William Febbo: Yes, I’d say, I’d just add to the headwinds, we have seen normalization on the FDA approval rate to back to 2021. I think given the economy, the turnover rate in general, if you track LinkedIn you can see people are jumping around a lot less and all those things were headwinds. And there, as Steve said, there are still headwinds for a lot of firms and if you’re a boater it all depends where your boat is when you have the headwinds. So I think we’re in a good place. We’re in that in that harbor where we have something that’s needed, it works and we’re starting to see that come back really happy to see it.
Unidentified Analyst: Okay, great. I think that all makes sense and nice to hear the good execution on the marketing side of things as well. One quick followup and this is sort of a related question to the first one just around 2024 visibility. Given some of the moving parts here with the acquisition and some of the changes that you’ve made on the product side, can you just level set with us as we think about the pro forma business in 2024 that $110 million or so target, how much of that is sort of a pure transaction or value based revenue stream and how much of it is more of a subscription revenue recognized overtime where you’d have kind of a backlog of visibility going into next year?
William Febbo: Well, we’re not changing our business. There will still be the architectural fees and then transaction fees related to DAAP programs or tactical programs that we are — we’re not a SaaS business, right. But what we are is a highly recurring revenue rate because what we do works and it’s been tried and true and it has scale. And I think ultimately that’s what’s going to make the difference here. And you’ve seen it in other companies out there that are three or four years ahead of us. Once you can prove that be reliable, get the data back to the client, have the measurement in place and the compliance in place and basically do what you say, say what you do constantly, that farmer really starts to invest in you and we feel like we’re at that place.
So we don’t foresee a substantial shift in the P&L model. And but we do expect to have a better visibility, one of the things we liked about Medicx when they go into the year. Again, not going to comment on it now, but as we get into Q1, we will, they just had more visibility on their year. Given the increase in DAAP and some of these wins that we’re seeing from Q3 and Q4 we’ll have better visibility as well, so the two will come together nicely. And ultimately if you think of that size business, now we’ve got lots of seats at the table and as we’ve mentioned, there’s fairly limited overlap and that just gives us a lot of opportunity to go in land and expand and the team is pretty fired up about that.
Unidentified Analyst: Okay, perfect. And Congrats again on the momentum and I’ll go ahead and hop back in the queue.
William Febbo: Thanks.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question is from David Grossman with Stifel. Please go ahead.
David Grossman: Good morning. Thank you. I want to go back to the comments that were made about clients coming back after kind of experimenting with some other vendors in the marketplace. Can you perhaps just drill down a little bit into that, maybe give us some data points that would help us better understand that dynamic and when they do come back, what’s the cadence of spending when they come back?
Steve Silvestro: David, hey, good to hear your voice. This is Steve. I mean just analogously speaking or just give you some key data points as you said, I mean they’re, the experimentation was around return on investment. And so it takes a couple of quarters for you know clients to be able to run programs, measure them, see how effective they were, what the impact was and then make a subsequent decision. I think in most cases those decisions are being made on a couple of things, one is the reach and the execution, the other is the ability to report back on what actually happened. We call that in the industry within level data for the HCP side. There are other DTC components for measurement. Universally, what we’re hearing is that other competitors ability to measure effectively, accurately, and timely is really lacking.
And so for brands, that’s problematic because the measurement of the first half determines and dictates the amount of spend they have for the second half. And so when a competitor didn’t deliver on what they articulated they would in the first half, it actually caused the brand to lose funds for marketing in the second half of the year, which is a big problem. And so that’s the pivot back, and that’s what you’re seeing. They know that our solution is really tried and true. They know that we’ve delivered a consistent return on investment. Actually, the return on investments have improved with the addition of DAAP because the audiences are dynamic, so real time. And they’ve seen that. And that’s really what has contributed to that. Scale from two deals to 16 very rapidly, and all of the 100% renewals that you heard will state earlier.
David Grossman: So, Steve, then the funding can be shifted to you that quickly. In the sense that they’re not satisfied with the results, they can shift that funding immediately to you to spend in the back half of the year. Is that pretty much how the Dynamic works?
Steve Silvestro: Yes, it is how the Dynamic works. I wouldn’t say, I would caution you to say they can shift it immediately like a buy up. It’s not a buy up scenario, okay? What it is a strategic decision to pivot away from someone who can’t deliver on the reporting, meaning they can’t measure the programs. They have no ability to tell whether or not their spend was effective, over to a solution where they know they’re going to have a solid reporting capability by the end of the year and be able to deliver back up to their senior management. Here’s what we spent, here’s what our return on investment was, and here’s what we’re plugging in for 2024. And right now, as you know, David, everybody’s in the middle of brand planning season, so it couldn’t be more critical to have accurate reports that project 2024 and the potential for them to have success as they’re building their budgets. So those migrations are happening.
David Grossman: Got it. Great. Thanks for that, Steve. That’s actually really helpful. Thank you for — and then the second question is back to the Medicx acquisition. And it sounds like there’s some pretty exciting opportunities now that you’re operating as a combined company. And maybe if you could explain a little more detail just how the decision making works in their model versus you and when I mean decision making, I mean at the brand. So, for example, are we leveraging the same types of contacts? Are they different? And also maybe explain a little bit about their channels versus your channels and how they compare and contrast and how that impacts the growth of the business going forward.
William Febbo: Okay, this is Will. I’ll start on the channels and I’ll hand it over to Steve on the first part of the question. Yes. So because they’re focused exclusively on the consumer or the patient and where they come across content digitally, right? So think digital TV, think social, think screens in pharmacies, screens in waiting rooms, wherever they will be. We know we basically can target content. The content is like us. It’s generated by agencies for pharma, goes through the same approval process. It’s more consumer oriented, and they’ve done a spectacular job similar to our model. They have a cost on their P&L to the partnerships, and then they have a team that measures that effectiveness and manages it. Again, like us, they do not generate any content.
