Richard Tobin : I don’t think that we’re getting over our skis in terms of demand. At the end of the day, we’ve got one to three in top line. Now taking to that one to three is we’ve got a small amount of dilution because we sold the DESTACO [ph] versus what we brought into the portfolio. I think from an earnings point of view, that neutralized itself, but not from a top line point of view, when I take a look at the math. We’ve got certain parts of the portfolio that have just done fantastically which would be can-making equipment and polymer processing equipment where are cycling down. So we’ve known about this coming [ph] and that’s why we’ve been investing in a variety of other portions of the portfolio to cycle up and we’re going to take a look that we had a couple of footfalls last year that we don’t expect to repeat.
So net-net, the underlying growth is higher than one, three because we’re incorporating the headwind that we have on some of the cyclical portions of the portfolio, but it’s not as if we’re baking in this return on just overall GDP growth, I think that what’s really baked into our growth is where we have invested. So like what we just try to highlight on that page. I mean, we’ve taken – we’ve got a significant amount of revenue growth on three platforms that really didn’t exist in the group up until a year ago of any consequence. So the growth is a little bit better than the highlight figure just because of the headwinds we got on the cyclical ones. And it’s largely driven on specific products and end market exposure rather than AG, the Fed’s going to drop interest rates and GDP is going to expand.
Brad Cerepak: Yes. I guess what I would add to that is, unlike like we’ve been pretty vocal about the fact that price was pretty significant to the top line over the last 2 years that I would say, while it’s not a big set of numbers here because of the one to three guide, there is positive volume growth, except for the first quarter as we come down on this idiosyncratic issue that we’re talking about. So I think it is a better setup for us this year than years past where you can actually now think about plant absorption, return to volume, not just price.
Mike Halloran: Helpful. It makes a lot of sense. And then when you think about the pumps business, the industrial pumps piece, maybe just talk about what you’re seeing underneath to put on that side, trajectory, order trends, et cetera, and how you’re thinking about that for the year?
Richard Tobin : It’s decent. It really – the industrial pump side never really had the kind of headwind in terms of stocking and destocking. And that’s really high-value equipment. So it’s more or less fundamental demand. I think there was some caution in the back half of ’23 just because of the carryover of interest rates and everything else. I think what’s baked into our forecast this year is some growth, but not anything extraordinary on the industrial side.
Brad Cerepak: Right.
Mike Halloran: Makes sense. Thanks, guys. Appreciate it
Richard Tobin : Thanks. Yeah.
Operator: The next question comes from Steve Tusa with JPMorgan.
Steve Tusa: Hi, good morning.
Richard Tobin : Hi.
Brad Cerepak: Hi, Steve.
Steve Tusa: Where are you in the like standoff on price and volume? And what do you assume for price for the year?
Richard Tobin : Price is about a point to a point and a half. And on volume, I think…
Brad Cerepak: Roughly the same thing. So on 50-50…
Richard Tobin : Yes. So a point to a point and a half, and so it’s 50-50 on price volume. And I think that we’ve done the hard work because of what the argument of against price is inventory balances. And I think that the one way you can protect price is not get over your skis in terms of inventory. And I think based on what you see in our cash flow that we’ve done the hard work for a good setup there. So right now, all we need to do is toggle production with orders at this point.
Steve Tusa: How much do you think that production take down in the quarter? Did that impact margins to a degree?
Richard Tobin : Yes. I mean you can see it in clean energy for sure.
Steve Tusa: Got it. And then lastly, just any kind of more specific color on total margins for the year, whether it’s basis point improvement or a hard number for margins?
Richard Tobin : How’s up for an answer. I know it’s so dependent on mix. We’d like to see a quarter or two before we want to put a hard number on it. But I think that by and large, we should mix up this year.
Steve Tusa: Sorry, one more for you. EPS seasonality too. How do you see that kind of feathering in over the course of the year? What do you expect in 1Q? And then how does that build?
Richard Tobin : Right. I think that Q1 will be more of a reflection of Q4. So I don’t get all worked up about the comp. And then we bought – we get the absorption because we ramp from there and then regular seasonality. The vast majority of the accretion in EPS should be Q2 and Q3. And by the time we get to the half year, we’ll probably have a good idea of where we stand on Q4. But I think that we put it in all the caution that we can just in terms of the macro, right? This is – our fundamental forecast is basically what we think volume is going to be by vertical here that – so we think that we can hit these numbers. And if we get a better macro or we get biopharma or return on some amount of HVAC that we’re ready to go, but we prefer – rather than trying to lead that like we have over the last couple of years and speaking to those end markets, it’s more of a show me. It comes, we’ll upgrade our forecasting.
