Glen Santangelo: Okay. Well, Balaji, maybe if I could just sort of follow up then on the profitability side, right, because the annual guidance this year, I mean, on the EBITDA side, it almost assumes like no leverage from the EBITDA number you reported in this fiscal fourth quarter. I mean, a little bit, which, again, back to that theme of providing two-year guidance, right, if you’re assuming you’re going to be profitable by the end of fiscal ’25, that assumes a very healthy ramp in fiscal ’25. And so I just wanted to get a sense, I understand the differences that played out in fiscal ’23 maybe to the original expectation, the uncertainty in the environment, but is there anything as we think about sort of this 2-year stack here that would load more expenses in the first year versus the second year or because it seems like the way you have it positioned, it’s not anywhere close to being straight lined. Thanks.
Balaji Gandhi: Yes. And I think I’ve heard Chaim say life isn’t linear.
Chaim Indig: It’s not.
Balaji Gandhi: But I think this also relates to an earlier question, which is around like maybe last year’s EBITDA and our entered EBITDA guidance and how we entered the year and this year. So I think we talked earlier about what’s different from last year. What’s the same is, it’s early in the year. We’re, what, 5, 6 weeks into our fiscal year. And we look at a lot of different investments that we’re going to make. Some of them are short-term, some of them are long-term. And we calibrate as we go. So we’ve got sort of a view of how we think things will play out. And so where we talk about that in March is going to be different than July, October, December, Glen. So some of that, we’ll just share with you as we go through the year.
But that said, I don’t think you should expect it to be linear because we’ll calibrate on the expense side and then there’s the earlier point about revenue mix, having sort of a different profitability. So it’s a seasonally strong payments quarter, for example. We’re going to have lower EBITDA.
Glen Santangelo: Okay. Thanks. Appreciate the comments.
Operator: And we’ll hear next from Sean Dodge with RBC Capital Markets.
Sean Dodge: Yes. Thanks. Good afternoon. Maybe just going back to the new metric for a moment, the total revenue per AHSC. You’re at 24,400 as of Q4. Can you give us some sense of what the fully penetrated opportunity would be right now on a per provider basis? I think before, you said something like 31,500 per provider for subscriptions, how we kind of frame that in our mind if we add in payments and now with the network services opportunity on a per provider basis could be over time, of course.
Balaji Gandhi: Yes. Sean, I don’t want to do the math off the top of my head, but it’s pretty simple. I mean all these numbers are like, again, just think about it like a jigsaw puzzle. So the total TAM is $10 billion. And so the 31,500, I think, that you mentioned, that’s what you said, right, on a quarterly basis?
Sean Dodge: That’s right, yes.
Balaji Gandhi: So that’s subscription-related services. So I think, on one hand, you could say there’s a universe of 50,000 clients, and there’s about $10 billion of total addressable market. Again, I don’t want to screw up my zeros, but it’s $10 billion divided by 50,000. And then 126,000 is what we talked about from subscription, and then you can do the math. It’s $2 billion on network solutions divided by 50,000 clients. Does that make sense?
