Paul Elenio: We did not provide mezz on that loan, and we did not have a reserve on that loan because the loan — and we like the asset a lot, and we think we’re money good. We did end up restructuring that loan, putting into one of our facilities and getting a pretty standard advance rate. But we did not provide mezz against that loan.
Richard Shane: That’s helpful. Second question, there were $347 million of extensions in the quarter. Just curious if you can just sort of give us — and I realize it’s going to be idiosyncratic over a wide array of loans. But if you can give us some perspective on what extensions look like? What you are able to get in terms of pay downs and what you’re requiring in terms of rate caps? And finally, what you’re doing with coupons on those?
Paul Elenio: Sure. So I can give a little color. Ivan, will probably be able to give the rest in the market, but most of all those extensions were as a bright extensions, which is what borrowers have if they’re making their payments and they’re doing the things they should be doing. They have an as a right extension. So there’s not really much we do differently with they’re entitled to that extension. They’ve executed their plan and that extension is part of their terms. I think there was one loan in which the extension was granted and as a concession to grant extension, we ended up having a pay down of the loan of $2 million and increasing the actual interest rate for like a 3- or 6-month extension. But almost all of the extensions we did during the quarter were as of right extensions. Ivan, I don’t know if you want to give a little color on that?
Ivan Kaufman: Yes. Listen, if it does it right, there’s not much to talk about. But if it’s not as of right, we usually seek a level of consideration to warrant that extension to put the asset and our loan in a better position. So each one is individually analyzed to see how we can improve our position on a particular asset.
Richard Shane: Does as of right require getting a rate cap extension as well?
Ivan Kaufman: It depends. If it is — if that’s part of it, then it was right, if it’s not, then it’s not.
Richard Shane: Got it. Okay. And then not to answer Jade’s question, but I think it ties into something that we didn’t fully understand in terms of the cash flows. There was commentary in the 10-Q related to a $211 million — $211.7 million related party transaction on servicing, is that…
Paul Elenio: Yes, I just looked it up and I was going to respond to Jade. So this is timing, and this is what we talked about early in the commentary, Steve Delaney asked the question. We had very, very late run off in the quarter, which sometimes happens, doesn’t always happen. When that run-off occurs, it runs off in our servicing shop, which is off balance sheet. And so we have to create a due from related party because that money is moved a day later. So if loans are paying off at the end of the month on 9/30, the money is sitting in our off-balance sheet servicer. But it’s removed out of our portfolio, and it’s a receivable that comes in the next day. So that cash flow change that you see of $200 million is all to do with the change in the related party line — to do from related party line, which is totally timing and all that money came in on October 1.
Richard Shane: Got it. Okay. And then last question. Stock is now trading pretty much at book value. You guys have issued $185 million this year, repurchased 35 million. What are the parameters as we think about this, what is the premium you should be trading at book to approach the ATM? And what is the discount where you would consider repurchasing? And I’m assuming that at really close to par, you’re doing neither.
