Matthew Pine: Yes. From a bidding pipeline standpoint, I would say, look, industrial remains really strong globally. We primarily play in the general industry. there, and that’s been pretty resilient. So that continues strong. Commercial is a bit of — it’s showing strength, however, expected to be slow in the back half, primarily due to new construction moderating. We track the ABI Index, the architectural billing index, that’s been less than 50 in the past 3 months. And so looking for a little bit of a slowdown in the bid activity for new construction for commercial. And we talked resi, that’s primarily a replacement for us. the orders are slowing down, largely due to the improved supply chain. It’s probably the biggest area that we’ve seen the supply chain improve and also from pandemic investments.
And so that’s really what’s impacted that. And then a strong pipeline in M&CS, plus water infrastructure, especially treatment. We’re starting to see treatment really ramp up and the net backlog also continues to build, and we have a strong funnel.
Operator: And we’ll take our next question from Nathan Jones with Stifel.
Nathan Jones : I think I’m going to go to questions and if I can get any answers around revenue synergies from the combination of Xylem and Evoqua. I mean this is clearly a growth-enabling deal, and Patrick, you highlighted a couple of avenues for that. Investors have been very hungry for information on what kind of value that might add. So is there any color on kind of what your targets are going to be in terms of the expected growth for the combined businesses, how you’re going to approach it? Are you going to have specific growth teams assigned to these kinds of projects? Any color and more color you can give us around those kinds of things?
Patrick Decker: Sure, sure. Yes. So as you’ve said, Nate, I mean — so first of all, I mean, the economic returns of this combination are justified on the cost synergies alone. And I don’t want to look past those because I want to make sure that our investors understand that we’ve got strong conviction around the $140 million of cost synergies within 3 years. Going forward, we will lay out exactly what the — not only the 3 buckets are that we’ve talked about, and I can reiterate those if we need to, but specific delivery time frames, ownership, et cetera. So strong conviction around that cost synergy. Then beyond that, clearly, this combination is about growth. It really is taking a long-term view, not on the realization of synergies, but a long-term view on what the world needs right now in terms of a water company at scale and depth, and there are so many things that we can do together that we could not do as separate companies.
Now on the revenue synergies I’m not going to give you a specific number as of yet. We clearly will do that, and I can talk a little bit about process. But clearly, we expect that there’s going to be an accelerated growth rate of the combined company. And we will put a specific target out there as we get closer to finalization of this. In terms of the process, there is going to be a clear ownership within our integration work that’s already kicked off. We have teams that have been assigned to go after each one of the several areas of gross synergy. Obviously, we have a view on that before we got the deal approved by both boards, but we’re looking to see where there might even be other opportunities beyond that as we go forward. I laid out in my prepared remarks what some of those areas are.
