Jason Combs: And Nick I think in regards to your 2024 question, it’s Jason. I think because of that uncertainty that Lisa referenced, it’s really too early for us to really comment on 2024. Certainly, when we get to the February call, I think we’ll be in a much better position to give you some insight into how we see the year shaping out.
Nick Zangler: Great. Thanks very much. Much appreciate it.
Operator: Thank you. And next we go on to the line for Michael Kupinski NOBLE Capital Markets. Please go ahead.
Michael Kupinski: Thank you and thank you for taking the questions. Nice quarter. Adam, thanks for providing more color on your right strategy. I think it’s amazing that the few that you already have so far as having such a meaningful impact on the total company revenues. A question on that. If you can provide what are your margin assumptions as you enter these sports rights arrangements? Are they different from the local strategy versus your national platforms? And I kind of think that this would be helpful for investors to understand that because many broadcasters have historically viewed sports rights in some instances as a loss leader to drive advertising and ratings. And I think it would be helpful just to kind of lay out your strategy for getting into sports rights.
Jason Combs: Hey, Mike, this is Jason. I’ll start and then Adam can add on. I would say, when we look at the sports right opportunities, we’re not giving any specific on individual deal margins. What I can tell you for is that when we model these out we model them out to be positive year one and to create incremental value and cash flow for the company. There is a different calculation that goes into a local deal versus a national deal because the local deal we’re essentially starting from scratch and adding this on top versus on the national side we’re replacing something that already makes good money over on ION. And so the math works a little different. You have a higher hurdle rate you need to clear on the national side, but all the deals that we’ve modeled out thus far we’ve modeled out to be profit positive year.
Adam Symson: Yes, Mike let me just be really clear. With our strategy sports is not a loss leader. We don’t think there’s a reason for sports to be a loss leader at this time especially for a platform like ours with such significant reach in this fragmented marketplace. We think that the owners have recognized the value of the reach and we think that the leagues are seeking partners that can provide that kind of reach. So in no scenario would we do a deal in which we would say that sports over the life of a contract is a loss leader for us these deals have to stand on their own.
Michael Kupinski: Thanks for the color. I think it’s important that that’s stressed out there. I appreciate that. That’s all I have. Thank you.
Adam Symson: Thanks, Mike.
Operator: Thank you. And our last question we’ll go to the line for Craig Huber, Huber Research Partners. Please go ahead.
Craig Huber: Great. Thank you. Good morning. I thought it was interesting you guys obviously talked about a 4% lift to core advertising for your TV stations in the fourth quarter. I just want to make sure you’re pretty happy with the profitability that you get off those two NHL deals you have here it’s all incremental. And I’m bringing that up because you’re talking about costs in the fourth quarter for TV up mid-single digits. So maybe Jason maybe just walk me through why is cost in TV stations going to be up mid-single digits in the fourth quarter year-over-year.
