Jeanine Wai: Okay. Great. Same (ph) on this well is always a good thing. Thank you for the detail. Maybe Dane, turning to you on just the shareholder returns versus debt pay down, you’re committed to returning at least 40% of CFO this year. The balance sheet is in a really comfortable place. At least at Barclays, our house forecast calls were meaningfully higher crude prices than $80 this year. And assuming our prices show up, how should we think about the allocation of capital in this scenario between buybacks and early debt pay down? We heard your prepared remarks where you talked about your track record is to actually exceed the original target percent return. In the past, you’ve given kind of different percent targets at different commodity prices.
But this time around, you’ve got the new Ensign debt in the mix. And so at what point do you really start chipping away at the Ensign debt? Is it as simple as if oil is $85 or $90, you start going after that more? Can you provide any more color? Thank you.
Dane Whitehead: Good morning, Jeanine, yes, definitely. Let me kind of go back to our return on capital commitment framework for a second, and then I’ll work my way to how we’re thinking about paying down acquisition debt and timing of that. One, as I stated, we’re firmly committed to our (ph) capital framework, a minimum of 40% of operating cash flow to shareholders as long as WTI is about $60 and obviously, we’re well above that right now. In ’22, we significantly exceeded that. We hit 55%, $3 billion back to shareholders, $2.8 billion of that was share repurchases. So significant return to in the form of share repurchases, and that’s how we’re thinking about 2023 as well. The Ensign acquisition really enhances our shareholder return capability added about 20% both our pre-acquisition operating cash flow and our shareholder distribution capacity.
So another way to think about that is a 40% minimum shareholder return post Ensign 50% pre-Ensign. So at a minimum, we’re pretty close to what we actually delivered last year, but we like having a track record not only of meeting our goal, meeting our minimum target but exceeding it, and that’s what we’ve done so far and we intend to continue that. Too soon to give you more guidance to model on that, but that’s our bias. With respect to how do we pay back acquisition debt in the context of that return framework, I think we really have the capacity to do both, even at today’s commodity price, as I look at this, I see the capability to not only meet and exceed our shareholder return goals but to start to meaningfully chip away at the acquisition debt and get that interest expense and just that gross debt out of the system.
From your lips to God’s ears on higher oil price, we have a tremendous amount of leverage to strong commodity prices, especially oil, and that would just increase our return capacity. You did note our balance sheet is really strong. Rating agencies have given us positive feedback around that. So we’re not in a mad rush to delever. But my base case is to get that taken down at $1.5 billion 2-year term loan paid off within that window. And we can prepay it without penalty so we can just start kind of slicing chunks off as we go through. And I think we’ll probably just assess that periodically as we go through the year based on how our cash generation is. But once again, restated our primary goal, our number 1 goal is return to shareholders, and that will not take a back seat to paying down the debt.
