Joshua Dennerlein: Yes. Hey, guys. I just wanted to follow-up on the drug store deal. Just curious, I think in the past, you might have straight away from drug stores just because they didn’t really have much rent bumps built in. Just curious if this kind of €“ was it different where there were rent bumps? And then was it a marketed or sale leaseback deal?
Steve Horn: Hey, Josh. So yes, the drug store deal as I mentioned, was north of our average cap rate deal for the fourth quarter. But this was €“ it was a real estate play. It was a sale leaseback. Therefore, it wasn’t the developer rent per square foot numbers, so it was very comfortable that the tenant set the rents, they are very market-rent deals. But more importantly, 85% of the properties are on in hard corners, I think 90% had drive-through. So it was really a real estate play. 1.6 acres was the average. So yes, we got the above average lease term that you see in the market for the drug store deals and more of a landlord-friendly lease than you typically would see. That’s why we jumped on this one.
Joshua Dennerlein: Okay. I appreciate that. And then just looking at your top 20 lines of trade, just kind of saw some themes. It looks like other increased year-over-year. Could you remind us what’s in that other category?
Kevin Habicht: Sorry, I’m pitching up to you. In other income, what are you looking at?
Joshua Dennerlein: No, on Page 15 of the sup, your top 20 lines of trade looks like you list other at 8.1% of the portfolio, it looks like it was up over the course of the year, just kind of curious if there is any kind of €“ what’s kind of in that other bucket and if there is any kind of themes what you are increasing in there?
Kevin Habicht: Yes. I mean, nothing notable, I mean, I can circle back to you and maybe give you a little more color on that.
Joshua Dennerlein: Okay, fair enough. I will circle up with you, Kevin. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you very much. Your next question is coming from Ronald Kamdem of Morgan Stanley. Ronald, your line is live.
Ronald Kamdem: Hey, just going back to the 100 basis points assumptions on the bad debt, obviously, appreciate that historically, you’ve come in way below that. But just trying to get a sense of, is this year, is your expectation that just based on the watch list based on what you’re hearing could we be closer to that 100 basis points this year versus last year? Just trying to figure out how conservative that assumption is based on what you’re already seeing in the portfolio? Thanks.
Kevin Habicht: We don’t have any visibility on any near-term concerns. So yes, so the 100 basis points still feels fine. But I share your sentiment that this seems like a year where retailers may struggle a little bit more. And so it might get more utilized, that reserve might get more utilized than it has in the past. Time will tell. We like the fact that it’s €“ we’re contemplating more than what typically occurs, like I said, this feels like an environment that might be prudent. But there is nothing on the near-term radar that’s got us worried about that not being sufficient at the moment, but we will see how the year unfolds.
Ronald Kamdem: Great. And then just looking at the cash flow statement in the K, I think it looks like at least in €˜22, that was close to $200 million of excess cash after the dividend base. I think you mentioned a similar number earlier in your opening comments. But is that sort of a fair sort of range for €˜23 as well given the FFO guide? Just to make sure we’re not missing anything.
