Christine McCarthy: So, Ben, great to hear your voice, and I will address the parks question. So, as I mentioned in my comments, we were really thrilled with the performance of parks in the quarter. There were no one-time items to call out. But the one thing I would mention is in previous quarters, we had mentioned that the recovery from the pandemic and our international parks was lagging domestic. And in this quarter, we had very strong performance, especially year-over-year from Disneyland Paris. We had the opening of Avengers Campus over there in July, and that is incredibly popular in driving attendance. And we also have a new hotel that was actually an old hotel that was redone into the art of Marvel. Again, very popular and attracting a lot of consumers to come out and experience that.
The other thing I mentioned was the strength at our royalty stream from Disneyland in Tokyo. And the other thing not to forget is, this quarter, our first quarter of the year is seasonally one of our strongest when you look at it relative to other quarters. But the year-over-year comparison, it was an improvement, and we feel great about our business going forward.
Ben Swinburne: Thank you both.
Alexia Quadrani: Thank you. Next question.
Operator: Our next question today comes from Michael Nathanson at SVB MoffettNathanson. Please go ahead.
Michael Nathanson: Thanks. Welcome back, Bob. I have two. The first is, when you go back to the second investment day you had for streaming, the company increased their TAM forecast, their investment spending and kind of vision for Disney+. Now that you have returned with more data and time, what’s the vision for Disney+? You don’t want to give us long-term targets, I get that. But what is the product vision? Is it a more narrow vision, any type of long-term size of the investment and awesome profitability case of D+ will be helpful. And then on linear, to Ben’s question, a big part of the cost structure of sports costs, you have signed a ton in lately. But when you think about going forward, can you help us understand what will change going forward on sports rights investment in terms of must-have and not necessarily must-have? Thanks.
Bob Iger: Well, the second question, as you know, we have locked in a number of deals already, including some of the biggest ones, which is in college football with the SEC as well as with the NFL, the one that’s looming is the NBA. And I know that’s on people’s minds, which is a product that we have enjoyed having and hope to continue to enjoy having, because not only it’s volume, but it’s quality. ESPN has been selective in the rights that they bought. I have had long conversations about this with Jimmy Pitaro, and we have got some decisions that we have to make coming up, not on something €“ not on anything particularly large, but on a few things. And we are simply going to have to get more selective. ESPN+ actually has grown nicely for us, and it’s shown us that the ESPN brand can be enjoyed and can be expressed well as a streaming brand.
And I think that we are going to continue to look at that as a potential pivot for ESPN away from the linear business. But we are not going to do that precipitously. We are not going to do that until it really makes sense from an economic perspective. On the first part of your question, what either €“ what’s changed or where we headed from what was the second Investor Day. I think a few things. First of all, we were as a company in a global arms race for subscribers. And it was €“ the number of subscribers that have become kind of the primary measurement of success not only here in the company, but among in the investment community. And in our zeal to go after subscribers, I think we might have gotten a bit too aggressive in terms of our promotion and we are going to take a look at that.
