Ep11. Coatue Conference Recap, Tesla & ISS Controversy | BG2 with Bill Gurley & Brad Gerstner

27:01Yeah, I mean, listen, heavyweight fighting. I think it's a good provocation. Thomas presented other paths to liquidity, M &A, PE partnerships, he put up on the screen. But here's what I see. We've recently sold two companies in our portfolio. One was reported by the Wall Street Journal for a billion to two billion dollars to Databrace called Tabular. We have companies that have gotten fit and that are re -accelerating their growth rates. And then we have two companies in the IPO pipeline. I just think this has taken longer than any of us think. Out of that 1 ,400, I suspect that 60 to 70 % of those companies are never going to go public.

27:49So these are companies that are either going to have to get sold off. They pass the peak in terms of their growth rates. They don't have enough revenue scale in order to get public. But I think that they're going to be 30 to 40 % of those that certainly could get public. They may have to accept a like instacarte. By the way, look at instacarte. They accepted a big downed round from their last private round. They went public. The stock traded downed, didn't trade that well. And I think the stock is up well over 50 % now because they've executed in the public markets. And so I can't, I can't, you know, I can't reinforce enough.

28:26Amazon since they went public. I think they've had four periods where they were down over 60%. I understand. And so... And a company I mentioned from the previous wave, Equinix, went from 200 down to 2. And today is at 778 and $80 billion mark cap. So it can happen. I thought we would see way more IPOs. I thought people would come public to two kind of cleanses that are coming. And we're going to start in wipe out the lick prep. Maybe we still will. I would encourage the regulators to do anything they can to make sure we don't have a systematic problem that's causing being public to be too expensive.

29:07And I know that the reality we talked about in the last podcast, if that comes to be true, we're just way fewer companies go public. And all the growth is in the private markets that the ginseler types are going to come out and say, that's bad for the retail investor and they're going to want to fix it. I hope the way they try and fix it is to look through the cost of being public. All the cost of being public and say, what can we do as regulators to improve that situation? That's where I hope. The second thing I would like to do on this podcast, assuming that we have some really good set of listeners out there.

29:44If there is a banker out there that thinks like the four horsemen did, who says, I don't need you to be 10 billion to be a public. I would love to take you public at 100 million in revenue. Come see me, call me. I will connect you to companies. I will promote you. We need someone willing to do that. I get the sense that the three big guys, JP Morgan Morgan and Goldman, just aren't that interested. I do think some percentage of the 1400 should go public. I don't think that waiting is helping them at all. I would love to help find the people that can be their stewards. Let me crystallize a question for you.

30:32I was rumored last week that OpenAI is run rating three and a half, four billion dollars in revenue. It's extraordinary. I think it's pretty evenly split between a consumer business and an enterprise business. I think that's even more exciting. I have some potential data on that. On top of that, I think that that team right through the teeth of so much noise in the market, has withstood incredible turbulence to execute the way they have. Faster than any other company I've ever seen delivering great products in the market. Greg Brockman in the basement, churning out product no matter what happens in that business.

31:19They have the big announcement at WWDC at Apple last week, which I think was another master class in deal making and brand building by Sam and team. They got four billion in revenue. You're growing well over 100 % in here. You marked it up a little bit earlier. Three and a half billion. Whatever you want to call it, would you go public if you could do a conversion to a four profit company? Would you take OpenAI? There's a lot in the second part. By the way, just to fill in some of this, and I could be wrong by math, but I went into one of these credit card survey things and I looked at it, and I'm assuming that people don't pay for the AI with the credit card, so the credit card pool just represents.

32:00I compared it to a company where I knew the revenue. It would imply that there are about 2 .1 of the three, four is the consumer business. It had $20 a pop. So two -thirds the consumer business. Put me in it and I love it. Well, there's one other thing that I could look at in the credit card data, at least for the cohorts that are old enough, the churn's about 65 % annually, so the only 35 % retaining, which sacks it, hinted at on all end. And maybe the reason that I think Sam, at one point, said he didn't really see the $20 thing as his future. Right. But would I encourage him to go public? Well, they just hired a very reputable CFO, so maybe they're taking about it.

32:46Well, the reason I think they would do it is, first of all, they're very good at self -promotion and they're very good at promoting the company. They're very good at enterprise sales. They've been staffed, but many, many others. And so if they thought they'd get a premium multiple and could get out there and have access to capital at a much cheaper price, and liquidity for the employees, which are now having to arrange, I could see it. I fear that the kind of current wisdom of the entrepreneurs to not do it. Right. Well, this is my, we have an opportunity to make a case for Sam and D'Saachia. And here's a bit of the case that I would make for him.

33:33Number one, I think this is, when you build AI, I think it's going to be about trust and safety. And I think being a public company, being exposed to public disclosures, the scrutiny of the SEC, all the things that come with that from public market investors, I think is a good thing for that business. I think it would force them to tighten everything up. No, I'm not talking today. But if I were on that board, you know, and maybe we'll tell this to Larry tonight, I would say, you know, let's start moving the company in a direction as though we were public, right? Let's do the conversion to a for -profit business, enough of this funky...

34:10By the way, I don't think that's trivial. Funky, sure. I agree. I'm just telling you, like it's doable. And the second thing I would say... I think it's only doable by putting a significant chunk of the company in the knot. Yes. Like a share base in the knot profit. Not this thing where they get it at the end. But you can't take public that structure. So here's what I don't like. I don't like the idea that you could have a company that could theoretically go to a trillion dollars in enterprise value, could theoretically develop AGI and a retail investor never has a shot to invest in that company.

34:47That is something that's good for the structure of our markets. I think for... I think it's better for the company. I think it's better for the markets. And frankly, I think it solves one of Microsoft's problems as well. And we've seen all of the corporate... Some of the chaos around this business. I actually think it would be good for Sam and Greg and Brad and team to do that. Now, of course, you've got to put it on a path. This probably takes a couple of years to get there. But to me, that is the iconic question. If four billion isn't enough, Bill, with a $90 billion private market valuation than what is.

35:22And I just don't think it's going to be looked on that well. If all the sudden, all the best companies in the world are only available to the... To the folks at this conference and not available to... And they may want to do acquisitions and getting the cap chart in a more traditional state would make that easier, public or private. So maybe we'll see that happen. I do think that the thing that may help us unlock this IPO problem, if you will, is a couple of AI companies going out. And maybe that will even make it easier on the others just so that we start to prime the pump a little bit. So I think you'll start to hear chatter on who are going to be the first AI first companies to go public.

36:09There's rumors out there about core weave. There's articles about cerebris. So it would be interesting to see, I think it would be very helpful for the ecosystem to get a couple of those under our belt. Well, there's talk that... Oh, Mr. LaFon himself, would you like to join us? I mean, just come on up here. Join us for a minute. We're live right now. For Leib, we're just first. Thank you. Yeah. This is one of our favorite, if not our favorite. You know, conference in the investing business. And what I said to start is you are positive, some. You have all your... You have the folks that most people would think of as your competitors.

36:46You know, you invite them here. You collaborate, you build partnerships. I'm thinking about changing my mind. Awesome. So we were just talking about the $10 billion to IPO, right? Which implies something around a billion dollars in revenue to go public, right? Like what... And I was saying, I would encourage OpenAI to go public today, right? We think more... I think an bill agrees. More of these companies should go public. We think they can go public smaller. We understand if you're a micro -cap and you don't have great margins and you're not growing fast, you can't go public. But aren't there a lot of companies that could be public today?

37:24Yeah, I mean, if you look at some of the big unicorns, they could definitely go public. But I think there's two criteria. One is, can you get to a billion of revenue? Yes. OpenAI would be... Check, check, check the box. But the second one is, do you have a sort of a break -even or a path to break -even? And the only thing I don't know the specifics of OpenAI is... But what if you had a billion of revenue, but like an enormous cash burn? And by the way, that cash burn is really smart. It helps them consolidate as a clear number one. But will the public markets be scared? If the cash burn is disproportionate, but the private markets, the investors, they know that there's a bit of a winner -take -all and they might be mortgaged.

38:06Now, that's just an OpenAI. SpaceX, an amazing company. It's sort of quasi -public, but why don't you give retail investors a chance to invest in SpaceX? They should have that right. That's when there's a lot of... That might happen. If you're right about the billion though, like if you have to have a billion of revenue and be growing, right, you got to be at what, 30 % growth, 25%. Like, if that's the hurdle rate, then how many DC companies are ever going to make it to that level? Like, that would be my question. Listen, I was speaking to your former colleague, Eric, at Ben Schmark. And he's like, this is a problem for the venture business.

38:49Yeah. This is a problem for portfolio. There's going to be less exits and bigger exits. So it's going to make the business that much more risky. And do we need to adapt in ways that maybe you have to reach out to the company? Maybe invest behind your best companies because there's not going to be as many of them. Do you need to provide companies the ability to win in other ways? What's weird to me is that the government by trying to protect small companies and not allowing big companies to buy small companies so big companies get bigger, I think it's got the reverse effect. We're now small companies have one less chance of winning, and thus the public market is even less willing to hold a small company because it's less willing that it gets bought.

39:31Right. And so why bother with small companies when you can just own big guys? I love you and I love you. Re -invent me on this amazing butt -past that I'm going through with some other people. Thank you for the link, you brought up. That's great. It was good timing. By the way, he's also just one of a kind human. Tiger, too. You know, and so it's fun to see him and glad he jumped in here. You know, Bill, I think it's a, you know, one of the things he was talking about got me thinking about something. You know, boards of directors, you know, they have influence over whether these companies go public.

40:08Okay. And it starts early, you know, in the boardroom about setting the conditions and building the company in a way it's built to go public. And I think one of the problems, you know, here we talk about it reflexively. I think we're going to look back at this. I happen to be more optimistic on this. I think we're going to look at this period. It's going to be a byproduct of the age of excess. This is going to be like all these companies raise too much money at too high evaluation during the ZERP period. And therefore they couldn't go public. And frankly, too many boards bought into this state private forever business.

40:42I think there is a whole new category of company coming that I hope that you lead the charge. I lead the charge and they lead the charge. There is no reason these companies, if we set the conditions early in the business, stay fit, get profitable, you know, you don't have to grow it all costs. Don't raise too much capital. Don't set the valuations to eye. You know, they can get public. But you know, it's going to be an interesting sale. Before we transition to our last topic, I would point out one irony from all that we heard today and what you just said, which is if the 1400 number of private unicorns that are the result of the age of excess is a problem.

41:23It's not clear to me that we're doing anything different in AI. Aren't we doing the exact same thing? So couldn't we end up with the exact same rules? We just said 5x and 6x higher value. You said something to me a few weeks ago that I think is spot on. I think 15 years ago, not a lot of people talked about the power law. Maybe there was a small cadre, a small membership, you know, once handheld road that talked about power law. But today everybody knows about power law distributions and venture returns, right? And so if there is any sniff that a company in AI link is going to be the winner. They get 400 million dollars.

42:03The amount of capital that jages it. So, you know, I think that's an interesting question. I think it's very difficult for founders to resist the urge to take the money. I think it's very difficult for founders to resist the urge to take the highest valuation. I encourage them to reverse engineer from the outcome, the liquidity outcome they hope to achieve. If you take a lot of money at a valuation, well over a billion dollars, the probability of you getting sold or you getting public is just a lot harder. That's just the truth. Before we move off in the venture section, one of the things I love a bunch of founders running around here, you and I met with one or two of them earlier.

42:42Just a few of the anecdotes that I'm seeing in the nine period. I spent some time with Scott Wu. I'm an angel investor in cognition. And Scott is building, you know, Satcha referenced him wall on stage. As Copilot is building effectively auto -complete, allowing engineers to become more productive. Cognition is building engineers. And I asked how many employees do you have? I think he has tens of thousands of enterprise customers already. And he said 18. I said, how do you do all this work with only 18 people? He said, we have 100 devins. We have 100 agentic engineers that are helping us write code.

43:21That's a theme I've heard from Gleene. I heard from Distill. I heard from cognition. This idea that we're going to have in Satcha referenced it. A workforce of people. In the not so distant future, that are going to be able to take these multi -step functions. Go build me a website. No longer just complete a line of code, but complete an entire task. We were just with our friend from Gleene, and who's building a great enterprise search product. But you don't have to squint that hard to think that that could be your enterprise assistant. They could go perform tasks on your behalf. So put me in the camp again.

44:06I don't know the time series, but I do think that we're on a path toward human replacement, not just augmentation. I think those folks in this period of dislocation will get consumed in other tasks. So I don't think this is a net negative for society, but I do think you'll have dislocation before you necessarily have that growth on the other side. I was just saying one thing real quick, because I gave the speech 20 years ago or so about how we evolve with our tools. You know, and you wouldn't try and, you know, run a high production farm without a tractor. You wouldn't do it with a plow in an oxen.

44:44And that just always has been true in our society. And so if you are a programmer who's worried about this, the best thing you can do is run at it. Like go hang out, play with cognition, get into get home copilot. Like that and learn, you know, such as said that the ordering of the workflow of riding code is changing as a result of this. You won't know that unless you're in it. 100 % 100 % and a lot of the talk here is not just about who the winners are, who the losers are. Right? The losers in the public market, you know, companies that are slow. Think about if you were a company slow to adopt the internet in 2000.

45:29If you were a retail enterprise, you said, I don't need any commerce capability. Right? Right? That was a very bad decision. I think in 2024, if you're any company and you say, I'm going to be, you know, I don't need to do all this AI stuff. I don't need, you need to be there, even if you choose not to adopt it, because I think failure to learn how to reinvent your business. I don't think you have to worry about this. I think most of them are there on it. They're on it. Well, another topic I think that, you know, we've talked about on this pod. We had some developments on this week, you know, and I wanted to dig deeper in.

46:03And this is to the shareholder vote as it pertains to Tesla. So we know now that Elon has won the vote for a second time. Retail investors, I think, voted 90, 10 in favor. Institutional investors, something like 70, 30 in favor. And even the passive ETF Vanguard, voted in favor of the package, okay? But there was a big reveal here this week. I think I think some tectonic plates started moving on something that you and I have identified as an issue for a long time. And it relates to ISS institutional shareholder services and class Lewis. So both of those organizations recommended a no vote or a vote against the shareholder package, okay?

46:48Now, that in and of itself is not that unusual, although I don't think it made sense because it was clearly in the best interest of shareholders, right? Stockwood go up. It did go up. Right. And, you know, so I started looking in again, and I know you and I started talking about the background of ISS. And just as a reminder, you know, ISS was founded in 1985. And the mission of the company was to provide advisory services to institutional investors, supposedly to do research and governance on their performance and to help shareholders make informed decisions as to what would maximize their own value in the business.

47:26And while all this sounds benign enough, many of us have argued over the years that ISS veered off course, right? And this started becoming kind of this cudgel to, you know, to coerce board behavior into ways that they deemed, right? In maybe societal best interest or in their perceived best interest as opposed to the corporate best interest. You and I have both served on boards where board members have said, well, I can't do this or I can't do that because of ISS. We know some of the best boards in the world like Netflix takes it on the chin from ISS all the time because they don't do the things that ISS sanctions as worthy.

48:07In fact, this got so bad that at the end of, or at the beginning of 2023, 21 state attorney generals wrote a letter to ISS demanding that they explain anglas Lewis to explain their advocacy objectives, right? So in this instance, I think the fact that Vanguard, right, which is passive, these are not active investors, that they came out and they voted in the opposite direction of glass Lewis and ISS. I think it just laid bare some of the nonsense associated with these recommendations. And I really wonder whether this is going to cause a ripple effect, right, where people start pushing back now on ISS and glass Lewis, right, because of a passive investor can do it certainly.

48:56And the active investors from retail institutional, they rejected ISS and glass Lewis straight out. So what do you, any thoughts on that? Yeah, well, a couple things. So one, I actually spoke to some people at ISS in their research group prior to our SBC conversation. And it became clear to me from talking to them that they're mostly backward looking. They talk to investors after the fact and say, do they appreciate this particular thing or not? And they're not doing first principles thinking around shareholder alignment. And, you know, and you said it lost their way. I mean, it became a network effect, right?

49:31They charge both the company end of shareholder and like, I mean, if there's a do -opily, we should worry about in this country. It's probably ISS and glass Lewis, who wants to see every board to follow their Marching Board. And the number one reason I hear very valid reason for companies to have superboding is so they don't get held up by these companies in their attempt to do the right thing and implement a compensation package that is aligned with shareholder. Correct. And as I said to you back then, and I believe even more today, and I've seen more copycats of it, the Edon package is the most shareholder aligned compensation package I've ever seen.

50:18I would be thrilled if all of my hired CEOs had a very similar package. Right. I'd be thrilled. Yeah. I think most of them wouldn't take it. Yes. Because it requires outsized performance. Oh, I think it's excellent. I think that it's ridiculous that Netflix would ever get a no vote on anything because they've had incredible stock performance and industry leading low delusion with their very innovative approach to compensation. It would be fun to look at a distribution. And I actually had a chance to talk with the co -CEOs recently, and they were still getting pushed back, because I was applauding them on their structure.

51:00And one of their board members said, well, they are even considering change, because I, as that won't leave them alone. And it's just, it's horrific. But, yeah. Anyways, there's one other thing that I would highlight about this. It relates more to the Delaware situation. So it's my belief that the, that many of the attorneys and lawyers that live in the Delaware ecosystem were very eager for Tesla to appeal this thing and push it to the Delaware Supreme Court. And it has been widely discussed here in other places. The reason that people chose Delaware is 100 years. I went back and looked up to say, over 100 years of practice of being business -friendly.

51:48Obviously, all these companies aren't located in Delaware. Yeah. They're just choosing this, and they're choosing this place because of its history of precedent and its history of, of how they adjudicate different things. And people felt that it was in the company's best interest. Here today, with the Tesla situation, we have a company who stock -performed incredibly well and was brought to heal by a lawyer and a law firm with a contingent, you know, derivative lawsuit. They're one customer had nine shares of stock. Nine shares. They went up. Yes. So if you consider the fact that, oh, I could be a public company in Delaware.

52:38My stock could go up. Yes. I can be, and then they asked for $5 billion in compensation to lawyer. They're still asking for it. And they had one customer with nine shares. Like, how do you ask for $5 billion? If, I would say this. First of all, I think that these people that live in Delaware are very fearful that they won't actually be an appeal because then this thing just stands out there. Yes. And I think it's horrible for the entire Delaware. It says, if I were the governor of Delaware, I would be scared, shitless. Yes. Scared, shitless. About what might be happened. If this judge hands out any penalty anywhere close, that has this over 100 million even.

53:26Yes. I think companies need to consider leaving Delaware as fast as possible. Well, I mean, first, it's such a bad, you know, case law, right, in the state of Delaware. I mean, your point. The various states of the country. The individual anti -lawyers chasing any company with high performance or a big market cap and just trying to get them on a gotcha. For sure. See if they can get a judge to give them this time. Corporate, the corporate code that exists in various states around this country is very similar. There's a model corporate code, and most of them adopt it, that's predicated on Delaware's corporate code.

54:03What makes Delaware so different is a hundred years of precedent of case law, which is very supportive of a lot of issues which are important to companies. That predictability led companies to incorporate there. Now we've thrown predictability out the window, right? And now we're talking about despite two shareholder votes that both voted in favor of giving Elon this package both before and contemporaneous. And now that they're going to go back if they award, I'm not not 100 million dollars bill if they award one dollar, right? I think you're going to see companies in the state of Delaware that leave the state of Delaware.

54:39And by the way, I think we should be encouraging them to leave the state of Delaware if that's the case. Because I would like to see a lot more jurisdictions develop a lot more friendly corporate codes, friendly precedent, you know, for these companies. The reality is if we can't support a performance -based compensation package for a company, then what are we doing? Look at the garbage packages that people get paid tens of millions of dollars on. Stock goes down, companies are terrible. Well, ISS is cheering that that's a good compensation package. And that's a big problem in the state of Delaware.

55:11Not a big one person, but people have highlighted that the CEO of GM has made tens and tens of millions of dollars. Stock hasn't gone anywhere. That's who, if they want to chase somebody, it's me chasing that situation. But I couldn't agree with you more. I think this is a very serious topic. I think that the, you know, even I think like the Wall Street Journal in New York Times, they missed this point. And as you said, if it's not about shareholder alignment, what's the point? Right. And then the last thing I would say is we started by talking about the dirt of IPOs and why aren't companies going public.

55:47If this is the type of thing you expose yourself to by making public, then I understand why there are less public companies. And I actually think in addition to the fact that everyone in Delaware should be afraid of this, I think the SEC should be afraid of it. Like you shouldn't want this type of activity, this type of derivative suit to come to the table. Because with nine shareholders in it, ask for $4 billion, it's clearly a shakedown. You wouldn't want that in your public market ecosystem. How do we give assurances to other companies that are reincorporating the Nevada, reincorporating in Texas?

56:27You know, Tesla's move to, you know, was approved to move to Texas. How do we give them comfort, you know, they're going to be protected there against these type of issues? I have work to do. I need to learn more. And as much as I would say, the governor of Delaware should be afraid of the governor of Nevada and the governor of Texas should be putting together a task force to take advantage of this and to answer the question that you posed. Like what needs to be in place? Can you borrow some of the precedent case law? I don't know how it works, but like, it's a, I'm shocked based on everything I've been told my whole life about.

57:07Why? You know, you say, why are all these companies incorporating Delaware? Oh, it's the most business -friendly state from a judicial standpoint. This blows that up. Well, I mean, one of the things I, again, I'll go, you know, call my corporate law buddies up as well. Why can't the state of Texas say, you know, because you can't just make precedent up. Pressident has to be the byproduct of somebody bringing a lawsuit. That just takes time. But you can draft it into your corporate code vision. Good. Like you could simply say that, you know, we're not going to allow these type of derivative lawsuits with, you know, that are totally, you know, a farce with nine shares to be brought in five billion dollars of, you know, of awards given.

57:46I suspect I suspect you could take a industry leading LLM and scan through the case precedent and help codify. I bet you love it. You know, for sure. So tonight, you and I and Phaleep have, you know, we're going to do a panel with Larry Summers. And we're going to talk a little bit about, you know, what the world looks like in 10 to 15 years as a byproducts AI and some of the consequences, you know, that we may see. And when you abstract away the next five years, you know, because who knows how long this is going to take and whether we bump up against scaling laws and, and all these other things.

58:22When you look out 10 to 15, what, you know, any thoughts about, you know, what you want to hear, maybe from Larry or, you know, big picture thoughts that you have. Do you think the world is over its skis again, Bill? Or do you think this is, is this, is this 2000 where we're going to go through perhaps a little bit of a rough patch here. But when we look back 10 or 15 years, it's going to be way bigger and way more consequential than we thought. I didn't know you're going to ask me this question, but I'll tell you the one thing that, that's on my mind. And then I'll ask you the same question. But I really don't believe in the declobalization push that's coming from either of these presidential, I just don't believe in it.

59:02I believe in Ricardo's comparative advantage. I believe in lifting all people out of poverty, not just people that happen to be born in the same country as you are. And that happens through globalization. And I just think more people are like the most people that are ever been made better off by one person was in China and Ding Xiaoping brought half a billion people out of poverty. And that happened by introducing capital. And I just hope we can find a way to stop vilifying China and just stop thinking that you're going to re -enshore a whole bunch of, man, in fact, I don't think we'll be competitive globally.

59:40Yeah. That's what's on my mind. Man, it's an interesting question. If you flipped it back around, I'm really interested in the productivity gains, you know, that I think we can achieve like the big unlock here. I'm interested in if he sees those same level productivity gains that perhaps we saw in the 80s and 90s. I'm really interested in how he thinks about our national competitive advantage, right? Like the United States, if you just look at the performance over the last 10 years, has been a byproduct of a lot of this globalization. But I also see the flywheel spinning like you just look around here.

1:00:17We have a system of risk capital that's better than anywhere in the world. We have a system of risk taking an entrepreneurship that's better than anywhere in the world, the rate of innovation, better than anywhere in the world. And so to me, it also... Well, let's open up that skilled immigration gap. Yeah, no. I mean, like that's, you know, absolutely one. And I was not to go, you know, off piece here, but I was talking with, you know, the president of a major, you know, Fintech company last night, public company, who was at the business round table, you know, with Trump. And he said, you know, they were all shocked.

1:00:51Their jaws were on the ground. Trump walks into the room, starts talking about immigration. You know, and while he says, we got an illegal immigrant problem, we got a, you know, we got to tighten the borders. They said it was the first time they ever heard him say, and I got to solve the problem for everybody in this room, how I get you more talented workers. And he proposed something apparently at the round table. He said, anybody who comes here for a four -year education completes their degree in the United States, we're going to give him a green card. I like to. Okay. Like, if that's true, this is one of our huge issues.

1:01:22Right. This is the best place on the planet to start these businesses, you know, because of ecosystems like this. But ultimately, you look at, you know, Elon came here. All right. Larry and Sergey. Not so many. You know, so I'm great to be with you. Yeah. Good to see you. I look forward to chatting more tonight. And thanks for having us. Yeah.

1:01:51As a reminder to everybody, just our opinions, not investment advice.