And the level of product revenue we have it today and this is really the reason is that the design win, even when we consider this design win, and even if we can go to $100 million there, they’re not all in production. And we have, as I said, 20%, however, all the projects that they were in the pipe last year and they continue and they are accelerating and we have visibility and very honestly, the delay we got on those in the majority of them, they were related to the focus of those customer on fixing their supply issue with the whole generation product. And we have — I’ll say good visibility and feeling like at least 45% of those projects will we — will be in full production when we exit 2023. That will give us good ramp for next year from there and where we can add more projects.
So we have good visibility. We are very comfortable on this. Obviously, customer are working on their project. Things are moving. Most of them, they are in the last phase if you want on execution. So we feel good about timing.
Scott Searle: Very good, very helpful. And lastly, if I could, and then I’ll hop back in the queue, but on combination of the 5G IP licensing special committee and kind of the balance sheet. First, just to clarify, it sounds like you have expanded discussions going on with your existing 5G China-based customer that is not one of the advanced discussions, is that correct? Sounds like there could be an expansion there in addition to the advanced discussions, it sounds like with one or two other guys that you would expect by the middle of this year. Want to clarify that — want to understand kind of the magnitude of what those potential payments upfront could be for that new customer. And then just if you could from a cash coming onto the balance sheet standpoint, there were some payments I believe in the fourth quarter related to the existing 5G relationship.
What does the timeline of new payments look like in 2023? And then, if you could on the strategic committee, what is the composition of the committee? What is the mandate on that front? Thanks so much.
Georges Karam: I mean Scott, on one thing, obviously, I want really to stress that the partnership we have, and I know that because we didn’t announce the name and maybe for whatever reason people are not really valuing at this value I will say this partnership. This partnership is really working very well, has potential, as I said, licensing and royalty because the customer is very solid and has business in hand. So as soon as the product will move to production, we’ll start getting royalty. And we have engagement and other opportunity and discussion with them even some related to product revenue, extra business that will help. And what I — when I was referring to new IP licensing deal, they are beyond this partner and other deals that that will be adding to this one and order of magnitude of this as, we left this open because the licensing model, we can have a licensing that can start at $15 million and can be $60 million.
The question about the licensing is really how much where is the royalty level, right? So if you could have — if you have low licensing, you’ll have very high royalty. If you have very high licensing, you’ll have lower royalty. And obviously, this is part of the discussion with the partner, and we are flexible on our side to conclude something, but it’ll be meaningful no matter what.
Deborah Choate: Scott, on the cash, I mentioned that we’re under the 5G licensee agreement, we’re scheduled to receive close to $7 million in each of Q1 and Q2, and then later in the second half of the year.
Operator: Our next question comes from Craig Ellis with B. Riley. Please proceed with your question.
