would include assets that are going to be operating up in space? And is that comment — if that is true, is it because you’ve got more fixed price work going on there than has historically been the case?
Kathy Warden: Yes, so as you think about the transition that the space market has undergone to where we had few large and exquisite assets, those were largely developed under cost plus and then transition to production but in low quantity, now we’re seeing much less dollars go into development, and then a transition into production of higher quantity. So that mix will be different in terms of development versus production in the market as a whole. In addition, when you think about our portfolio and what’s in our space segment, it includes things like solid rocket motors, particularly large solid rocket motors, it includes programs like Sentinel that will transition into production, and programs like [indiscernible] that we’ve talked about so as those transitions happen again, specifically now to our portfolio, not just the market in general for space, we’ve seen mix shift that will be tailwinds to margin over time.
Todd Ernst: Josh, we have time for one more question.
Operator:
[:
Unidentified Analyst: Hey, good morning. Kathy, just sticking with that a little bit and tying this to the prime versus merchant supplier discussion we had in the beginning on aeronautics, when you think about the shift, at least in satellites from GEOs to MEOs and LEOs when these highly proliferated constellations, and the significant to the SDA in that part of the market and their desire for fixed price contracts, is it better, at least in that kind of work to be on the supplier side at some point would you consider that?
Kathy Warden: We consider it with each opportunity, just as I discussed in Alpha process around military aircraft, we don’t have a blanket, we will do this and we won’t do that we think about each opportunity in terms of its risk profile. The maturity of our designs and offerings at the time that we’re being asked to bid also weighs heavily into our thinking about that decision. And so in the case of the Space Development Agency, we are executing on several programs for them today and performing quite well. So we have chosen wisely and been disciplined in how we have taken on that work and will continue to do that. The beauty of our portfolio, as we’ve talked about before, is we can choose to prime. But if we don’t see the right mix of risk reward we can also choose to be a supplier and still bring the capability forward that the government needs and expects from us.
