Kate Holmes of Innovating Advice is a consultant to financial services professionals, host of the Innovating Advice Podcast, and founder of the IA Community.
In this interview (Part 2 of 2) we discuss the overarching challenge of moving from Peak 1 to Peak 2 – the intergenerational handover.
The talk follows the findings of the report ‘New Frontiers in Wealth Management‘ , which Kate (along with 15 other thought leaders) contributed to.
Visit Kate’s website and download the podcast / view show notes here.
Find out more about the Innovating Advice Community here.
Interview Transcript
Introduction
Kate Holmes: You’re listening to the Innovating Advice Show. And I’m your host, Kate Holmes, bringing you the global pulse on financial services innovation, featuring financial planners, financial advisors, and related professionals from all corners of the globe. Let’s dive in.
Hello, Matthew. Welcome to the show.
Matthew Jackson: Hello, Kate. Good to be here.
Kate Holmes: I am stoked for this conversation because we are chatting about a white paper that you recently put out, co-authored with Bob Veres, and it’s called New Frontiers in Wealth Management, How Advice Firms Can Ensure Long-term Survival In A Changing World.
And there is a ton of great stuff in here. I highly encourage everyone to read it. It is 86 pages, but don’t let that be too daunting. It’s actually a pretty quick read. But really thoughtful. And we’re going to be specifically diving in today, talking about the intergenerational challenges of moving from Peak One to Peak Two, which is the basis of the paper.
So Matthew, can you share where the idea for this paper came from and what Peak One and Peak Two means?
Matthew Jackson: Absolutely. So we have a separate conversation where we get into it in more detail, but essentially the idea is you can be humming along pretty nicely with a certain way of doing things, and getting better and better over time as you add and enhance.
But if there’s a change in the external environment, this might render your paradigm obsolete and you have to change to a new paradigm altogether. So the concept of Peak One is when you’re incrementally improving, it’s like climbing up a hill and getting slightly closer to the summit with each step.
And if there’s a higher plane somewhere, Peak Two, what you’re going to have to do to get there is actually descend into the Adaptive Valley in between. And this makes it look like you’re going backwards. And you may be at a disadvantage to your competitors on Peak One initially. And it’s a dangerous journey. But if you do make the journey successfully, you will be in a position where you’re head and shoulders above the competition literally.
And other people won’t be able to catch up with you very quickly. So a practical example of this would be, the classic example is the digital camera. And this is an interesting one, because Kodak famously discovered the digital camera in 1971, and didn’t do anything with it for 30 or 40 years, and then went bankrupt as a result.
And this actually blends into our conversation quite nicely, because what we’re going to focus on in this conversation is less on the actual findings of the report, which we’ll get into in a separate discussion, but focusing really on the challenge: why do firms fail to update? Why do they fail to move from Peak One to Peak Two?
And I think you’ve got some really great examples of this. We’ve got some examples that we’ve we both heard about. And we’re going to get into that in more detail.
Kate Holmes: Yeah, absolutely. And that’s a big thing. Because this has to be looked at in that intergenerational way. As you mentioned, Kodak, we’re talking about decades here, so that right there is intergenerational.
So who within Kodak might have been forward thinking enough to say, “Hey, actually, this could be the way of the future. We should do something with this now”, but they were held back. And so we’ve got three examples that we are going to be looking at in terms of the intergenerational challenges.
One, we’ll talk about first where the owner refuses to change strategy and the next generation then buckles under.
The second one is where the owner also refuses to change strategy, so the next generation actually leaves and founds a new firm. And many people know that’s my story, that’s my history.
And the last one is that the owner actually allows the next generation to develop a new model within the firm, which is super exciting.
Option One: Founder Digs In
So we’ll end on that nice positive note, but let’s start with that first one where the owner refuses to change the strategy and the next generation buckles.
What did you see as you were having conversations for this report? Which I have to say has an incredible lineup of industry professionals in it. So you got some really great insight from a lot of different people.
Matthew Jackson: Yeah, we heard a lot of stories. Some positive, some not so positive. And with this Option One, where the Founder refuses to change, this isn’t necessarily negative. There are Founders who have established client bases, and they have staff pretty much the same age as they are. They don’t really see their business as multi-generational, as going into the future. They’re just happy to have a business and they enjoy working with their clients.
And the idea there is that they’re happy, to use the expression that you used, to “evolve or dissolve”, they’re quite happy to dissolve eventually. And that can work out. There is a danger, I think that you pointed out that for the clients, everyone has to be at the same age for everything to work, if the advisor is going to die with their boots on.
What can of course happen though, is that the Founder doesn’t want to update the model, but they do want it to be a multi-generational business. And that’s a bit tricky for the next generation.
So we heard an example: it was a father and son. Working in a town, which was formerly the headquarters of a Fortune 500 company. And there was this pipeline of execs coming out with their retirement plans and it was all working great.
The firm then moved away from the town, and the son, who was a former college athlete, came up with an idea for a different type of business.
It wasn’t focusing on wealthy retirees, but instead was focusing initially on college athletes and getting them into college, and eventually expanding to their family and managing their wealth. It was a much longer term play, but it was a very innovative approach. It wasn’t the classic approach.
And he got somewhere in developing this, but the father eventually stepped in and said “Hang on. Let’s be realistic. You want to come up with something that’s going to be a bit more predictable. So why don’t you just go and learn to prepare taxes? Everyone needs taxes.” And this is a really interesting case because from the outside, at least the way I’ve told the story, it sounds, “Oh, why did the father do that?”
You can absolutely understand why the father did that because, I bet, if you looked at the business case for that College Athlete Advice, it wouldn’t look stellar. It would look risky for a start, and it wouldn’t look like it was bringing in a huge amount of money.
So you can understand the father’s point of view, but also from the son’s point of view, the son’s looking into the future and saying “Is tax preparation going to be laying the golden egg for the next 30, 40 years?” Probably not. If you think about what AI is doing to the tax preparation business.
I think you’ve heard similar ones as well.
Option Two: Next Gen Breakaway
Kate Holmes: I have, and you’ve mentioned the quote that I’ve got in the white paper there at the very end where, ultimately it comes down to a simple decision of, do you want to evolve your business and have that multi-generational business that grows and builds with your clients and their children?
Or do you want to dissolve? And as you mentioned, that is a decision. And there definitely are cases where advisors have been at this for decades. They’ve built a really incredible business. They probably got a really incredible life that goes along with this successful business.
They’re no longer working a hundred hours a week. And so, they don’t want to get pulled back in and put in all of the time and effort that it takes to revamp and to go through that Adaptive Valley. And that was the situation with my Mom and I came into the industry and I became, or I was, her succession plan for the business.
And about eight years in, we hit this place where I wanted to evolve. And I wanted to bring all these new things to the business, and make it multi-generational. And I completely understood that just didn’t make any sense for her. Why change this amazing life that she had to then fundamentally change the business?
And I hear that a lot from other advisors around the world. And so, we get into this challenge of, the Founder needs to really be honest with themselves about what they want. Do they want to put in that work to continually evolve the business, cause that never stops, and knowing that it’s gonna bring them back in the business, or do they want to just reap the fruits of their labor and have attrition naturally occur?
And then, you’ve led into a nice retirement.
Matthew Jackson: And the point is you can’t have it both ways. And your case is actually an example of the second option, which is the founder doesn’t want to change. So the next generation goes and establishes their own firm, and it obviously worked out well in your case.
And if the founder is happy with the lifestyle business, then the founder could be fine with it too. I think the issue is, as you say, if the founders are honest with themselves, they absolutely want the firm to survive in the future, but they don’t want to change it. That’s where the issues come.
And there’s another example which comes in the white paper, a firm called Facet Wealth, which is, they’ve really gone all out on Peak Two! They’ve said, “Okay. Let’s think about everything. Let’s think about technology. Let’s think about the planning and thinking about pricing. How would we do it if we were going to establish this from the ground up?”
And the story about that was one of the co-founders Brent Weiss was sitting in a room in his traditional firm, with the senior advisors. And they were saying “Look. We know that the direction the industry is going in is very different from where we are right now, but we’re five years away from retirement. Why would we go to all of this effort to change?
Kate Holmes: Exactly right.
Matthew Jackson: Brent thought to himself “Okay. I can see how that makes sense for you. Not so much sense for me.” And went off and established this firm. So that’s good.
Let’s think about why this is maybe not the ideal option in some cases.
So for example, if you’re not a natural Entrepreneur. You can have a great idea for a business, but it is very difficult to set up something from scratch. In Brent’s case, he had these amazing co-founders with different skill sets, and they managed to do this amazing thing. But it may not be an option for a lot of next gen advisors.
And what we don’t hear about is the failure stories. So it’s not as simple as just saying, “If you don’t like it, then just go and set up your own firm”. That requires a lot of luck and it can work out really well, but it’s not something which is an ideal solution for a lot of people.
Would you agree with that?
Kate Holmes: Yeah. For some people, it is working out amazingly. But no, it’s not easy. And even for the people where it is going really well, none of them would tell you that it’s easy either, but we’ve seen thousands of financial planners just in the US alone, to say nothing of all over the world, over the last few years, leave these firms often because they weren’t evolving.
Because people were in situations where one of the other challenges we see is that the Founder, wants to pass it on to the next generation, but look, they’ve been in this business for decades. It is their heart and soul.
And so they can’t actually easily walk away. And so the goalpost often keeps moving. So if you are the next generation, you think you’re going to take over and it’s, “Oh, it’s going to happen this year”. And that year comes and goes and the next year.
And so that gets back to the Founder, really needing to be honest about what’s going to happen. But it’s been so interesting to see how many people are going the second route and leaving and starting their own firm, knowing how hard it is. And it’s so interesting to me because when you hear from all of them, most of them were accidental business owners.
I called myself an accidental business owner, I did it out of necessity. I didn’t grow up thinking I was going to do that. And I wanted to build a business that fit around my life. And that’s what a lot of people say. They say, “Look, I couldn’t find a firm that provided the flexibility I wanted to live the life I want, in an efficient way with technology and allowing me to work with the clients that I want.”
And we’ve got so many of those people out there that I think at some point we’re actually going to see them start to come together and put all of their various talents together and, potentially form some of these Peak Two firms because people are experts in different areas.
But, just knowing that there are all those people out there, that’s a tremendous amount of talent that could be going to continuing a lot of these firms that have been around for a long time. And that…
Matthew Jackson: And that’s the point? Yeah. If we think about evolution, eventually you have to take risks and you have to experiment or mutate, but most of our genetic code is based on what our parents gave us.
And if you break that link, you can lose a lot. And an experienced Founder, the external environment may change, and you may need a bunch of new assumptions, and you may need you need a bunch of new systems, but there are things which don’t change. There are things about dealing with clients, about relationships, about this, that, and the other, which are really wisdom, rather than knowledge and expertise.
And that’s something which having an older person in the firm can really benefit you. When there’s a sort of acrimonious split and someone gets frustrated and goes off and founds their own business. Obviously that itself is not particularly pleasant, but also something’s lost in the process. (Yeah.)
For some people it’s the right thing to do. And there’s no fixed hard and fast rules.
Option Three: Rebuild From Within
But maybe it makes sense to go on to Option Three now, which is this “best of both worlds” situation where the next generation is allowed to innovate within the existing structure.
Kate Holmes: Yeah. And I love this one because this is hands down my favorite. To me, it’s a win-win for everyone.
It’s a win for the Founder. It’s a win for the Next Gen. It’s a win for the clients and it allows you to do it in the way that preserves that wisdom and you get the mentorship. And it’s a two-way mentorship. The original generation learns from the new generation and vice versa. And there are some great examples of this around the world.
And one of them is Adam Carolan at Xentum in the UK. And he came up with a plan wanting to innovate in the business and evolve and serve younger clients. And he was given the space to create that business plan very slowly, very thoughtfully, and present it to the founder who kept giving him more and more space over time.
It was almost like done in phases in a way. To say, okay let’s work on this first and see how that pans out, and then work on the next thing and see how that pans out. It’s when you empower people. And that’s something that we don’t see enough in the world, not just in this profession, empowering other people to be their best selves and try and fail.
Everybody’s going to fail every single founder of every business in the history of the world has failed. And we need to remember that and allow the next generation to fail as well, because who knows they could come up with the next best thing.
Matthew Jackson: Yeah. And may maybe worth at this point, just taking a step back and understanding why this is so difficult. Because if you’re a successful firm, by definition, you are the fittest.
As in survival’s for the fittest, right? So you’ve seen other colleagues in your cohort who maybe started businesses 20, 30 years ago, maybe give up out of business, do less well than you.
So you have every reason to believe that you know how things work. And if you look at the next generation who “know nothing”, or like when you were their age, you didn’t have the first clue about how to do things, it’s quite reasonable for you to assume that if they come up with an idea that’s radically different from what you think, it’s probably not a good idea.
So it’s very natural to think this way. The difference of course is when the external environment changes, as we’ve been saying, your old assumptions are maybe not helping you so much anymore.
Things in the realm of technology, for example, they’re just so different to how they were when you started out. If we think about how, so you gave one example which was an interesting one about people being allowed to innovate within the existing structure.
There were various ones, actually, when you look out there, there are some really good examples of traditional firms. Altfest Personal Wealth Management, for example, is a very well-established firm.
In fact, they were one of the first to innovate in the fiduciary space. The next generation there, Andrew Altfest, he developed a really great new software called FP Alpha, which for me is just one of the stand-out FinTech solutions.
And it’s developed by an advisor. It’s not developed by a FinTech company. And to be able to do this, I think he’s now running it as a separate business as well, required the older generation, the successful older generation to say, “This sounds a very ambitious scheme. It may not work, but I think you should give it a go.”
And the result has been a splendid success. Another example, which we referenced in the white paper, is Brad Felix. And this is weird because he started off, I think in Option Two. So he went off and founded his own firm.
And his thought process was very much, “I wouldn’t build a firm like the way I see firms being run today, if I had to do it from scratch.” And then a traditional firm bought his firm as an answer to the question, ” What does financial planning for mass affluent clients look like?” And now he’s actually revolutionizing the way they serve traditional high net worth clients using the techniques he developed in this other business.
So that’s an example of a traditional firm actually recruiting the next generation, not just allowing the existing next generation to innovate, but saying “We need to install this some way in our business in order for our model to survive”. So it is possible to do it, if you have this open-mindedness and recognition that the old model isn’t going to work for the next 20, 30 years.
Digression: “The Explorers“
Kate Holmes: It’s not. And one of the conversations we had in our other chat was around, what’d you call them evolutionaries? And people are just born.
Matthew Jackson: Yeah, no “Explorer Mode” is I think what we discussed.
Kate Holmes: Explorer Mode and some people are like that. So it doesn’t matter if you’re in your twenties or you’re in your seventies, do you have that mindset of wanting to go there?
And I think those are going to be the founders and the owners that we see in Option Three, that even if they don’t have the answers themselves, they’re willing to try it out. And they almost have a higher calling, because this is risky. But as we know with risk can come reward. And knowing that they want to see the profession continue, and that they do understand what worked 20 years ago isn’t gonna work 20 years from now.
And there are, as you mentioned, lots of great examples. Another one that I recently talked with is First Pacific Financial, which is in Washington State. And they’ve grown, they’ve built an amazing business. They’re at 25 people right now with incredible growth plans. And Todd Striker, the founder there, he’s absolutely an Option Three person.
And he’s looked around and seen, he’s had the success. He’s been in this profession in the same company for decades. And he’s like, “How can we do better? How can we do more? How can we continue to set an amazing example for this profession and serve more people? And so he’s done this, and built this team within a team that is playing around with how do we serve the next gen, and how do we create different business models?
And it’s this wonderful adaptation of all of his wisdom and with the space and it’s actual physical space, they’re connected to the office, but they’ve got their own physical space as well.
And so again, it’s that nice blend of giving people enough room to go play in their own sandbox and figure things out while still having the support and encouragement of all of those years of experience and expertise and the rest of the team around them.
Matthew Jackson: Absolutely. And that’s obviously an expense which doesn’t have an obvious immediate return. If you give people space in their calendar to come up with new ideas, it takes a certain amount of commitment and resolve,
Kate Holmes: But you’re only talking about financial return right now, aren’t you?
That was a fascinating conversation with Todd is again, we were talking about the business has been successful. It’s proven that it’s scaled that peak and he’s looking around going, how can we just have a bigger impact? It’s not all about money. And I think that’s something that we’re going to see across everyone that moves to Peak Two, and that is in this third option right here, where they’re allowing that play space, is you have to be in it for something more than money.
And there was a great quote from Peita Diamantidis in Australia. She was on the podcast last year and she rightfully said the reason that a lot of advisors aren’t truly entrepreneurial, they aren’t explorers, is because they’ve been fat and happy so long, there’s been no need to.
Why fix something if it’s not broken? And there are so many successful businesses, which kind of gets us back into that Option One, if you’ve been successful why change? It’s working! No need to fix it. So you have to have a greater desire and a desire to make a bigger impact than just making money. And the best part is, the firms that do it, I think actually are and will be more financially secure.
Matthew Jackson: Absolutely in the long-term. I think it comes back to, do you have a long-term perspective? Because if you’re going to wind up your business in a couple of years time, and you don’t really see a future beyond that, it doesn’t make sense to update your firm.
But only in those conditions, does it not make sense to update your firm. Because as you point out long-term financially as well, there’s no future on Peak One. But that is a really interesting point, which I never considered, which is the people who tend to undertake this perilous journey, give power to the next generation, are motivated by something intrinsic, more than money.
Those are definitely the first people, the Explorers. And the guy who came up with the Explorer Mode theory, Bret Weinstein, he was told by his, I think one of his professors, that wherever you work, whether it’s in academia or in a company, you should never work in an institution without undergraduates.
People who literally don’t know anything yet. Because when a field or industry becomes stuck, it’s typically because some faulty assumption has been baked in to everyone’s mindset. To the point where they can’t remember having made the assumption. And it could have been an assumption that was valid in the 1960s or 70s or 80s, but which is no longer valid now.
And those undergraduates, those “no nothings” are going to be the people who don’t have that assumption and ask the stupid question. “Why are we doing it like this?” And having that experience (I love that) I’ve had this experience myself with people who are say 10, 15 years younger than me in consulting.
They make these points, which are like “No, that’s not how it works” is my initial reaction. And then you let them play with the idea of it more and you say “Actually, what you’ve said makes total sense”. And it is a bit embarrassing, frankly, because when I was there, I really did know nothing. But the world’s changed I think so much since then, that being younger and having fewer misconceptions is a real advantage when it comes to innovation.
Kate Holmes: It is that, and even people that come from other careers that don’t understand how financial planning works, or how things have traditionally been done, it gets into the whole “That’s the way it’s always been done”.
I love that. ” Why is it still done that way?” Anyone that comes in with that fresh perspective is so valuable. And I try to have conversations with friends sometimes even, or family members or my husband. And I love the questions they ask because it gets me thinking. I’m like, “Oh yeah”, this is getting more complicated than necessary, or we’re doing it in a silly way.
Matthew Jackson: And just to build on that point. A lot of the success of financial advice, because it is a successful industry, super-successful, growing, resilient, highly profitable. A lot of it is predicated on stability, and that’s why changes to the external environment are such a risk because if something challenges that stability, then all of a sudden people who thought they understood how things worked, and thought certain things didn’t need to be questioned, are suddenly going to be scrambling for solutions.
And the solutions are there. In fact, the old cliche that the future is all around us, just unevenly distributed. Parts of that future already distributed in parts of the US and Australia. And we mentioned some of them in the report.
And that’s a real opportunity actually, if there’s things which people typically haven’t addressed or people typically ignore about the way we do financial advice, that is a huge opportunity for a firm, not just who wants to survive and thrive into the future, but actually it’s also about serving clients.
Because if a lot of firms start doing badly, that’s really not good for the clients who aren’t going to receive their advice. So from so many different perspectives, if you’re looking at this intrinsic motivation to change, without necessarily making a huge amount more money in the next few years, there are plenty and plenty of reasons to do so. And now’s the time to do it. In fact yesterday was probably the time to do it, but certainly today.
Kate Holmes: 10 years ago might’ve been better. (Yeah. Even better. Yeah.)
What are some of those examples you said distributed in the US and Australia?
Matthew Jackson: Oh, sure. We’ve mentioned a couple of them in this conversation, but it’s typically smaller firms because smaller firms have more latitude.
They can take more risks and they can do things. But the trouble about smaller firms is they don’t tend to be the ones that get invited to speak at conferences. At least most conferences it’s generally the big successful firms that you hear from and by definition being big and successful means that you were innovative 20 years ago. It doesn’t mean that you’re being innovative now.
But one firm that I really love to talk about is Dentist Advisors. They exemplify so many of the things that we talk about in the report. For the people that don’t know about it, it’s a firm which went literally all-in on a niche. They didn’t say we’ll advise you if you have a million dollars, but we like to serve Dentists.
It was more a case of we only serve dentists and everything we do is built around dentists. We mentioned this in the report. So that was an example of I think it was Option Two. The founder, Reese Harper was I think he started off, I think at one of the big firms. And then went and founded his own firm, and he did something completely different.
And if you’ve got your ears open and your eyes open, you can find these firms. And talking to the founders is absolutely fascinating. Abacus Wealth in Santa Monica, not Abacus Wealth Partners, which is also a great firm, but Abacus Wealth in Santa Monica is another great one.
[Correction: Abacus Wealth Partners is the one referred to in this example. But both great firms!]
This was a couple of founders who, I came across them because of their pricing model. But they decided they wanted to be able to serve anyone who walked in the door. They were Buddhists and they had this, it was an intrinsic motivation. It wasn’t to do with making money. It was to do with to doing something more.
Ironically, of course, they ended up with a bunch of ultra-high net worth people coming through the door, because ultra-high net worth people are often Buddhist, it turns out. But in the course of being able to serve everyone, they had to innovate. Cause they had to come up with a new pricing model in a way that would not just rely on assets.
And they have this really interesting modular system of pricing and financial planning. And the founder, JD Bruce is quite open about it, he shares it with people. And I think I wrote an article on it a couple of years ago, which people can look at. I think the US market has a real advantage in terms of the sheer number of advisors that it has.
And when you have a large population, inevitably, you’re going to have a number of people who are doing weird and wonderful things. It’s a case of finding them. So listening to your podcast is a great way to start because you don’t, we joked about this, I think you don’t focus on who’s top of the Barron’s list. (No!) It’s more case of who’s got really good ideas.
Kitces is obviously a fantastic resource. He’s really done that. He’s sought out the, I don’t wanna say weird and wonderful because that’s not doing them justice. There was a podcast a while back about a lady who runs a financial planning business, which is also a pie shop.
Keeping your eyes peeled for the small, but innovative, I think is a great way to get inspiration and those are the people I think we try to honor in the report. Exciting times and everyone can be a part of it.
Kate Holmes: They can. And again, if you’re in one of those situations in Option One where you’re realizing that you are that next generation, however old you are. But if you’re in a situation where the Founder is not willing to evolve, where you can tell the business is just going to dissolve, know that there are tons of these amazing people out there.
There are tons of innovative firms. And the other thing I have found, again, First Pacific Financial is a great example where they’re not out there telling everyone. And so, I actually want to share their story because they’re doing so much great stuff. And I want other people to know that firms like that exist.
So we see all the big firms, like you said, they’re the ones on stage. They’re the ones with the big booths at the conferences. But you’re so spot on, that does not mean they are the ones innovating. And in a lot of cases, they’re not, once you get that big, the bureaucracy is too much.
Closing
Matthew Jackson: Yeah. You, so you were saying, if you are in this situation, I believe there are communities you can join, which are in line with this mentality, including there’s something called the IA Community. I can’t remember who set it up, but it’s a really great resource, a really great place you can join, where you can speak with like-minded individuals, so definitely check it out.
Kate Holmes: The IA Community. Thank you so much for mentioning that. And that’s exactly what it is. It’s the Innovating Advice Community, full of all those forward-thinking people that are continually trying to evolve. And there are some incredible people in the community, and we also collaborate with people all over the world.
So we’ve got the largest global financial planning conference in the world coming up in a couple of weeks. So if you want to hear from lots of innovative people, come join that. And again, read this white paper. It’s so worth it. I’ve actually read it I think I’ve probably read it three or four times now.
I keep going back because even though I was part of it, there’s just so much great thinking, thought-provoking stuff in there, and I’m so excited to see in another, hopefully, five years that the report is actually just featuring a whole lot of Peak Two advisers. So Matthew, thank you for all of the work, I know it was a ton of effort to put this together and it was so worth it.
Matthew Jackson: Yeah, it was a real pleasure. And just to resonate at that point, joining community is a great thing. Cause it can feel very lonely when you’re going against the orthodoxies of an advice community, which doesn’t necessarily recognize that what you’re doing is important or even sensible.
So community is a great thing and there are people that can help. So keep it up, keep going.
Kate Holmes: Likewise. Thank you so much.
Matthew Jackson: Thanks for having me here.
