Jeremy Barnum: Yes, it’s a good question. It’s quite a technical issue. So I think in the past, the way this number was constructed was to assume through the cycle betas and all the deposits. And so your notion that like the number would include deposit beta acceleration would not have been the case because it would have been using essentially terminal deposit betas for the based on the forward curve and then based on a 100% shock to the forward curve. The nuance that we’ve introduced now is to recognize that given the shock, the reprice at the beta predicts will not be instantaneous. And so you get sort of just the mathematical consequences of that. But I think translating that into a statement about our expectation for beta for the next 12 months relative to our NII guide might be a bridge too far. I’m not sure you can actually draw that thing.
Betsy Graseck: Right. But you were saying earlier, deposit betas you do anticipate are going to be accelerating from here, and that’s part of the outlook for NII longer term to normalize in the mid-70s. Is that right?
Jeremy Barnum: Yes. Go ahead, James. Yes.
Jamie Dimon: I mean basically, yes, as you have – if the next round is going to be the beta built from 30 to 40 to 50, whatever the product is, yes, that’s the latter. And the 2.5 will go down over time as that actually happens if rates actually go up. The rates don’t actually go up to 2.5 billion is exactly 2.5 again.
Jeremy Barnum: And what I was going to say, as is just that the projection of the 87 coming down to a significantly lower number contains both the element of internal migration, as well as the potential, which is by no means guaranteed, at product level reprice. And furthermore, then obviously, the dynamics are a little bit different in the different business segments as we move from large corporate wholesale to consumer.
Betsy Graseck: Okay. All right. Thank you. Appreciate it.
Operator: Next, we’ll go to the line of Matt O’Connor from Deutsche Bank. You may proceed.
Matt O’Connor: All right. Good morning. So I mean your came eventually consumers will want more deposit rate sensitivity here. I guess what would make you change your rates meaningfully? So the top two banks have about 50% consumer market share, loan-to-deposit ratios are low. Your outlook for loan growth, and I think others is fairly sluggish at least outside of card. So I get that it’s common sense, and that’s what we’ve seen historically, but there really is this kind of big divergence among big banks and everybody else where the big banks just don’t need to pay that much for deposits for the reason. So what would make you change that?
Jeremy Barnum: Yes. In the end Matt, it’s just feedback from the field. It’s competition and feedback from the field.
Jamie Dimon: I think every bank is in a different position about what they need. And so, you have a whole range of outcomes. But remember, we do this also by city. So you have different competition. Arizona and Phoenix then we have Chicago, Illinois, and we do have high interest rate products. So it’s a combination of all those things. I wouldn’t call it a big bank or a small bank, and you’re going to see whenever we report who kind of payable the more things and who did and things like that. So look, I would take you to give – I think it’s going to say there is very little pricing power in most of our business and betas are going to go up. You take it as a given – there is no circumstance that we’ve ever seen in the history of banking where rates didn’t get to a certain point that you had to have competing products and they go through migration or a direct rate or move into CDs or money market funds.
And we’re going to have to compete for that. You already see it in parts of our business and not in other parts.
