Melanie Boulden: Hi, Peter. So let’s first — you asked about performance and wanting to kind of unpack that, if you will. Let’s start with our performance in Q4. It’s important to remember that the Prepared Foods business, it has some seasonality aspects that typically resulted in softer margins in Q4 compared with our full year expectations. But despite the seasonality and impact from our start-up costs this past quarter, our margins still remain — our margins still increased year-over-year in line with our full year expectations. And as John pointed out, this past quarter, we generated — it’s been our second highest Q4 result in the past five years. And so then as I think about the full year, and our outlook for 2024, I have full confidence in the growth proposition of our Prepared Foods business.
As we think about fiscal year 2024, we are driving profits behind disciplined revenue growth management and price pack architecture capabilities as well as we have strong operational improvement initiatives planned. And yes, to your point about that, we are investing for the future behind our business with increased math but we’re also investing behind new highly automated industry-leading production facilities to increase our capabilities in service to meet our growing demand. But I do want to say, though, as I think about 2024, it’s also important to note, just like we had in Q4, we still have some start-up costs in Q1 for our new facilities, and that’s probably going to impact our profit.
John R. Tyson: And Peter, if I can add one thing. Just to answer your question, we did not mean to indicate that the seasonality in Prepared would be meaningfully different than from prior years.
Peter Galbo: Got it. Okay. No, that’s helpful. Thanks, Melanie and John. And then Donnie, maybe just — and I know we have Brady on the call as well, but a two-parter on Beef, I mean, it seems like you missed the window or the industry missed the window on kind of heifer retention for last year. Is that pushing out now another six to 12 months prior on beef cycle recovery versus kind of what you thought previously? And then — the second piece would be, obviously, you’re consolidating some of the case-ready operations that you announced last week. Historically, that was supposed to be a pretty big value driver in margining up the beef business over time. And just I want to make sure that, that’s still kind of core to the strategy. And again, removing those plants or shuttering those plants doesn’t kind of knock that off the rail. Thanks guys.
Brady Stewart: Well, thanks for the follow-up there, Peter, this is Brady. And first, touching on the question relative to heifer retention. And I think a lot of industry analysts have continued to go back to where we saw diminished supplies almost a decade ago relative to the beef cycle. And certainly, the cattle on feed number relative to heifer as a percentage is extremely high. And we’ll continue to monitor that. USDA indicated it was the largest on record for October. And so I think what we are looking at relative to the shape of the future certainly is maybe more of a U-shaped curve on the bottom end relative to supply as opposed to the V-shape we saw back almost a decade ago as well. So we will continue to monitor heifer retention and cows relative to production capabilities and supply and really prepare for the variety of outcomes to go.
We’ve got a solution for really those variety of potential outcomes. Relative to our case-ready assets, I think there’s a few key focus areas here. Number one is we did not lose any true capacity relative to our customers. All of our customers that we currently service today will be serviced in the future. We had redundant capacity. And so this just really allows us to continue to service our current customers, and we still have opportunity to grow into the future, but we’re able to do that in a much more effective cost structure as well. So still a focus for Tyson is to get as close to our customers as we can relative to our value-added proposition.
Donnie King: So if I could add a couple of things to that as well. I think it’s important that when you’re evaluating beef that you evaluated across the entire cycle, which is approximately 10 years. And I will tell you and this thing moves kind of quickly. But a year ago, I was testifying before Congress with some of my peers because Beef was making so much money. And today, we’re talking about what it looks like on the downside. So my message there, and I have to tell myself this as well, is that you have to look at it across the cycle, and we do that. But a couple of other things that, again, I would just reiterate, don’t miss the fact that we have redundant capacity and are able to shutter that, that don’t miss the fact that we got better at what we do and every aspect of the operational component.
And so we did. But we continue to evaluate all options, but something that Brady would never say, but I’ll say because he won’t that we have best-in-class assets. We have best-in-class team members. We have — we are aligned with the right suppliers, and we have great — we have all the great customers that you would want to service. So we have a number of things that are lined up against — or lined up the right way for us.
Operator: Our next question comes from Ben Bienvenu from Stephens Incorporated. Please go ahead with your question.
Ben Bienvenu: Yeah. Thank you, good morning. John, a follow-up on a comment that you made around the Chicken guidance for next year. You noted the operational improvements you expect to make and I think the variability from the bottom end of the range for next year to the top end is subject to the pace of that progress. But you also made a comment about the market conditions that we can all see improving, is improved market conditions a variable that you’re considering in guidance for next year for FY ’24 in chicken?
