Mark Dwelle: Okay. Thanks for that. And the second question, this is just a reiteration, I guess. Steven, I think it was in your comments talking about the reinsurance treaty, it’s something and I’m just trying to write what I heard. So if you — on a $1 billion of total losses, you would have $542 million of exposure in the new treaty versus $499 million. Is that — that’s $1 billion of aggregate losses or is that a single event loss?
Steve Johnston: Yeah. No, good question, and I will clarify that a bit. So I wanted to make sure to kind of put things on an apples-to-apples comparison. So this year’s program 2023 goes up to $1.1 billion. And so we have moved up a bit as our equity has grown, our GAAP equity has grown, our premium has grown, we feel we are in a position to move the program up a bit, but we wanted to buy more at the top end. So to put it kind of on an apples-to-apples basis, I used a hypothetical $1.1 billion loss for both years 2023 and 2022. And you’re right on for the 2023 year, we would have $542 million of exposure. So that would include the $200 million up to the attachment point plus co-participations and that compares with $499 million for 2022 — in the 2022 program.
Mark Dwelle: And then, again, just to clarify, that’s on an aggregate basis for the full year or that’s on a per event loss?
Steve Johnston: Per event.
Mark Dwelle: Per event. Got it. So if there were $2 billion storms — your two storms that cost Cincinnati Financial $1 billion in a year, then it would be double each of those respective figures, again, just for comparison.
Steve Johnston: Right. We have reinstatement provisions in the contracts.
Mark Dwelle: Right. Of course. Okay. All right. Thanks for that. And then another question just — can you remind me within Cincinnati Re, what proportion of that business is property and property catastrophe oriented as compared to being specialty or liability lines?
Steve Johnston: Yes. I have it. And you know it’s interesting. We don’t necessarily target a given percentage, but our 2022 full year in our inception to date are really pretty close. And for property, both from 2022 and inception to date, it’s a little over 30% of the premium. For casualty, it’s right in that 55% range. And for specialty, it’s a little over 15% for the year in a little bit lower than that for the year-to-date, probably about 13%. So across time, it’s been very consistent in that 30 plus range for property 53-ish for casualty and 15% or so for — they didn’t quite add up. I better make it get to 100%, so more like 30%, 55% and 15% across time.
Mark Dwelle: Any outlook you’d like to share on how your January 1 renewals might skew those percentages?
Steve Johnston: No. I think it’s a little early on the January 1’s, but — it’s one nice thing as buyers of reinsurance, we’re seeing the cost go up. It’s almost like a little bit of a hedge in that we have Cincinnati Re, we’ve got very talented people there, very experienced people, and you see that shining through in a market like this. And they are benefiting from the firming rates and firming terms and conditions that you read about.
Mark Dwelle: Okay. Appreciate that. Thanks for the answers.
Steve Johnston: Thank you, Mark.
Operator: Our next question will come from Greg (ph) Carter with Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Grace Carter: Hi, everyone.
Steve Johnston: Good morning, Grace.
