Robert Berkley: It’s not a big growth area for us these days. There were moments in time where we found it to be very attractive. And then to your point, we saw a lot of people coming into the space. And again, we have the underwriting discipline that we’re not going to do foolish things. So have we ever been a giant player in the space? No, we’re careful and selective and we’re conscious of how to manage the systemic exposure that comes along with that product line. But clearly, cyber has become a more competitive market and we have a view as to what an accurate rate is and appropriate terms and conditions. And we will draw the line in the sand and stay on the right side of it.
Operator: Your next question comes from David Motemaden with Evercore ISI.
David Motemaden: So I had just a question on these fire losses. Just had a question just in terms of how far along we are in fixing that and specifically how many more quarters would you expect this to really have an impact on results?
Robert Berkley: I think you’re going to see it having a diminishing impact on results between now and the end of the year and it will be diminishing gradually.
David Motemaden: Got it. And then I guess, I’m assuming that the shift in mix, just sort of excluding the fire losses, the shift in mix would mean that something in the neighborhood of the loss ratio ex cat, ex reserve development is somewhat of a sustainable level just given the mix shift is obviously enduring. Is that the right way to think about it?
Robert Berkley: I apologize but I’m not sure I fully understand the question. Could we do that once more, please?
David Motemaden: Yes. So looking at the 59.5% accident year loss ratio ex cat, you cited mix as a sign as to why one of the reasons why that was at that level and it deteriorated a bit year-over-year. Obviously, in addition to the fire losses. Is that something — just given the mix is obviously a more sustainable change, is that something we should expect around that level for the remainder of the year?
Robert Berkley: I can’t answer the question with certainty but we think that ultimately, the way the portfolio is running and our ability to deliver a 90 combined or better and then 18% or 21% return, depending on how you look at it, feels like we’re in a pretty comfortable spot. Do I think that there’s the opportunity for the 59 to potentially improve a little bit? Yes, I do but we’re not going to push the envelope unnecessarily and set the stage for disappointment in the future, particularly in an environment that’s as complicated and volatile as this. We just don’t think that’s in the best interest of anyone. So we’re — in our book, at least, achieving very healthy outcomes for stakeholders while still ensuring that we are not putting undue pressure on the situation. And that’s a good place to be, in our opinion.
David Motemaden: Got it. And then maybe just a follow-up. Obviously, not a big impact on the entire book with the $3 million of favorable reserve development. But you guys have been on top of the 2019 and prior casualty lines. Can you just talk about any changes you may have made to those lines for those years in the second quarter and how you feel about your reserving position there going forward?
