Thomas Sandgaard: No, as I have said, there shouldn’t be any €“ so, those inspections are not based on what’s happening on the product side. Inspections of the company on a €“ I wouldn’t say on a regular basis, but we tend to see those in €“ with intervals of less than 5 years. And the product approvals, it’s a whole different scenario through the FDA. So, that’s independent.
Jeffrey Cohen: Okay. Got it. And then could you talk about adjusted EBITDA for full year €˜23? It looks like you are expecting a similar type of growth cadence and trajectory as you had in €˜22. On an adjustment basis, Dan, do you see that €“ it looks like you are coming in around where you are over 20% for the fourth quarter, but you averaged about high teens, 17%, 18% for the full year. Any thoughts there on €˜23?
Dan Moorhead: Yes. No, I think we were guiding more towards EPS this year and pushing away from adjusted EBITDA a little bit. But I think, generally, when you look at the year, you should see similar growth in €˜23 to what we saw in €˜22.
Jeffrey Cohen: Got it. Okay. Thanks for the call and thanks for readout.
Dan Moorhead: Yes. Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from Simran Kaur with Piper Sandler. Please go ahead.
Simran Kaur: Hey. Good morning. This is Simran on for Adam. Thank you for taking the questions and congrats on the print. Maybe just starting off on the full year guidance of $180 million to $200 million, can you walk us through key assumptions at the low end and the high end of the range? And specifically, what is assumed for the core pain franchise versus ZMS?
Thomas Sandgaard: Yes. Maybe I will take that one. We basically €“ even though there might be a little bit of revenue in ZMS this year, in our guidance, we are not accounting for any of that. So, that’s all the pain management division. And obviously, the order growth we are seeing now is going to result in increased revenue over the next several years. And some of that is obviously going to hit here in the next couple of quarters. And the assumptions assume that as Dan mentioned earlier that by the end of the year, we can get up to around 550 sales reps. So, there will be an increase in sales reps in itself is not that productive initially. So, that’s going to be part of increasing our fixed expenses. But our existing sales reps are experiencing high growth right now.
And as they continue to become more and more productive, we expect that to turn into revenue in the $180 million to $200 million range. And what would determine if we are in the low end of the range versus in the high end of the range would probably be the productivity of the existing reps more than anything. We have a very stable scenario when it comes to how do we collect the cash, which is payments from health insurance companies. And that is obviously based on preset amounts and preset quantities and preset length of treatment that is determined by insurance companies. And we don’t really foresee any changes. So, productivity and from a better mix of insurances could also help us a little bit in terms of moving the revenue up. But we are still somewhat dependent on the labor market in terms of new hires for our sales force as well as employees for our corporate headquarters here in Colorado.
I don’t know if you have anything to add, Anna?
Anna Lucsok: To the productivity of sales reps?
Thomas Sandgaard: Yes.
Anna Lucsok: We have seen an increase in productivity of our sales reps, obviously, throughout the end of 2022 and then especially the first two months of 2023. And we are seeing them focus more on payer mix, insurance mix and driving that forward.
