Nathan Rich: Hi. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking the questions. Maybe just following up on that last one as it relates to €˜23. I think you had talked about taking high-single digit type price increases for next year. Now, that you kind of have a better view of the competitive landscape, how do you feel about your positioning and the ability to hit the membership target that you gave? And do you think that membership outside of the range that you gave would have an impact on €“ a negative impact on your profitability, or do you see flexibility within the organization to hit your profitability goals even if €“ given the challenge of forecasting membership next year if that does fall outside of that 1 million plus or minus 10% range? Thank you.
Mario Schlosser: Yes. Nathan, let me hit the first part of this, and then Scott, you can talk a bit about the range and what happens to be follow side of it. So, let me put on the long-term hat there first, which is just to reaffirm, we think we have got an attractive product. It’s innovative, great distribution partners, very committed. We spend a lot of time with them and a good brand in the market. We keep putting new products in the market, including expanded virtual primary care offerings into tumor space in €˜23 and things like that. But this entire year, really, we have been managing, as I said before, for this confirmation of outcomes, so a slight shrinkage to maybe moderate growth at 1 million plus or minus 10%. And to give you a bit of an example there, we are in high-single digits this year.
As we said, the market is probably coming in around 6% or so on average across the country. So, we did go above the market, which speaks to the fact that, again, we are going after the profitability and the margin there as compared to the growth. Last year, by comparison, our increase probably was more in the 2% range and the market was probably around 1% to 3% range thereabout. So, you see that flipping a little bit there. And all-in-all, pricing is always a very nuanced and local decision making. And because we are deeply tied into the local communities there, I think we generally feel good about where we are priced, to be right in the middle of that cone in all the states and all the geographies where we want to be competitive and where we want to be getting the right memberships, we are in a good place and then other ones we have just taken rates.
And so Scott, you can talk about
Scott Blackley: Sure. Hi Nathan. Just in terms of membership, I would just kind of point out two things. Obviously, bigger membership, we think would be positive for earnings. And on that side, that’s clearly a positive. We think we would get more fixed cost leverage and have the potential for generating even greater earnings in our insurance business. On the flip side of that, that requires growth capital. And as we have been talking about, we are very focused on making sure that we really don’t create additional demands on parent cash and that we leverage the capital that we have already got in our subsidiaries. And that is an important part of our strategy for trying to land in that 1 million member range that we discussed.
Mario Schlosser: Yes. And if we fall outside that range, we would have levers supposed to the upside and the downside to make sure we mitigate the impact on the financial outcomes.
Nathan Rich: That’s helpful. Thank you.
Operator: Your last question comes from the line of Josh Raskin with Nephron Research. Your line is open.
