Andrew Nocella : Sure. I think that’s a really good question. Look, what I would tell you is our international RASM in Q2 and profitability was well above even our very lofty expectations from April. As we head into Q3, the year-over-year comparison is different than Q2. And during Q3, most of the world was already easy to travel to. Where in Q2 ’22, travel was still limited. And that will make a difference in our year-over-year comps. When we compare versus 2019, it’s easy to see that Q3 is tracking very, very close to Q2. So it looks really good. So not unlike domestic, we go into Q3, expect an amazing performance but tougher RASM comps year-over-year and RASMs that are roughly flat. Profitability is going to be amazingly strong.
Latin America is going to be the weakest. But to your question about the Atlantic, it looks really good, particularly demand to Southern Europe. And that’s motivated to a lesser extent our seasonal flying to Southern Europe well into Q4, which we didn’t normally do. But as you can imagine, and again, to your question about the Pacific, given our announcement earlier this week, on adding four new Trans – direct routes this fall, you can imagine we’re most bullish on Asia. As a result, we moved capacity into the Pacific, including our first-ever nonstop flight from San Francisco to Manila, a third daily flight to Hong Kong, the second daily flight to Taipei, and we’re resuming our L.A. Narita flight. We also expect that Japan is going to remain strong well into 2024 as it did not fully reopen until this spring.
So in summary, we see – Asia is going gangbusters, and we’re really happy with where it’s at, and we’ve leaned into it. And overall, for international exposure, what I can tell you is we were — in Q2, we were up 2.3 points in terms of percent of international ASMs of the company versus 2019. And in Q4, we’re going to be up 3.1 to 3.4 points to show you how much we’re leaning into the global long-haul environment because that’s where we think the revenue is right now.
Operator: Our next question comes from Catherine O’Brien from Goldman Sachs.
Catherine O’Brien : Can you help us think about the total impact of operational issues at the end of the second quarter into the third, plus the impact of the changes you’re making to shore up operations going forward? Like what that is to third quarter and full year EPS outlook? It sounds like the 1 to 2-point headwind to CASM is all tied to this. But just wondering — correct me if I’m wrong there. I’m just wondering if you can you take into account any revenue impact? I’m asking mainly is because of the move in the full year midpoint EPS is a bit smaller than the 2Q beat. So I would just love to get some color.
Gerry Laderman: Hi, Catie, let me take a crack at that. So let me talk first on the cost side, where — what you saw us do for the second quarter, third quarter full year is adjusted CASM entirely related to the operational disruptions, which is why I wanted to emphasize that costs aside from that, our core costs are trending right in line with our expectations. So the variance versus our prior guidance is all attributable to this. So the way to think about it is about 1/3 of that CASM variance is related to the actual incurred costs from the disruptions and 2/3 just related to the capacity adjustment. The overall impact in the second quarter versus our forecast prior to June 24, I would call it about 1 point of margin is what we lost in the second quarter because of the events.
