And we are able to, therefore, focus on investment management performance and growth of the enterprise I would also add that because we do generate cash flow, we can take these incongruities in the marketplace as buying opportunities for the underlying stock. So we are happy with our structure where we are.
Mike Brown: Okay. Thank you for the thoughts there. And then just as a follow-up, if I just take – approach the capital allocation question a little bit differently. And just – are you seeing any opportunities on the M&A front? And how are you thinking about some of the strategic opportunities that would best fit Federated Hermes that you think could kind of take you on your next evolution of growth here?
Tom Donahue: Okay. It’s Tom. We have – we’ve talked about before, looking in the real estate development area. That’s going to be a long, long process. It’s going to probably be an acquisition in the U.S., and we’ve got to get the skills and expertise that we have in London and trying to bring that over here will require boots on the ground in the U.S. And so that’s a long-term thing. It has to fit with us. It has to culturally and all the things it took us a long time to find acquisition in Hermes. I would expect that it’s going to take us a long time to find something that makes sense for us there, too. That would kind of be the biggest thing. We don’t have needs in growth or quant or value. So those would probably expect to be more roll-up type of things that happen. And then, of course, in the money fund business. We’re all in, in the money fund business. And if someone wants to be out, we are a highly interested player.
Mike Brown: Okay. Great. Appreciate the thoughts.
Operator: Thank you very much. Your next question is coming from Brian Bedell from Deutsche Bank. Brian, your line is live.
Brian Bedell: Great. Thanks. Good morning, folks. Thanks for taking my questions. First on the money market side, sort of a combo question on the proposals from the SEC, particularly the liquidity rules, I think, going from 10% to 30% in – I think overnight and weekly to 25% and 50% debt proposal, which subset of funds would that impact on the money side for you? And then, I guess, sort of connected with that, I know you tend to manage relatively conservatively across the money fund asset class. How do you see the competitive yield dynamic on the retail side of the business? Sometimes you get obviously flows chasing – sort of money chasing higher yielding and you don’t typically engage in that, but maybe just some perspective on where you see your competitive yields in the marketplace and how that might change in the near to intermediate term?
Chris Donahue: Debbie?
Debbie Cunningham: Sure, I can take that. So going from 10% in overnight and 30% in weekly liquid assets that are required in the current role to 25% in dailies and 50% which will be required in the new rules. The only funds that, that will impact would be the prime funds. First of all, the municipal funds are exempt from any kind of daily liquid asset requirements. So it’s only weekly liquid assets that impact them. And from both a municipal and a government standpoint, they operate well in excess of those either 25% or 50% requirements for dailies and weekly. So it’s really the prime funds that will be impacted. And for the most part, since 10 and 30 and especially the 30 had a negative consequence of the potential for dates and fees, we tended to never manage our funds with 10 and 30, but rather something that was probably closer to 20 and 40.
