Jonnathan Navarrete: Sure. Okay, thanks. And the last one, can you just remind us where we are with the New York license and as a competitive process and just where Bally stands at the moment?
George Papanier: So, it, you know, we will. So, obviously, it’s public that we’re part of the process. We’re working on presenting an appropriate plan once the RFP process begins. We’ve secured the land and we think that it’s a real opportunity at State. We think that anyone that does a project here will be successful and we’re just putting ourselves in a position, to build the appropriate project there and be successful. But the first step is acquiring the license.
Robeson Reeves: We can’t give you any color on New York’s timeline. We are taking every step and measure that will put our name in the hat for consideration. So we’re very interested in it. We think we have a very, very compelling proposition and site anchored by our Bally Links golf course. And so we are, we will engage and await New York’s decision and timeline.
Jonnathan Navarrete: Thank you.
Operator: We’ll take our next question from David Katz with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
David Katz: Hi, good evening, everyone. Thanks for taking my question. And apologies, I was a couple of minutes late. But I wanted to just go back on Chicago financing, which I know is still an open question. You may not have conclusions for us today, but any updates on what’s in bounds or out of bounds as potential outcomes would be helpful.
Charlie Diao: Hi, David. This is Charlie Diao. I think we haven’t changed. You know, we expect to finance it when we need to have the financing. I know that the market would like to have greater certainty, but the fact is we don’t get access to the site until July 4, 2024. And we’re going to spend the back half of this year demolishing and site prep. So as Robeson mentioned in the introductory, the bulk of the CapEx is in 2025 and 2026. So unfortunately, we don’t have a commitment in place to tell you about. If and when we do, we shall do that, but we continue to progress towards that outcome. And we are, you know, confident of our ability to finance the project because it’s a great project.
David Katz: Okay, we’ll have to leave it there. I appreciate it. Thank you.
Operator: We’ll take our next question from Brandt Montour with Barclays. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Brandt Montour: Hey. Good evening, everybody. Thanks for taking my question. I want to circle back on the international interactive segment guidance, which is essentially flat on the top line, right, for 24. And I just, I guess if I’m just trying to… you know, read between the lines here on the different segments, it sounds like, you know, you’re constructive on the UK, which I would expect to mean that you expect that part of the business to grow somewhat. And then it sounds like Asia’s stable, but maybe you have to lap, right, a reset there from last year. And so on a year-over-year basis for the year, Asia will probably be down and maybe those two offset. Am I wildly off there in terms of thinking about the different geographies within that line?
Robeson Reeves: No, I think you’ve interpreted it pretty well. Asia does have to lap because there was a significant decline there over the course of 23. Now we’re seeing recovery there which is good but we have to lap that. We obviously when we’re thinking about our guidance, thinking about our forecasts, you can’t predict perfectly in some of these environments. So we know that what we have in there is rational and we know that we have enough levers to pull on marketing optimization to ensure that we have the right flow through to the bottom line. Yeah, and we’re making investments in other markets to set ourselves up for the future as well.
Brandt Montour: Got it. That’s helpful. And then a follow up to the capital allocation discussion. You guys gave some color on how you think of how you’re thinking about it going forward. I guess just sort of thinking or looking back on the fourth quarter, we noticed you drew down some of your revolver and maybe it’s separate though, cash sponge, well, you know, you bought some of your stock back and so leverage picked up a little bit on that. And so I guess the question is, maybe just remind us your philosophy on your leverage, where, when it sort of, is to add a level where, you know, it doesn’t make sense to the stock price to buy back stock and sort of how you think about that.
Charlie Diao: Yeah, look, at any point, this is Charlie Diao, at any point in time we have different options and certainly in the fourth quarter the equities got too cheap. But we also have various forms, you say our leverage, we do have a land bank that we know that we can monetize at any point in time. It doesn’t necessarily mean that we’re going to monetize it and then buy stock or do other things with it. So those are levers that are available to us. At the end of the day, we only spent less than 70 million for that. That’s point one of a turn. So, I don’t know if that satisfies you, but. The point is that option is never off the table for us, but it doesn’t mean that we’re focused on doing that exclusive to other opportunities available to us.
Brandt Montour: That’s helpful. I mean, I guess, no, that’s satisfying. I guess I’m just curious if you think it’s worthwhile to sort of send a signal that you care about bringing leverage down or if you think that this level you’re very comfortable with and you don’t need to do that.
