Ben Gerlinger: Appreciate it. Yeah. If we could just think about just the deposit franchises in general. I think Casey asked the question, you gave some deposit beta assumptions on your different niches. I’m just curious if the forward curve is correct or even just the four-cuts assumption. Are there any flow differences or what you might see in a deposit mix in general? I get that down 100 basis points in a non-recessionary environment is kind of unprecedented. But just kind of just your thoughts on what that deposit mix might look like, how flows might change over the course of those 100-ish bps going forward?
Glenn MacInnes: Yeah, it’s a good question. So there’s a couple of things that I think are unique to us, and obviously, we talked a lot about Ametros. We do have the benefit of HSA as well, where we get the enrollment period in the first quarter, and then we continue to get those funds — those accounts funded during the year. We have interLINK, which gives us optionality from the ability to increase core deposits or to the extent we have — we’re satisfied with our loan-to-deposit ratio to lay some of those off. So that gives us optionality as well. I think the thing that we’re watching is as far as the flow of deposits, we do have maturities on CDs coming due, about $2 billion in the first quarter, another just under that in the second quarter.
So that’s something that we’re keeping a close eye on, on how that rolls over. And we’re also keeping an eye on things like demand, our pure DDA, which has come down a little bit. So basically, we’re basically — we’ve been hovering around that $11 billion mark. We think that probably has potential to grow about $200 million over the course of the year. So those are the sort of things that we’re thinking. I don’t see anything significant. I think you’ll still see a little bit more of deposits flow from low-interest-bearing type of money market and savings accounts into CDs to the extent people or our clients think that rates are going to drop, they might want to go a little longer on their investments and things like that, we have continued to see that.
But I think that’s — those are very basic dynamics.
John Ciulla: Yeah, I would agree with Glenn. And I think — I hope we’re answering the question you’re asking, which is the first 100 points down. I don’t think it changes necessarily, behaviors by customers and depositors or kind of overall bank, non-bank deposit flows.
Ben Gerlinger: Got you. That’s really helpful. And then just for a follow-up, just to play a little bit of devil’s advocate here. I know that you said if the forward curve is correct, there’s kind of the six-ish cuts. You probably have a little bit of downside relative to that NII range, which in reality would probably put your revenue at the floor maybe a little bit below the combined range today. And I know you said you had flexibility on expenses. Could you also put expenses overall below the $1.3 billion, or is that kind of the floor in terms of investment? And we just expect a slightly higher efficiency ratio for the year.
Glenn MacInnes: Boy, interesting question. No, I mean, I think we always have optionality, right? Because some of it is project-based and investment based. And if the market conditions change and are more dramatic, then the projected performance-based incentive comp cut in line comes down naturally. So there is — we can clearly go below the $1.3 billion if the overall environment demanded us to do that. But I would say again, kind of dramatically, that we believe we have the opportunity to invest. And even at those expense levels, we’ll still have the most efficient operating model in the top 25 banks. And so, yes, we do have flexibility. There are some variable costs in there and some project-based investments that we could either delay or cancel or pull back on if we had to.
Ben Gerlinger: Got it. That’s helpful color. Appreciate it.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Laurie Hunsicker from Seaport Research Partners. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Laurie Hunsicker: Great. Hi, thanks. Good morning.
John Ciulla: Hey, Laurie.
Laurie Hunsicker: Just going back — going back to Ametros here, can you help us think what the pro forma intangibles will look like and also just maybe fine-tune a little bit when the closing date is expected in this first quarter?
Glenn MacInnes: So on the pro forma, I think you can think of it as us bringing in $800 million immediately in deposits, and the immediate action would be to pay down FHLB. And so call that 5% to 5.25% on those. And then it would eventually or quickly move into funding loans, which you heard me say earlier, are more in the range of like [750] (ph) — 7.5%. I talked about the fee income being $25 million, and I talked about the expenses in the range of $50 million, with half of that being CDI. So I think you can build the P&L pretty quickly. The thing I would point out is, John, and we talked earlier, is that this is a business that’s going to grow at 25% CAGR every year. So we’re bringing in $800 million. Good chance we’ll be closer to the $1 billion range by the end of this year. So — and that will continue based on contractual relationships and everything that we see in the market. So that should allow you to build your sort of P&L.
