Doug Leggate: Thanks. Yes, I don’t want to start with a rumor that you are selling Haynesville, so my apologies for speaking. My follow-up is really a housekeeping question, so I apologize for this, it maybe for Mohit. The transport costs, are there any MVC or other type of midstream obligations that have €“ there’s some kind of ramification from the decline in production, monies decline admittedly, but it just looked to us that your transport costs were ticking up a bit, I wonder if the two were related? So, that’s my follow-up. Thanks.
Mohit Singh: Yes, Doug, good morning, this is Mohit. None that we are concerned about at this point, I mean the MVCs historically that we have discussed have been in the Eagle Ford and as yesterday’s announcement to INEOS, so the buyer is stepping into those obligations for that package. There are some MVCs in the rich package also, but our production is way ahead of those minimum volume commitments. So any €“ and then when you start looking at Haynesville, there is quite a bit of uncommitted volumes that we had, and we’ve proactively been looking to try and get flow assurance through transport contracts and firm sales, which you start building up towards the overall projection of the volume that you’re forecasting and trying to get flow assurance for all those molecules. But overall, when you look across the portfolio, Doug, nothing that bothers us at this point from an overall obligation perspective.
Doug Leggate: Thanks, guys. Appreciate the time.
Operator: The next question comes from Matt Portillo with TPH. Please go ahead.
Matt Portillo: Good morning, all. Mohit, maybe just a question, starting out with the hedge book, great to see you guys added quite a bit in 2024. Just curious how you’re feeling about your hedge position now, looks like relative to your public peers, you’re in a position of strength given your coverage in €˜23 and in €˜24. But just curious how you guys are thinking about the €˜24 curve today?
Mohit Singh: Yes. Thanks for that question, Matt. it’s interesting when things were €“ when prices were going up, we heard a lot of pushback from our investors that we should not hedge as much. Now what we did do is we stayed consistent and our plan is to hedge the wedge as we have described before, Matt, when we’re making capital investment decisions now, the production comes on 9 to 12 months. Later on, we want some certainty on the cash flow from that production. And that’s why we hedge. So what you have seen in the disclosure that came out yesterday, we’ve added about 360 Bcf of new hedges since our last disclosure. We have done that both for 2023 and into 2024. So we feel pretty good about our exposure there and our coverage. What it does do is provide us downside protection, which underpins the commitment that we have towards shareholder returns.
Matt Portillo: Perfect. And then a follow-up question, just maybe a bit of a longer-term view on the market. Nick, you talked about being well positioned in the Haynesville to meet a surge in demand from LNG takeaway coming on, the basin as a whole, I think the industry doesn’t have as good of an acreage position as you and maybe one or two of your public peers have in terms of inventory depth and quality. Just curious how you view the cost curve in the Haynesville over time, even in your portfolio, there are wells that need something closer to $3 to $4 an Mcf to make a return. So I’m curious if you think the cost curve in the Haynesville over time is going to take higher as inventory depletes from maybe some of your smaller peers that are running a lot of activity in the basin.
