I think the level of dissatisfaction at many of the big banks continues to remain. People who have come to our firm have thrived and appreciate the unique culture, and the way in which we can all come together to serve clients, that’s better understood by those who are considering joining our firm. We’re able to create those personal connections because we’re all back in the office. And the friction costs in the current environment are as low as they’ve been, arguably forever, because of the low levels of M&A activity. So we don’t have quotas every addition to the firm is individual-by-individual, it’s all from the bottom up. It’s not from the top down. But without those macro impediments. The attractiveness of our firm as a destination for talent is better shining through.
And I certainly expect that momentum to continue in the fourth quarter into 2024. And at some point, we’ll get back to a more normal cadence.
James Yaro: That makes sense. Thanks a lot.
Paul Taubman: Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Steven Chubak with Wolfe Research. Please go ahead.
Brian O’Brien: Good morning. This is Brian O’Brien filling in for Steven. I guess to start, results were a bit stronger than maybe your commentary last quarter suggested. And based on the prepared remarks, it seems like that might have largely been on the restructuring side of the business. So I just wanted to get a sense as to whether this was simply a function of timing, meaning that deals that you expected to close in 4Q closed a bit earlier, or whether there’s some meaningful pickup and underlying activity that you weren’t expecting. And if there was more timing related, should we be expecting to see that seasonal uplift in 4Q that you typically have?
Paul Taubman: Well, I think we — I think our full year commentary is modestly more upbeat than it was a quarter ago. So that suggests not timing, per se, but just some additional strikes. And in the firm, it’s always hard to predict exactly how all of these mandates and all of these opportunities translate into revenues, But I would simply say that, as we’ve been in the, in the field, competing for business and doing the business, and just seeing the macro environment and the opportunities presented to ourselves. I think our outlook for this year, is marginally improved relative to a quarter ago, I don’t believe it’s a step function improved, but it is marginally improved. A lot of that is restructuring, but it’s not exclusively restructuring.
Brian O’Brien: Got it. That’s helpful color. And I guess for my follow up, I know you touched on this a bit, but we have seen a number of large strategic transactions announced over the past few months, which along with the positive news on the antitrust front, such as the approval of Activision, Microsoft suggests that the environment is relatively more favorable for large strategic transactions. But at the same time, some of the commentary from the large public audit suggests that activity at sponsors is likely to remain subdued in the near intermediate term. Could you compare the dialogue that you’re having with sponsors and strategics at the moment? And do you feel like the gap is higher and long end rates [ph] is as maybe or could serve as further to seller and I guess for sponsor activity?
Paul Taubman: I’m sorry, just just repeat that last — that last sentence I didn’t hear.
Brian O’Brien: The gap higher and long end rates and the potential impact on sponsor activity?
