Charlotte Simonelli: Yes. So the cash balance doesn’t really change dramatically quarter-over-quarter. We manage, especially when we’re borrowing, we managed to hold the amount of cash that we need to hold and keep the revolver as low as possible. In the fourth quarter, we tend to still generate positive free cash flow. It’s really the first quarter where the seasonality and the timing of our expenses hit us. So we normally borrow in the first quarter in a good housing market. So you can anticipate we’ll probably be borrowing in this housing market in the first quarter as well, but that’s very common. So I’m excited that we were able to pay down $50 million of the revolver in the quarter despite and on top of doing open market repurchases and having expenses out the door for some of the debt exchanges.
I’m very proud of our cash flow delivery this year. We have — we are being ruthlessly focused on it and making very specific choices with how we deploy our cash, and we have tons of liquidity. So proud of the steps we took on our debt over the past five years, and this is not the thing that keeps me up at night for sure.
Tommy McJoynt: Got it. Thank you.
Operator: Our final question today will be from Ryan McKeveny with Zelman & Associates. Your line is open.
Ryan McKeveny: Hey, thanks very much. Charlotte, when the audio cut out earlier, you had just started mentioning the litigation. So maybe you’ve already touched on what was expected to be said in the Q&A, but I don’t know, it might be worth. Reading any of those comments from the prepared remarks, you kind of came back at the cost — talking about the cost, but it was right around that litigation comment that the audio cut out – maybe start there. Sure.
Charlotte Simonelli: Yes. The exact comment I made was we entered into a settlement on our seller antitrust litigation on a nationwide basis for $83.5 million, of which we expect to pay $10 million this year, the remainder in 2024. That’s the comment.
Ryan McKeveny: Okay. Perfect. Thank you for that. And then second, Ryan. So I hear you on the pricing trends. I guess — maybe just square a couple of comments. So you mentioned the incremental slowing in the back half of the quarter, which makes sense with what rates have done, assumingly that comment is mainly about transaction size. But I guess I’m just curious, with rates continuing to move higher, are you seeing any change in the pricing dynamics at all, or is the kind of ASP growth just seemingly kind of remaining in place and it’s more of a transaction side issue?
Ryan Schneider: Yeah. In our book, it’s a unit issue, it’s a transaction sides. And I just think it gets back to the — even at the higher rates, there is still more demand than supply for the houses that are out there, which is strange, obviously, given the affordability issues of 8% mortgage rates, but it is the reality. And so even in the back half of the year, we didn’t see like, when I look at September prices, they didn’t behave differently than the quarterly prices. What was different in September with more pressure on the unit side and that drove a little bit worse results volume-wise in the quarter than we thought and a little bit of why we’re at the worst end of the volume guidance that we think for the year. So it really was a unit story, not a price story.
And again, we’re not going to sit here and better future that prices are going to go in a certain direction. We’re really focused on what’s happening on the unit front. And what we can do for our agents and franchisees there. What we can do on our cost base on a lower unit environment, et cetera. But we didn’t see anything in the end of the quarter that changes the price unit dynamics that we saw for the full quarter.
Ryan McKeveny: Got it. Okay. Thank you very much.
Operator: We have no further questions at this time. And this will conclude today’s conference call. Thank you, everyone, for participating. You may now disconnect.
