Stephen Volkmann: Okay. Thanks. And then it sounds like everywhere we turn, people are talking about sort of normalization. But does it make sense to think about 2024 just really big picture terms as kind of mid-cycle year for the industry, and you guys may do what you do if you have outgrowth targets, but is mid-cycle the right way to think about 2024 for now?
Eric Hansotia: Yes, we’re not giving exact numbers, but I think that we don’t see any dramatic moves in 2024, let’s say it that way. And so it’s a general slight movement into 2024, but we haven’t committed to any industry numbers. But wouldn’t be shocked with your kind of prediction.
Operator: The next question is from Kristen Owen with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.
Kristen Owen: Hi. Thank you for taking the question. I’m also going to ask a normalization type of question. And in particular, on the pricing front, as we think about pricing normalizing, can we just double-click on what pricing normalization for AGCO means today? So arguably, you’ve got a much richer technology mix, a much higher contribution from Fendt. Just how we think about what norm pricing means on a go-forward basis?
Damon Audia: Yes. I think, Kristen, directionally, when we think about pricing, I would sort of tell you, it’s 2% to 3% has been the historical. Again, when you think about the pricing and you referenced Fendt, Fendt is driving more of the margin enhancement. Again, if we’re raising prices on a Fendt tractor, it may not be different than what we do with a Massey or Ultra tractor, when we think about that 2% to 3%. And to your point, when we think about the Precision Ag, the retrofit, that does operate at a slightly different price point. And so the pricing there may be slightly different. But in aggregate, you’re probably looking at us being in that more 2% to 3% based on our historical rates.
Eric Hansotia: Maybe just another comment, both your and Steve’s question touched on this normalization. It works — we believe it works on both sides of the equation. So although pricing won’t be going up as much as in years past, we also expect that, there’s going to be a lot more opportunity for farmer costs to come down and AGCO costs to come down. So, farmer costs in terms of fertilizer and some of their other inputs and then in interest rates, we feel like they’re probably near peak or close to it. So that has a potential to go more down than up. And then AGCO costs similarly, both in our factories and our supplier factories, we’ve had a lot of inefficiencies over these last two or three years. And we’ve not gotten all that out yet. So, although, we’ve had a much better performance this year, our plant shortages are down 54% year-to-date, there’s still cost in the system that we intend to take out in 2024. So that’s the other half of the normalization discussion.
Kristen Owen: Appreciate those puts and takes for next year and beyond. But so then my follow-up question is related to the Trimble JV. You talked about the fill that needs to occur in order to replace the existing OEM relationship. But the $2 billion in Precision revenue implied by 2028, it’s about a 15% CAGR off of a much higher base. Just help us dimensionalize the sources of growth in terms of technology solutions and how to think about the cadence to that $2 billion revenue. Thank you.
Damon Audia: Yes, Kristen. I think for us, again, that 15% CAGR, I think what you’re going to see here over the first couple of years is actually a decline in some of the OEM revenues coming out of the system, which we knew about as we were looking at the partnership with Trimble. As Eric alluded to in his comments, our plan is to replace that with our OEM fitment opportunities here and we expect to sort of recover that. But again, from an absolute level over the first couple of years, you won’t see much growth there but see more of a transformation of the mix of that revenue. And then as we introduce new products, we start to leverage more of the combined channels, so again, bringing the Trimble type products into Precision Planting, some of our OEM channels, looking at accessing advantage channel with Precision Planting, we see significant revenue growth coming there, plus some of the new product introductions that they have in the pipeline that we’re excited to bring to all of those different channels.
And those are the two sort of the primary drivers that will help drive that growth over the next several years.
Operator: The next question is from Larry De Maria with William Blair. Please go ahead.
Larry De Maria: Hi, thanks. Good morning, everybody. Just want to follow up on this — the Trimble discussion. And the $170 million in pro forma EBITDA, there’s obviously a big portion that you’ve referenced of CNH and CNH dealer EBITDA. Can you maybe give us some color on specific numbers on what 2024, that $170 million looks like in 2024, given all the dynamics? Let’s say, it’s a flat market for what they sell and you’re going to lose some sales and EBITDA but also gain some. So how would that $170 million translate on a full year basis, given those dynamics?
Damon Audia: Yes. I think, Larry, it’d probably be a little premature for us, given that we’re still in the midst of closing the transaction right now. I think we’re going to defer any comments on 2024 on the JV portion of 2024 until we actually get to closing. Again, what I would tell you, as Eric has alluded to, once we’re able to, we’re going to start to work with the team there in shifting the receivers and our base offering to Trimble. But we have to work through the process here to ultimately close the transaction. But once we’re able to, we’ll give you guys more clarity on how we envision and what we see for the joint venture for 2024.
Larry De Maria: Okay. Thank you. And then maybe switching gears. You said, I think, in your comments, the tractors, planters, application equipment in North America are sold out for 2024 or for model year 2024. Can you put some context into that? What percentage of North America is covered by that? And is it — are those sold-out levels higher than the 2023 levels? Just what does that directionally mean for North America?
Damon Audia: Yes. I think that’s directionally speaking, it’s about 20% of the North American revenue. And it’s, I’d say, relatively flat volumes year-over-year in those particular products.
Greg Peterson: Since supply chain has improved, Larry, it probably means we’ll produce a small amount more than we did the year before but relatively similar.
Operator: The next question is from Tami Zakaria with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.
