Lisa Clive: Very clear. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. We will now go to the next question. And the next question comes from Robert Davies from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Robert Davies: Yes, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. My first one was just around the evolution of order book. I think you’d cited in your presentation pack the order book being 20% higher than 3Q of 2021. And that was going to kind of cover you despite the sort of negative trajectory in orders at the moment. My question is, as we look into sort of 2024, are you expecting that order book to kind of normalize back down to sort of pre-disruption levels through the end of the year, i.e., is that sort of negative run rate on orders going to get canceled out by the end of the year, and we’re sort of exiting 2024 at a sort of normalized order book level? That was the first question around declining order books. The second one was just around the testing and whether in terms of the feedback from the FDA, as they told you exactly what they want in terms of additional testing and have you made any initial estimate for how long that additional testing will take to get the answers to?
And then the final one was just in terms of where you’ve returned to market in the sleep business outside the US, just be curious what you are doing in terms of pricing of those products versus some of the peers in the sort of non-US markets. Thank you.
Roy Jakobs: Thank you, Robert. Let me start with the — with the first question. So, on the order book. So, I think, as you indeed call out, it’s important to recognize that we are still working through a kind of normalization of the order book where on one hand we have this higher percentage of order book that kind of we are building down as we dial up our sales. Whilst, in the meanwhile, we also kind of improve our order intake. And then in that mix you see that kind of we will in 2024 indeed cross the line where we will kind of normalize and build down that order book to a rate where we want it to be. Because in some way it is kind of strange that, yes, you have too high order book and that holds you back in certain elements to kind of capture the full opportunity in the market.
So, that’s kind of something that we are forecasting that, in 2024, we will get fully back on track with. Then on the testing, in terms of the feedback, we’re working through that exactly as we speak. That’s also what I mentioned, we are in active dialog. I think it’s positive that we have that dialog because the moment we can clarify, we can then test, we can also satisfy their needs. And that’s what we’re all focused on. We both have the same objective. We want to get to an outcome here. So far we have a strong testing program executed, really also acknowledge that this was extensive, this was with third-party independent test houses. Now they have formulated that there are some more testing that they want to be done. We will agree with them on that and then we will, of course, pursue that and conduct it in the best possible and fastest manner, but taking the patient interest first and foremost.
The third one on the return to market, what we do see actually, I would say, is encouraging. Firstly, we see customers really welcoming us back and that also means that welcoming does not go with significant pricing differences versus what we had seen before. There is still significant demand. They welcome actually competition in the market and therefore, there is no special program of discounts or anything like that happening or needed for us to get back in play. Of course, we will work our way back into these markets in a gradual way as we have been out for some time, but the first steps back into the market, I would say, are encouraging.
Robert Davies: Thank you. Maybe just one sort of follow-up. Just on the size of the liability for the medical injury claims, what’s the timeline there in terms of having a number, do you think, that you can come to market with? Is that still the first half of 2024? Is that likely to be the second half? Thank you.
Abhijit Bhattacharya: We have said it’s going to be the second half of next year. That’s what we estimate. It’s not a figure carved in stone. So, I don’t want it to be the next target that we are hunting. Just to be clear, we expect it around the second half and then we will see how it goes.
Robert Davies: Got it. Okay. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. We will now go to the next question. And the next question comes from Veronika Dubajova from Citi. Please go ahead.
Veronika Dubajova: Hi, Roy. Hi, Abhijit, and thank you — and hello, Leandro as well. Thank you guys for taking my questions. I have three, please. The first one is very sort of short-term, but the fourth quarter, if I look at the guidance, there is still about a EUR200 million delta in the adjusted EBITA number in Q4. Abhijit, I was just wondering if you can give us some insights into what you see as the biggest moving, biggest sources of risk, and whether you feel more comfortable at the upper or the lower end of that number would be — would be super helpful. Then my second question is just trying to understand a little bit more about sort of the FDA’s motivation for the testing. If it’s disconnected from the consent decree, can you give us a little bit more insight into what the FDA would like to understand from the testing?
Is this about your ability to return to market with DS1? Is this about how the recall is classified? Just what exactly is it that they were looking to do with the testing data? I appreciate that you can’t tell us what exactly you have to test, but just would be great to understand that. And then my third question is just kind of more conceptually, obviously, the market share losses that you’ve seen in D&T. Other than lead times being back to normal, is there anything else that you can do to reaccelerate momentum as we move into 2024? I’m thinking product launches. Is there something we should be thinking about in terms of what comes at RSNA or beyond, kind of, what else is in your toolbox to get you guys to see some better growth momentum in 2024?
Thank you.
Roy Jakobs: Thank you, Veronika. Let me start with the second question, then Abhijit can take the first one. So, on the FDA motivation for testing. I think as you also have read from the FDA, and actually what they are looking into is and question to clarify further, the testing data to support our conclusions of no appreciable harm, right? We have done very extensive testing with independent labs that came to the conclusion that no appreciable harm done — was done to patients, which is a very important outcome of that. They have been looking into the data. They also have been actually already counting along the way. And now they have posed some additional questions and they’re kind of currently defining exactly what they want to ensure that can — they can supplement the data with any data they want to kind of come to hopefully same conclusions, as we also shared the same objective that we want to ensure that whatever is out there is patient-safe.
