In terms of the conversations, yes, they’re very productive, fruitful. There’s a lot of interest. We’ve got a few different LPs that we’re talking to today as of right now. And I think we’ll partner up in the near future with those opportunities moving forward.
Operator: The next question is from the line of John Zamparo with CIBC. Please proceed with your question.
John Zamparo: It’s a relatively simple question. It’s on the guidance, which implies a pretty significant step-up in EBITDA even if you account for Montauk — and you some of the cost measures you have underway, but I wonder, can you get to the EBITDA guide with the current level of revenue? Or does your guidance assume some pretty meaningful sales growth.
Carl Merton: So if you remember from the start, John, we talked about the onetime sales adjustment that we had. So obviously, we’re using that more as a base than the 144 that was in our financial statements this quarter. But the answer to your question is, yes, with the cost savings we have coming with the addition of Montauk with the $7 million cost reduction that we’re looking at in Europe, more than half of which will be achieved by the end of the year. We see that as the basis for reiterating our guidance.
Irwin Simon: But John, yes, we’re looking at absolutely sales growth and sales growth is a part of it.
Operator: Next question is from the line of Michael Lavery with Piper Sandler. Please proceed with your question.
Michael Lavery: I wanted to come back to a comment you just made about some of the capacity and how to think about opportunities there. And you mentioned things like fruits and vegetables as an opportunity. But you also had just a little bit earlier reiterated how you think about the Company’s name and Tilray brands and you don’t really see branded produce, at least not with kind of any margins and there’s not any of those companies who have multiples that are really interesting. So you also touched on just some of the fixed costs as a consideration for EBITDA. And I guess, maybe instead of trying to be a farmer would you just rationalize more capacity? How do you think about weighing those trade-offs?
Irwin Simon: So, I think there’s multiple going into it. I think we’re working on a plan on rationalizing our facilities versus and then how do we focus on our brands and is there two businesses here, et cetera. So I think as we come back today, utilization of facilities is important today for us. We’re not going into the branded vegetable business and don’t take that away for a second. But one thing I want to make sure is we have facilities out there that we’ve invested a lot of dollars into their world-class facilities. And getting utilization, if you look at it just in this quarter, our amortization on our facilities, in the $30 million, $40 million range, okay? So we got to make sure we’re utilizing our facilities to grow something out there and hopefully it’s cannabis.
But we don’t want them to sit idle. And we’re again, sitting here looking at multiple opportunities as these facilities are world-class. So that’s what I’m saying, and there’s lots of things that we’re looking at to do with these facilities, but growing cannabis is first and foremost for us and growing branded cannabis is first and foremost for us, being in diversified businesses, whether it’s spirits, beer or other wellness products is what’s our priorities. We’re not out there saying we’re going to become farmers.
Michael Lavery: So I guess maybe can you just clarify how you thought about that? Is it, I mean, I think you pointed to it as an opportunity? Is that maybe just under the right circumstances or as a temporary kind of bridge?
