Sometimes those student loans could be provided by the government and sometimes they could be provided by private institutions. Because of that dynamic, we will always be in the student loan business. The question is, are we just in the private student loan business or the private student loan business and the refinancing student loan business? I believe we will always be in both businesses regardless of what’s decided by the Supreme Court on forgiveness and regardless of what happens with the moratorium. Why? The cost of education is significantly greater than the ability of people to pay. Therefore, they have to borrow money to do that. As long as they’re borrowing money, we can find a way for them to not just get access to that loan, but to do it at a lower cost as they continue improving their financial lives.
So it’s never a question in our mind whether we’re going to be in the business. It’s just a question of what are the actual products and how we best meet the member’s needs. Because I’ll just reiterate again, we want to be there for every one of the major financial decision of someone’s life and all the days in between, which means we have to be in the student loan business to execute our strategy. In terms of the particulars as it relates to EBITDA margin, I’ll let Chris answer that.
Chris Lapointe: Yes. So in terms of the outperformance that we saw in Q1, Dominick, we saw revenue outperformance across both our lending and our financial services businesses, primarily attributable to net interest income as I alluded to in my prepared remarks. From an expense perspective, we did see really good CAC efficiencies, given the strong member and product growth, particularly in lending where our customer acquisition costs on a per loan basis was down 20% sequentially. And then in addition to that, we were able to manage expenses effectively, again, throughout the quarter creating leverage across our entire fixed cost area. Collectively, the revenue outperformance along with the efficiency gains drove the excess earnings that we decided to drop to the bottom line and take more of a conservative approach given the uncertainty in the market.
Overall, as we’ve discussed in the past, we strive to spend about 70% of our incremental revenue as we’ve said. Depending on a number of factors we may choose to drop more to the bottom line, period-to-period. And that’s what happened certainly this quarter. And you’ll see periods of over earning followed by deployment of those resources back into the drivers of the business.
Anthony Noto: And the only other thing I’d add is, there’s a lot of operating leverage in the business and you’re seeing that come through in Q4 and again in Q1. We are trying to balance investing to drive growth with prudent responsibility of driving towards profitability to give investors clear transparency on where our long term margins and ROE can be. We couldn’t be more confident about the long term margins of the company and return on equity, but we need to move judiciously through the process of balancing both. One of the things I would tell you is that, we’ve been driving the growth that we have and the improvement in profitability with their financial services segment being unprofitable. So the lending segment has a positive contribution margin, the tech platform has a positive contribution margin and then we have large losses in financial services.
