Lorin Crenshaw: So my answer was in regard to the year-over-year impact. From a sequential point of view, you’re right, we only saw about a sequential decline of about 5% or so in the average selling price. And so the impact sequentially would have been principally related to cost. And I’ve said before that that is principally related to the KCL.
Jeff Zekauskas: And then in your inventories, your inventories are close to $400 million. And historically, maybe a peak inventory level for Compass is $300 million. Do you have to really cut production rates in your salt business for the remainder of the year in order to get your inventories down?
Lorin Crenshaw: I would focus on days for two reasons. Due to inflationary dynamics, we have higher valued inventories. If you just look back over the past three or four years and the team has successfully passed through a lot of those costs. But with that said, inventory days coming into this year were at about $200 million and our focus is on reducing those days. Every 10 days is approximately $25 million and you should expect starting this quarter and as we focus on the balance of the year that we’re going to drive those days down. They are not at acceptable levels but they are inflation adjusted at higher levels. And so, we’re going to focus on getting those days down and they are at historical highs and that’s something that we’re going to get our arms around. It goes to George’s point earlier about running these assets flexibly to reduce production to meet where demand is.
Jeff Zekauskas: And then lastly, you talked about some changes in requirements from the US Forest Service affecting your Fortress business. But I couldn’t tell whether you thought that it actually delayed anything. What you said is you expected to have your paperwork in order before the 2024 fire season. So if that’s true, does the delay really make no difference?
Jenny Hood: So the delay, just to give a little bit more color on that. The original solicitation from the US Forest Service was issued in late September. It took them until mid December to issue a final revised solicitation, and the solicitation deadline was then January 10th. So it absolutely pushed back the contracting process, in total. However, we are pleased since January 10th when we were able to start the negotiations, we’re pleased with the progress and the engagement that we’re seeing from US Forest Service. Keep in mind that previously the Forest Service was dealing with one sole source supplier for over two decades. So thinking about how to integrate another supplier, both from a contractual standpoint as well as in the field has been quite challenging for them, but however, we are supporting them in those efforts. And again, we’re pleased with the engagement that we’ve received since the submission deadline.
Lorin Crenshaw: And Jeff, from an earnings perspective, you’re exactly right. There’s no change. We entered into this year not assuming EBITDA for 2024 for Fortress until we get the contract. When we get that contract, which we fully expect, you should expect us to raise our guidance to reflect the profitability. And so we have been conservative in not speculating, but you should expect that we will raise our guidance. And there’s no change there, it’s just a little bit delayed.
Jeff Zekauskas: And then lastly for Ed, what’s your number one priority that you want to get done over the next six months?
Edward Dowling: Well, after ensuring that we’re operating in a responsible manner as a company, it’s focused on cash, working on the balance sheet, managing the inventories to an appropriate level, which it’s just all cash management and getting the mindset right, establishing the accountabilities and the changes of plans that accompany that, there’s some subtleties that you run your business differently and making sure that we’re moving ahead with that in a very quick way.
Operator: We will take our next question from David Silver with CL King.
David Silver: I have a question I guess about any lingering liabilities related to the decision to terminate the lithium project. So I’m sure you have a number of agreements, but the ones with Ford and LG on the supply agreements, you have an agreement with the technology provider et cetera. Should we expect any lingering costs or cash requirements to any of the counterparties related to the lithium project going forward?
Lorin Crenshaw: As it relates to the technology provider, any expenses associated or potential liabilities associated with the technology provider have been included in our write down. And so any expenses there have been included in that write down. As it relates to the OEMs, there were no financial obligations that were not contingent on us advancing this project. And so we have notified them appropriately, but there are no financial obligation.
Edward Dowling: There’s no take or pay or any requirement to deliver associated with those agreements. The more relationship base that when and if it got going, we had a customer base established, that’s it.
David Silver: So from an earnings per share perspective, the charges you took this quarter are sufficient. But is there any estimate of the cash impact that will flow from the decisions that’s maybe how much of that $77 million, let’s say, will be addressed via cash payment as opposed to just the write down of things you’ve already paid for?
Lorin Crenshaw: And so as you can see in our guidance for CapEx for lithium, it hasn’t changed. We said that we would spend about $30 million for lithium as it relates to in flight capital that we could not stop even after we suspend it. And so as you do your model, you should assume that we will be around that level and only that level, not any more than that level. Now when we get to the end of the year, not all of that $30 million will show up as CapEx, because we have written down the asset, some of it will just be liabilities that we pay off. But that $30 million is a good number and there’s nothing more than that. And I would also say that the preponderance of the cash has already been paid. And so it’ll be behind us after this 3/31 quarter.
David Silver: I have a question about operational strategies on your salt business. So Ed, you were very clear discussing your priority on cash generation. And there’s a couple of things when I think about your salt business. But firstly, there is the underground mine plan that is underway. And to me that’s something where you would have to invest a little more to generate a certain amount of efficiency, incremental efficiency from that. And then, so I’m wondering about should we expect the underground mine development program to take a little longer or to be conducted at a more measured pace going forward? And then secondly, on your marketing strategy, I did note that you talked about maintaining the product pricing as far as I guess bid season strategies are concerned.
But I’m just wondering, I mean, along with Kevin’s departure, the Chief Commercial Officer did depart as well. And some people might interpret cash flow generation and per ton margins as a bit of a trade off there. So could you just reiterate, I mean, what is the plan for spending to further progress the underground mine development? And then what, if anything, might change going forward with the value over volume approach to your upcoming bid season for deicing salt?
Edward Dowling: George and I will address the first half of your question, and then Ben will speak to the market and commercial side of that. There are numerous improvement efforts underway, not just at Goderich, but at all of our operations. And that not just the mines but at the plants and at our distribution centers, all focused on cash. When you go to a mine like Goderich, our priority will be to be driving through the east on the mains that are up on the north side of the mine really tied into the infrastructure better than what the existing infrastructure is. We have to haul through conveyor or other means the product all the way around to the shaft basically going three quarters away around our many miles more than the direct shot through would be.
