Tim Wojs: Okay, good. And then, I guess, just on the field inventory, I mean, it sounds like you’re going to — you expect to actually exit the season with higher inventory in the field. So, I guess, what are the conversations that you’re having with distributors and dealers, just given — I think you do have some pretty tough comps in the first half of the year for ’23, and it seems like just given kind of exiting the year with higher inventory and then just higher cost to carry and those types of things, I mean, do you think it’s possible that your distributors and dealers kind of take inventory into next year more on a — I guess, just in time basis, or closer to the season?
Rick Olson: Field inventory for us is really a story that’s different depending on which of the categories. If you do think about those areas of high demand, our field inventory is very low. For example, the underground specialty construction, much, much lower than we would like to see it. That product is going directly to customers. The same with golf and grounds. The other end of the spectrum is what you’re talking about, which is for those landscape contractor products specifically, in some categories of res, we go into a lower part where they’re off part of the season with higher field inventory. So, we do expect that, that will take into 2024 to work through that. And probably realistically, if it gets carried through the off-season, it’s going to be largely the second quarter when the demand is high enough to really bleed that off in a significant way and get back to a more normal level, just kind of working through the rebalancing of demand, the channel expectations and what our production is.
Tim Wojs: Okay. That makes sense. All right, appreciate the color, guys. Good luck on the rest of the year.
Rick Olson: Thank you.
Angie Drake: Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Eric Bosshard from Cleveland Research Company.
Eric Bosshard: Thank you. Two things. First of all, if you go back a little bit in time, like, the only residential mass customer was Home Depot. And it felt like that was a strategic decision. And over the last three years — three years ago, you had Tractor, now you got Lowe’s. And so, I’m curious, philosophically or strategically, what changed in either the market or your thinking that suggested good idea to do business with all three of these guys versus previously there obviously was a conscious decision to just sell one. What changed?
Rick Olson: I don’t know that anything has necessarily changed. We make that kind of calculation on an annual basis. We think through our strategies, we look at particular product categories where we’re looking to grow. And we value all of our long-term and medium-term partners as you’ve mentioned. We just look at the opportunity that was there with Lowe’s to bring our product to more customers and look at the entire picture, and we believe that it was the right thing to do for us now. And so, we have the opportunity to bring our brand to more customers and that ability to leverage at higher volumes, it’s important for us as we’re investing in new technologies and so forth to the level of investments in new product development becomes even greater.
And to have larger scale and larger volume really is a help for all of our partners. We have a relationship with each of our channel partners, and we have an incredibly important dealer channel that we think of in every decision, and we believe we have the opportunity to grow at each of those channel types of channel partners as we go forward.
Eric Bosshard: Okay. Secondly, Intimidator, just curious to understand a little bit better within this. I would assume when you bought the business or valued the business or pro forma the business, the revenue growth — the mid-teen revenue growth last year was probably better than you had budgeted. I guess, I’m just surprised 18 months later to have a write-off of this magnitude, especially considering the first 12 months performance was again probably better than the pro forma. Is this inventory being written-off? Is this goodwill being written-off? Is there like something over the medium-term that — or what’s different in the medium-term that changes the arc of this business that accounting-wise got you to having to make such a move today?
Angie Drake: Yeah, you’re right. We saw a really nice growth in the first year of Intimidator Group, it was about 16.5%, so, very strong growth. What we saw impact that group and that business this year was the same thing that we saw in our other residential and homeowner businesses. Our Q3 results were significantly lower than expected. Really, the summer seasonality trends that they normally see did not come to fruition, mainly due to the weather. June ended up being a really hot month, and it impacted them in kind of the southern regions and — that they play in. They are also largely based on customers that are homeowners who prefer to buy a professional product. So that, with the macro factors that Rick discussed earlier and he had in his prepared remarks, really affected that business. So, it’s really goodwill and the trade name that were impaired. It’s not a write-down of their assets.
Eric Bosshard: Okay. And I — admittedly, I don’t — totally understand the accounting piece of it, but what I guess I don’t understand is like the June was a hot month in the summer seasonality and — which seems very near-term to then impact how you carry the asset on the balance sheet. It just seems like a big change, if it’s just indeed hot weather in June and some unique seasonality. There’s not something different on a sustained go-forward basis. It’s just as narrow as what happened here this summer.
Rick Olson: It’s largely — Eric, for us, it’s largely a math exercise, and really the impacts in near-term on our model is more significant. So, the actual results in the current quarter, for example, and then projecting just as we’ve talked about with the other businesses through — into next year really has a more significant impact on the overall model for the business. Interest rates were also significantly higher. So, you put that all together, and I’d indicated it was appropriate for us to have the impairments related to goodwill and trade name that we’re carrying.
Angie Drake: Yeah. I would just also add to that, they’re going into next year as well with a lot of field, a lot of channel inventory, so just like our res business.
Rick Olson: So, we’ll take into 2024 to get through that. I will say just not to get lost in this discussion, we still feel incredibly positive about the Intimidator Group and the Spartan business, we have no regrets about that becoming part of The Toro Company and have very strong expectations for that business going forward.
Eric Bosshard: Okay. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Tom Hayes from C.L. King.
Tom Hayes: Hey, good morning everyone. Appreciate the time today.
Rick Olson: Good morning, Tom.
Tom Hayes: Hey Rick, you mentioned a couple of times in your prepared remarks that it sounds like the supply chain is getting better. Could you just maybe elaborate a little bit on that? And kind of where you think — is there further improvement we could see going forward?
