Peter Carlino: So let me — I’m sorry. Desiree, do you want to go ahead? I was going to say that look, we walk a tightrope especially in our industry, because there’s not a long string of predictable acquisitions on the horizon. So we kind of take the temperature of where we are, what’s in the shop at any given time and try to pick a prudent level to be prepared and not be cut unprepared if and when we need to have cash. I mean, you raise money when you can. And as favorably as you can. Sometimes — and I’ve said this on earlier calls that we’ll accept some, at least, I will, some drag from over equitizing, because it’s a safer place to be. And that’s the model that we operate with, safety, safety, safety for our investors. So we are opportunistic about that.
Obviously, it says something about what we hope to have in the future. And I think Desiree explained where short-term needs were that made this the prudent way to raise cash. The debt market obviously was very unappealing. Go ahead.
Haendel St. Juste: Got it. Got it. Yes, go ahead. Was there more?
Peter Carlino: Anything from…
Matthew Demchyk: This is Matthew. I’ll add a little nuance taking a step back. Our long-term approach of targeting a 5 times to 5.5 times leverage range remains really important to us. At the same time, tactically, when we issue equity, it’s really with — it’s permanent capital. It’s with a long-term view in mind. So the approximate use of the cash towards the debt wasn’t the driving decision. It was to prefund what our future opportunity set might be and to add optionality into our business model as I mentioned in the intro. So whenever those next opportunities might come to the past, we have the option to choose using more leverage to the extent we wish to at that time or equity in the mix. Remember, we’ve got a very deep tool chest between overnights, spot deals, ATM that we’ve used with and without forward the different debt strategies between the term loan we used and also long-term unsecured that we’ve — really, to Peter’s point, artfully woven together to get the best outcome for shareholders.
And the punchline is, as we fund whatever is next, we’ve got more choices than we’ve ever had as a company to do what’s best.
Haendel St. Juste: Great. Guys, appreciate that color. Separate question, one for you, perhaps, Peter. I think the Governor of Texas mentioned the other day that he’d be open to experiential assets that have an element of gaming €œif it can be built in the way that professional provides a form of entertainment for people€. So I guess, I was curious if you could provide your thoughts on the potential legalization of commercial and destination casinos in Texas. And if you would see that as more of an opportunity or a threat.
Peter Carlino: Well, certainly not a threat. It would indeed be an opportunity for one or other of our operators. But — and we do stay fairly closely to that. My sense is at the moment nothing material is going to happen. You may see sports betting, because remember, the teams are involved. The professional teams are involved in Texas, so I have a feeling that that’s what you may see first move to sports betting. Flat out casinos, I think, are further down the line and who knows. I’ve always said somewhere in my lifetime, I hope that Texas gets full gaming. But my sense is, and from what I’m hearing, that’s not likely to happen in this first round. So — but what it’s worth, which is not a lot. That’s my sense of where Texas stands today. But we keep a close eye on it. And obviously, we want to make sure that we’re around the hoop for any state, any activity anywhere, and you can bet that we are. Texas is tough. We’ll see. I think it’s going to be a multistep process.
