Loading summary
Transcript69 lines
- [00:00]
A
Welcome back to OnStrategy Showcase. I'm Fergus O' Carroll in Chicago and I'm actually recording the intro to this episode before I go to Cannes and the episode's going to drop the week after Cannes, so hopefully I survived it and hopefully a lot of great work got awarded and hopefully we actually got great turnout for our FE roundtables which I'm going to be doing at Cannes. This is my first visit to Cannes, by the way, so I'm kind of like unsure how it's all going to work out. So hopefully it went well. A couple of things I want to mention. Number one, in terms of upcoming episodes, we've got our next on the Spot episode. We just recorded it earlier this week prior to Ken with Chris Gallery of Mother in London and Nick Hurst of Adam and Eve London. In that episode we talk about Heinz and the New York Times on the spot, for those of you who don't know, is where planners talk about brands they've never worked on. And so it's a fun, more casual approach and loved the conversation with Chris. And so that's coming up soon. We're also doing our next episode in the Planning for Effectiveness Outcomes series, Effective Outcomes series that we're partnering with the EFFIES on. The next one will be episode number four and so that's going to be upcoming. We also had a great conversation recently with NPR's Chief Marketing Officer and Mischief's EVP of Strategy Ed Gunn about the new NPR campaign and I love that. Well worth the listen to that episode. We've also got an episode coming up on Paddy Powers who for years have done brilliant work and I'm really excited to talk with the folks in Dublin about the Paddy Powers works that's going to be upcoming. Also in terms of live shows, we just got back from Carmichael lynch in Minneapolis. We are planning a it's going to be in an invitation only roundtable though in Chicago at the BBDO in July. That's coming up. But then the next live show with a broad audience is going to be in September at GSDNM. So we're gonna be in Austin at GSD&M September 10th. So if you are around, there'll be more information coming up about that shortly. Since I know that Martin Weigel episodes on my show are always very popular, I did wanna mention something that I think will be of interest to strategists around. Of course, Martin's book is one of them. But the one that I wanted to mention today is the fact that we are planning to undertake what we would say is the world's largest study of strategists in our industry. Like many of you and I hear from a lot of people about this, we're sort of burned out about hearing about commentary on how strategists feel from studies that maybe had a very, very small sample. And it's dangerous to take direction from sorts of things. So we're going to try to create a robust global snapshot. Actually, it's not going to be a snapshot. It's going to be a deeper inside look into what's happening in the minds of strategists around the world. We want to make it an annual study, and then we will share the results of that with everybody once we get it gathered. We're in the early stages of figuring this out, but this show is the voice of strategists worldwide. And so I think what we want to do, we've been trying to take the show and the live show global, and we've been making brilliant progress in that area. But I also want to capture the voices of strategists, the opinions of strategists, and how we can help each other in meaningful ways as a practice area in the industry. And strategists in the broader term, not just strategists and comms, but strategists in the broader term. So look for more information to come out about that soon. We're trying to figure out exactly how we're going to deploy it. It's going to be hard work to get everybody to participate because, you know, sampling and finding people is always tough. But we're going to make it happen and we're going to make it an annual event. And maybe next year at Cannes, we'll roll out the results or at some FE event, we'll roll out the results and make it meaningful. Speaking of the broader definition of strategy, I'm really thrilled to have Martin Weigel with me today as my guest. Martin has been on the show a number of times. His episodes are always among the top episodes on if you don't know Martin, he is very well known as the Chief Strategy Officer Widening Kennedy Amsterdam. He's been the Chief Strategy Officer at AMV bbdo. He's worked at many major agencies. He's an extraordinary intellect and voice in this industry. In the last couple of years, you'll know him from his presentation at Cannes with others like Rob Campbell and Paula Bloodworth for a couple of I'm not sure if Martin did a couple of those presentations, but he was there at the last one. And those things are like hotcakes, man. Those decks and those presentations, everybody wants to get their hands on them. So he has written a book. It is called Strategy is a Verb. And if you're on YouTube watching the show, you can see I'm holding up the book here. It's Strategy is a Verb. Notes from the front line. Martin Weigel. Now, Weigel is spelled W E I G E L W E I G E L pronounced Veigel. And you can get the book on Amazon anywhere, globally. Also, what's really interesting about this book, Martin is typically a long form writer and if you've read his stuff, you know that to be the case. But this book is not long form. He has taken a different approach where most of these chapters are just three to four pages long and the book itself is roughly 200 pages. So it is sort of a different filter for the way that he thinks. And it's really interesting when you get into the book, it's extraordinary. So if you do, however, want to read some of his long form work, you can check out martinweigle.org, martinweigle with a w.org and when you get to his site, not only is there information about the book, but also in the archive tab on the right hand side of that website, you can click that archive tab and see all of his. Well, there's a lot of his. I don't know if it's everything he's written, but there's an archive of his long form writing and I've read a ton of that stuff and I hope that you guys will too. So I think I've covered everything I needed to touch on. Martin now has his own consulting firm. I hope I'm pronouncing this right. M dub. It's spelled E M D U B E M D U B. You can connect with Martin on LinkedIn and I guess you there's probably a way to connect with him on the other site, martinweigle.org so this is a conversation we recorded last week. You may hear birds chirping in the background and Martin was in this idyllic location and I was in Chicago. So the bird sounds were not coming from my microphone, they were coming from his. And it sort of adds a little bit of context. I hope my editor doesn't actually take the bird sounds out, which may have happened. You never know. But here's our good friend and an inspiration to us strategists. This is my conversation with Martin Weigl. Enjoy. So Martin Weigel is here Martin Weigl's episode. And we've done a couple of different conversations. Martin, over the last couple of years. Your episode where you and I were just ranting and raving like we're going to do today, is the most popular episode on this show, and we have done over 300 episodes. You believe that shit?
- [08:13]
B
I didn't know that.
- [08:14]
A
Yeah, yeah. I checked it out this morning. It is the most popular show. So needless to say, I'm excited that we're doing this again. Welcome back, my friend. Good to see you.
- [08:24]
B
It's good to see you.
- [08:26]
A
You look better than me, but then again, you've always looked better than me. But, you know, you have that tanned look. So people who are watching this on YouTube can get a sense of what I mean. All right. We are here to talk about your new book, and I'm excited about it. I can imagine it was a torturous process. That's my lens on things, because I struggle with writing emails or memos or decks. But when you have to write a substantive book and reflect on it and have it be something that you can be proud of, I can't imagine it can be something that keeps you up night after night. I mean, how was it to write it?
- [09:08]
B
I think it took me about a year to get to a raw manuscript.
- [09:13]
A
Unbelievable.
- [09:14]
B
About 60,000 words, and some of it is based on previous writings, and quite a lot of it is entirely new material.
- [09:27]
A
Give us two minutes on what you want people to note and know about this book and why it should be read.
- [09:39]
B
The book is an argument for strategy as a way of thinking. Strategy is a way of orientating your self in the world, and it's about understanding that you have agency in the world should you choose to exercise it. And as strategists, we should all be in the business of exercising agency. I think it's a call to arms. I know that sounds grandiose and like I'm delivering some sermon on the mouse, which I'm not. I think the strategy has got small. Not just in ad land or marketing. It seems to be in thin supply in all walks of life. It's got small. This is about making. I want people to understand the strategy is, by its nature, an ambitious undertaking. By its nature. Strategy is ambitious because it's about a better tomorrow. It's a hopeful discipline because it says we can make tomorrow better, more desirable, more valuable, more sustainable. We just have to want to do the work and think like strategists, not administrators or bureaucrats or fluffers. We're people of action. We're men and women of action. Be ambitious. Build a better tomorrow, do the fucking hard, hard work and claim your agency and maybe just put the PowerPoint away. Who said a little less talk and a bit more action?
- [11:19]
A
The thing that strikes me about the book is the further you get into it, the deeper you get involved in it. And that's a compliment. I think that. And as I read through it, I was kind of reminded about the debate that so many of us have in planning, which is the right way to do things. There's one argument that says that there is no right way to do things. Number two, there's a sort of a call within this book, I think, or implication, that there's at least a better way to do it than how it's being done today. And that if we're not careful, the work, and these are my words, if we're not careful, the work and the quality of the work will continue to decline. Because I think it has been in decline for many years and I think there's a lot of empirical data that supports that. But is this partly you sort of raising a concern about how we're doing
- [12:23]
B
things now in that process of professional and personal soul searching that made its way onto the pages? Part of that, to begin to answer your question, was a dissatisfaction with the conversation around strategy.
- [12:39]
A
Yeah.
- [12:40]
B
Speaking candidly, I think clients are being underserved by strategists and thus consumers are eventually being underserved. Given that everybody is a broadcaster, the quality of advice around the practice of strategy is largely risible.
- [13:00]
A
We've forgotten what strategy is. I think that it's become such an overly used term. Just like others we'll talk about today, such as insight, it's lost its meaning. I mean, in conversations that I have with brands, with clients, with people who are strategists, the toughest question to ask a strategist is, what was your strategy? It becomes a conversation rather than anything succinct, which is dangerous, because I think strategy is. Strategy does have a definition. It's not complicated, but it has sort of lost its power. And I think that's because it's sort of losing its value in many ways.
- [13:43]
B
Yeah, I mean, I think you make a good point. Articulating what your strategy was shouldn't require five minutes of rambling. It's a sentence.
- [13:54]
A
Yes,
- [13:57]
B
you can provide color and texture and rationale and elaborate on the process that got you there, but the strategy itself, I'd argue if you can't articulate that in A sentence. One, you don't have a strategy, and two, you probably don't know what your job is, you know, because it's alarming how at least in advertising agencies, so few strategists are even capable of articulating what a strategist is.
- [14:28]
A
I wanted to start off on, and we'll just bop around. So I want to start off with chapter 56, which is struggle Now.
- [14:35]
B
Oh, interesting, right?
- [14:37]
A
Because this one struck me because there's a couple of different dimensions to it. You mentioned in this first, in this chapter, the circumstances in which you wrote the book. And I think in doing that, it sort of reflected on this idea of fast versus slow way of working. Not in a Daniel Kahneman sort of way, but more in the fact that maybe within the culture of planning today, everything is expected to be faster, everything is expected to be delivered. And God knows how we got into that, but we're in it. But that is not the place where great strategy emerges versus for long term, durable strategy. Tell us what you mean in this chapter when we talk about without struggle, our work is predictable.
- [15:26]
B
The struggle is necessary because I think it's only by having gone through the bad versions or the suboptimal versions of a sentence or a chapter or a thesis. Only by going through the suboptimal versions can you really understand why the right or better version is right and better. You need to go through that grind. It's not just enough to get to the right one, because the rightness of it is. Is only illuminated when you've consciously gone through all the other ways you could have done it and understood and been clear why you had rejected them. So wrongness, for me, illustrates and illuminates the rightness. And I don't think that's a. I don't think that's an indulgence. It's necessary because at some point, inevitably your strategy will be queried, critiqued, challenged, and all of that is right and good. But if you haven't gone through the hard yards of the struggle, you're going to be much less well equipped to represent that strategy. Be an advocate of the strategy. Articulate clearly why that version of the strategy is more fit for purpose than the myriad of other versions and alternate routes you could have.
- [17:08]
A
If there's an expectation that I have to deliver a strategy in 24 hours or 48 hours versus if I have two weeks, I can't think of an example of where in the early stages of strategy development there's this tendency to have this outpouring of Potential directions that you could go with, and they all seem extraordinarily exciting at the time. And you capture them on paper or however you capture them with a group of people. I can't remember a time in my career where then having time to continue the process of interrogating assumptions and exploring audiences, et cetera. I can't think of a time when I ever went back to that day one and said, oh, that day one was the right one. So the danger is that we are having the clock stop at 48 hours and then we're going to market with that as a strategy and not realizing that if we did invest our time doing other things or having more time to do that thing, that we ultimately would look back on those early ideas and go, they were never the right one to begin with. So we've made a mistake by going to market too fast with it. It's not to say that there isn't great strategies that are born in 24 hours that aren't great. There are outliers, absolutely. But there's no doubt that time to reflect, time to shape, time to debate, time to explore makes for better strategy.
- [18:43]
B
I mean, there's nothing worse when you're representing a strategy than somebody asking, have you thought about doing it slightly differently? Or have you thought about. And having to answer, no, you know, dude, it's the first idea we came up with and we're against the clock. So here it is. It doesn't make for a great, great conversation if you're able to say, we did, and here's why. It's flawed or not fit for purpose or doesn't map well to the needs of the audience or the org. Yeah, we did, but this one, and here's why they're suboptimal, and this is what this one does that the others are much more persuasive. Conversation to Find your Find Yourself and you have. You have. I think the struggle, as I wrote the struggle is the craft. And as I said, I'm not asking for sort of the strategic process to be treated like an indulgence and not be cognizant of commercial pressures and timelines and all the rest of it. But if you're. I begin to wonder whether, if it. If you're banging out strategies and find them easy, I wonder how good they are. I mean, there are outliers, and I've. I've been privileged to be in a couple of occasions where we knocked out a strategy in a day and won the pitch in the week, but they're outliers they're educators.
- [20:22]
A
And I suppose it's important to delineate between the various types of strategy. I mean, if we're talking at a level of trying to build a platform for a brand, that is not something that is typically pushed out in 24 hours or 48 hours, but sometimes it is from a new business perspective. And that's the level we're talking about executing off of an existing strategy. We can do fast, right? We should be able to do that
- [20:45]
B
quick, should be able to do it
- [20:46]
A
fast, should be able to do it quick. But it's getting to that higher level and then feeling that we're under pressure to deliver against that. It's just recognizing that we. Why are we, in my mind at least, why are we constantly going faster? Why are we feeling that pressure to deliver so quick? And a lot of people come on this show will answer by saying that's a client side issue or it's the speed of culture. Why are we trying to keep up with culture? I don't know why we're fucking trying to keep up with the speed of culture. We're supposed to be defining ourselves and our place in it, not keeping up with it and changing constantly. So I don't buy that. I think that we as an industry, as a client side too, we've gotten so used to fast that we're accepting that's the norm. But I don't agree with that.
- [21:38]
B
I wonder whether now, having escaped the cloisters of Adland, whether that's a particularly Adland client relationship affliction.
- [21:51]
A
Just another chapter I wanted to touch on is chapter 11, which is imagine. You talk about it in terms of the ability to see things that do not yet exist, that could exist, and work out how they might exist is central to strategy. It's imagining that. And it's the idea of working backwards from an imagined future.
- [22:12]
B
Working forwards from what you have, what you know. What you know to be feasible, or at least what you believe to be feasible, I'd argue dooms you to incrementalism and solving small problems. And I'm not. There are times when small problems are important problems, but that's not strategy. Strategy is we want tomorrow to look different from today. If A is the present and B is the future, I don't think you start with A. That's the argument that Roger Martin makes. Because if you start with where you are, there are going to be a whole host of reasons why you can't get to B. We don't have that skills. We don't have the right investment, we don't have the right people, our brand has the wrong reputation, nobody knows us. There'll be so many reasons why you can't get to B. But if you start with B, go, do you want to live in the B world? Yeah, it sounds exciting. It's sustainable. It creates value for businesses and human beings. Is it differentiating, exciting, necessary? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Great. So what, as Roger Martin argues, what would have to be true today to make that happen? Well, we need to open a new factory in China and the list goes. And if you start with A, you'll be constrained by what you don't know, don't have, haven't explored.
- [23:47]
A
And that's the imagination, right? It's understanding where that imagined, where that end game is. And now there's a journey we have to go on.
- [23:54]
B
Yes. So that's why I would argue that strategy is. It is time travel. You travel to a more desirable future and work out how to bring that back into the press. I tell the story in the book of the Apollo program when JFK announced that we will put a man on the moon. The technology to accomplish that did not exist. Didn't exist. They didn't know how to do it. They didn't know how to get a human being safely to the moon, land on the moon, have a bit of a wander on the moon, come back to the moon and communicate with Earth. All of that. Have meals, be able to breathe and not die. None of that existed. That's why it took 40,000 engineers and scientists to work out. Oh, shit, okay, well, what will we need? What would need a completely different navigation system and way of communicating with command and blah, blah, blah, the list goes on. And they had to invent those technologies. If they'd worked, if they started with where they were, they wouldn't have landed a man on the moon. Because we're going, well, we don't have the technology.
- [25:10]
A
And the problem that I. The other challenge that I have with it, I'm interested in your thoughts on this too, is as an industry, we tend to be sitting around on the where we are and just trying to reframe where we are because we're thinking about it solely in the context of comms. And this is where people like you and people like Tom Morton and Johnny Bauer, others in the industry, are trying to encourage us to get to, which is to get beyond comms, get beyond just thinking about how we're representing what we are and start thinking about what we want to be. And B, how are we going to connect these dots? How are we going to imagine that future? How are we going to get organizational buy in? Because the strategic implications are not just in the area of comms. They're organizational strategy, they're people strategy, they're product strategy, distribution strategy, there's physical infrastructure, et cetera. That's this super exciting space that everybody, even in our industry of comms wants to be a part of, but it seems out of reach. You say much of our strategic craft has become a zero consumer exposure undertaken. Yeah, undertaking.
- [26:27]
B
I was reflecting before we started talking why it, why it matters. Making, actually making contact with customers, or let's call them people, actual contacts and not reading about them in research reports. Not simply applying say synthetic research to your strategy. Because you go, there are all these new tools that make the research process more efficient. I'm not going to say better, but this is going to make it more efficient. Why does it matter so much to have that contact? Because it's a shag. Right back to our time conversation earlier. Why does that matter? Again, we've got reams of research and real time data that gives us the granularity of understanding or at least knowledge about people's habits, preferences. Actually why the fuck do we need to go and meet them? Yeah, I think it's really, really hard to feel that you have a responsibility towards consumers if you haven't met them. These people deserve great products. These people deserve to be able to find our products easily enjoy experiencing that. They deserve, if we're going to insist on interrupting their time to be served with stuff that is intelligent and, or entertaining or both. And I say responsibility because the purpose of marketing is to serve the customer. All else flows from that revenue, profit, stock price. But none of that happened. The point of marketing is to serve the needs, wants and aspirations of people. And I think that's really hard to do if you aren't driven by a sense of responsibility towards if they're just the data point. I think it was Bob Hoffman who said something along the lines of extrapolating from your own experience is fucking narcissism.
- [28:52]
A
I'm really interested in getting your point of view on how we use AI, should use AI, can use AI because this is one of the positive sides of AI. And I'm hearing this increasingly recently from folks who are now beginning to have a sense of what form AI is going to come in, that we might in a way that we might in actuality have to use it versus what we thought of might might have been. I think, I think the industry, many in the industry are starting to realize that AI can free them up to do the things they really want to be doing or really should be doing. So it's not replacing you, it's actually becoming a liberating force in many ways.
- [29:36]
B
I mean, that reflects my own personal experience too.
- [29:41]
A
I can stay away from the drudgery now and I can focus on the higher level work.
- [29:47]
B
I now have an I. I have built myself a planning department.
- [29:52]
A
You're just so. In case people aren't picking up on this, you're talking about. You've been, you've built yourself a sort of an agentic planning department using a large language model.
- [30:01]
B
Yeah. Now I've. I spent the last couple of months just building a whole end to end workflow around my strategic practice just to accelerate the craft. There's an army of one. I can deliver what a team of planners can do, but I can probably do it faster than they ever. Faster than they ever did it, leaving me to do, at least for now, the bits I enjoy the bits I'm good at the bits that benefit from. From human judgment. Yeah.
- [30:42]
A
You know, there's a great, there's a great test and a great line that Les Benat had a couple of weeks ago. He was on a webinar that I was watching and I've rolled this line out at a number of our live shows around the country and given less credit as I'm doing right here. But he said during this conversation that AI helps you lift the floor, it doesn't raise the ceiling.
- [31:07]
B
Oh, that's an interesting way of putting it.
- [31:09]
A
Yeah, isn't it? It's a great way of thinking about it.
- [31:12]
B
I probably push Les's thought further. It can make good strategists even better. Yes. But it won't make shit strategists good. So it might make shit creatives and shit strategists deliver shit faster, but it won't turn them into sort of the Lionel Messes of strategy and creativity.
- [31:39]
A
I want to come back to one of our favorite topics to discuss because we both feel pretty passionate about this. Now, you're a mild mannered gentleman, but I also know that you're a fiery son of a bitch when it comes to. So this is one of those things. And you talk about it in chapter 14, which is titled Understand. It's your disdain for the. And mine for the term insight. I don't think either one of us are saying that insight is not a possibility. There are brilliant campaigns that are developed off of genuine insight. But they're rare. And we've kind of set a bar where that's our deliverable as a practice area within strategy. And I think we're handicapping ourselves significantly. What is the point that you want to make about sort of your disdain for the term insight in this chapter?
- [32:33]
B
I think it might have been that chapter where my editor wrote back and said, do you need to say fuck quite that much?
- [32:44]
A
I hear you.
- [32:44]
B
There was a time when marketers didn't use the word insight at all. And you know what? Some of those juggernaut household brands that are in people's everyday lives, you know, like Coca Cola, McDonald's, FedEx, were built on decades without ever using that word. I went back on 30 years in Avatar. I don't know if I know. I don't think I had an insight that satisfied the standards and demands of the insight.
- [33:22]
A
Insight is. Yeah. Which is amazing for somebody of your caliber to say. It's bizarre. And I find that very common for people who come on this show. The best people that come on this show rarely use the term insight. And when they're expressing the essence of their work, it's reflected off of what appears to be a genuine understanding of their audience, how they tell stories. It's not about. And our insight was when I.
- [33:53]
B
When I, in the first agency I've worked in, back in the 1800s, the. The brief said, who's our audience and what do we know about them? The problem with the problem that drives me wild is the insight has become, in many quarters, an end in itself. You know, oh, that's not an insight. This is an insight. You know, when the real question is, is it useful? You just need something useful, you know, I think you've spoken to my former colleagues at Wieden on Old Spice.
- [34:32]
A
Yes.
- [34:33]
B
What was the insight? Was shopper data that the primary purchaser was a woman? Oh, you know, insight police. Where's the tension? Where's the, you know, intellectual edifice that you build around that? No, but. But that was really useful. It was directly informing of the work.
- [34:53]
A
Yeah.
- [34:54]
B
So creators go, oh, so we're not talking to men, then? We're talking to the people who do the buying, what are influenced to do the buy. Completely changes everything. Really, really useful. Thank you very, very much. You know, I don't think there was any penetrating insight into the state of, you know, the state of contemporary masculinity, blah, blah, blah.
- [35:23]
A
Yeah. And the other thing for me is I think that. I think that the danger is that if we make that the deliverable of the strategist. The strategist who may come up with some wonderful observations such as that data point will assume in their own mind that that's not good enough for them to share, that they need to go further. And in trying to find an insight they end up being off strategy because they move the goalposts in order for it to fit the insight. And we've talked about this before, that to me is not only dangerous, it's irresponsible. And if we're there to do effective work, it's highly irresponsible to do that just because you think your deliverable is a so called insight.
- [36:11]
B
Positioning the insight as the planner's primary output is very convenient for those who want to domesticate and declaw the strategist and keep him or her at arm's length from creative execution shows the insight and off not have a point of view on how this brand shows up all its promises, blah blah, blah, blah blah. Just come with an insight and leave us alone. And I think that insight as the strategist core deliverable is toxic.
- [36:54]
A
And the other thing that I think we can, we can both agree on is I'm trying to think, I mean many people have referred to this term, but it's better to be interesting than right version of that, which is so true. And I think I felt during my career I sort of fell into this trap is I wanted to create a strategy that was impenetrably right. I wanted it to be fully supportive. And many times, and I had convinced myself it was absolutely right and then I would share it and socialize it internally at the agency and it just fell fucking flat. And then my idealistic Irishman Fire and blood came out right. And I'm like, what the fuck? This is absolutely right. It's absolutely. But the problem was it just wasn't interesting, it wouldn't be creatively compelling and therefore it would lead to very practical communication. Therefore I wasn't fully getting the fact that it needed to be more than just right.
- [38:06]
B
I think it was Stephen Bungay, the author of Art of Action. I think I've cited it in the book, talked about it's not enough to get people to understand your strategy. I think he said understanding gets compliance, but only belief gets commitment or words to that effect. Because the enactment of the strategy by the total business will only happen if people can believe in it.
- [38:45]
A
It is Martin Weigel and Weigl is spelt because you're going to need the proper spelling when you go to Amazon to buy the book. It's W E I G E L Martin Weigel. His book is Strategy Is A Verb. Notes from the front line. And you've been on the front line, man. You've been at the best agencies in the world, working on many of the best brands in the world. Where can people buy the book? And here it is, if all of
- [39:14]
B
them, increasingly all good bookshops, Amazon, Kindle and Prints, Waterstones, Foils. I think Barnes and Noble comes on stream soon, so.
- [39:30]
A
So we can get it on Amazon here in the US now?
- [39:33]
B
Yes, exactly. No, it's Amazon globally pretty much.
- [39:36]
A
Brilliant now.
- [39:37]
B
So there are no excuses.
- [39:38]
A
Brilliant to see you, Martin. Thank you.
- [39:40]
B
Lovely to see you, my friend.
- [39:41]
A
Spending.
- [39:42]
B
Thank you for having me.
- [39:43]
A
My pleasure. And we will see everyone on the next episode.