Mark Hughes: I guess you’ve discovered you’re winning more than you might have thought perhaps.
Pete Graham: Yes, we don’t want to win every bid, that’s for certain, in this type of an environment.
Mark Hughes: And final question in Europe in the core, it looks like the collections multiple for the six month is down a little bit at 165%. I think it’s down few basis points sequentially. Anything going on there?
Pete Graham: That’s just mix of different price multiple or gross purchase price multiples and different countries and different costs to collect of the business there. It’s a normal sort of dynamic in Europe.
Mark Hughes: Would you say the pricing is better in 2Q than in 1Q?
Pete Graham: Yes.
Mark Hughes: Yes, okay. Thank you very much.
Operator: [Operator Instructions] The next question comes from Robert Dodd with Raymond James. Please go ahead.
Robert Dodd: Hi, everybody. On the outsourcing and offshoring, again, I think you mentioned its more efforts on costs and efficiency, but obviously, with some of the bank relationships in the past, there’s been some resistance to outsourcing or offshoring, particularly, in some relationships, not necessarily yours. Have you approached any of your bigger clients and had any preliminary discussions about whether they’d actually be open to offshoring as a component of the collection process rather than just the efficiency process, let’s say, or is that just not something that you’re going to leave up to them or discuss with them in advance?
Vikram Atal: Anything we’re doing is, obviously, any action we’re taking is completely in conformity with our existing contractual processes and connections with them. And I think just to reiterate, this whole notion of offshoring and outsourcing is not just on collections and voice, but we have enormous amounts, as a company, right, enormous amounts of data management that we need to do at every level of our processes, from the starting of the relationship to executing it. So we’re looking at, as I just told you, we’re looking at voice, we’re looking at data, we’re looking at all of the optionality that we have, and over the next several months, we hope to be able to make decisions around that, that would be helpful, but all of it would be in conformity with our contracts, and we don’t believe at this time that we need to open up conversations with our seller relationships to get any variance from them on their existing protocols.
Robert Dodd: Got it. Thank you. And I scribbled something out. On the comp for Q3, did you say kind of mid-70s up from like mid-60s? Or did I write that down wrong? And if that is the case, can you give us any color on the big driver. Obviously mid-70s isn’t particularly high compared to where it was last year, but it would be a big change from Q2?
Pete Graham: Yes. Again, you heard me right. I signaled that mid-70s for compensation for the third quarter. Again, we’ve had some volatility in that line item over last quarter and this quarter, some onetime things in terms of timing of different accruals and the like. And as well as healthcare expenses, which can move around from quarter-to-quarter based on claim experience. So that mid-70s is our best view of what third quarter is going to look like.
Robert Dodd: Got it. Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from Bob Napoli with William Blair. Please go ahead.
Robert Napoli: Thank you for the follow-up. Just can you give some color on the mix of forward flows that may be at historical higher prices versus the better pricing, the higher IRRs that you’re getting in today’s market?
Pete Graham: Just broadly, as we go through this year, because of the way that forward flows are staggered in terms of their renewal dates, we will gradually blend into the more current pricing environment and the older flow bids will roll off. We’ve also begun to look at optionality on some of those existing flows where returns might not be commensurate with current market pricing and evaluating options for what to do there as well.
