Loading summary
Transcript47 lines
- [00:00]
A
Welcome to ODD Strategy Showcase. I'm Fergus o' Carroll in Chicago. If you're in the London area in November, we're going to be at the Effie's gala, which I think is November 11, and interviewing people as they come off stage as the official podcast partner of the Effies. So I'm super excited about that. A lot of great work coming out of the UK this year. And after the Effie's gala, we're going to have a bunch of those brands on the show. So I'm super excited about that. We're also going to be doing a show in advance of the Effie's recording at Mother, but it's going to have an audience. We will record it and we'll air it as an episode in December. So you will get to hear it. It's a fantastic roundtable. If you listen to last week's show, you've heard all about it. We are then going to be in Chicago for planning's biggest Christmas party or holiday party ever. We did it last year at High Dive and all we do is we invite the whole planning community from all the agencies in Chicago and we watch all of the great holiday ads from this year from the and from the UK and we talk about them, we rate them. We have a bunch of fun. If you didn't go last year, do come out and join us this year. It is December 4th in the merchandise Mart and it's brought to you by High Dive and Cutter Studios is also a sponsor, a supporter of that event. Love to see you there. Tickets are available now on our website, on the homepage right under the Live Tour tab. So super excited about that. We're talking today about Persil now. I just discovered this afternoon, maybe I'm just dumb and I should have known this before, but people have been talking back and forth to me about personal work in the US and how it has nothing to do with Dirt Is Good, which is the platform in most all other parts of the world. And the reason, which I just found out today, is they're not owned by the same company. So Personal in the US Is owned by a different company. It has a completely different message. It's all about color protection. And you've probably seen their ads, you know, in various places here in the US but the work we're talking about today is the Dirt Is Good platform for Persil out of Unilever. Unilever owns this brand and it has different names around the world, so different markets have it under different names, except for the US it's got nothing to do with it, but in different markets it is still under a different brand name. But a lot of those markets still carry the Dirt is Good brand platform. So it's sort of become this enterprise wide in laundry detergent, enterprise wide brand platform for all of the various brand versions and brand names of this particular laundry detergent which we're talking about today is Persil. I've had them on the show before and loved the episode. I think it was like two or three years ago. Now. One of the things that's really interesting out of today's episode is the fact that Dirt is Good was slightly tweaked a little bit before the pandemic, during the time when Unilever wanted all of its brands to have purpose and they tweaked it to be Dirt is for Good. And so it had sort of a sustainability message, it had sort of an environmental message. And what's interesting now is we're hearing that the actual product performance features in terms of how the brand is perceived by consumers, the performance aspects of, of the brand lagged behind the message of sustainability. Because I think a lot of people don't necessarily. I think there's a trade off that people expect when a brand is skewed towards sustainability or ESG or whatever the platform might be, that there's some sort of a trade off with performance. And I think that might be a component that went into the brand tracker kind of showing a shift. So this work is now talking about Dirt is Good through the lens of performance. And so it's a great conversation. I really enjoy this. We're going to be talking about this through the context of their recent sports sponsorship with Arsenal women's football team. I love the conversation. It is Tati Lindenberg of Unilever and Rachel Stets of Mullen Low. Enjoy. This episode is brought to you by Tracksuit want always on brand metrics that deliver value to stakeholders. Tracksuit is a beautiful, affordable and always on brand tracking tool that helps consumer marketers and agencies answer the question is what we're doing working? A not so secret fact is that companies pay $100,000 or more for brand tracking, which is out of the question for many modern brands whose budgets are under pressure. Tracksuit provides enterprise level brand tracking without the big price tag. Their in house research experts do the heavy lifting using best in class pract to craft and launch your survey and get your results fast. Check them out@gotracksuit.com that's gotracksuit.com now back to the show. So once again, I have the pleasure of having Tati and Rachel on the show. For those of you who are regular listeners, you remember, I think it was a couple of years back, we did a show on Dirt is Good, and it was a phenomenal episode, because at the heart of all of this is taking a convention and a category and subverting it. And in this category, which you would assume is all about dirt and about cleanliness, should I say this is about actually embracing dirt. So in a category fixated on clean, it's about embracing dirt and Dirt is Good. So we're going to be talking about the subsequent phases of the campaign, because this thing has been going on, Tati, for quite some time. I mean, it's a platform that always has had massive legs and the ability to be stretched into different things. Tell us about where it started for you.
- [06:13]
B
So Dirt is good started 21 years ago, and it was created, as you pointed out, as a way to cut through in a category that was well known for celebrating cleaning. And we decided, Unilever decided that it was a moment to disrupt the laundry category by actually celebrating dirt and showing that dirt is something not to be avoided. It's something that you should embrace. And the idea has been evolving over the past 21 years. The core of Dirt is Good is sacred. So as we always say, we don't change it. It should be always Dirt is Good. However, the way that we express the idea of Dirt is Good has been evolving, going through eras throughout these 21 years.
- [07:06]
A
And I think the last time that we talked about it, what I loved about it and the way you and Rachel explained it, I'll go to Rachel for this. It was the idea that we, as parents, we tend to be overly protective because we were taught that way, that we needed kids to avoid even the things that we ourselves did as kids. And as a result of that, we've. This. This campaign was a refreshing reminder that we need to let kids be kids. Rachel?
- [07:37]
C
Yeah, I think the core of Dirt Is Good, you know, of course, started in that real. That parenting tension and how, you know, we view parenting and especially when we think about dirty kids, you know, how they might be perceived. And like you said, I think that this most recent iteration of the campaign still, as is still at the core of Dirt is Good in terms of, like, talking to kids and parents and that kind of thing, but also allowed us to have a much broader conversation and reach a broader audience beyond, you know, just the parenting and children, although that was very much part of the campaign, but it resonated with women and parents and, you know, adults of all kinds, because it was something that is a lived experience by many, not just, you know, parents and families. Which is what I think was exciting about it, is that it built on that foundation and expanded it.
- [08:28]
A
So, Tati, how would you describe this most recent phase? Because I think the last time we talked, which was just a couple of weeks ago, you articulated it really well about the phases of this campaign and the phases of the platform. Can you share briefly a little bit about that?
- [08:45]
B
Yeah, of course. So, as I've mentioned before, Dutch Is Good has been going. The expression of Dirt is Good has changed throughout the 21 years. And the moment that we change is basically impacted by both external and internal factors. So a couple of years back, when I started leading Dirt Is Good, at the beginning of 2020, we were initiating what I call the Dirt is for Good era. So internally, we had a purpose and a mission to make all of our products more sustainable. So that was the agenda that we have quite prominently at Unilever. And at the same time, it was the year of the pandemic. And it was also a moment in which society started looking at the planet in a different way. You might remember this was a moment that people saw, like dolphins, I believe, swimming in Venice. So there was a more, I have to say, much more awareness about climate change and the planet. So we started then showing that dirt is not only good, but it could be used when the act of getting dirty as a force for good. So this is when we've made this adaptation of Dirt is a force for good. And at that moment, it worked beautifully because we indeed made all of our products more sustainable, both packaging as well as formulation. And at the same time, people and society was prepared and wanted to hear that message. So that was the beautiful combination that we've managed or the matchmaking happened between internal and external context back in 2020. Nevertheless, of course, the world changed and changed rapidly. And we've noticed that internally, the brand started to be perceived as was softening a little bit.
- [10:41]
A
So what does that mean by. What do you mean by softening?
- [10:44]
B
What I mean is that when we. We always track the attributes of the brand, we track the brand power and the attributes. And while the. The. The brand power was largely stable, we've noticed that attributes of difference, which are usually associated to innovations, and at the same time, our shell's endorsement on performance led attributes and were either stable or declining. At the end, when we were bringing a message of a brand Being tougher on stains and kinder to the planet. Kinder to the planet. Being the more unique message made people start looking at the brand as a more sustainable, but somehow potentially not as good performing as they would expect from a top laundry brand. So when we've noticed, we realized that we needed to find a better balance and a balance in which we would remain sustainable as we are. So we didn't change that. But at the same time, from an expression point of view, we needed to find a way to make people appreciate that the brand was a top performance one. And by doing so, we, as we like to say, took the kids out of the forest and move them to the pitch or to the football ground. So it was the time really to find a way in which we could still celebrate that, still celebrate dirt is good, but do it in a context that would help us to land high performance. And at the same time in a context, as I said, always internal and external, but also in a context that we knew people would love and would engage with the brand. And what we saw is a rise in consumers, sports fandom, people actually being more active. So it was again a second match made in heaven between what we needed internally and how we need to position the brand. But also externally, what we saw design. Guest like changing into.
- [12:51]
A
I love that, Rachel, because there is that sort of sense sometimes that when you, that when you buy a brand that is highly sustainable or more natural ingredients, that there can be this sense of trade offs in terms of effectiveness of the product and how the product itself perform, whether it's taste in a certain product, whether it's performance in something else is what does that then cause you to do in terms of the expression of the brand? What follows that then?
- [13:22]
C
Yeah, I think as Tati mentioned, I feel like the shift that we made, you know, four or five years ago at this point was a necessary one at the time because of, as she mentioned, the heightened, you know, concerns about the planet and all of that kind of thing. I think the, when we saw this kind of change, you know, internally, we started to see some of the impact. The good thing about it is that the core of the brand and the core of the products have always been rooted in excellent performance. So it wasn't that difficult for us to kind of reinforce that what we needed to do and what was very smart in the kind of pivot to sports specifically is how do we make that culturally resonant for now, because we typically are a brand and a product that people trust and do consider to be high performance. But as Tati said, continuing to only message the sustainability kind of the message. The campaign wasn't going to be enough to take the brand forward. And indeed we have probably almost, I don't know, Tati, every five to seven years, the brand does a slight shift and pivot. And I have no doubt that we will be on this podcast in five more years talking about how we needed to make a shift again. But like, the thing that stays consistent is the point of view and dirt is good and why dirt is good in all of these contexts. And, and we continue to find it, even though every time the world changes, we kind of have a moment when it's like, wait, is dirt still good? I'm not sure. And every time we find a way to answer it. And that's like, what makes it fun, but also very rewarding and very profitable for the business as well.
- [14:59]
A
The other thing I noticed is that in. In what you guys sent to me, you mentioned that people are getting less dirty. What? Tell us what that means.
- [15:10]
B
Well, they are having different types of dirt. That's how I would respond to you. So, of course, thanks to urbanization, people are living different lifestyles. And as a consequence of dirt, you don't have people, for instance, or the types of dirt that you have nowadays are less so grass and mud, for instance, and more invisible dirt, as we call sweat or pollution and grease and oils, also because of the change in the way that people eat and the rise of fast food, as an example. So what we've noticed as well is the fact that dirt has been changing. And I must say that there are three guiding principles or trends for us in dirt is good machines and the evolution of washing machines. The second one, fabrics. So obviously we have way more synthetic fabrics nowadays than cotton. And for that reason, our formulations have to adapt. And obviously dirt, it always starts with dirt. So that's why for us, it's important that we see how dirt is changing. And you were right to say that people are less visibly dirt, but it does not mean that they don't get sweat or as I said, pollution nowadays. So that is the biggest shift that we have seen over the last 5ish years.
- [16:35]
A
Let's talk about this new work. So sports has become such a huge thing for so many brands. So I'm curious, why sports for Persil? Why women's sports? Do you want to start on that, Rachel?
- [16:50]
C
For a lot of reasons, the pivot into sport made a lot of sense. But also, and Tati will know this even better than me, dirt is Good has been in the sports space multiple times throughout the years. We've told different stories. So now we're really going into it in a big bet way with a big partner like Arsenal, but in a lot of ways has always been a part of the story and you can like pick it out in different markets of how we've, how we've told those stories. So for me, it's a natural, you know, evolution just told on a much larger scale.
- [17:20]
A
Scale. And so Tati, was this something that, like, was it a sponsorship in search of an idea or was it an idea in search of a sponsorship working with Arsenal, and in particular with the women's football team, it was an idea.
- [17:42]
B
In search of a partner or sponsorship. So we had the idea first. I hope Rachel agrees, by the way.
- [17:50]
C
So just I have a thought, but you keep going.
- [17:56]
B
No, we first, if I think before even going to this specific work with the Arsenal women's team, when we decided that we needed to reinforce performance for the brand and start telling stories and creating products that would be associated to sports, we started looking for partners. And I like to use partners, not sponsors, because the way that we are also working with these different athletes or clubs is pretty much on a partnership space. We go way above what is a usual sponsorship in terms of collaboration. So it's more collaboration than a transaction type of relationship. And more specifically, when it came to the idea of it's part of the game, or every stage should be part of the game, the idea could exist with or without Arsenal, or with or without a athlete, A or B. So that's why I like to say that it was an idea that we wanted to have more credibility. We wanted to co create with people who have delivered experience, experience behind the idea. So Rachel, for instance, plays football. So I like to say she's an athlete or an amateur athlete. I am not. But at the same time, we wanted to make sure that the idea should be told in a very credible way. So we needed people to co create the idea with us. And at the same time we would. We wanted. And it worked, but we wanted to have also athletes that could help amplify that idea and be a source of inspiration for the community that we wanted to engage with. So that's why it was an idea in search of a partnership.
- [19:51]
A
So how does it materialize for the agency? Rachel, what's the brief from Tati? And then what kind of ideas do you start sort of shaping?
- [20:00]
C
Yeah, I think.
- [20:02]
A
And how baked was it early on? I mean, was the partnership with Arsenal the Club, or was it with Arsenal, the women's soccer team?
- [20:14]
C
Yeah, I think it's interesting because what I was going to build on, what Tati was just saying is this, to me, again, feels kind of like a natural evolution in terms of. I feel like we'd had this cooking for a little while, because it was several years ago, I think it was in 2019, we had conducted a study that found that period blood, or blood in period blood, was the number one most frequent and tough, toughest stain across all of our markets. And we knew that this was a. A thing as dirt is good. If we're about, you know, stains and showing why they are good, and no stain should be a source of shame, we should be doing something about this. When we cracked the idea, it was not in partnership with Arsenal immediately. It was actually a really simple. A really simple, like, visual. Visual device where a lot of our team was looking at these pictures of. One of the things we talked about is that there's this double standard for blood in sport. So. And the way I talk about it is, like, if it's blood from your nose, you're brave, and if it's blood from your. From your uterus, it's. It's shameful because, yeah, it's like, that's. That's like the world that we live in. And so the guys. I remember this so clearly because we were. It was very difficult to land on the articulation that we landed on. We actually definitely got it wrong a few times as well. Like, we had a few iterations. We were like, it's just not hitting the right tone because it's really, really challenging to, like, not shame people and also the way that you show it and all of this kind of stuff. So the very neat way that the team cracked it initially was just by taking a picture of an athlete who had blood stained as a result of, like, a bloody nose or, you know, a cut or a scrape that they got, and just putting the outline of an underwear icon around the blood and then drawing a line where it said shame inside the underwear and brave outside of the underwear. And as soon as we saw it, we were like, oh, there's something here. And then it took. Even once we had that, it took us then even a little bit longer to get to the line. Originally, it was, every stain is part of the game. And then we realized that it should be. Every stain should be part of the game because blood was not, you know, period, blood was not, you know, considered a part of the game. So.
- [22:32]
A
So how so how do women. Because I'm. I'm the father of three daughters. And when. When you talk about the fact that women are avoiding being active or sport or physical education classes in school because of this. I totally have heard that.
- [22:47]
C
Yeah.
- [22:48]
A
For my girls, over time. The thing that I'm curious about is how do women feel about it? I mean, I'm assuming that they. Do they. Do they want it to. Do they want to be. Do they want to have a stain that they can not feel shameful about? Are they trying to still avoid the shame? Because I'm just curious about how they're feeling about this, the problem. How do they want to express it or do. Or they want it to be talked about? It's a fine line.
- [23:15]
C
Yeah, I think.
- [23:17]
A
I think maybe I'm wrong.
- [23:18]
C
No, no, no, it is. It is a very fine line. And also, to be honest, I don't know if there's a right or wrong answer to that, because I think women feel so many different types of way about these things. And we had extensive conversations within ourselves. We started working directly with a group of young girls, and we spoke to the Arsenal women about it as well. And I think that the tension around it actually is what made it, the partnership and collaboration so powerful. Because when we first spoke to the Arsenal women about it, they were like. It was. It was on a. In a slightly different campaign about period blood. What they said specifically was, why are you always. Why are you just coming to talk to us about, you know, period stains? Why are you coming to a women's team? It's like, oh, this is like a women's issue. Whatever. They're like, we play through all kinds of stains all the time, and, you know, like, no one talks to us about that. We are just as high performers as the men are. But then there was this huge gap between. So that was the lived experience of those athletes, right? Like, top performance athletes. They're like, this isn't that big of a deal. Like, why are you, you know, whatever. But we were like, but here's the thing. These young girls, first of all, don't even realize that that's how you feel because you're not talking about it. And a lot of girls are dropping out of sport as a result of it. So those were two different. You know, we had to hold those two different truths alongside of each other to get to this campaign.
- [24:46]
A
What do you think, Tati?
- [24:48]
B
Yeah. If I may build on, we wanted at the heart of Dirt Is Good, that is a sentiment of freedom. So Dirt Is Good started Of course, with this idea of the freedom to get dirty, as you mentioned, it was all about the overprotection of parents and how kids could be free to get dirty as they wished or to play. And what we, we use freedom as a sort of, as a way in which we, no matter what we do for the brand, it should be a guiding principle. And what we wanted with this campaign was not to say, well, you should or should not play when you have your period, is to give people freedom of choice. So to be honest, there is no shortage of campaigns and products aimed at helping women to feel more comfortable playing on their period, be it for instance period proof sportswear or underwear or even the shift, for instance of a white shorts to dark navy blue shorts. So that is a lot out there. And while to be honest, all of those innovations and campaigns are commendable, they do expose a much deeper issue. And the deeper issue here is that the burden of adaptation lies or falls on women. So it's the women's responsibility to manage to consist still want to hide their period. And what we wanted with this campaign is to have a shared conversation about inclusion and systemic change. So that's why the entire campaign is about freedom of choice. So if you prefer, as a woman who bleeds to play on your period, just do it. If you prefer to wear a period proof underwear, please do so. But if you wanted to play on your period and you are afraid of a leak, what we are offering as a solution or as part of the systemic change is not to say hide it, but it's to say it's part of the game. It might happen, but it can only happen if those girls and women, they know they would not be made fun of or they will not create headlines. We've heard this from some of the players who said, my concern is that if I have a period leak the following day, what I will read in the news is not that I scored a extraordinary goal, but is that I was playing on my period. So that's what we wanted with the campaign, is not to advocate like, oh, just play and show your period if you want to do it, but if you don't, that's also fine. What we just want is for this to be a conversation to make sure that when it happens, because it can happen even if you have a dark, if you are wearing dark shorts, even if you have a period proof underwear, we wanted to normalize it. And this normalization of period leaks is what the campaign is all about.
- [28:11]
A
The other side of this is this isn't a campaign only directed at girls and women. This needs to educate men. So is there an aspect of this, and have you thought about it from a target perspective, that this is a, that this is for women and men and that there needs to be programs even at a, at a school level to get young boys to understand that this, this should be normalized behavior, this is, this is normal and therefore should they should react normally?
- [28:46]
B
Yes, but it was even beyond a community outreach. So the first aspect of this is the idea that we envisioned. Rach and I created and produced this campaign and the majority of the team was made up by women, but we purposefully kept a representation of men because where while women could obviously including us, shared our lived experiences, we wanted to make sure that men could be part of it and could also help us to understand how to talk to everyone. So that was one aspect. It was important for us to choose to work, for instance, with male athletes. So we partner with Ian Wright, who has a podcast in which he nurtures and incentivize women's football. But we want Ian to speak about the campaign also because a large audience of Ian's podcast is basically men and we want men to hear about the campaign as much as women. And at the same time, as you've mentioned, we also had a program in partnership with Arsenal in the community to educate boys and girls about period and period sts. So in other words, what I'm trying to say is that there was an aspect of education, there was an aspect about the crafting of the campaign, and there was also an aspect about media choices. This is not a campaign only by women to women, is a campaign by mostly women, with some men to everyone. Because the systemic change that I've mentioned before about, let's make sure that boys will not make fun of women or let's ensure that journalists are not going to make appearance. Staying a headline can only happen if they also. If the campaign also reaches them.
- [30:46]
A
So listen, we have just a couple of, a couple of minutes left and I wanted to touch on impact and I'm just curious, Tati, are there other business impacts or brand impacts that you've seen so far?
- [30:58]
B
Our even earned reach after two and a half months, I think it was 240 million. So it was really out of control.
- [31:10]
A
Wonderful. And was this an international campaign or was it only in the UK?
- [31:13]
B
It was a UK campaign which was then well, reached more than 30 countries. But organically we haven't done anything. It was just like really people sharing the campaign, talking about the campaign, both people as well as like news or journalists, we could see influencers. So people really started talking about the campaign and the impact to the brand. We will know more in a couple of weeks when we have our admissible brand superiority scores, which looks at brand power, penetration and other measurements. But what we saw is the sentiment of the campaign is extremely positive. I also love the fact, and Rachel can comment more about it, that even when there was one negative comment about the campaign, Rachel can explain more. We could see how the community manage that poor human being who decided to say anything bad about the campaign.
- [32:18]
A
Because I love that that happens an awful lot. This, this sort of self policing of this communities. It's really great and, but in this.
- [32:26]
B
Case it was extraordinary and it showed how much like how, how much engagement the campaign has created. So I cannot yet confirm the impact on the brand in terms of brand power, brand meaningfulness, which were the metrics that we wanted to increase. But we can see that at least in terms of rich talkability and engagement, we've never reached that in any other campaign with much higher investment than what we had on this one.
- [32:58]
A
So before I, before I go to, to, to Rachel on that, I did have one thing I wanted to touch on. I loved the original Dirt is Good and the simple thought that we should embrace that dirt is not the enemy, right, as you guys have talked about. And that idea that the relationship with the child can be much richer, that it's that being out in the world and exploring, et cetera, et cetera, is a powerful way to sort of transform and to build a character in a child rather than the alternative. Is that a territory that you've left or is that a territory that you might return to? Because it seems again, so timely and it's such a rich territory emotionally.
- [33:42]
B
Yes, I will have a go. But Rachel, please build on this is potentially one of our next big thing and a shameless reason for you to invite us to speak again. But on a serious note, for sure, yeah, no, on a serious note, you might have watched adolescence and the Netflix series is one example out of many in which you can see the horrible, I have to say, consequences of a generation that has been attached to screens. And what we've noticed, unfortunately, is that there is a behavior in which parents still over protect their children when it comes to being outside. So even though Dirt is good exists for 20 years and we can see a shift in society and a much larger acceptance of the idea of getting dirty, there is still a overprotection outside. You still see, for instance, parents when they are in playgrounds saying, oh, no, please don't go there. Don't do this. There is beyond just the idea of getting dirty, but even a physical protection of children. Conversely, when you go to indoors, what you noticed is that parents tend to not protect children when they are in front of screens. We have a lot of research. We have access to a lot of research showing that usually parents feel safe. Oh, at least he or she is home. At least they're just checking a screen. And then this idea of the protection inside and outside and how much the whole idea of getting dirty and being stuck in something outside can actually help building resilience and even improve mental health compared to the opposite, which is just staying indoors, attached to screens is something that we see as also a big potential for the brand to tap into.
- [35:50]
A
I'm not sure parents want to hear more about screen time. I mean, they get that. I think it's almost like, okay, this. The beautiful part of that. That campaign was the emotional part of. Because that's how we all grew up. And most parents are now, like, how do I give my child? Yeah, some of the aspects of what I grew up with, the good parts of it, that.
- [36:10]
C
That was one of the things we. I said, like, it's killing me because it's like one of the things we have talked to people about is like, talking to parents about how do they remember their childhood and what did they, you know, what do they feel about it? And then when you ask them kind of the same thing about their children, there's a certain level of, like, you know, nostalgia. But also. Yeah, they want them to have these experiences and these and these, like, just sheer joy of, like, being a child and being outside. And that is a really challenging. You know, again, actually another fine line to walk, like you said, with the screen time and not shaming parents and that kind of thing. So it's kind of like a stick that I feel like some parents get beat with. But, yeah, it's absolutely. It's absolutely something that we're. We're thinking about. Tati, go ahead.
- [36:56]
B
No, I would just build on saying that we, whenever we bring this to life, as Rachel said, we are cooking a few things. We will again make sure that we use freedom as a principle. The same aspect of play, however you feel comfortable. We obviously don't want to say what is right or wrong, but there are benefits, physical, physiological and mental benefits on being outside and playing freely. So there is a lot in that space.
- [37:31]
A
There is a block away from my house here in Chicago. A kid built at the base of this enormous tree in his front yard. And, you know, a huge tree where the roots are so large they're even above the surface, one of these trees. And he built a tiny little town of toy figures and toy homes and a little village out of these beautiful little buildings that he got somewhere. And for many days I would see him out there in the front yard building this little town. And every day when I take my dog for a walk, I always walk by that house. And when I see it, it's amazing sight because there's an innocence and a joy in that. That really brings me back to that early part of Dirt Is Good, the joy that he's having and the joy as a parent looking at somebody who's taken the time to create that. So it's pretty amazing. It is. Tati Lindenberg, chief brand officer for Dirt Is Good at Persil, in Persil is the brand name. I think a lot of people becoming a lot more familiar with it here in the US and just she is at Unilever in London. And it's Rachel Staats, global strategy director for a Mullen Low group in London. Brilliant, ongoing, brilliant work. And I'm super excited to know what comes next. I'm going to be hassling you guys. So thank you all. Thank you both for your time and really appreciate you guys coming back on again. Terrific stuff.
- [39:01]
C
Thank you.
- [39:02]
B
Thank you.
- [39:03]
A
And we will see everybody on the next episode.