Ivan Kaufman: We can’t answer that in a vacuum. There’s too many factors. It all depends on our liquidity position. The obligation is we have to fund the opportunities that we have in front of us, where the market dislocation is. So each circumstance presents us a different opportunity. Certainly buying back our stock at the right value is a great opportunity for us. If we have liquidity, it’s something that would be extraordinarily attractive. We always feel our best investment is within our own sphere on the other — on one hand. On the other hand, we always want to grow our franchise and our business. And if it’d be really great lending opportunities through our franchise, we keep our eye on that as well. So it’s a balancing act based on a variety of factors.
Richard Shane: Got it. Now the balance sheet has continued to shrink this year. I think assets are down about 6%. You’ve issued equity into that. If the balance sheet continues to run off, would you continue to issue equity? Or is this something that will sort of stall until you have objectives of growing the balance sheet again?
Ivan Kaufman: Well, let’s keep in mind that we booked a lot of SFR business and that SFR business funds over time. So when we’re booking business, we have a capital obligation and we try and match our capital obligations and keep our cash very, very constant in this kind of environment. So we’re really sensitized to the opportunities on capital needs and keeping our cash balances at a very heightened level during this economic cycle. So that’s one of the things we pay a lot of attention to. Clearly, when our book was high, and we’re able to raise capital and then increase the amount of lending we did on the SFR side, we thought that was a really good match to generate 16% and 18% returns. And we’ll manage that and monitor that accordingly.
Richard Shane: Got it. Okay. That’s very helpful. And last question, I promise. There is — and it ties into what you just said. There is a $56.9 million mezz commitment. I am curious what the CECL reserve levels are for unfunded commitments on mezz?
Paul Elenio: Yes. It’s a model that we run. I don’t have that at my fingertips, Rick. I mean the models are run, obviously, subordinated paper gets a higher CECL reserve than obviously, first lien senior bridge stuff. We do have roughly right now, we’re sitting with about $73 million in general CECL on our balance sheet. I don’t have it in front of me. It may actually be disclosed. I’m not sure, but we can get you that on how much is related to mezz and what’s related to unfunded commitments. It’s just — it factors into the model. It certainly factors in at a higher loss level because of the subordinate position to it.
Operator: And we have our next question from Crispin Love with Piper Sandler.
Crispin Love: Just looking at the nonperformers in the quarter, you added 5 loans there, but only $16 million. Just curious a little bit more detail there. Are those smaller loans? Or was that to resolve in that delinquency you mentioned? And just any additional info in detail on the new nonperformers and credit generally would be helpful.
Paul Elenio: Sure. So we added actually six new nonperforming loans during the quarter for a total of about $98 million in total UPB. So they range anywhere from $10 million to $30 million of the assets, and then we resolved the $70 million asset that I took Rick through on the change in the terms. So the net change was $28 million during the quarter. The assets are not particularly different than the type of assets we’ve done. They’re all multifamily, all bridge, they’re throughout the country and the LTVs on these assets range anywhere from high 60s to 90s and then one we have 100, because we took a reserve against it of $1.5 million. But really nothing different than the type of assets we’ve had in the past.
