Operator. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to GoodRx's earnings conference call for the second quarter of 2022. Joining me today are Doug Hirsch and Trevor Bezdek, our co-founders and co-chief executive officers, and Karsten Voermann, our chief financial officer. Before we begin, I'd like to remind everyone that this call will contain forward-looking statements. All statements made on this call that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including statements regarding management's plans, strategies, goals and objectives, our market opportunity, our anticipated financial performance, the impact of the grocer issue on our business, and the expected impact of COVID-19 on our business. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other important factors. These factors may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Factors discussed in the Risk Factors section of our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021, as updated by our quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2022, and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements made on this call. Any such forward-looking statements represent management's estimates as of the date of this call, and we disclaim any obligation to update these statements, even if subsequent events cause our views to change. In addition, we may also reference certain non-GAAP metrics, which are reconciled to the nearest GAAP metric in the company's shareholder letter, which can be found on the overview page of our investor relations website at investors.goodrx.com. I'd also like to remind everyone that a replay of this call will become available there shortly as well. With that, I'll turn it over to Doug. Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us. Today, we would like to share our perspective on our recent performance and actions we're taking to strengthen the business as we navigate the headwinds we're facing. We are disappointed with our performance this year, and I suspect you feel the same way. We anticipated both higher growth and stronger margins, and that we would be helping more Americans get the healthcare they need at a price they can afford. On our fourth quarter earnings call, we reset expectations because our historical cohorts from the COVID period contributed less than we expected. Our prescription transactions offering was impacted by the grocer issue we discussed on our first quarter earnings call. We did not expect to be in this position. I can say that Trevor and I, as both founders and significant GoodRx shareholders, have no higher priority than getting GoodRx back on track. Over the past several months, we have significantly strengthened our leadership team and embarked on a top to bottom review of our business, our products, and our relationships with key partners to ensure that we are prepared for the future. We will also be doubling down on our engagement efforts with consumers, medical professionals, and other constituents that make up our business. We have amazingly devoted users and close relationships with America's healthcare professionals. As we previously shared, our NPS with both consumers and providers is a remarkable 90. We are the best-known brand in our space with significant scale. We consistently have great cash conversion and high cash flow from operations, and we've proven our team's ability to enter adjacent markets, as exemplified by the trajectory of our Pharma Manufacturer Solutions offering. We want you to know that we, as an executive team, are fully focused on returning to the level of performance you've seen from us in the past. Finally, I want to highlight that the grocer issue we discussed on our first quarter earnings call was very recently addressed. As communication is rolled out to the grocery chain's pharmacists, we expect GoodRx discounts to be consistently welcomed at the point of sale. While we recognize that our year-to-date performance has been below expectations, we're aggressively working to reverse that reality and evaluating every aspect of our business. We're taking actions to better prioritize spending and investments with a focus on enhancing both growth and margin, and we're confident in our ability to execute. I'll now turn the call over to Trevor to speak about our results and plans in more detail. Thank you, Doug. As Doug said, we're disappointed by our year-to-date performance, and we're committed to driving toward higher growth and margin in the future. The second quarter was particularly disappointing due to the impact of the grocer issue we discussed, which was in line with the expected $30 million revenue hit we estimated on our first quarter earnings call. Despite that headwind, our revenue, and to a greater extent, our adjusted EBITDA, came in ahead of our expectations for the quarter, as prescription transactions revenue, subscriptions revenue, and Pharma Manufacturer Solutions revenue each performed slightly better than we anticipated. Prescription transaction revenue decreased 7% year-over-year due to the grocer issue. We exited the second quarter seeing approximately 20% of the weekly volume we processed through this grocer before the issue began in March, and have seen subsequent continued declines post-quarter end. We were effective at redirecting new users during the affected periods to other retailers. New user numbers in the second quarter were close to prior period levels. As Doug mentioned, the grocer issue has been addressed. We have worked collaboratively with the grocer over the last few months to address the situation in a way that allows GoodRx and the grocer to jointly serve consumers in a way that helps consumers and also satisfies the grocer's needs. We are pleased that our consumers can once again enjoy the prescription access and affordability benefits of GoodRx at the grocer, who we value as a partner. Karsten will provide more detail on the second quarter revenue impact and the expected third quarter revenue impact shortly. During the second quarter, we also took actions to strengthen our prescription transactions offering and minimize the potential for disruptions going forward. In addition to ongoing conversations with PBMs we work with, as well as the grocer discussed, we also proactively engaged with many retail pharmacies to ensure broader marketplace stability. We've been meeting with the pharmacies that represent the vast majority of our volume. Each pharmacy has unique challenges in the current macro environment, and we are working proactively to collaborate on solutions to drive our mutual success and profitability. We strongly believe that our pharmacy network remains stable and during the period the grocer issue occurred, volume and other retailers grew substantially. In fact, with the exception of this particular grocer, volume across other pharmacies increased more than 3% quarter-over-quarter. As mentioned, our new user counts in the second quarter, driven by strong new user growth in many of the grocer's competitors as consumers chose to fill at other pharmacies with attractive GoodRx prices, largely offset the new user decrease at the grocer. While we were able to effectively move new users, returning users were down significantly due to the grocer issue and drove the decrease in prescription transaction revenue. As mentioned on our last earnings call, returning users often go directly to the grocer without checking prices on GoodRx, given how reliable our savings have historically been. This behavior resulted in a decrease in overall volume of transactions from returning users and of course, returning user counts. In addition to the actions we've taken to ensure marketplace network stability, we are also prioritizing new product enhancements. When we founded GoodRx, we recognized that building trust with consumers was key. We created a user experience that was as frictionless and simple to use as possible. Consumers could access the GoodRx platform and find significant savings without creating an account. Today, we are focused on developing new services and incentives for users to register with GoodRx so that we can increase our touch points and play a more active role in all aspects of their care. This will add friction to the acquisition and price search funnel and will most likely negatively impact conversion, macro growth and revenue, which Karsten will speak to in guidance. However, we believe the benefits of deeper relationships with our consumers will allow us to help them better navigate their healthcare journey with an even more compelling GoodRx value proposition and user experience. We also believe that allowing users to provide us more information will increase the LTV of each user in prescription transactions and other areas of the business over time, as we leverage it to create new tools and products for our users in quarters and years to come. The diversification of our revenue continued in the second quarter, with our other offerings now making up 30% of revenue compared to approximately 5% just three years ago, primarily driven by their rapid growth. Subscription revenue grew 82% year-over-year as the response from our Gold subscriber base to the increase in monthly subscription fees was largely in line with our expectations. The momentum in our Pharma Manufacturer Solutions offering continued during the quarter, with revenue more than doubling year-over-year as we continued to increase penetration and deliver high ROIs to the manufacturers and brands we work with. Our distinct ability to reach both consumers and providers continues to be recognized by manufacturers as evidenced by this strong growth. We expect continued year-over-year growth as more pharma ad spend shifts to digital, and pharma manufacturers continue to recognize attractive returns on their marketing spend as they leverage our broad provider and consumer audiences. Our second quarter acquisition of vitaCare, a pharmacy services platform that gives us valuable capabilities to facilitate the brand medication prescription process from start to finish, adds yet another innovative product and enhances our pharma-focused capabilities. We believe vitaCare increases our strength and differentiation, particularly as it relates to the access element of the medication awareness, access and adherence spectrum, which is a key focus for manufacturers to drive medication volume and revenue. We recently announced a strategic initiative with Mayne Pharma to deliver an enhanced direct to consumer campaign to build awareness of Nextstellis, their novel contraceptive, and expand access to birth control. By combining our extensive reach across consumers and healthcare providers with Mayne Pharma's novel contraceptive, this campaign aims to bring broader awareness and access to this branded contraceptive and other available birth control options. It will also build awareness among healthcare providers. This exciting relationship with Mayne Pharma demonstrates the tremendous value we can deliver as a scaled platform where both patients and HCPs engage with us at the same stage of the patient's healthcare journey. Even with the rapid growth of our Pharma Manufacturer Solutions offering, our revenue has penetrated less than 1% of the $30 billion Pharma Manufacturer Solutions TAM. We expect growth to be driven by more relationships with more pharma manufacturers, more penetration of their brands, and increasing the number of solutions each brand deploys with us. We are also adding more solutions to our consumer and provider offering and continuing to sell into the HCP opportunity with GoodRx for Providers. GoodRx for Providers creates a more customized experience and equips providers with the tools they need to support their patients throughout their healthcare journey. With over 825,000 prescribers using GoodRx since June of 2021, and more than 300,000 HCPs who have opted into the GoodRx for Providers so far, we believe there is an enormous opportunity for us to meet providers' unique needs with innovative solutions while helping them achieve better patient outcomes. With our incredible opt-in rate to our GoodRx for Providers platform, we believe we are on the path to becoming one of the largest provider platforms in the U.S. With the combination of GoodRx for Providers and our consumer offerings, we have the opportunity to deliver a truly unparalleled digital healthcare platform that enables us, our partners, physicians, and manufacturers to educate and serve providers and patients in a coordinated fashion. Before I close, I'd also like to talk about margins and cost structure. We've historically combined high growth and high profitability at GoodRx. We are committed to increasing both growth rate and margins from today's levels. We're taking a hard look at all of our costs and expenses and reprioritizing where and how much we spend across the business and all of our offerings. This is one of the principal focuses of Raj Beri, our recently hired COO, and we have begun to take actions to improve our cost structure and will continue to do so into the fourth quarter. Despite the grocer issue, we delivered revenue growth, margins, and strong operating cash flow in the second quarter. This was fueled by the continued commitment of our team and a collective dedication to our mission. With the current macroeconomic environment and the pressure it's putting on consumers to make deliberate choices about how to prioritize their spending, we recognize that helping Americans get the healthcare they need at a price they can afford has never been more relevant. The opportunity for GoodRx is clear, and we intend to capture it. With that, I'll turn it over to Karsten to discuss our financial results and guidance. Thank you, Trevor. Revenue for the quarter grew 9% year-over-year to $191.8 million, exceeding the guidance we provided in May. Prescription transactions revenue decreased 7% year-over-year to $134.4 million due to the grocer issue we disclosed in the prior quarter and which Trevor discussed earlier. The estimated impact of the issue on our prescription transactions revenue in the second quarter was largely in line with the $30 million we estimated on our last earnings call and drove a decrease in both MACs, which decreased 3% year-over-year to 5.8 million, and PTR per MAC, which decreased 4% as consumers at the grocer have historically had more transactions per month with a slightly higher fee per transaction. I'll discuss the expected future impact of the grocer issue in more detail in the guidance section, but in the meantime, I want to point out that we estimate the issue had a mid-teens% impact on our revenue growth. Market-wise, when you look at trends in prescriptions in the U.S., the second quarter is back to pre-COVID levels on most prescription metrics like total generic volume, new prescriptions, and new therapy starts, which is a positive development we anticipated and baked into our guidance. Turning to subscriptions. Subscriptions revenue continued to grow rapidly at 82% year-over-year to $26 million. We ended the quarter with over 1.1 million subscription plans and 1.6 million members benefiting from our subscription offerings since our family subscriptions generally serve multiple consumers. The increase in subscription revenue is driven primarily by the one-time increase in monthly subscription fees we charge for our GoodRx Gold program and also an 8% year-over-year increase in subscription plans. As a reminder, in the first quarter of 2022, we increased fees for new Gold subscribers for the first time in our history from $5.99 and $9.99 per individual and family to $9.99 and $19.99 respectively. In the second quarter, we increased fees to our existing Gold subscriber base as well, which catalyzed the largely price-driven revenue increase. Subscription plans were down modestly quarter-over-quarter as expected, and as we discussed during our fourth quarter earnings call when we set expectations for a one-time higher than usual churn level in the second quarter due to the one-time increase in monthly fees. Overall, we are pleased with the response of our subscriber base to the increase in Gold subscription fees, which was in line with our expectations. Pharma Manufacturer Solutions revenue grew 102% year-over-year to $26.6 million as we continue to work with more pharma manufacturers and offer more solutions and deliver superior ROIs to those with which we work. This is the first quarter that includes revenue related to vitaCare, which contributed approximately $1 million. Other revenue grew 13% year-over-year to $4.9 million, driven by the growth in GoodRx Care. Moving down the P&L. Cost of revenue was $18 million or 9.4% of revenue compared to $11.1 million and 6.3% of revenue in 2Q 2021. The increase in cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue was driven by the grocer issue described earlier, which materially impacted our prescription transactions revenue as well as the acquisition of vitaCare, which has a higher cost of revenue due to the operational nature of its business. Product development and technology expenses were $35.4 million compared to $29.6 million in the comparable period last year. This increase was primarily due to continued investments in the team and product. Excluding stock-based compensation expense and other items, adjusted product development technology expense was 13% of revenue compared to 11.3% of revenue in 2Q 2021. The grocer issue described earlier contributed to the increase in adjusted product development and technology expense as a percentage of revenue. Adjusted product development technology expenses were modestly lower quarter-over-quarter, due primarily to a higher capitalization rate of certain qualified costs related to the development of internal use software. Sales and marketing expenses were $94.3 million compared to $88.4 million in 2Q 2021 as we continued to invest in our incredible team with the goal of increasing our consumer and pharma manufacturer base in building the GoodRx brand. This was partially offset by lower advertising and promotional spend, which decreased $4.8 million year-over-year. Excluding stock-based compensation expense and other items, adjusted sales and marketing expense was largely flat quarter-over-quarter in absolute dollars and decreased year-over-year as a percentage of revenue, making up 45.3% of our revenue in 2Q 2022 compared to 46.7% last year. General and administrative expenses were $34.7 million compared to $39.6 million in 2Q 2021. The decrease was due primarily to stock-based compensation expense relating to the non-recurring co-CEO award made in connection with our IPO, which was approximately $12.1 million higher in the comparable period last year. Excluding these and other adjustments, adjusted G&A as a percentage of revenue was 7.7% compared to 5% in 2Q 2021. The GoodRx issue described earlier contributed to the increase in adjusted general and administrative expense as a percentage of revenue. Net loss was $1.4 million compared to net income of $31.1 million in the second quarter of last year. Net loss was impacted by stock-based compensation expense of $31.6 million, $11.9 million of which related to the non-recurring co-CEO awards made at the time of the IPO. The year-over-year decrease was primarily due to the grocer issue we discussed, as well as a decrease in our tax benefit, which was $37.3 million last year compared to only $8.7 million this year. This was partially offset by a decrease in stock-based compensation expense. In addition to these drivers, the acquisition of vitaCare also had a negative impact on our second quarter 2022 net loss, but to a lesser extent. Moving on. Adjusted net income decreased 22% year-over-year to $27.2 million. Adjusted EBITDA decreased 13% year-over-year to $47.2 million. Adjusted EBITDA margin decreased year-over-year, but continued to be a strong 24.6%. The decrease in adjusted net income, adjusted EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA margin were all driven primarily by the grocer issue. While we're able to keep adjusted sales and marketing largely flat quarter-over-quarter in absolute dollars and decrease the proportion it made of revenue on a year-over-year basis, it still forms a larger percent of revenue compared to the first quarter this year, and some other more fixed cost expenses formed a larger percentage of revenue as well due to the decrease in prescription transactions revenue. Even with the grocer's impact on our business, we're still able to generate an adjusted EBITDA margin of almost 25% and continue to generate strong cash flow with net cash from operating activities of $51 million for the quarter. Moving on to guidance. We will not be providing full year expectations at this time as the full year impact of the grocer issue continues to be difficult to estimate because there are several variables, including, among others, consumer response to pricing and returning user levels that have to be determined. Given we only have less than a week of empirical data on utilization and a more normalized state with the grocer, we do not yet have enough data to reliably estimate the impact. For the third quarter, we expect total revenue of approximately $185 million. This assumes the loss in prescription transaction revenue related to the grocer issue expands to approximately $35 million-$40 million. The impact is expected to be greater compared to the $30 million impact in 2Q22, as the impact was gradual as the quarter developed and was not as severe in April as it was in June, and as our plan for the year assumed sequential growth at this grocer. As Trevor mentioned, we exited the second quarter at 20% of weekly volumes at the grocer. In July, that number is already lower in the mid-teens. We believe the benefit to third quarter revenue from the grocer issue being addressed will be immaterial. In other words, we do not expect a meaningful volume lift relative to where we exited the second quarter for a few reasons. First, the issue was addressed less than a week ago, and it takes time for changes in communication to reach the pharmacy and store level. Second, it is unclear how many GoodRx consumers that switched to their insurance or another form of savings at the grocer during the second quarter will return to using GoodRx. If they do return, how quickly that will happen. Finally, pricing has changed and will be higher in many cases. For all these reasons, we believe that the impact or benefit on Q3 and Q4 revenue, and possibly for a period of time after that, will be minimal. In addition to the impact of the grocer issue, we expect the consumer engagement efforts Trevor discussed earlier to further impact prescription transactions revenue by approximately $5 million in the third quarter and approximately twice that in the fourth quarter due to higher friction in the funnel. As Trevor said, we believe that these efforts will allow us to create tighter relationships with our consumers and deliver more value to them in the future. We also believe it will allow us to generate higher LTV from our users across not only prescription transactions, but also our other existing offerings as well as services and products that we will build or buy in the future. The impact expands from the third to fourth quarter since we began this effort in the middle of the third quarter. For these reasons, as well as a modest decrease in PTR per MAC we're anticipating due to continued volume mix shift, we expect a quarter-over-quarter prescription transactions revenue decrease of approximately $10 million in the third quarter. We expect subscription revenue will be moderately lower by $1 million-$2 million in the third quarter compared to second quarter due to the late second quarter churn from our existing user base as we rolled out fee increases to the entire subscriber base. This is in line with our expectations from earlier in the year. On the fourth quarter earnings call, we discussed our strategic repositioning of Gold, our subscription program, and the fact that we're planning to focus on a more specific audience that we believe finds more value from Gold, members with chronic conditions, multiple recurring prescriptions, and other long-term needs. As part of this repositioning, we undertook a one-time price increase for new Gold subscribers in January to reflect all of the value we've added to the program in 2021 and create a clearer differentiation between our offerings. In the second quarter, we rolled out increased prices to our existing subscriber base. When we announced the Gold price increase on our Q4 earnings call, we shared that we expected a one-time churn impact when we raised prices to our existing subscriber base in the second quarter. As we anticipated, we're entering the third quarter with a slightly smaller Gold subscriber base due to churn. As a reminder, the strategic repositioning of this offering focuses on a narrower audience, which may affect future growth rates. We will continue to work hard to ensure that GoodRx consumers find the offering that makes the most sense for them and best suits their needs. We expect Pharma Manufacturer Solutions to grow approximately 60%-90% year-over-year. We're providing a fairly wide range, both because individual deals can be quite large and delivering on them pre- or post-quarter end can swing revenue materially. We've also begun to take advantage of opportunities to earn revenue based on our performance, and the timing when we drive consumer or HCP actions can also create some fluctuation. Finally, we expect other revenue to be largely flat year-over-year. We realize that our total revenue guidance for the third quarter reflects a year-over-year decline in revenue. The primary reason for that is the loss of the majority of revenue from the grocer, which made up almost a quarter of our prescription transactions revenue in the comparable period last year. We currently anticipate the grocer issue and our registration efforts will negatively impact our year-over-year growth rates by more than 20% in the third quarter. Turning to adjusted EBITDA, we expect a third quarter adjusted EBITDA margin of approximately 20%. As mentioned, in the second quarter, we were able to keep adjusted sales and marketing largely flat in absolute dollars quarter-over-quarter and decrease the proportion it made of revenue on a year-over-year basis. It still formed a larger percentage of revenue compared to the first quarter of this year, and some of our other more fixed costs and expenses formed a larger percentage of revenue due to decrease in prescription transaction revenue because of the grocer issue. Even with this issue, we're still able to generate an adjusted EBITDA margin of almost 25%. Our 20% adjusted EBITDA margin guidance is lower than our historical margin profile and lower than our second quarter results, primarily driven by the revenue compression due to the grocer issue. An additional factor is vitaCare, which we indicated at the time of acquisition would have a low single digit drag on adjusted EBITDA. vitaCare has historically been in a negative adjusted EBITDA position, which we expect to be the case for a few more quarters. We are committed to ensuring our adjusted EBITDA in future quarters increases relative to this quarter's. I also want to reemphasize our commitment to increasing growth rates and improving margins. All of us on the leadership team are focused on these goals, and we're reevaluating spending to prioritize growing adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenue. That entails scrutinizing all of our costs and expenses with the objective of greater efficiency today and greater adjusted EBITDA flow through as we grow. We've historically been able to deliver a strong combination of growth and margin, and we want to make sure that continues to be the case in the future. We're confident in our ability to continue to drive our mission to help Americans get the healthcare they need at a price they can afford. We believe the current macroeconomic environment that increases many people's need to trade off expenses as inflation rises makes everything we do more and more relevant for all Americans. With that, I'll now turn it over to the operator for Q&A. As a reminder, to ask a question, you will need to press star one on your telephone. You will need to press star one one on your telephone. We ask that you please limit yourselves to one question. Our first question comes from the line of Glenn Santangelo from Jefferies. I'm gonna ask two quick ones. I know we're supposed to ask one, so I'll be quick. You know, with respect to revenue growth and the outlook for that, do you expect to be at some normalized rate in the fourth quarter so that when you exit Q4, we'll return back to that sort of mid-20% sort of growth target that you had as you enter 2023? And then secondly, on the margin side, you know, margins have come down substantially year after year here. And Trevor, to your comments, you say you're focused on it, but I understand the growth issue is a big part of it. But now it sounds like you're doubling down on consumer engagement. You're talking about a modest decrease in PTR per MAC. You highlighted product development, tech expenses in the press release. Is this the trough in the margin here in the second half of 2022? How should we think about the outlook for margins as we also move into 2023? Thank you very much for the question. I'm gonna have Karsten speak to this. Hey, Glenn, it's Karsten here. Glenn, I think the two questions are related to 4Q and to margins generally over time. I think first of all, with respect to revenue, 2Q into 3Q into 4Q, we didn't guide 4Q yet, again, as we said in our prepared remarks, mostly because the impact of this issue remains somewhat challenging to predict is probably the best way of putting it, especially since addressing the issue with this particular grocer only happened quite recently. So for that reason, we're not actually guiding 4Q today. However, I think that we have indicated that from the 2Q levels of impact, which were around $30 million and represented about a 70%-75% drop relative to expected revenue. Represented about a 70%-75% drop, relative to expected revenue of the grocer into 3Q, that expanded somewhat because the effect had been there for the entirety of the quarter. We expect larger impact. We talked about $35 million-$40 million, and we expect that impact will extend, not only into the third quarter, but potentially into the fourth quarter and beyond as well. The reasons for that tie specifically to the fact that, number one, it again, resolution was just achieved, so we don't have that much empirical data on the future-looking impact of addressing the issue. Second, it's unclear how many GoodRx users that switch to another form of payment, perhaps using their insurance in lieu of GoodRx, given about 75% of our users have insurance coverage, will return and how quickly they'll return to using GoodRx. Thirdly, we expect that pricing will flux to some degree, and in many cases be higher at the grocer in question as well. I think our view is that we expect the impact to continue beyond just the third quarter. With respect to the second question you had on margins, we're taking an extremely hard look at our cost structure right now. From that perspective, we continue to believe that especially in the longer term, our expectations around margin haven't changed. We've talked about the fact that we aspire to and believe we can return to becoming a Rule of 40 company. I think what's changed is that with this one-time step down in revenue that we've experienced hasn't necessarily impacted growth trajectory at all, but it impacts the step down right now with the Kroger. That may extend the period a little bit, it takes for us to get to those higher combined growth plus margin levels. Sorry for the long answer, but I wanted to make sure I hit both. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Sandy Draper from Guggenheim Partners. Thanks so much, and I may just try to follow up on that line of questioning in a slightly different angle. Totally appreciate the follow-up response to Glenn's question. That was very helpful. Maybe asked another way, what could happen that would make the impact, the $35 million-$40 million you're expecting in the third quarter. Is there anything that could happen that could make it bigger? I get now why the $30 million in the second quarter is stepping down to $35 million-$40 million, but I'm trying to see. We don't know clearly when it's getting better, and I can appreciate that. I'm just trying to understand, would there be anything that would cause it to decline further? Because it just doesn't seem like it at this point it's for a further step down. It seems like the uncertainty is just when and if it starts coming back. Thanks. Sure. I can grab this one too, if that's okay, Sandy. It's Karsten speaking here. I always hesitate to say nothing could happen that could cause a drop to be bigger. I think at the same time, with respect to the issue in question, speaking more narrowly about that, we are extrapolating from the levels of usage that we see today, hence the increase from 2Q to 3Q. We talked a little bit about on the scripted remarks, talked a little bit about the fact that we've seen further exacerbation of the issue from 2Q to 3Q. Given that reality, and extrapolating from levels that we're seeing now, I don't think we're in a place where we anticipate the impact would be larger than we had talked about. That said, at the same time, the counterbalancing issue is that we do have limited empirical data right now. That's because associated with the addressing of the situation, we will likely see some changes to consumer pricing, and we'll likely also see that impacting potentially which particular pharmacies consumers utilize. We've done a nice job of being able to shift demand, and consumers have gone to wherever the prices are best. That's why, as Trevor articulated in the scripted remarks, we've seen on average about a 3% growth of volume in other places. I'm not sure that would be totally deleterious if prices increase a little more or a little less than expected. I think to answer your question on some, we think we've taken a realistic view of it. I think the only other issue outside the grocer one that we talked about a little bit on the call was that we're also focusing quite aggressively on increased engagement with consumers, and that may have some funnel impact. We talked about on the call that looking like it could be about $5 million of impact in 3Q and about double that in 4Q. Those two elements together are the ones that we realistically see potentially impacting us. Hope that's useful, Sandy, and sorry for the long response. Yep. No, that's great. Thanks. I'll keep it to one question and jump back in the queue. Great. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Stephanie Davis from SVB Securities. Question: Congrats on the resolution. I was wondering if you could talk to us about the renegotiated prices for the grocer and how that compares to their historical levels as well as your broader pricing base. Will the pricing reset in a way where grocers will go back to being the majority of volume if everything shakes out as before? Or are we going to see more radical distribution of volumes post-resolution because their pricing is more in line with a broader base? Thank you very much for the question. We're happy that the grocer issue has been addressed, and we're really pleased to have this more strategically aligned relationship with the grocer who we value as a partner. In regards to pricing specifically that you asked about, some GoodRx prices at the grocer will now be higher for consumers than they were previously, but the prices are discounted relative to what users might otherwise pay, and we believe they are sustainable for all parties, the consumer, the grocer, and GoodRx. Pharmacies have to manage these price volume trade-offs sustainably and, you know, these are highly dynamic. We know that consumers are extremely price sensitive, but they also value having the choice of pharmacy. We're really pleased that they will have that access. Stephanie, this is Karsten again. I'm gonna jump in just for a sec as well. I think, one more point on pricing is that the grocer prices for most medications will now, we expect, likely end up being more similar or in line to prices we show at other retailers. Based on what we saw in the second quarter when folks were generally seeing pricing at other retailers, new users just shifted there. It's the way marketplaces work and went to their next lowest price. They found those prices, continuing to be quite attractive. But to your point, that did mean that we saw a volume shift as pretty much on average, all the other pharmacies and retailers picked up volume during this period. That's just the last. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Cherny from BofA. Thank you for taking the question. Maybe along those same lines of thoughts as we think about your place in the competitive environment, I appreciate the commentary you had about being able to shift volumes to other pharmacies and at the same time, that dynamic that you mentioned at the beginning about with the impacted grocer and how traditional customers just got used to still going in there, only to find out that they weren't participating in the network. How does that play off in terms of the dynamic for the individuals that went to these new grocers? Is it just that they changed and that's it? How does that factor in terms of where you see that rebalancing, rebasing of growth going forward across your various different grocery and other pharmacy channel partners? Thank you for that question. Yeah. As we talked about, for new users, the new users largely moved to other retailers. We saw the new user volumes are quite similar to what they were prior to this issue. However, existing users often, you know, go directly to a retailer without always checking GoodRx first, because historically, you know, while prices of drugs do move up and down, there's some relative stability there. That's one of the reasons we've been very focused on engagement, and on driving, and spoke about that in those prepared remarks, because we wanna make sure we can move existing customers, just make them learn about information about a change in price or something else, and learn about that quicker so we can get quicker action on that existing user side into the future. Yeah. I think adding to Trevor's point, I think the reality is that as we continue to move forward through this process, we're gonna continue to see the benefit of the now addressed situation. With that, we're gonna see that we're gonna be able to work with each of the individual pharmacies to continue to meet their specific needs in a manner that's gonna create a more sustainable environment in the long run. Thank you. Our next question goes to the line of Craig Hettenbach from Morgan Stanley. I know a lot of the focus is on the grocer, but you did comment that, you know, more broadly, the difficulty for a number of pharmacies. Just wanted to see how you're thinking about that in terms of what that means for the economics of the business and pricing on a more broader basis. Yeah. I appreciate the question. You know, we have been really proactively engaging with pharmacies that represent the vast majority of the volume, and we strongly believe the pharmacy network is very stable. What we've seen and to your question, is that each pharmacy is facing unique challenges, and in particular, relative to these current macro environment changes, you know, that has a different impact and different opportunities for each pharmacy. So we've been working proactively to collaborate on solutions to drive mutual success and profitability and sustainable economics for all the parties in our ecosystem. As an example, many of the pharmacies in our network benefited from increased volume during this period the grocer issue occurred, and they're working closely with us on additional tactics to grow volumes in the future. Each pharmacy has different needs, and we're trying to make sure we're really effective at addressing that. We've just recognized the importance of working creatively to help pharmacies address unique challenges and supporting strategic priorities, and believe we are doing a much better job in trying to be expeditious on that. Yeah. Just jumping in on that, this is Karsten again. Looking ahead, I think while we do see the grocery issue as having caused a one-time step down in terms of revenues, we also don't believe that it's gonna impact our grocery in future years or doesn't impact the future market size or opportunity. That's in part because our value proposition with pharmacies is very strong. We drive foot traffic and help consumers have a positive experience at the pharmacy counter, and our data shows that GoodRx users buy an incremental item more than 75% of the time, which is, of course, very attractive. On top of that, you've seen us do a lot of work with individual pharmacy banners as well, like ads that we've shot together with Walgreens, Rite Aid having joined our Gold program, deep integrations on the tech side, things like the ability to book CVS MinuteClinic appointments through the GoodRx app, et cetera. I think, again, given the volume growth we've seen outside the particular grocer in question, I think we're feeling like the other retailers and pharmacies have a highly symbiotic relationship with us. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Mark Mahaney from Evercore ISI. Thanks. I wanna ask if you had any commentary on some of Amazon's recent moves, maybe the pending acquisition of One Medical, and whether that may actually create opportunities for you, partnership or distribution opportunities for you? Thank you very much. Thank you for the question. You know, Amazon has been pursuing the health business for years. We have not seen a material impact on our business. We believe the recent acquisition of One Medical signals an intention to move further into the employer services space and their efforts with Amazon Care, and we don't expect this to have any impact on our business. Thank you. Our next question comes to the line of Eric Sheridan from Goldman Sachs. If I can, the first just a clarifying question. The new agreement with the grocer partner, does that have a duration, that new agreement that we can better understand? Somewhere down the road, if it has to get renegotiated or be renewed, that we're aware of some of the timing dynamics around the agreement. That would be number one. Number two, you know, moving away from the grocer, you talked a lot over the last couple of earnings calls about a return to normal in terms of doctor visits and prescriptions. Where are we in general in terms of the overall backlog of doctor visits and expected prescriptions? How do you think about either leaning in if you're seeing that improve or elements of broader customer growth you think that could drive in the platform as we move further away from the pandemic? Thank you. Thank you for the question. I'll have Karsten speak to these. Hey, Eric. With respect to the terms of the agreement, the terms of the agreement are confidential, so I can't really go there on this call. We're feeling very good about the fact that the situation is addressed, not just for today, but for the future as well. With respect to sort of therapy starts and the like, we're for the first time in certainly a couple years seeing now that new therapy starts are approaching levels that they're at for almost all therapy categories that they're at pre-COVID. When I look back at the data, I'm generally seeing that the data is now converging back to sort of the 100 index of where it was previously to the COVID period. From that perspective, we view that as generally positive. I think what's hard for us, though, is that when we look at our own data, the grocer issue did create some noise, so that makes it a little tougher for us to see if that's fully manifested in our case, the higher rate of healthcare utilization. We do anticipate that it could continue to turn into a tailwind as trends normalize further. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Doug Anmuth from JP Morgan. Just back to the grocer issue. I know you talked about pricing for prescriptions going up for consumers there, but just was hoping you could talk a little bit more about what it means for GoodRx take rates with that pharmacy and then also on an overall basis. I think you mentioned a modest decrease in PTR per MAC going forward. Thanks. Karsten. Sure. Hey, Doug. It's Karsten here. Yeah, I think we expect that pricing for most medications at the grocer will now be more similar to those seen at other retailers. That has a few implications. I think one is from a concentration perspective, we don't believe the grocer will reach levels they're at historically. With respect to our revenue economics and economics, historically, this grocer had higher PTR per MAC, mainly because the pricing was good. MACs filled more scripts than they did at other retailers. The other aspect is that take rate will likely go down formulaically simply because as prices go up, all else held constant, that larger denominator means that the take rate as a function will fall. I think we will see those impacts to some degree. I think the other thing that we see potentially happening is that as mix shift continues to evolve going forward, we also have the potential that we'll continue to see going into the third quarter and beyond, some flux in PTR per MAC. We could see another low single-digit% sort of smaller sequential drop in the third quarter with that evolving mix shift as well. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Charles Rhyee from Cowen. Thanks for taking the question. Just wanted to get a little bit more, just to clarify a little bit more on the grocer issue. If I recall, the issue was the grocer was having a dispute with a number or all its PBMs in regards to reimbursement for their discount card programs. Your role in all this is you know, your algorithms facilitate showing best price to members, you know, at the point of them looking for a cheaper option. What I'm trying to get a better understanding is that the resolution here, you seem to be talking a bit about an agreement you've come to with the grocer, but isn't the issue more about them having resolved with all their PBMs? I mean, is that what we're really talking about here? Just to understand your role in terms of facilitating or negotiating, you know, on behalf of the grocer. Can you explain sort of what my understanding is. Your role was a little bit more separate from all this, and that, you know, the impact that we were seeing last quarter and obviously into this quarter was sort of a byproduct of a sort of contractual dispute between the grocer and its PBMs. Thanks. Thank you for the question. Yeah, we're very happy. We spoke about the issue's been addressed, you know, and it's been addressed very recently. You know, over the next few days, communications around GoodRx acceptance will be provided to the pharmacist. Discounted pricing will be up on a platform, and most importantly, GoodRx discounts will be consistently accepted at the point of sale. You know, there are many parties involved here, so I'm not gonna speak to sort of specifically the agreements between different parties. We're pleased that consumers will be able to enjoy the prescription access and affordability benefits of GoodRx at this grocer who we value as a partner. You know, we are, though, really disappointed that this disruption occurred, and we are being extremely proactive, as I spoke to a bit before, just to ensure that all needs are being met by all of the marketplace participants, that all players have sustainable economics, and make sure that the affordable prices that we help make accessible are available as broadly as possible. We do wanna play that role of trying to be helpful, where we can in making a functioning marketplace. GoodRx is the best-known brand in our space. We have a large devoted consumer base. We have a large HCP base. We have millions of visitors on our platform monthly, and all of that gives us the opportunity to grow and scale the business. We're happy to be able to do that collaboratively and proactively with all of the different marketplace participants. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of John Ransom from Raymond James. Hey, good afternoon. Just to be clear, the grocer, let's say you got all of those customers back. I know that's not gonna happen, but theoretical exercise, you get all those customers back in the fourth quarter. What I'm inferring is that the take with that particular grocer has gone down in this renegotiation, but I don't think you specifically said that. If everything reset back to normal, you get all those customers back, you know, what would be your pro forma take rate gross margin, versus where it was, say, before all this happened? I'll let Karsten speak to this. Hey, John, it's Karsten here. I think the question relates to, hey, what's the—what would be the sort of gross margin impact of the combination of mix shift given that this grocer is now not over-indexed anymore in our ecosystem and in association with the addressing of the situation? Just to make sure I got it right, does that, did I echo back the question you're asking, maybe said a little differently? I'm gonna assume yes, because you may not be able to speak right now. If I did get that right, I think the impact of both the mix shift and the change in pricing is what we talked about a little bit to an earlier question around PTR per MAC and the impact that this had on it. It's slightly diminished our PTR per MAC, again, because the volumes at this grocer were higher in terms of transactions per MAC and because of the take rate impact of price going up, potentially pushing down take rate. I think on a net basis, all those factors would impact gross margin to some degree. Though again, the differences in PTR per MAC at the grocer in question versus other ones, like we said in the prepared remarks, is not that significant. The impact on gross margins would also not be that significant. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of George Hill from Deutsche Bank. Thanks for taking the question. I wanted to kinda delve into the EBITDA guidance and, you know, by relation to the Kroger a little bit more. Should we think of the change in the margin profile that you guys are guiding to in Q3, aside from the very small vitaCare drag, is largely like it's the change in volume and the change in margin? So basically, the gross margin of the business or the EBITDA margin of the business is meaningfully lower, ex kind of the Kroger under the old terms. Is there a reason to expect that it would improve to historical terms, to historical ranges, under the new terms with the Kroger? Or is that just not gonna? Is that not a margin profile that's attainable under the new agreement? Hey, George. Karsten here again. If I'm understanding the question right, it's sort of like what drives the change? The change in margin for both 2Q and ultimately for 3Q is effectively driven by the fact that PTR, prescription transactions revenue, is just lower. That drop in PTR associated with the grocer issue in combination with the cost structure that we are focused on now ameliorating, but that we've kept relatively constant until now, impacts the margins. If you were to add back potentially the kind of revenue that the grocer had historically done, you would find that the margins would be relatively consistent, a lot more consistent with what they have been historically. I think this issue is solely one of sort of revenue hole associated with the grocer and not more complicated than that from at least the lens that we're looking at it through. As we look forward, again, I think the pricing at the grocer in question is not really that material. The reason I say that is that for a period of time over the last several months, when we weren't promoting discounts at the grocer in question, our new user volume just sort of seamlessly flowed to other retailers, pharmacies, grocers, et cetera. As it sort of flowed to these other places, we actually saw volumes grow in those locations. I think our view is that as long as the volume comes through, we're sort of near agnostic, and this goes to John Ransom's question too, as to which particular retailer it comes through. On the margin, yes, the users who frequented the grocer in question did do more transactions on a monthly basis, and the take rates we achieved were a little higher. But that was, again, at the margin. It wasn't sort of a dramatic thing. The big thing was that the grocer had a significant amount of volume with us historically, and that volume is now diminished. Going forward, we're not sure how to what degree it's gonna come back and at what rate it's gonna come back. Hopefully, that distinction makes sense. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Stan Berenshteyn from Wells Fargo. Your line is now open. My questions. Maybe just to go back to, I believe, a comment that Trevor made in the prepared remarks. I think you said something along the lines of having incentives for users to register with GoodRx and that may lead to friction or to acquisition or conversion of new users. I'm just trying to understand the source of the friction. Is it that if they don't register, they won't get as deep of a discount as those who aren't registered? Just trying to understand what's going on there. Thank you for the question. Yeah. You know, we're trying to give the opportunity for consumers to provide us more account-related information in a variety of places in their user journey. They'll be doing that for the reason, you know, for a reason like you just mentioned, such as a deeper discount or just for additional product features and more capabilities. That just may impact our conversion funnel and the number of users in the short term. We believe this is the right choice because over time, with a more robust user experience, and it gives us just more opportunities to assist users in their healthcare journey. By personalizing that experience more, we let them navigate healthcare journey better. We potentially and hopefully increase the LTV of each user in our prescription transactions offering. It just helps us enable other areas of our business to let users access those and then hopefully monetize those also. Yeah, one great example of that I just wanna throw out there, we've recently launched last week, a feature called My Medicine Cabinet, and if you have the GoodRx app, I encourage you to try it out. This is where we're actually allowing a consumer to track their entire, you know, every medication that they take, and it's about not just cost, it's also about information, you know, potentially side effects, the name of the doctor, their refill history, the pharmacy they fill at. It's a really robust offering for consumers that goes outside of pricing, outside of the pharmacy counter. With just a little bit of information from the consumer, we can actually provide a whole slew of services that can help them everywhere from diagnosis all the way through to care management, and ultimately keep consumers healthier and keep them on medication. This is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what we're doing on engagement, and we're really excited about the things that we can do here. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Steven Valiquette from Barclays. Your line is now open. Great. Thanks for taking the question. This was touched on a little bit, but maybe just to hit it again. Yeah, just on unpack the reported two key results a little bit more. You know, total company revenue of $191 million-$192 million was essentially in line with the $190 million guidance. EBITDA, you know, $47 million came in about $12 million-$13 million higher than the street view of $34 million-$35 million, which I feel like that's indirectly where the company sort of guided everyone towards for the quarter when talking about operations last quarter. I guess the questions are at the end of the day, did the full $30 million revenue impact from the grocer in 2Q ultimately fall right to the bottom line from your perspective in terms of $30 million impact on EBITDA as well, or were there some other mitigating factors? I guess secondarily, one could argue the EBITDA upside in the quarter was just driven primarily by just the slightly better underlying prescription transaction revenue and also better subscription revenue. I guess I'm more- Oh, I think we lost the tail end of your question, Steve, but we think we heard most of it. Hopefully you can hear me okay. I think, first of all, yeah, the I think our $192 million in revenue, yes, that revenue, did among other things, did benefit from potentially some incremental volume coming through in the market generally, utilization volume, which is great. But I think the more important factors are things like that we, during the quarter, were able to take some actions that potentially allowed us to optimize around OpEx too. The impact was more muted between top line and bottom line. Some of the things that we talked about in relation to that are that the capitalization rate, given how we have changed the deployment of our technology, our product development engineering staff, has increased, which led to less of the product and tech expense hitting the bottom line and some of it being now applied to balance sheet. I think the other thing we talked about a little bit is that from an advertising perspective in particular, we found some sales and marketing efficiency which we'll anticipate getting more of in the quarters to come as well, hopefully, as we've talked about focusing on our cost structure further. From an EBITDA perspective, we were able to harvest some benefits through the quarter that we didn't necessarily expect in advance of the quarter. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jonathan Yong from Credit Suisse. To take my question. I guess going back to the grocer, kind of putting it all together, you're talking about a bit of a mix shift away from the grocer towards the other pharmacies. You know, the pricing at the grocer won't be as attractive. I guess, does this kinda change the growth algorithm kinda moving forward, kinda given that you did have an outsized growth component related to that grocer? And then does that $30 million-$40 million, you know, it almost sounds like it won't necessarily all come back. I guess kind of what's your view on those items? Thanks. Thank you. Yeah. We don't believe this changes the growth outlook. You know, we most importantly are very happy for customers that get the affordability benefits of GoodRx, and they get them broadly. You know, we want people to have the broadest access we can. We've seen no decrease in demand. I think even with this current, you know, potentially recessionary environment and such that we see that Americans have even greater needs for getting affordable healthcare than they ever have in the past. We see the growth dynamics remaining the same, and we are pleased that we have reached that this has been addressed. You know, most of all, we are being very proactive. We are working with, you know, with all the partners in our marketplace and trying to make sure, and delivering on providing a sustainable marketplace for everyone, delivering on our mission, for consumers and, providing a strong, robust, future growth story. I'll let Karsten add. Yeah. No, I think we see sort of a one-time step down associated with the grocer, obviously. You saw that in 2Q, and you see us describing the impact in 3Q and beyond as well. The reality is we don't see this as shifting our trajectory, meaning our growth rate. The TAM continues to be huge. As Trevor said, demand is high. We've seen shifts in volume even during the 2Q period where we've seen growth at all the other retailers on average. From that perspective, I think we remain highly confident that the market that we're serving and the consumers that we're helping, as well as our healthcare providers, are gonna continue to use GoodRx in huge numbers going into the future as well. Thank you. At this time, I'm showing no further questions. I would like to turn the call back over to Trevor Bezdek for closing remarks. While our year-to-date performance is not what we expected at the start of 2022, we're aggressively working to change that. We've historically been able to deliver a strong combination of growth and margin, and we wanna make sure that continues to be the case in the future. In addition to evaluating our business and reprioritizing spend where necessary, we will continue to pursue innovative opportunities that both deliver on our mission and unlock growth and are working collaboratively with stakeholders across the ecosystem to drive mutual success. I look forward to updating you on our progress in the quarters ahead, and thank you for joining us today. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating.