Rich Anderson: Okay. Yes, I remember the smoking section on a plane when I was much younger, it didn’t seem like that was really a creative approach to addressing the issue. But yes, we’ll see how it plays out in the gaming space. Thanks for your color.
Peter Carlino: Well, I think if were in this — think in the seat right behind the guy smoking.
Rich Anderson: I didn’t quite get that one, but whatever. Thank you.
Peter Carlino: You’re welcome.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Barry Jonas with Truist Securities. Please proceed with your question.
Barry Jonas: Hi, hey guys. Good morning. Congrats on a great year. I think years ago, you used to talk about a target of like $500 million a year of M&A. Curious how you think about that today?
Peter Carlino: Look, I’ll just answer quickly. I think we’re still there. It may not be in a particular year, but I think you can pretty well — but we were willing to stand by that. Anybody else on the GLPI side want to opine.
Steven Ladany: I mean, I’ll throw in two second answer, I guess. I mean I think $500 million is fine as a goal. I think we continue to outperform that in the past. And I don’t necessarily believe that we would underperform it in the future. So I think it’s fine for a target. I think between the PENN transactions that we hope to fund over the next few years, and some of the capital improvement dollars that we expect to put out to different tenants for different projects. I think we’re going to be there again or through it. So I think all signs point to that as a continued goal and continued purpose of outperforming it.
Barry Jonas: Great. Great. And then just for a follow-up, why don’t I touch on iGaming and cannibalization. Just really how it plays into any long-term strategy or how you may start underwriting future deals. Peter, I think I asked you this question like a year ago, and you said it was too early, but curious another year of data. Any updated thoughts here or still too soon? Thanks.
Peter Carlino: No, look, I’ll stay with where I was a year ago. And for this reason, look, iGaming and provide the convenience that obviously we all understand. But people are social animals. I mean, my whole feeling about that is that people may — look, you’re going to place a bet on a college game, for example. So we’ll look at some sports betting in your driveway to bet on your college team or some other game around the country. But that’s not an experience that people like. I look at it this way. I look at how well the Cordis people are doing with their Live! facilities that don’t even offer gaming. Pack, damned, my 23-year-old granddaughter this year could have watched the Eagles at home on a giant screen and watch the play.
Where did she go? She went all the way down to Philly Live. And joined all the other crazies down there, drinking, partying and having a grand all time. Because, look, gambling is a social experience. And you can play poker on your iPhone, but it’s not the same as look at the guy in the sunglasses and the baseball had turned backwards across the table from you trying to figure out where that person is actually, that dynamism is what people want. So I’m suggesting there’s going to be a hell of a lot more gambling going on, but I don’t think it’s going to have a negative effect at all. In fact, I’m more convinced to that now on the bricks-and-mortar properties.
Barry Jonas: Great. Thanks so much.
Peter Carlino: Thank you.
