Ryan MacDonald: Hi. Thanks for taking my questions and congrats on an excellent quarter and fiscal year. David, first for you, you talked about in one of your earlier responses that two-thirds of the deals of the 48 new customers you added this year started small and grew. Given this larger opportunity for multi-product consolidation, do you feel like you need to change the way you go-to-market at all to win some of these larger deals on the initial land and to have you started to see any potential gaps or natural adjacencies you can expand to with the product portfolio to maybe capture more share on these consolidations?
David Steinberg: Ryan that is not to suggest the other questions weren’t great. But that’s a really good question. And I think, Chris, even hinted at the size and scale of the deals we are seeing coming out of the gate are substantially larger than we have ever seen before. We are often now going to market with Fortune 1000 companies for the whole shoe bang , where they are moving massive dollars in one fell swoop. And I think I pointed out the one retailer who signed a five-year contract with us. That’s not something that would have happened a few years ago, right? So I think in order to go-to-market, what we have seen is with the turbulence that a number of the large legacy marketing clouds are having, we have been able to steal, I shouldn’t say that, a number of their very senior sales people have left those organizations and then we have been able to hire them shortly thereafter.
So we are not just bringing in more salespeople, we are bringing in senior sales people coming out of these marketing clouds who have made these very large sales and they are building a go-to-market strategy that in many cases is sort of all of it versus a very small part.
Ryan MacDonald: Thanks. Very helpful. Maybe as a follow up for Chris. Chris, you mentioned in terms of the incremental leverage that you are going to see this year that it’s going to come more from at the OpEx level than at the gross margin level. Is that being driven at all by sort of a continuation of maybe more of this mid-70%s mix of direct platform? And if so, what’s driving, I guess, maybe that mix shift that’s going to remained in the mid-70% versus you put up a couple of, I think, high 70%, 80% quarters? Thanks.
Chris Greiner: Yeah. It’s not as much that, Ryan. It was more reflection that, we are significantly ahead in terms of what we should be reducing our cost of revenue by, our model says 60 points a year. Last year for the full year, we reduced it by 170 bps. So we are ahead. I think the second part is, we wanted to add a layer of conservatism in the middle of the P&L, just like we have at the top part of the P&L. Not to say that, it just gives us flexibility, frankly. And then third, it’s really more a reflection of the investments we made, particularly in sales and marketing, adding multiple CROs. David talked about adding mechanisms and infrastructure around marketing. We don’t need to make those same investments this year, so they are just going to be some natural, natural leverage as we wrap around on those investments. But it’s more around conservatism and leaving ourselves flexibility.
Scott Schmitz: Thank you, Ryan. Operator, next question, please?
Ryan MacDonald: Yeah. Thanks.
Chris Greiner: Thanks, Ryan.
Operator: Our next question comes from Elizabeth Porter of Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Chris Quintero: Hey, guys. This is Chris Quintero for Elizabeth. I wanted to better understand the reduction in the superscaled customers. It was primarily due to them falling below that spend threshold. But just curious kind of where that reduction was, it was in more kind of on the activation media pass-through side or was it on the more kind of subscription side?
