Walter Berman: No, with that. That does not contemplate LDTI. We’re still evaluating that. And from that standpoint, so it does not. And we’ll obviously settle on the approach that we’re going to take before the quarter. As it relates to the — why it’s lower, again, we’re on part of that profitability improvement was lower sales. And so we’re looking at activities as it relates to that. And so that gives a positive PTI in that situation, plus there was some anomalies as you basically look at what the changes and the huge change in equity markets and other things that took place, it gave a lift on SOP, so from that standpoint, we’re — I’m just saying we’re comfortable with the — what you guys are indicating in that $800 million range for the year, and we’ll continue that when we’re getting that lift. There’s no question about it for the investments that we repositioned.
Thomas Gallagher: And Walter, does the $800 million contemplate a little bit of extra spread that you would expect to still get? Or is that more of a 4Q static look at it?
Walter Berman: No, it’s the continuation of the volume of it. But actually, at this stage, since that point, certainly since we’re still investing, the spread has come down from that, but we still feel very confident in the ability to generate whether just on the $800 million for the year.
Thomas Gallagher: Okay. And then my follow-up is how should we think about the fees and margins of the wrap versus the brokerage flows in AWM. I think your wrap has a little over 100 basis points of fees. The non-wrap is more commission-based. But just curious, how do you compare the economics of the two, particularly now if we’re going to see stronger flows into brokerage, I just want to understand how that’s going to impact your overall margins?
James Cracchiolo: Yes. So Erik, I think as we — Tom, as we look at the business, okay, we’ve had a bit slower flows into wrap but still good flows, but you also had the depreciation of the markets, which impact the wrap overall fees for the firm. And so I don’t feel that, that’s permanent. As I said, we also had some transaction volume being down on the commission side. So I would probably say, if markets settle as they are, you’ll continue to see part of that going back into the wrap programs. You’ll also — depending on what happens with market, you may see some appreciation of that, which really was a negative in the last few quarters. And regarding the brokerage activities, we will hopefully see some pickup in the commission side based on getting back into some of the contracts that people have again been more conservative investing in right now.
So I can’t really like piece together exactly what that shift is. But I would probably say there’s a bunch of dynamics occurring over the last few quarters in that regard.
Thomas Gallagher: Okay, thanks.
Operator: Your next question is from the line of Craig Siegenthaler with Bank of America.
Unidentified Analyst: Hi, this is Mark filling in for Craig. I had a question within AWM. I was curious if you were seeing any incremental demand from third-party bank suites for deposits and what that environment looks like? And then kind of following up on that, too. I believe your contracts were historically priced on kind of floating with a spread. Is there any possibility of extending the duration on those contracts, which would let you capture higher yield and also offer some more visibility into cash flow, while also taking pressure off of your bank?
Walter Berman: Okay. So let me answer that. The answer is back about a couple of months ago, there was certainly — you couldn’t give deposits way. Now clearly, at this basis, there is more demand, but we are evaluating what is really — from our standpoint, what is the appropriate balance for balancing cash and bringing it back on balance sheet. So we have a very good relationship. We’ve been doing this for multiple years through promontory, not promontory . So our relationship banks, when we do have a combination and laddering of long and short. So there — we are assessing it, but it’s a good situation from our standpoint, both from the demand from coming on the suite and our capacity to bring more back on to balance sheet and the fact we are still attracting good balances in.
Unidentified Analyst: And just for a quick follow-up and kind of switching gears a little bit. Really like your significant program, that’s a great cash management solution for clients with competitive rates. I was curious, looking at the historical allocations from past cycles, is there anything different this cycle that you would say that would affect allocation that we should be taking into consideration?
Walter Berman: Into the . We have — are very cognizant trying to give our clients the capabilities there. So that trend has been going and been evaluating as the Fed makes it ships and other things and alternatives. So you’re seeing that. And yes, we will continue to do that. But the important thing is we’re also building that capability very shortly into the bank, which also gives a different set of alternatives for them to really look at their laddering as I mentioned. So you’re just adjusting and certainly having the product capability and the capabilities to grow either our balance sheet, our balance sheet and on balance sheet in the bank and insert.
Unidentified Analyst: Great. Thank you so much.
Operator: Your next question is from the line of Alex Blostein with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.
Unidentified Analyst: Hey all, this is Luke on behalf of Alex. Thanks f
