Operator: . Our next question will come from Tim Rezvan of KeyBanc Capital Markets.
Timothy Rezvan: My first question — just following up on a prior one on the acquisitions. You’ve been absent from a lot of the larger acquisitions that have happened. You seem to have in that $41 million deal got some third-party minerals. How actively do you look at third-party kind of minerals? Because it seems like you’re sort of posturing that you were really focused on just Diamondback. Is it just if the price is right, you’ll do it? How should we think about kind of your willingness to go to third party going forward?
Kaes Van’t Hof: Yes. Good question. We’ve kind of shied away from a significant amount of third-party acquisitions. I think we’re certainly still looking at them today. They’re just harder to get across the finish line because we don’t have, what I would say, differential knowledge as to the development pace of those positions. And so you’ve seen a few deals trade where they’re concentrated positions that you could probably underwrite some sort of pace of development. But we still just kind of got — got blown out in terms of value. So I think it’s good discipline to not have your name on every trade, but we still think we have the differential knowledge on the operated side.
Timothy Rezvan: Okay. And then if I could circle back to the cash return framework. In the Diamondback call this morning, Kaes, I think you said when the stock is down, the variable dividend doesn’t matter. And that seems to be what you’ve indicated with your capital allocation in the first quarter. And I believe there is different opinions in the marketplace about the role of a minerals company and the role of yield to investors. So you’ve also talked about the discount to NAV, which is probably apparent in any public equity across the energy landscape. So how do you think about the competitiveness of the Viper equity when you have a distribution now that’s half of public peers? And what is the role of — holistically the role of Viper to investors that are looking for yields?
Kaes Van’t Hof: Yes. I mean I think the role of Viper is to create value. And the best value we can create right now at these prices is to spend more money buying back units. I think the public markets don’t see what’s going on in the private markets and the public markets maybe misunderstand what the value of a mineral is relative to the upstream. I mean, I think what’s happened over the last couple of years is that the upstream model actually converged to what the mineral model was prior, right? The upstream models are becoming yield and distribution models, some changing their capital allocation to more buybacks versus distributions. I think at the end of the day if you had to — if we had to pick, we would prefer to distribute more cash at Viper and repurchase more shares at Diamondback.
But when there are extreme dislocations, like we’ve seen over the last 6 months or so in pockets, we’ll lean into the buyback. And Tim, at the end of the day, we think creating value over creating a story makes more sense.
Timothy Rezvan: Okay. I appreciate that. I just — yes, I think I just have a different view on that from our conversations with shareholders that might prefer that yield. So — but I appreciate your insights on that.
Kaes Van’t Hof: Yes. Listen, those are discussions we’re happy to have. At the end of the day, we’re also the largest shareholder, right, at 58%. We are taking money away from ourselves by not distributing it and buying back — I mean buying back open interest in the market. But we still think it’s — we think that is the best long-term value lever for both us, Diamondback, and the public shareholders that remain.
