Josh Silverstein: Yeah. Thanks. Good morning, guys. You provided a lot of good details on the lower breakeven price. So I just had a couple of questions there. First, I think you exclude the non-op divestiture impacts. Can you give us what the pro forma numbers would be? And then just around the third-party revenues, it’s big at $0.27 here. Does this change over time? Or are these under 10, 15-year or 20-year agreements that would say pretty consistent through the 2030s? Thanks.
Jeremy Knop: Yeah. So, I guess, first of all, on the cost walk, I don’t anticipate much of a change from the non-op sales. They are high-quality assets, but it’s not going to move the needle all that much. I think there’s other variables in the mix that will have a more outsized impact of that in terms of like you capturing synergies, other projects we’re investing in around the asset footprint. So I wouldn’t — I think that’s still a pretty good directional walk as to where we expect that to end up.
Toby Rice: Yeah. And then as far as the third-party opportunity set, yeah, we look at that as a way to reduce our cost structure. Listen, we’re rolling up our sleeves and understanding what the opportunity set looks like there. Like what we did when we came in here with EQT, we wanted to realize the full potential of EQT’s assets. It’s the same playbook being and mentality being applied to the E-Train assets. And one of the ways that we can realize the full potential of those assets is increasing the utilization of those midstream assets. And one of the ways that we can do that is with our own volumes, but also there’s going to be opportunities where there’s opportunities for us to increase utilization using third-party volumes.
So that’s something that we’re mapping out. The leadership at EQT that’s going to be running these assets has a track record of maximizing the utilization of our pipe systems. Just a reminder, at Rice Energy producing 2 Bcf a day gross, our midstream team was gathering almost 3 Bcf a day. So this is a part of the DNA, and it’s aligned with our core strategy of lowering our cost structure.
Josh Silverstein: Got it. That’s helpful. And then you touched before on the hedges. Just going back to the prior call, I thought the view was that E-Train would now be the new hedge, but you guys have added hedges into the first half of next year, pretty similar to it looks like to what the second half of ’24 is was just a view of maybe some potential weakness or uncertainty this winter before you have a rising demand outlook going forward? Or is this a change in strategy over the past few months? Thanks.
Jeremy Knop: No, Josh, it’s consistent with what we talked about before. I mean, step one is deleveraging. So we need to protect the balance sheet first and foremost. By the time we get through that, we hit our targets by the end of 2025. I think you see the post 2025 hedge strategy look very different. But look, the next 12 to 18 months is all about the balance sheet, bulletproofing that plan. In 2026 and beyond, I think you’re going to see us have differentiated upside to higher gas prices in volatility.
Josh Silverstein: Got it. Thanks guys.
End of Q&A:
Operator: There are no other questions in the queue. This will conclude today’s conference. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.
