And that’s who we do business with and we feel really good about how we’ve responded in terms of both how our members have responded. Of course, as a team, we went into the same with all the unknowns of two weeks ago. We went into the same kind of crisis management mode as everyone else did to make sure that things were okay. But, I can’t tell you how much this demonstrates to us, and I think ultimately to our partners across the banks and the insurance companies that this is why this is a very stable source of liquidity when they need it.
Operator: The next question is from Greg Peters with Raymond James. Please go ahead.
Greg Peters: Well, good afternoon everyone. I guess I’d just like to build on your answer from the last question about, the chaos that’s unfolded in the bank channel. And then, not only have bank prices gotten killed, and there’s been some companies that have been called in question, we’ve seen pressure in the life insurance industry. So I know you were talking about the value of your de deposits from the perspective of how your depository partners might look at it. But can you talk to us for a moment about the credit risk that you’re considering as you established these partnerships, not only with the depositories, but also with the life insurance companies, and maybe how that might have changed in the last couple weeks?
Jon Kessler: Yeah, I think fundamentally, Greg the things that you would be concerned about, let me — the first thing that we are concerned about, it’s not — I don’t even get into issues of asset quality. I want to start with issues of whether for the insurer, whether the liability side of the balance fee is strong, meaning whether these are truly illiquid and so forth. And so there’s real good coordination and that’s had an impact on the kinds of insurers that we want to do business with as we start this program. As you well know we have largely steered away from the folks that are relatively newer into the space that have gotten in on the back of private equity, money accumulating that kind of thing, and have tended to focus perhaps at the expense of some premium on return.
Have tended to focus on winning partners who have been in the insurance business across multiple lines for not just tens of years, but as in some cases hundreds and that’s served us well here. So, we obviously do monitor. The nice thing about the insurance side is we get a ton of data and we get it in rough real time. And so we have been able to monitor very closely things, the kinds of issues that people have talked about in the bank space with regard to both the liability and asset side of those institutions. And they have performed extremely well, exactly as we would’ve expected. I think where you’re seeing more stress is I think in institutions where the growth of the balance sheet is a relatively new phenomenon. And so, not dissimilar, I think you’ve heard me say before on the bank side where we get very cautious when someone is looking to us as a means to sort of launch a business plan on the bank side or and the regulators don’t want us to be necessarily the source of rapid balance sheet growth.
They want us to be the source of stability, and I think we’ve sort of taken the same approach with the insurers. And again, I think that’s serving well from the perspective of our goal, which is ultimately, getting the most for our members and for us, but in the context of stability. So it’s a great question and it does seem like it’s playing out in the way that we would want thus far.
