Gregory Orenstein: Yes. Saket, thanks for noting that we don’t manage the business to RPO. We appreciate that. And we’ve tried to go out of our way to make sure folks understand that. When you think about the different moving parts, you mentioned duration being one. Obviously, with the churn that we noted, that’s an impact to RPO as well. Pierre mentioned some of the lumpiness in enterprise, particularly when you think about the over 24-month number. As you know, those contracts with the larger customers are generally longer than the two years the 24 months that we given this to RPO and so that’s where you see some of the lumpiness that we’ve been experiencing throughout the year in light of the macro environment. And then the other thing I’d probably note is just in terms of — Josh mentioned in his comments, approximately 60% of our gross ACV bookings in the quarter came from existing customers A lot of that is going to be add-on business.
Generally, we will align the add-on business to co-term with the agreement that’s in place. And so those would generally be in that shorter duration bucket as well. And so those would kind of be some of the moving parts. On the other side, things that we’ve talked about recently in terms, for example, of how we’re structuring our mortgage contracts, right, to take into account some of the growth that we expect as that market stabilizes and ultimately grows again, that’s not captured in RPO either as we think about upside opportunities outside of that specific metric. So those are the things that I would kind of highlight to you.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Terry Tillman of Truist Securities. Your line is open.
Terry Tillman: Pierre, Greg and Harrison. I guess the first question, and I don’t know if this is — and Josh — sorry, Josh, I almost forgot you. I don’t know if this is for Pierre or Josh. But on the retail or consumer lending side, it does seem like a really important lighthouse win. What I’m curious about is I’m not trying to put you on the spot, 4Q is a seasonally stronger bookings quarter, hopefully. But could we see rapidity here in more large wins in the offing in the near term? Or do you need to kind of get them up and running and they become this kind of referenceable customer. And then from there, we can start knocking them down like Domino’s in terms of other large enterprise retail or consumer lending wins? And then I had a follow-up.
Josh Glover: Terry, Josh. Look, the goal is to go as quickly as we can to sign a $200 billion bank for our consumer lending solution obviously if you have to go through pretty detailed and long evaluation process. That’s a fantastic proof point. So if you look at the other announcements we’ve put out even in this call, multiple community regional financial institutions picking us for both commercial — small business and consumer. That’s a great proof point that we’ll try to take to the market. And frankly, for a $200 billion bank to pull the trigger on a consumer lending deal in this environment. It shows a lot of conviction. It’s a great validation point. So we’re excited. So to answer your question directly, we’re going to go as quickly as we can. because ultimately, the scrutiny that we’ve stood up to shows that we can scale up.
Terry Tillman: Got it. And I guess the follow-up question is, — you all recently hosted a great Analyst Day in terms of a lot of content, a lot of helpful content. One of the things I think we picked up from you all was the idea that ending 2Q, the ending ACV balance is up 14% year-over-year, I know we have a little bit of a kind of a moving part here in terms of some of the IMB churn. But do you still feel like there’s — that’s kind of the floor or is the floor a bit higher? Is there anything you can share about kind of the risk as we move into calendar 2024 in subscription revenue kind of what’s the low watermark?
Gregory Orenstein: Yes. Terry, I think we’re going to, again, hold back on — on addressing next year. We did give you some commentary around bookings this quarter versus last quarter as well as some commentary around how we’re looking at the second half of the year versus the first half of the year. So I think at this point, we’ll probably leave it there. Again, noting that, that was, as we said at the Investor Day, kind of a data point in a point in time. And I think that’s something that we would really look to revisit more on an annual basis versus on a quarterly basis. But hopefully, those data points in terms of the second half of the year over first are helpful to — and the commentary around the ample pipeline coverage that we have are helpful in terms of how we’re thinking about Q4 and ultimately ending the year strong.
Terry Tillman: Yes. But Greg, just one quick follow-up on that. 4Q, you signed business. Some of this can be shorter dated activation schedules though, correct? So some of the products, if you do have a strong finish, some of that could meaningfully show up in calendar ’24. Is that accurate? At least in the second half/
Gregory Orenstein: That is accurate. Yes. And again, as we talked about at Investor Day, we’re seeing with the mix of business with some of the pricing evolution that we’ve addressed, we’re seeing a quicker turn from signing to revenue. It’s upwards of 28%, 30% in the first half of the year and compare that to the prior year, I think it was around 16%. And so we expect that trend to continue and so again, we’ll be getting, as we go forward, more in-quarter or in-year revenue from deals that we signed in quarter and in year than we have in the past.
