Brody Preston: Hi, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. Dale, I was just hoping to dig a little deeper on the moving parts on the margin. But I wanted to follow up on Steve’s question and I am sorry if you guys said it and I missed it, but the $3.2 billion of new deposits, I know it’s weighted towards mortgage warehouse. But I was interested and if you have an idea as to what the cost is, just because when I look at the new and return deposit growth in the existing client growth, it looks like it had about a 2% cost on it for this quarter, is that $3.2 billion close to that cost?
Ken Vecchione: So, again, a lot of that — this is Ken, Brody. A lot of that…
Brody Preston: Hi.
Ken Vecchione: … deposit growth is coming from our warehouse lending group, which means it’s growing in our non-interest-bearing deposits and from an interest expense point of view, that comes — it comes with a zero cost, although the ECR credits are in the operating expense line. So that’s going to skew more towards having a lower interest expense for both the non-interest — for the warehouse lending business, as well as some growth is coming early on from HOA, which is a lower-cost channel as well.
Brody Preston: Got it. So if you are getting a lot of growth in the — I know it’s got an ECR, but it’s non-interest-bearing. I am looking at that interest-bearing deposit cost and the spot rate of $305 million is lower than the $308 million, you did on average for the quarter. Why — I guess if you are growing the interest-bearing deposit costs at a blended rate with those new clients, so that were the total deposit cost, I guess, at two, like, why wouldn’t that interest-bearing deposit costs continue to move lower from here in the third quarter?
Dale Gibbons: Well, so, I mean, warehouse deposits. They have an earnings credit rate, which is much higher than 3%. It’s close to kind of effective Fed Funds generally. So it’s going to be higher than that. But you are correct, Brody, and that — yeah, these funds, they are not wholesale, they are not brokered, so there’s a lower charge associated with them in terms of what that is and their client relationships and so were trading down in terms of what it’s costing us from there. I mean each way it was a significant contributor, some of those have ECRs as well, but those dollars, those are going to be in the 3% range as opposed to buy.
Ken Vecchione: Your premise about a cost of funds equal to Q2 or Q3 or going forward. That’s not a bad premise.
Brody Preston: Got it. Okay. And then just on the loan yields, the average loan yield for the quarter, the difference between the spot and the average for the quarter is relatively large. So the spot rate is $674 million. If we think about the third quarter and we think about a potential for another rate hike here, I guess, how does that — how does the loan yield move off of that $674 million for the third quarter assuming that that happens?
Ken Vecchione: Yeah. I mean, I think, we are going to see something like 40% of that.
Brody Preston: Got it. So I guess if I take those two pieces combined, then, Dale, just would like the deposit costs kind of stalling out at this level and loan yields continue to move higher. I just look at that 3.50% to 3.60% NIM guide, the implied NII guide and the PPNR guide that you have for the back half of the year and it just feels exceptionally conservative. And so, I guess, why shouldn’t we be thinking about something well north of 2.82% by the time we hit the fourth quarter of the year?
