Ashley Johnson: Yeah. So the numbers I was providing were specific to Q1 guidance. So just some context on the year. The gross margin for the full year will be impacted by increased depreciation from the three satellites that will be deorbiting, it’s around Q3. So it’s an approximate $5 million impact over that period. And I gave you kind of that impact on Q1. With respect to partners, as I noted, when we act as a prime, we’re pulling partners into that relationship then we get both the revenue, but also the revenue that goes to the partner that’s providing their part of the solution. So that flows through our cost of goods sold. So I quantified that impact on Q1. Obviously, how that will impact the full year will depend on the mix of business that we see come in and how much of that are these government deals where we’re prime in pulling in a partner solution or how much of it is more of our traditional business, where a partner might sell side by side with us or where the partner might actually be prime.
So, a little hard to quantify at this point, gave you Q1 and we are leaning into it. So we do expect that to continue, but unable to give you exact quantification at this time, other than to say, we do expect this to help us drive scale. And so we are leaning into it.
Ryan Koontz: Make sense. Can you maybe explain where you are in the process of building out solutions? And how we should think about partner prime versus sell with versus Planet as prime like, which way is more common now? And which ways are you trending in the future maybe?
Will Marshall: Yeah, I mean, it’s really both of those things. I mean, both Planet’s own solutions and partner solutions. Typically, we have been the prime in those cases where they do involve Planet partners. We’re obviously looking primarily at what the customer needs most and driving it from there. But fundamentally, AI is driving a lot of this, and both our own AI and partner solution AI is opening up the value proposition here to extracting out more value from our data. I think our PlanetScope data set is particularly well suited to that because of the broad area and the fact that we revisit every area each day, no matter what, which means that you have this consistent dataset, time series stack to train AI algorithms upon.
So it’s a pretty unique asset there that we have that is differentiated and has high appeal to AI companies that are anywhere close to this space. But anyway, I don’t see any particular trends. I mean, we’ve seen some very good takeoff with some of our partners that like the Navy example that I mentioned, but there were others. We mentioned a couple of pilots that we’re working on. There is a distinction between most of the existing work has been on what we would call classical machine learning. Some of these pilots are based on large language model type fundamental capabilities, which is opening up yet more things. I would say most of the growth right now is more to do with the classical stuff, but there’s a huge frontier opening up with large language models now tackling both text – multimodal pieces, multimodal large language models are now doing text to imagery conversion.
And that fundamental capability is something that will become a more of a boon to us from my perspective. So I’ve extrapolated beyond your answer there, but I think it’s an exciting time in that domain.
Ryan Koontz: Great. Well, thank you. And just one more, if I could on, any color you can give us on the EOCL contract, how that’s progressing? Is any of these strength in government that you’re seeing coming the result of that, or maybe just a little update on how that’s progressing? Thank you.
Will Marshall: So far, so good. We feel very good about the implementation of our team against that contract. I understand the customers satisfied. We do have a renewal coming up with that contract, and we feel very good about that prospect. I don’t know as to how it’s affecting other areas. I do think that the more we show that we’re a serious player in this space generally, and that’s one of the mainstays of that, the reputation that Planet is providing good services there and reliably is important. So in that sense, I think it has a sort of indirect benefit. Yes.
Ryan Koontz: And it boosts your brand. All right, great. Thanks for the color. That’s all I’ve got.
Ashley Johnson: Great. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you for your question. The next question comes from the line of Noah Poponak with Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open.
Noah Poponak: Hi, good evening.
Will Marshall: Hey.
Ashley Johnson: Hi, Noah.
Noah Poponak: It sounds like you’re saying that the decision to not provide full year 2025 annual guidance is less downside uncertainty and more upside uncertainty, I guess, as you’re alluding to these large prospects, but where you don’t know if and when they’ll land. You’ve given that the 1Q guidance where the growth rate is somewhat consistent with full year 2024 and that’s on your toughest year-over-year compare that you’ll face this year by far. And so, I guess, is it a reasonable base case for all of us on the outside to assume 2025’s growth rate looking similar to 2024 is kind of a floor. And then there’s upside depending on when the large opportunities land, if they land, or is that too optimistic? Are there scenarios where the growth rate decelerates? Is there a scenario where revenue is down?
