Ronald P. O’Hanley: Yeah, Glenn, what I would add to what Eric said is that the — if you think about over the last four, five years, our focus on pricing has been — initially was on fee pricing and kind of addressing, if not combating the fee compression and really working that in an institutional way and in a very high skilled way and escalating those — or elevating those decisions way above where they used to be. Deposits for — up until this rate cycle really weren’t part of that because, I mean, there were times that we would just assume not have had the deposits. We’ve now integrated that as Eric has implied into that discussion, but also included a full share of wallet analysis. And the part of this is recognizing that these institutions are very large.
And when you have a pricing discussion and putting that in air quotes, it really depends on what it is. And what we have worked to avoid is to not have a series of unilateral discussions without understanding and making sure that at the highest levels of our clients, they understand the impact of this. And just reminding them that you have the fee you have because of this assumption on other services that we’re going to provide you or some assumption on deposits. And those conversations are actually starting to work well. It’s caused a change of process for us, another change of process for us. But more importantly, it’s changed in the way how we’re engaging and at what level we’re engaging with these clients. And so more to go there, but we also think it’s a skill, but now developed, will help us through various kinds of cycles going forward.
Glenn Schorr: Thanks for all that color.
Operator: Your next question comes from Steven Chubak from Wolfe Research. Please proceed.
Sharon Leung: Hi. Good morning. This is actually Sharon Leung filling in for Steven. Just on the deposits, outside of the rotation out of NIB, can you talk about the overall trajectory of total deposits, particularly because it looks like more recent liquidity drawdown has come out of RRP instead of deposits. So just wanted to get your thoughts on the expectations for the trajectory on deposits from here in the context of QT treasury issuance, et cetera?
Eric Aboaf: Yeah, it’s Eric. It’s hard to really gauge the deposit changes outright. I think we’re a little more focused on the net interest, I’m sorry, the non-interest-bearing deposits where we’ve signaled another $5 billion likely outflow this coming quarter. That’s less of an outflow than in the second quarter. So you’re starting to see some of the burn down that I’ve described. In the external environment, I think, from the H8 reports those banks, we’ve seen about a 2% sequential fall in deposits. For the trust banks, we tend to have more deposits coming in when deposits in the bank system increase and we have somewhat more coming out when deposit the bank system come out and probably just the absolute sophistication of our clients.
So we’re — we expect a downtick in deposits again next quarter, but just been a little more focused on the non-interest-bearing because that’s where it makes a big difference. I think there is always some movement in interest-bearing deposits, especially at the higher rate tier because what we’re finding increasingly as we get to a little more of this as we expect to get to a time stabilization or at least a little more of a balance with our clients. Now what they’re going to do is it’s hard for them to move an underlying operating deposit that actually has to cover the hundreds, thousands, in some cases, tens of thousands of transactions that are flowing through their particular account, but sometimes they’ll move the thin margin deposits to a treasury.
And so we might lose 10 basis points on something and they’ll pick up 10 basis points on treasury. So there’s some of that that’s going on. And I think in truth that’s not as dominant as a driver of our NII at this point.
