So continue to be surprised by how competitive the smaller opportunities have been and continue to be pleased by how attractively priced some of the larger deals are.
Paul Diamond : Good. Makes perfect sense. Just a quick follow-up. If I just, if I just look back into a math on the existing permits and DUCs versus production guidance growth. Should I think about that as more of an expectation that you have a similar level of DUCs turned in line and the Permian is kind of progressing as normal, seeing about 40% — like 38%, 40% of the existing going through? Or is it more just in an expectation that there might be some increased volatility in the markets this year. And maybe–
Davis Ravnaas: I think it’s a little bit of both. And I like the way that you framed that. So historically speaking, we expect close to 100% of our net DUCs to be completed over the next, let’s call it, 12 to 18 months, but it’s probably closer to 12 months. On the permit side, I don’t disagree with the percentage that you just framed there. I don’t have exactly in front of me what historical averages have been on permits, but that sounds reasonable to me. I think that what you’re seeing from us and maybe this is what you’re driving at, is perhaps it looks a little bit conservative on our guidance given that ratio of net DUCs and permits on our acreage to the maintenance level needed to maintain flat production. Are we being unduly conservative?
I just think that in this market environment, we’d rather look at that volatility and say we want to put something out there that makes sense on guidance. We don’t want to be unduly conservative, but we can’t guarantee that a natural gas price environment like this or if oil starts to turn over this year, we don’t want to be overpromising production to our shareholders. And so I think that what you see is us that’s trying to be — trying to tow that line of giving realistic guidance for the next 12 months and not being unduly conservative but also keeping in mind, obviously, the natural gas was, what, $1.50 a couple of days ago. So it’s a tough environment, specifically right now to be providing guidance, but I think that’s something that’s going to be tough for any mineral owner, obviously, that doesn’t have developmental control over their assets.
Paul Diamond : Got it. Understood. I appreciate the time. I’ll leave it there.
Davis Ravnaas: Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from Grant Adkins with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question.
Grant Adkins: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the call.
Davis Ravnaas: Good morning, Grant.
Grant Adkins: So this is going to be kind of on the macro side. But given the kind of activity reductions we’ve seen from some operators in both Appalachia and the Haynesville. Do you all see that as kind of I guess you kind of mentioned that you don’t really want necessarily those assets to be drilled up right now, but how do you think that affects your kind of gas production or does it moving forward into ’24?
Davis Ravnaas: I’m not too worried about gas production or asset in 2024, just because of the amount of DUCs that we have in gas basins currently. So I think what you’ll see is that those alone with some permits will be able to keep our production more or less flat, absent even increased drilling on the acreage. That’s really more focused on the Haynesville, which is now only let’s say, 13% of our rigs that are running today. So a little bit less relevant than it was for our business, even just a couple of years ago, which you enjoy is just kind of amazes me to look at how the portfolio has changed. Appalachia, less significant portion of our production, obviously, so less focused on that. But what we are hearing overall from operators there is get maintenance production levels, are going to be what we’re going to see here over the next 12 to 18 months.
So I don’t feel — your point well taken. I think that’s baked into our guidance and kind of echo some of the comments that I’ve made on previous questions, which is that we feel very good about our DUCs and permits relative to maintenance activity that needs to happen to keep production flat. But our guidance does reflect a realistic and conservative view of the fact that at a recognition that natural gas prices are very low and very volatile and therefore, difficult to predict in terms of activity levels, so.
Grant Adkins: Awesome. Thank you. And then a follow-up, this is going to shift gears a little bit. So you all have a pretty distinct advantage with the like tax structure on your distribution. The last announcement that 93% was non-taxable. Can you give any color on like what — where you expect that to be for the coming year, just like an average kind of what your tax yield is going to be there.
Davis Ravnaas: Blayne, do we have anything that we can share on that now? Or any thoughts on that? Blayne Rhynsburger is our Controller.
Blayne Rhynsburger : Yeah. So we used to give tax guidance going forward, and we stopped doing that just given the volatility of pricing. I would just say if you want to benchmark it, I would take what pricing is today and then you can kind of — it’s going to ride whatever natural gas and oil prices do for the rest of the year. So I would take whatever we have for Q4 and maybe use that as a benchmark and then whatever you think whatever the strip price of oil and natural gas is kind of — the movement of that is going to be what’s going to dictate what our tax shield is going to be.
Grant Adkins: Okay, awesome. Thank you, guys.
Davis Ravnaas: Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from Aaron Bilkoski, with TD Cowen. Please proceed with your question.
