Good morning and welcome to Owl Rock Capital Corporation’s First Quarter 2020 Earnings Call. I would like to remind our listeners that remarks made during the call may contain Forward-Looking Statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or results and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that are outside the Company’s control. Actual results may differ materially from those in forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those subscribed from time-to-time in Owl Rock Corporation filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement. As a reminder, this call is being recorded for replay purposes. Yesterday, the Company issued its earnings press release and posted in earnings presentation for the first quarter and year ended March 31, 2019. This presentation should be reviewed in conjunction with the Company’s Form 10-Q filed on May 5th with the SEC. The Company will refer to the earnings presentation throughout the call today, so please have that presentation available to you. As a reminder, the earnings presentation is available on the Company’s website. I will now turn the call over to Craig Packer, Chief Executive Officer of Owl Rock Capital Corporation.

Thank you, operator. Good morning everyone and thank you for joining us today for our first quarter earnings call. This is Craig Packer and I’m CEO of Owl Rock Capital Corporation and a Co-Founder of Owl Rock Capital Partners. Joining me today is Alan Kirshenbaum our CFO and COO; and Dana Sclafani our Head of Investor Relations. Welcome to everyone who is joining us on the call today. We hope you and your families are safe and well during these unprecedented times. At Owl Rock, we have been incredibly focused on managing our portfolio while taking the necessary steps to ensure the safety of our team and maintaining full operational continuity. Our entire team has been working remotely for two months and we are proud and appreciative of their efforts to engage closely with our borrowers, partners, and service providers while always striving to be accessible to all of our stakeholders. Recognizing this environment is markedly different than any anything, any of us have ever seen. I will start today’s call briefly discussing our investing activity, financial highlights for the first quarter, but then spend the bulk of our time on what we are seeing across our portfolio and our response to these challenging conditions. Then after Alan covers our financial results, I will conclude by discussing our outlook and what may come next. Getting into the first quarter highlights, net investment income per share was $0.37 for the quarter, the same amount as the fourth quarter. We ended the quarter with net asset value per share of $14.9 down 7.5% versus the prior quarter primarily reflecting the unrealized losses across the portfolio resulting from the significant spread widening we saw in the market at the end of the quarter. Looking forward for the second quarter, our Board has declared…

Thank you, Craig. Good morning everyone. First and foremost, we hope that you and your families are all safe and healthy. These are certainly unprecedented circumstances and we want to thank you for your continued partnership and support. There is a lot to cover today, so I’m going to hit the numbers for the quarter now and then we will get into a series of other important topics. To start off and you can follow along on Slide 7 of our earnings presentation. We ended the first quarter with total portfolio investments of $8.9 billion outstanding debt of $3.6 billion and total net assets of $5.5 billion. Our net asset value per share was $14.9 as of March 31st compared to $15.24 as of December 31st, and now decline of approximately 7.5% quarter-over-quarter. Our dividends for first quarter was $0.31 per share plus an $0.08 per share special dividends, and our net investment income was $0.037 per share. On the next Slide, Slide 8, you can see total investment income for the first quarter was roughly flat at a little over $200 million or $0.52 per share. Although our total funded par, the principle amount of loans, which is what interest income is calculated off went up approximately $500 million quarter-over-quarter this was largely offset by the decline in LIBOR. Expenses were also flat quarter-over-quarter leading to NII flat at $56 million or $0.37 per share. Our cost-of-debt continues to come down, driven largely by the decline in LIBOR. Our other expense ratio continues to be among the lowest in the industry at 25 basis points on a trailing 12 month basis, and we have $0.14 per share in undistributed distributions as of March 31st. There are a number of key topics I wanted to cover today. First, when I…

Thanks Alan. I want to spend the last few minutes discussing our current activity and outlook. Not surprisingly, new deal activity has slowed. Private equity firms are focused on their existing portfolio companies and in this environment it will be difficult for buyers and sellers of assets to agree on prices. In addition, most companies have paused their acquisition plans. Given our strong balance sheet and sponsor relationships, we are seeing some very interesting opportunities to provide financing to companies seeking enhanced liquidity. However, given the economic uncertainty, our bar to invest in new situations is extremely high, and until the environment stabilizes, we don’t expect to invest significant capital in new portfolio companies. While we have highlighted our liquidity and available capital, we are focused on preserving net capital primarily for our existing portfolio companies so we can protect the value of our existing investments. Clearly, we are preparing for the results of our portfolio companies to be significantly impacted in the second quarter is this will reflect the full impact of the economic slowdown. We are focused on each company’s liquidity profile and are in close dialogue with them on the steps they are taking to reduce costs and manage near-term cash flows. In the second quarter, we expect to see an increase in discussions with our borrowers and their sponsors around the need for covenant amendments and the quest for additional support. We are entering this period with the financial and portfolio management resources to be a resilient source of support, but with the clear objective of protecting each of our investments with the goal of getting back par on our original investment. While we always expect some level of loss in our portfolio, we remain focused on this goal of getting back par even sitting here…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Casey Alexander from Compass Point.

Hi good morning and certainly hope that everybody is doing well. I have a couple questions. And then I will jump back in the queue and circle around at the end, if necessary. First of all, I think shareholders really appreciate the aggressive nature with which the share repurchase program operated. I mean, we knew that it had been announced at the IPO. But nobody was really certain until it came into practice, how aggressively it might operate, depending upon the environment with only $27 million or $28 million left on it. It is likely to be used fairly soon. What is the appetite to reload at the management and board level?

Sure Casey thank you. We got a lot of questions on the share buyback during this period of time. It should have been that uncertain because as we had said at the time of the IPO, this was a programmatic buyback, that was taking place as long as the stock traded a penny below NAV. We didn’t disclose the amount, but, it was very clear from our disclosure that any day that the shares are trading a penny below NAV that the buyback would be in place. So there was nothing aggressive or not aggressive about it, it was just mathematical based on shares that were trading on days that the stock was trading a penny below NAV. As you know, most of this period of time since our IPO, that has not been the case, but with the recent market disruption it probably been the case. And so the buyback has been operational. We haven’t disclosed the formula, but I can share that the program, the regulatory program that it operates under has a cap on any given day of 25%. So that can’t be above that. We haven’t disclosed the exact percentage but you can do some math around the 25% and can’t be above that. So, that is a little bit of the context around it. In terms of the going forward, as I indicated in our call, our focus right now is on being defensive of the portfolio and preserving our liquidity for protecting our existing investments. We think the most important thing we can do for our shareholders is getting back par on all of our investments and our dry powder and the capital we have for that is critical to that because we may need to provide liquidity for these companies to ultimately improve our prospects or getting back par. So that is really our goal. Over time, to the extent that the programmatic buyback runs out, we would certainly engage in a discussion with the board and about whether we should do a different type of program. The programmatic program was really put in place on the context of the IPO and trying to make sure the IPO was successful. We may consider that or others but I would say it is not a big focus for us right now. And I would not want to set expectations that you should expect to see an additional buyback program put in place in the near-term. So, that is as best I can give you color on it right now.

Okay, thank you. That is very fair. And then secondly, as I kind of work through the math, where rates have gone, which is sort of been an anticipatable, and the likelihood that, at least for a while here, we are in an environment where there is not a lot of deal activity and making deployments at the rate that you had in the past might be somewhat difficult. You kind of run through the math, and it could be that when the management and fee waivers run out, having net investment income that exceeds the base dividend could be challenged by a penny or two or three. Would the company consider partial incentive fee waivers to make sure that NII covers the base dividend if that event where to evangelize?

Sure. So when I come back to the guts of your question in a second, but I think we can all agree that the most important thing we can do for our shareholders right now is making sure that we get back par on our loans. We obviously have experienced a reduction in NAV which was primarily driven by spreads widening. Spreads have now tightened since the end of the quarter. If that sustains we hope that NAV will go up. The markets obviously, based on taking in an expectation of loss, our goal is to avoid those losses and experience and get our stock back to back to NAV. And in the short-term our focus is on that. But you are right longer term, assuming we do a great job on that, assuming rates stay low, looking out, past some pretty unclear and uncertain terrain on you make a fair point, where LIBOR is on sustainability of dividend. We think, we have a number of levers to address, our ability to cover our dividends. We -- first and foremost, we think, we are going to have the opportunity to improve spread in our portfolio. I would say that comes from two factors. One, as I highlighted in my prepared remarks. We have a significant amount of loans on our books that are sub L plus 500 that was very deliberate on our part as we assembled the portfolio to do that in a very conservative manner. As those companies get a retailer loans, which will happen overtime, we can redeploy that capital and markets spreads that will be an excess of that so they will plus 500. In addition in this environment, we think we are going to have opportunities once we have more confidence in the point capital…

Alright, that is really helpful color. I will step back and let others ask questions and if I have more I will come in at the end. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Ryan Lynch from KBW. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions and hope you all are doing well. Just wondering to get some commentary on, you spoke about your guys focus right now is to focus on your existing portfolio companies. But you guys do plan on selectively making you in the market and you talked about your leverage going up modestly kind of by this year. Just wondering, you also said in your prepared remarks that, it is really not possible to tell how long this unprecedented economic downturn will last. So when you guys are evaluating new opportunities, what are the criteria that you guys are using? And the companies that you guys are focusing on to actually deploy new capital in an economic environment that just has such great uncertainty?

Sure. Ryan. So as I said, our bar is very high. And that is driven by, we just don’t know how long this is going to last and we don’t know what the needs are going to be for existing portfolio companies. And we think that it is prudent to really use our dry powder to the extent that those companies are going to need it because we want to try to make sure we get back par. We will do new deals, they will be pretty limited, the bar will be very high, what is the criteria? But I think first and foremost, it is about credit selection. And I think that in this environment that is very difficult given the lack of visibility on when the medical environment will improve when the economy will start to improve. There are sectors where you can gain confidence to underwrite despite the current environment. We have highlighted, some of the sectors that were larger than are the kinds of sectors that we could consider underwriting software happens to be one. We think software will hold up well, in this environment, insurance is another, food and beverage is another, the sectors that were largely. Generally our sectors that have reasonable visibility even in this environment. So if we see opportunities in those spaces where we feel confident in the ability to underwrite the loan, and we have economics and feature economic features and the equity questions that we like, we can consider doing that and we will do it. But I think it will be a pretty limited number until we get greater confidence on the broader needs for the portfolio. we just need to weigh every new deal opportunity against, what that liquidity may be used for down the line in some of our existing companies. So you should expect to see us do a limited number. We can do a couple add-ons to existing businesses. But I think it is going to be modest until we can more conviction.

Okay. if I look at your unfunded commitments speaking of existing companies. When your unfunded commitments have a pretty good mix of secured revolving, as well as delayed draw term loans. Can you talk about, are there any specific provisions in there regarding that delay, draw term loans that only make them accessible for certain reasons like acquisition or M&A or those free to be accessed by the portfolio companies that will?

Yes, they do. Typically, the way draw term loans have are tied to typically use the proceeds related to an acquisition. In addition, they may have other financial tests, such as a leverage test or other credit metrics that needs to be met for them to be drawn. So that is typically the case that is not the case in every situation. But if those conditions are met, then we can we will fund the draw. I would say, in this environment, the sponsors, I think, are being very cautious about doing additional acquisitions at their portfolio companies for obvious reasons. And so I think they will have the same caution that we will about whether they will be trying to trying to grow through acquisition right now given their own concerns about visibility into companies. But there may be some and maybe we stand ready to meet our obligations under those. It is not a massive number in the context of our overall portfolio, but as we as needed will provide them. They also are time based unlike the revolvers, the revolvers are typically five, six years. The delay draws are at a time based limit on typically a year or less, sometimes as long as two years. So, overtime over the next year or two, they will all go off if they are not used. They just go away, unlike the revolvers, where they can be drawn and repaid overtime the delayed draw at just go away.

And Ryan, I guess what I would add to that is about two-thirds, as I mentioned of our undrawn are in delayed draw term loans. And we do disclose all of our unfunded commitments, we don’t just disclose the ones that we are required to fund immediately. So you see the full population there.

Okay, got it. And you mentioned, that two companies this quarter you guys switch their interest payments to pick. What were those two companies, I have had a chance to define them in your schedule investments, number one. And then what was default with switching those to take obviously that that is you do that in order to preserve cash and liquidity and get that that company better runway to navigate this unprecedented environment, but what was the thought process behind also keeping those on a cool status that obviously if you are going to record that as income that you have that kind of speaks to you guys thought behind your ability to eventually collect data just giving you an economic environment where and it seems so uncertain. Can you just talk about why yourself as switches to take that also keep them on a cruel?

Sure it is a good and fair question. If you look for you will see there were two - one was a very small amount for a company that shows up on our STS, CM 7 restaurant. It does business under [Metra] (ph), it is a restaurant, it is a KFC franchisee, it is a less than $40 million investment. So it is very small. And so the other one is a company called STS which we approve post quarter end. So I’m not positive that shows up in the schedule of investments. But that is the other one I’m referring to. STS is in the aerospace space. And that is a bigger investment is closer to $200 million. We go through all our names and determine nonaccrual or not based on our expectation of collecting interest or expectation of collecting principal, you are right to asked the question, we obviously went through that analysis on these couple names, as well as, all our names but certainly the ones that or have lower valuations. And we have determined and in consultation with our auditors determined that we expect to get our interest payments and interest over time and we expect to get our principal back at par. So we, in the short-term I thought it was prudent a lot of company having additional liquidity, but we believe that we would, we expect to get back par on our investments and therefore and back our interest and therefore it is appropriate to keep them current. Obviously, liquidity in the short-term is measured in millions of dollars and recovery is measured by enterprise value and certainly in situations where companies have limited short-term liquidity but have lots of enterprise value and therefore we thought was appropriate to keep them current.

Okay, thanks for taking my questions. Hope you guys all stay safe and I’m going to hop back into queue.

Great. Thank you.

Thanks Ryan here as well.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Mickey Schleien from Ladenburg. Please go ahead your line is open.

Yes good morning everyone. Just a couple of questions. I have seen some reports that Owl Rock Partners, in other words the platform is looking to raise $1.5 billion optimistic debt fund to invest in small and medium sized companies looking to help bridge their liquidity gaps. It sounds like from your previous comments that the BDC won’t co-invest with such a fund but I’m interested in understanding what sort of structures those investments could take in today’s market? And could that turn into deal flow for the BDC down the road when things normalize?

Sure. So look, we are really here focused on ORCC. As you know, we manage four funds on not just ORCC and so it is really not the place to talk about other funds that we may manage. We have since inception, we have opportunities where multiple funds can invest in the same deal if the deal is appropriate for those funds. It has to meet the investment criteria for the specific portfolio. That is something we have done since inception. I think it is an advantage for us and our platform to be able to offer that out. But we are very careful about making sure each investment is appropriate for that specific fund. So to the extent we had other funds and they had deal flow that was appropriate for ORCC just as we have had in the past, we would operate as we have in the past but the strategy for ORCC remains the same. High quality upper middle market sponsor-backed well-performing businesses. And regardless of any other strategies that Owl Rock pursues other funds that strategy is not going to change.

Okay. I understand. And one housekeeping question, I apologize. You may have already mentioned in the prepared remarks. What is the portfolios average LIBOR floor.

Hey Mickey it is Alan. In the case on the left side of the balance sheet, it is an 86 basis point average weighted LIBOR

Okay. Thank you for that, Alan. Those are all my questions.

Thank you. And our next question comes from Robert Dodd from Raymond James. Your line is open.

Hi guys yes and hope everybody is being okay. A couple if I can I mean , obviously comments about a higher bar to do incremental but to take on new investments at this point in the cycle makes a lot of sense. How does that mesh with the fact that as a platform, I mean everything happened so fast, the platform had made certain commitments and obviously ORCC implicit within that certain commitments on transactions before these, latest events. So, are those being reevaluated in the context of the market spreads of obviously widened for new investments today? Or how does that fit with your view, obviously certainty of close to amendments already made versus the color you just gave in terms of being very, very hesitant about making new investments right now.

Look it is just not a big thing. It is not a big factor for us to have spent a lot of time on. I mean, obviously if we make a contractual commitments any borrower, we are going to live by that commitment regardless of the change, economic environment, our commitments don’t allow for us to change our mind based on the economic environment. Having said that, it is a, I don’t want to - it is a really low amount of number of deals and dollars and just not consequential to really, engage in the discussion. We are not sitting - our first quarter was a relatively modest amount of deal flow given the slowdown in sponsor activity. That activity only slowed down during the quarter, and as only slowed further in the beginning of the second quarter. So there is not a large pipeline of deals that we have committed to that we haven’t yet closed on. And so I wouldn’t have any great concern over that.

Got it. Thank you. And then the conversations you are having with companies sponsors on a weekly, daily, can you give us any kind of how much it is a feedback you are getting from them is say qualitative versus quantitative? I mean, I can get the feel wet where a company can say things. Okay, but are you actually receiving in recent periods customer renewal rates? Are your cash flow numbers that are very, very up to date? Or is it more of a quantitative, sorry, qualitative discussion that the, it is been the focus from the feedback you have been getting recently?

Sure. Look, this is I think one of the big advantages of direct lending versus the public markets. I mean, we get a much heightened level of information versus what is available in the public markets in order to change get to know the companies extremely well. And beyond any required financial information, I would say most of our borrowers, most of our sponsors want to make sure that the lenders are well informed and provide us with lots of information in quantitative and qualitative. It varies by company, but in specially at times in stress, I think that the companies, you want to make sure that lenders are well informed, we have covenants in our documents, the vast majority of our personal terminals have covenants. And so the companies recognize that in this environment, they may be popping into those covenants at some point in the future. And they recognize that they owe it to their lenders to make sure we are well informed and what the prospects are for popping those covenants and share that level of information. So our teams are doing a great job of getting that information, obviously, you want to make sure you don’t lose the forest for the trees and you are getting daily financial information, isn’t going to necessarily improve your decision making, but I would say we get a good quantitative sense of what is happening on the ground with the outlook will be and we feel very well informed, not every single company but I would say the picture is we feel very well informed on what is going on with our businesses.

Okay, I appreciate that.

And our next question comes from Kenneth Lee from RBC Capital Markets. Please go head. Your line is open.

Hi good morning and thanks for taking my question. Just wondering, if you could frame the potential expansion for net interest margins. Just given where LIBOR currently is sitting at? Thanks.

Ken, you are asking about like spread or are you asking about pennies per share?

Ideally, pennies per share, or even spread would be fine.

I mean, look directionally, we think that and again, this is really directional and there is not a precise analysis around this. But we think that just by our improved spreads in the current market environment by replacing lower spread loans as they roll off at higher spread zones. We can easily add a couple pennies per share to our net income per share per quarter.

The only thing I would add to that is if you are looking at to crunch numbers can be interest sensitivity table in the back of our queue and back to the MD&A might be something you are looking for. But happy to take that up more offline.

Great. And just one follow-up, if I may. Just in terms of - I know there is been ongoing efforts of in diversifying the funding mix and just wondering, if you could comment on whether we could see a potential change in either the pace of the efforts given the kind of environment or whether there is any potential change in plans?

Generally speaking no, no change in plans. It is obviously more challenging environments to go out and raise debt, but we continue dialogues with our lenders. Our mix is not going to change. If anything you certainly can continue to see a lot more unsecured in the future as we have telegraphed on prior calls. But no, nothing generates change there.

Great. Thank you very much and hope everyone stay safe.

You as well Ken. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from George Bahamondes from Deutsche Bank. Please go head. Your line is open.

Good morning everyone, hope you are well. Thank you for taking my questions. I’m wondering if you can give us a sense for the number of hours who reached out for relief or just to engage in conversations around loan modifications in the first quarter?

To give you a sense, look I can give you some metrics. We had less than 10 amendments for the quarter and less than half of those were for material amendments. There were a number of borrowers that I would say engaged in discussions that, didn’t result in any substantial amendments. But, that number I haven’t sat back and counted up with the teams we are always having kind of informal conversations. But in terms of like substantive amendments, less than 10 and less than half of those were meaningful amendments. The others were more technical in nature. There is probably another 10 to 20 on top of that, that had informal discussions that didn’t result in anything. Obviously, that number is going to pick up materially in the second quarter. But in terms of what happened in the first quarter, it is fairly modest in the context of 110 portfolio.

Thank you for that color. I guess just my next question is how you seen that number maybe evolved through April and the beginning of May, have you seen a noticeable difference? I would imagine it would pick up so we are wondering if you can share any color there as well?

I don’t think I could really define a difference between what happens in the last couple of weeks in March versus the patient, what the most recent couple of weeks. I would say there is a steady stream of conversations. Obviously, our companies generally report compliance with covenants on a quarterly basis. And so at the end of, as companies look out to where they expect the quarter to come in, that is when those conversations ramp up to the extent they think there is going to be an issue. So, I would expect it to be -. Okay. I think this isn’t specific ORCC. Any direct lender is going to spend a lot of time in the second quarter talking to their borrowers about how they are doing compliance with covenants? I have tried to be very forthright about addressing areas of concern, I just want to make sure I’m giving you the proper picture. We have a lot of companies who are actually doing just fine in this environment, and that aren’t engaging us with covenant requests, and think they have plenty of liquidity. And we were staying on top of them, but I would say there are many companies that we don’t expect to have any amendments at all. It is hard to predict, because the environment is just unpredictable, and we are prepared for whatever comes our way. But I think that our greatest intensity is going to be focused on those three and four rated names, those sectors that I have highlighted that are going to be a greater concern. And it is a relatively limited number in our portfolio on 12% at this point. But if conditions continue to be weak, there is a chance that number increases from there. So just having an amendment is not a daunting proposition that is why we have maintenance covenants just to have that seat at the table to work through it with the companies. And I don’t think the number of amendments is in and of itself is going to be necessarily an indicator of risk of loss for us. And that is why we haven’t had covenant packages, but it is going to be an indicator that you have a seat at the table and we are focused on preserving the value of our loans.

Great. And I appreciate the color today and that is all for me.

Great. Thank you.

Thank you George.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Finian O’Shea from Wells Fargo Securities. Your line is open. Finian O’Shea: Hi, hope everyone is well, thanks for taking my questions. First of all I want to follow on, I think what Robert touched on earlier on commitments, looking at a loan [indiscernible], it lists you as leading the $440 million loan subject to close upon the completion of the debt marketing period. Can you provide context on what that means for your commitment to the deal? Was there any flex language in this one off? Or did you not commit to the whole transfer perhaps any context would be helpful.

Thanks, Fin. [indiscernible] is a public company, I’m not in a position to make any comment whatsoever on that. Finian O’Shea: Okay. I understand. And I guess a little higher level than, you talked a bit about rotating out of lower spread loans L plus 500, I think was the number you threw out. I’m looking at one of your larger investments this quarter. KS Management was L 425. So in that context, how much incremental spread do you anticipate being able to take on? And what should, we think about the risk and return for that specific credits?

Yes, it is a fair question. In the context of the comments I made. That particular transaction was a deal that we had committed to a fair bit ago. I don’t remember, but it was months ago. And so you are right that is my comments about increasing spread or not consistent with closing on that deal. But that deal was committed to last year, I don’t remember off the top of my headwind, but months ago in sitting here right now, I don’t think you’ll expect to see us do new, KS Management type fields at that spread. At the time we committed, we thought it was a very attractive deal, very high quality healthcare provider. And so we did it then, but I think given how the portfolio has evolved, I wouldn’t expect you to do other deals in that spread range in this environment. So where would we, I guess maybe the question, where would we deploy capital? I think that we unitranche pricing today is substantially higher than L plus 600, let’s call it L plus 650 to 750 that type of spread range. So that is gives you a sense of where that piece of the marketplace is. We won’t do too much. You shouldn’t expect to see us do anything meaningful so the L plus 500. Finian O’Shea: Thank you Craig.

Thank you. And our next question for today comes from Chris York from JMP Securities. Please go ahead . Your line is open

Good morning guys, thanks for taking my question, obviously a lot discussed so I do just have one question. Craig, in the experiment healthy relationships are key to achieving good outcomes for the partners. But they can also be tested from competing interests during stress. So the question for you is, are you thinking about the need to protect your par value by enforcing your rights as a lead lender today with performance materials versus the risk of impairing the trajectory of Owl Rock’s franchise value, or market share you’ve created over the last five years?

Sure Chris. Again fair question. Our role and our job is to protect the value of our investments and our shareholders capital. Now, we appreciate this, why you are asking the question, because we have built our business around being a partner for private equity firms. We have very deliberately built that business by having a large pool of capital, a very large team, and a broad set of relationships and you can go through our portfolios and you can see we finance for lots of different sponsors. We are not dependent on any one, two or three and we cover hundreds of private equity firms. And I think we have done a nice job and I know the private equity firms would agree of becoming a valued partner to the private equity firms. We are going to approach our, this period of time and is as constructive as we can be. We are certainly, we think constructive means listening to the sponsors being rational about what we are being asked to do. But make no mistake, our job is to protect our loans. And I think that private equity firms are fiduciaries of capital work fiduciary capital. Any sophisticated private equity firm that raises institutional capital understands the difference of where we sit in the capital structure and what that means for us? And I believe I’m very close, my partners are close to folks running private equity firms. They understand that difference. So we think we can do both. We think we can protect our investors and maintain our franchise as being preferred partner, to private equity firms, and for the solutions that we can provide. I don’t think it is an either or inevitably there is going to be may be situations where we need to take…

Great that is very helpful color inside out. One follow-up. I know you guys have been building out portfolio management resources at the platform over the last year. So I’m curious many dedicated investment professionals, does investors have to support the platform’s restructure or portfolio management expertise? And then what is that maybe year-over-year?

Sure, look, I think like most direct lenders, in this environment, in my comments about new investments, the entire investment team is essentially focused on portfolio management. So it is not - the resources we have right now are significant. There is, there are a handful of folks whose job it is day-to-day to work through specific portfolio management issues. As I mentioned in my comments, we have taken additional folks who were investment professionals but essentially, we said put that aside and just become additional resources and we will continue to add to those overtime, but it is we have plenty of resources. And we will continue to add not so much about the number of people but adding a couple that have, some very specific technical experience that might benefit us in this period of time.

Sure, it make sense. That is it from me. Thanks Craig.

Thanks Chris.

Thank you. And at this time I would like to turn the call back to Craig Packer for closing remarks.

Okay. Well, look, thanks everyone for your time. I know this went a little longer than our typical calls. We really tried to share as much information as we could about what we are seeing and talk about the future in this uncertain time. I appreciate the questions. We are obviously available for follow-ups. Really sincerely wish everyone on the call on good health for you and your families and look forward to coming back and updating you on our progress in the future.

Thank you for joining us today ladies and gentlemen. We appreciate your participation. This concludes our call. You may now disconnect.