Michael Sturmer: Yes. So on the preconception front, it’s really an enhancement off of services that were — that we’ve been providing in that realm. So we’re excited to continue down that path. And then on the maternity front, this is something that we’ve been looking at for a while now. And given the trust that we’ve built with our membership as well as our employers, there’s a significant opportunity to help support our members after they have successfully become pregnant and continue the services there with a focus towards the high-risk pregnancy and avoiding high-risk maternity cases. So we’re excited about the focus there. And again, looking at a few spots beyond that into postpartum and others but that’s where the primary focus is for this year and as Pete had rolling out into next.
Peter Anevski: The male infertility, we talked about it’s creating a separate network of reproductive urologists. In particular, those reproductive urologists that our network of REIs generally tend to work with and like to work with. So it’s a small subset of urologists in the country, addressing the unique needs that affect and create what is known as male factor infertility, to the extent that the male themselves has to be addressed. And so to make sure that there’s no gaps relative to the specific urologists that the REIs like to work with and or any other potential gaps in coverage they may have with their regular health plan.
Unidentified Analyst: Exciting. I imagine there’s a lot of opportunity there. Maybe just a second question. You talked about the strong starts to the selling season this year with kind of similar momentum to last year. I was just wondering, are conversations with prospective employers any different this year than last year given the macro? Are they more focused on savings? Or is the pitch of maximizing your fertility dollars?
Michael Sturmer: This is Michael. Yes. No, nothing really different from the conversations in the prior years. Again, I think each year, the buyers get more educated and sophisticated on fertility and understanding where the differences are and what the differences are in this market or for that population, I should say. But at the end of the day, it continues and the differentiation and conversation continues to come down to the member experience, providing great outcomes and being able to do that at both a lower cost but at a cost that can be controlled over time.
Operator: The next question is coming from Jailendra Singh with Truist Securities.
Jailendra Singh: Congratulations on strong quarter and guidance. I want to again go back to the same comment around strong pipeline for 2024. Just curious if this is driven by like new employers rolling out fertility benefit for the first time? Or are these like employers moving away from their carrier-based programs. And if you can spend some time around the savings you guys generate for these employers compared to carrier-based program because there’s one debate in the marketplace that how long this fertility benefit can be a carve-out benefit or if employees could start moving to the carrier as such?
Peter Anevski: There’s a couple of things there. One, we continue to have interest from both greenfield and brownfield clients relative to those that don’t have anything whatsoever and/or those that have something but not as comprehensive a solution that Progyny offers. And so that continues, no different than what we’ve seen in the past 2 years. Relative to whether or not it’s easy for imports to just go with their carrier from a cost perspective, we generally show prospective clients we could save in the neighborhood of 30% compared to traditional carrier and PBM plan for both the pharmacy and medical side of the benefit that we offer. But the important point isn’t just that. It’s the whole comprehensive solution. As Michael said before, there’s an assumption, especially with investors that cost is always a discussion.
