Frank Fuya Zheng: Let me add some more color for your question. I think that your observation is correct, which means our — not just our stock, but our peers, the space, all the so-called fintech company in China or buyer for some cases have been on strike for some time now. The reason — the biggest reason I think I could come up with. The first one is legal risk. Legal risk is you see something like some educational company in China one day — the day you legally could operate; the second day, you are out of business. That’s — by those kind of risks, without any warning, definitely could be applied to anyone. We — our fintech industry because we charge maybe — the market that we focus on is the supply market. So, it’s not apolitical correct or favorable in China.
I believe you understand that. The second one is, I think that, say, likely all at buyers — all the purchaser in the U.S. is spooked to say the least, because I know that all the institutional, they have a legal responsibility to responsibly manage client’s money. And therefore invest something could be out of the business or legally out the business in one day is just something could not be accepted. That kind of risk is not something you can calculate. I think that’s the big — legal risk is the biggest reason. The other reason is the phenomena is like that, it’s not just we are trading below — around or below the cash, it’s even for the, nobody seems like losing money. And the only reasonable conclusion is all the management in the tech, fintech company, in China will manage the Company very irresponsible way.
They’re not just not going to increase shareholder value and they will be squandered all the money they already have. Otherwise, how can you like price those stuff at such ridiculous way. But I think that the time will tell. And I think the PCAOB have ability and can examine the — auditing all different operate in China will maybe will alleviate those kinds of concerns over time. And also, I think is the maybe circus, I think for the U.S. investor. They probably we would like to see the regulatory situation to be stabilized somewhat before to any invest — meaningful investment. For us, I think we are just take this advantage and do our — do all that we can to manage the Company the best way know-how and do more buyback and that kind of stuff.
I think that over the long run, maybe whatever we do right now will be correct. Thank you.
Unidentified Analyst: I have one — I guess one more question. You’ve touched a couple of times about the threat of regulatory change that could eliminate your business model. So that was one of the risks. What would be the incentive of authorities in the PRC to eliminate a model that is presumably helping with consumption, getting money to people who need it to consume and you’re doing it effectively at a rate that isn’t frankly much different than here in the United States if somebody has credit cards, which are very common. But why — what incentive for the authorities is there to do away with an industry that increases consumption and it’s something that people rely on to manage their own cash flow needs, whether it’s to buy PCs for school or whatever the case might be. So why would that be a risk?
Kan Li: Well, I’m sorry. We can’t comment on what the government thinks, right? But we work closely with them. So if there’s any way that we will — that the government and us can reach good results, then I think that will be great for us and for our industry.
