← Pod Force One
Pod Force One
Wall Street’s top cop Paul Atkins reveals how he cracked down on Biden’s corporate DEI rules and why he's shaking up crypto.
00:44:31
Loading summary
Transcript63 lines
- [00:01]
A
Welcome to the Pod Force One podcast. I'm Miranda Devine. Today we're joined by chairman of the securities and Exchange Commission, Paul Atkins. Chairman Paul Atkins, thank you very much for joining podforce One.
- [00:15]
B
Well, thank you very much, Miranda. Happy to be here.
- [00:17]
A
I guess people don't, you know, the average person wouldn't really know what the securities and Exchange Commission does. I think of you or have thought of you, and pardon my ignorance, but as sort of the cop on the beat of the market. So. And is that fair?
- [00:33]
B
Yes, that's it. But also we're here to try to make sure that the markets are also operating properly, that they're fluid, and that people can come in and undertake their capital formation to raise money for their companies. Because, after all, that's the essential reason why we have capital markets for investors to meet public companies and then be able to. To trade their investments. So that's essentially it. But if I think back to the 1990s, one time I was going through at the airport the security check and I had a bag that had SEC on it, and one of the people said, oh, maybe you can get me a ticket. And I said, I don't think you want the ticket that I can give you. So they were looking for a football or basketball ticket rather than whatever ticket we can give anyway. But I think now there are a lot more people understand what the securities and Exchange Commission is and does just from the recent market issues and whatnot.
- [01:48]
A
So that's good, particularly just to interrupt you. I mean, I think the way the SEC has become quite famous in the news lately has been for all the wrong reasons under your predecessor, Gary Gensler. And I mean, he had a beef against Elon Musk and Twitter. And if, if I can ask you to weigh in on that lawsuit that the SEC brought against Elon Musk, it seemed like harassment. I think also the FTC was doing that and, you know, the, the story was that the Biden, Joe Biden, had instructed all the federal agencies to go after Elon Musk and try to destroy him, which obviously should not be the role of government. But do you have any thoughts on what happened to Elon Musk?
- [02:41]
B
Well, I can't really comment on any particular issue because some things are still going on. But suffice it to say that I think that is one problem of the SEC over the last several years, that instead of confronting issues through rulemaking and changing rules, antiquated rules that are a lot basically the same as from the 40s, 50s and 60s, to embrace innovation and then to try to bring people, help people get into compliance. And so there was too much regulation through enforcement. And that was basically where instead of again changing the rules to suit the new situation, the SEC used its enforcement, basically lawyers going around to investigate and sue people for not complying with rules that they couldn't readily comply with. With. I'm not talking about any particular company or Mr. Musk or anything like that, but in the crypto area, let's say in that area was a prime example of how I think the SEC stood athwart the innovative technologies and the development of those in the United States and didn't forthrightly address it.
- [04:07]
A
You really are a departure from your predecessor, Gary Gensler, who was a lifelong progressive Democrat who believed in intervening and punishing companies that weren't abiding by his progressive philosophies on climate change and DEI and esg et cetera. And so I really wanted to explore that with you. What sorts of things are you doing to sort of loosen that grip of, I guess, woke bureaucracy?
- [04:41]
B
This is my third time actually at the sec. I was here first when I moved down from New York back in 1990-94 and worked for two chairmen there, then in their office, chief of staff and counselor for Richard Breeden, and then under Arthur Levitt, and then came back from 2002 to 2008 as a commissioner, and now, of course in 2025, chairman. So I've seen the SEC through those various decades and have worked in and around the securities laws for my entire career. So anyway, I have a feel for the rules and the mission of the Commission. And so historically, the Commission has been maybe not at the vanguard of technological innovation and how the markets are changing, but they haven't actually obstructed changes. And so unfortunately, in the last few years, it has done just that. So that's my mission right now, to focus on the technological changes and other changes that have happened in our markets and then to try to get us back to basics. That means protection of investors, making sure that the capital markets are efficient, and then trying to promote capital formation. That's what Congress has put in statute for us as our mission. And I want to make sure that we are recalibrating things for the next, you could say the next quarter millennium. We're about to get into the 250th anniversary of the United States, which is pretty exciting. But anyway, I'll settle for the next 30 years or something like that rather than 250. But I think we can lay the.
- [06:35]
A
Groundwork, the legislation, I think, that President Trump is pushing for on the proxy advisory duopoly situation, which sounds very boring, but I think, and I'd love you to tell us more, that this is really intrinsic to how companies are run, whether they have autonomy to decide, make decisions without having to take into account, you know, social sort of woke ideas or climate agendas. And these two companies, which are sort of, they're called Glass, Lewis and iss, have really had a stranglehold on advising investors, institutional investors, about which companies to put their money into. And if those companies don't abide by, you know, DEI or ESG policies that were favored by the Biden administration, then they didn't get as much investment. I mean, that's how it looked from the outside. And certainly President Trump has moved to change that. How did it look from your point of view?
- [07:45]
B
Well, so, yeah, you're touching on an important point of corporate governance, the relationship between shareholders and management of the company. And so the president has issued an executive order, which I'm happy he's paying attention to us here at the SEC and what we're doing. And so it's basically, it directs us or advises us, asks us to look into the relationship, relationship of these two companies with how they interact with public companies and how shareholders interact with management. So a lot of this stems from a rule that the SEC adopted back when I was first commissioner back in 2003, and I voted against it because I was afraid of the unintended consequences. And so this is one of those unintended consequences, basically.
- [08:44]
A
What was the rule?
- [08:45]
B
Well, the rule was a mandatory disclosure by mutual funds and other intermediaries of how they vote, the shares that they hold on behalf of their beneficiaries. So for mutual funds and pension funds and things like that. So every year under state law, a company has to have an annual general shareholders meeting. And. And during that time, the shareholders vote for directors and they reappoint the auditors and things like that. And every once in a while, if the company's going through a merger or, God forbid, a bankruptcy or something like that, those significant events shareholders are supposed to vote on under state law. So there's this one class of shareholder questions that are put to shareholders to vote on that are called advisory proposals, or lawyers call them precatory, a fancy word for advisory proposals. And so these don't. They're just advisory. The shareholders, under state law don't really have any authority to command the board of directors and others, the company, to do things. And so with these sorts of issues. The mutual funds then were mandated to disclose their votes and these are treated as, you know, obviously other than a compliance issue for the SEC examiners and others to check up and make sure that mutual funds are voting for all of them. With thousands and thousands of proxy questions that the mutual funds have to do. They basically then hired out companies like ISS and Glass Lewis and the SEC staff permitted the mutual funds and others to outsource those votes. So that's how over the years these two firms have garnered pretty big clout to vote on, especially these precatory proposals and increasingly on these very important issues as well, like mergers and acquisitions and bankruptcy. So that's one thing that we certainly will look at and we have already started this, one of my pillars to try to make IPOs great again.
- [11:05]
A
And how do you do that? I mean, do you already. I noticed that these two giant companies, the proxy advisors, ISS and Glass Lewis, they since Donald Trump came into office, they've backed off somewhat. I think they're probably preempting whatever you might do at the securities Exchange Commission. But I mean DEI seems to have been on the, it's now on the back foot. Same with esg, which is environmental, social and governance, you know, sustainability. These sort of ethical questions that really nothing to do with the company's performance and is something that has been sort of imposed on capitalism on companies for political reasons. But only one side of politics seems to be doing it. How do you extract yourself? You know, even things like trying to force companies from having a, you know, half women on the board, for instance, which might not suit them. So how do you extract capitalism from this kind of woke yoke?
- [12:20]
B
Well, so part of that is to get back to basics. All this mayhem in the corporate governance area, I submit is one of the reasons why companies don't want to go public because they just don't want to put up with the distraction of all of this. Because most of this does not have to do with the real fundamental issues of a company. So I mean, it's one thing for shareholders to hold directors accountable, but for a lot of these very non substantive type of issues that don't go to the economic reality of the company, I would submit that it's a distraction and that through the power of these or other sorts of shareholder groups that it's going towards their own issues, that they have an ax to grind basically with it.
- [13:20]
A
And is that you, you mentioned that you're trying to make IPOs great again? I mean, is this kind of confusion and extra distraction A reason why I think you said in your, your speech to the stock exchange, there's been a 40% drop in the number of listed companies in the America, in America, since the 1990s. Is that the reason?
- [13:43]
B
That's exactly it. So it's very. Our capital markets are public. Capital market markets are very important. We have the biggest and the deepest and the most liquid capital markets in the world are the American capital markets. Stock markets, essentially, and others now account for 50% of the total capitalization in the world. And that's just the public side. And then that's up from 30% several years ago. And so that's a hefty amount, obviously. But at the same time, as you said, we're now about half or so of the number of public companies that were listed 30 years ago, about 40% down. So that is also concerning because that's much more concentration in our markets. And some of that is the Magnificent Seven, which you've heard about. And they make up a larger percent of at least the indices S&P 500 and whatnot, but still a larger percent of our marketplace. So we need desperately to, I think, to boost this population of public companies. And it's declined over the years because you have bankruptcies and you have mergers and acquisitions and that sort of thing. But like with any population, unless you have newbies coming in to replace the ones that go away, then the population will decline. So that's what we're facing now. And so we need to make, like I said it cool to be an IPO again, to be a public company again and make IPOs great again. And that is through three basic things. One is our rule book is incredibly complicated now. Over the last 30 or 40 years, it's really ballooned and the costs of being public have really skyrocketed because you have to comply with all the different rules and make sure that you're complying with it. And so second is the corporate governance issue that we were just talking about, all the distraction from these shareholder proposals and other interested shareholder groups who are basically politicized shareholder activists. Yes, they purport to own shares, but a lot of them very, very few shares of a company. Yet they are trying to influence where the company is going to, mainly for their own parochial issues. And then finally, the third pillar is litigation. People have always heard, I think everybody has heard about the growth of lawsuits and whatnot over the last 40, 50 years in the United States. So we're taking steps to try to make that a bit more still have shareholders Be able to, if they've been harmed, to get their grievances heard and adjudicated. But at the same time there's a lot of, let's just say, threatening frivolous lawsuits that companies have to spend time and money to try to dismiss.
- [17:07]
A
You may only have four years I until the 2028 election. Who knows? Then pendulum may swing back the other way if the Democrats win. So how can you sort of fireproof the market or is there anything you can do to try and prevent that regulation pendulum crashing down on companies? And if you're encouraging new companies to go public, how do they know that they're not going to be crushed in four years?
- [17:42]
B
Great question. So that's one reason why I'm talking to you today and to others. So thank you very much for this opportunity. But to try to help educate people, I think that is one of the first things that we need to do because again, these issues are a bit esoteric. They don't affect people every, every day because they're busy.
- [18:04]
A
They don't know why.
- [18:06]
B
Exactly.
- [18:06]
A
I understand why companies have gone woke against their own interests.
- [18:10]
B
Exactly. So yes. So people are busy and it's even hard to get individuals to vote their shares. And so for many reasons, because they don't have time. And even if they're traveling, by the time they get home, it's in the bottom of the inbox, the proxy form and everything else.
- [18:30]
A
And, and how much of a burden do you think it's been on the economy to have all these sort of rules and sort of social issues being imposed on companies?
- [18:45]
B
Well, the cost.
- [18:46]
A
What percentage?
- [18:47]
B
Yeah, yeah, I'll have to ask and I'm sure our economists here at the SEC are working on that question. But anyway, that's a very interesting question, but I'm sure it goes into the, the billions of dollars, if you look at the compliance and legal costs, accounting costs and whatnot from all of the rules and regulations that may not be achieving what they originally sought to achieve. And then the distraction to management and then I think the incalculable consequence of not so many companies going public as in the past because individual shareholders, if you look at how the difference between the IPO markets back in say the 80s when Apple and Microsoft and all those sorts of companies went public, you had Steve Jobs and Bill Gates and whatnot, they were building their companies from their garage and there was not a big venture capital or private equity market back then. And so they had to go public to get money to build their factories and to develop their Products and to market them and sell them and all of that versus now where there is a very robust venture capital and private equity market. Basically because there was a demand and rich people and institutions recognized that they could go directly to the smaller companies or whatnot and invest in them early on and help them develop and there was no need to go to the public market. So what's happened is that average, you and I, average investors who are investing on their own don't necessarily have the access to these types of investments that other people do. And so they do through say a mutual fund or particular type of mutual fund kind called a private equity fund, if that, if they can invest in that through say their insurance company or their pension plan or whatnot. Mostly regular people can't go directly to funds like that. So anyway, the retail people, the normal folks have not been able to share in the growth of these many, many companies from their initial stages until they're mature and whatnot versus other folks who have been. So that's a complete switch from the 1980s to now, where back in the older days there the people who invested through an IPO were able to realize a lot of the return on their investment versus now that's not so much.
- [21:46]
A
So how do you solve that though? Because you have got these private equity people who are there with bags of cash and, and they're competing with the mum and pop shareholder, I guess. Is, is that the way you would look at it? And how, how do you, you know, how do you encourage that Bill Gates or whoever it is, that young up and comer to actually go public? I mean, why would they? What's the advantage for them?
- [22:16]
B
Well, so that's kind of the rub, the essential issue that we have to address. So it's not so much that the two are competing because the people who invest in venture capital and private equity are filling a need. And it's not that it's free money that they're passing out. I mean they drive a, a hard bargain, of course, with the companies that they're investing in because a lot of times these very young companies go bust. And so that's why people who invest in private equity, not everything is a unicorn that can be a billion dollar.
- [22:58]
A
You already hear about them.
- [22:59]
B
Exactly. So there are lots and lots of ones that don't make it. But that's why you diversify and you vest in lots of different things and you hope that the winners will way offset the losers is the goal. Of course. So that's one reason why we don't Just open the doors for every mom and pop to invest in these things, because they can easily get killed by those sorts of things don't work out. So because the people who are wealthy are able to afford lawyers and accountants and other advisors to help them do that.
- [23:37]
A
So what is the advantage of going public, ultimately?
- [23:41]
B
So one big one is that if you have a lot of employees, that you can issue them stock as part of their compensation. Like there are many companies that do that, you know, big public companies, and for their employee stock option plans and things like that. Another one is it gives a company a currency. Say, if it wants to do a merger, rather than pay cash or borrow money to buy something, it has a publicly traded stock that it can use as, say, currency to make an acquisition. So that sort of thing is really important. And then for the overall US Economy to have a strong public market that attracts. Builds on itself, because success obviously attracts more success in general. And so that means foreigners come here to invest in these markets. They can also invest privately, but it's more transparent for them as well. And it's a good way to make an investment in a foreign country. And so all this stuff builds on itself. It helps then with valuations for private companies. You have better comparables and all that. So it all builds on itself to have a good, robust public market.
- [25:01]
A
You mentioned the Magnificent seven, which is, of course, the big tech stocks. I think Nvidia is the most successful or the biggest of them, you can correct me. But I guess having the market so incredibly reliant on those seven big stocks is a danger. I mean, it's a risk, isn't it?
- [25:24]
B
Well, I mean, it's the way our market is right now. And obviously that's not an issue for the government to intervene on or anything like that. But again, that's why I think the real solution is to focus on why it is that our markets are not attracting the IPOs that they once were.
- [25:50]
A
Yeah, I mean, I think the Biden administration, and certainly you hear the people in, in the crypto business, business are now complained bitterly about the fact that they treated cryptocurrencies as unregistered securities and, you know, led to a lot of lawsuits, a lot of uncertainty. China is competing with America in that space. Is that a priority of yours? I know you've talked about it in your various speeches that you want to bring cryptocurrency into the, into the modern world, I guess in this country. Why is it important and what are you going to do?
- [26:33]
B
The capital market's all about raising capital. We want to make sure they're efficient and safe and all of that. And in many times over the last, say, well, I don't know, 50 years or something like that, the SEC has increased, encouraged development of other technologies, including like in the 1960s, believe it or not, there was a big bull market and there was a lot more trading. The amount of trading just really skyrocketed. And so there was that back then there were paper certificates, so the markets bogged down. So the New York Stock Exchange, believe it or not, had to close down for at least a day, a week, if not two days, a week to just catch up on the paperwork. And because things got lost and everything, broker dealers went out to a business because the transactions couldn't be completed. So the SEC worked with the industry to set up what we call the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, which basically immobilized the shares and had book entry of the shares. So that founded the electronic trading that we have today. And so through the years, SEC has responded to the needs of the marketplace and changed its rule book to accommodate those innovations and to encourage them. But this is really the first time that I know of where the SEC has just said nyet that they will not that basically too bad. Here's a form on the website. You fill it out even though it's inapposite to what your business is all about. And many people, because in the crypto side, couldn't fill it out because they did didn't meet the guidelines and the questions that were there. And so basically they were frozen out of trying to comply with the rules and were frozen out of the public markets. And so investors still would invest in them because the Internet is everywhere. They could go offshore. That's why we had Sam Bankman Fried who went to the Bahamas to where his firm FTX operated. But this I like to tell as a great story of how good regulation, effective regulation in the United States can work. So you had ftx. The SEC basically he was operating offshore. He invested in a company called LedgerX, which is their instruments called Swaps. And so it's like a futures contract. But anyway, so LedgerX was a swaps trading platform for cryptocurrencies and crypto companies. And so it was, it was regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a sister agency to the SEC here in the United States. And when it was fully owned by FTX, when FTX imploded, LedgerX didn't skip a beat and it continued to operate, operate. And customers did not lose a penny because all of their assets were accounted for and segregated. And so LedgerX still operates and has changed hands, of course, coming out of bankruptcy. But that's an example of how our regulation system can accommodate other types of, you know, new innovations here onshore in America and how we can then try to fulfill President Trump's declaration, how he wants to make America the crypto capital of the world.
- [30:10]
A
How did a Sam Bankman Fried actually happen? How could he thrive and survive on such a house of cards under the former sec? You know, there was a lot of stories at the time about how he was a favored son of various very powerful Democrats and therefore including his parents. And I mean, was there something dodgy that was going on about how his company was allowed to continue on? Well, until it didn't and he's now in jail.
- [30:48]
B
Yeah, well, a lot of this is still under investigation and so obviously the bankruptcy is being cleaned up and all of that. And luckily, from what I've followed, I don't know all the details, but it looks as if investors have been made mostly whole luckily by some investments that because of the rise of the crypto, markets have increased in value. So it could have been a disaster like Madoff and maybe it wasn't so bad, but just through luck it sounds like.
- [31:28]
A
So do you think the Sam Bankman Fried fiasco would have happened under your leadership at the sec?
- [31:35]
B
Well, who knows? Well, if we were. So if we can get our rule book squared away so that we can accommodate innovation in financial services on the digital asset side. Because I think there's a lot to be said for distributed ledger technology, the blockchain, the transparency that it provides. And there's a lot of de risking of the markets that can be achieved, I think through adoption of this technology by some of the internal, even the back office workings of, of the securities markets through tokenization of securities, we can maybe have on chain clearance and settlement payment for securities as we start to come out with our rules here in the next year and proposals with respect to these digital assets. I think that that is one thing where we can try to make a very wholesome and, and appropriate environment for people to develop their new products that are under American laws and American regulations for the protection of investors and for the benefit of our capital markets.
- [32:55]
A
Just one last question about the markets before I just move to your who you are and why you're at the sec. But Warren Buffett, Larry Kudlow, they say you're really better off as an investor just investing in the index.
- [33:14]
B
What's your view Well, I think different people, different strokes are different folks if you don't have a lot of time to focus on things. And yes, that's definitely the case, but a lot of people seem to like to invest directly in stocks. And so that's to each his own. And as long as you know what the risk risks are and are able to take those risks. And this is not like putting money into a bank account. You know, it's not guaranteed and whatnot, but, you know, the power of the capital markets is just really breathtaking.
- [33:47]
A
And this is your third time at the sec, Chairman Atkins, and what is it about that institution that keeps bringing you back?
- [33:58]
B
Well, the president asks in the last two times, you know, President Bush and now President Trump. And then I started out as a lawyer up on Wall street doing securities transactions, which is how my first boss down here in Washington, Richard Breeden found me. And so came down to help when the Berlin Wall had fallen in 1989. And then so I came down here in 1990 when there was a lot of change going on in the capital markets and a lot of, especially abroad. All the constituent parts of the Soviet Union were becoming free and a lot of them, the former Warsaw Pact countries, and they all wanted to have their own capital markets or stock exchanges. And so they were contacting the sec, like help, how can you advise us to build or our exchanges? So that was one thing that was really top of mind here at the sec. Plus there were a lot of changes that were happening at that time with respect to our own internal capital markets. The growth, as we talked about earlier on, of institutional investors and that sort of thing. So corporate governance issues and all that. So that's what we were occupied back then. So that was kind of my wheelhouse from having been up in the capital markets up in New York and you.
- [35:28]
A
Have to take a big pay cut. So to go from being in a very high class blue chip law firm, Davis Polk. And did you always want to be a lawyer? How did you get into the business?
- [35:43]
B
Well, there being professionals in my family back in earlier generations, grandfather and whatnot, doctors and lawyers. And I was just attracted to, to the concept of being able to help people and to understand the laws and the rules. And so that's how I kind of got into that. And I liked the stock markets and it was interesting to me as a young person to follow that.
- [36:15]
A
And you grew up in Lillington, North Carolina. Grew up in. And grew up in Tampa, Florida. Tell us about your family and your childhood.
- [36:27]
B
Well, my father was an army officer and a career army officer and specializing in data processing. And so he was into computers from the early years in the 1940s. 40s and did that in the army in the US and then in Korea and elsewhere. And so anyway, so that was always fascinating to me back in those days. Now, what we can do on our little handheld telephone, you'd walk into a big room and have these humongous machines that would do the data processing on, on cards that had holes punched in them. They key punch holes. And so that was pretty fascinating to see all that.
- [37:19]
A
Yeah. And then tell us about your. You were apparently at Vanderbilt. You were roommates with Senator Bill Haggerty, who's a wonderful man. And I know he had been ambassador to Japan in the first Trump administration.
- [37:37]
B
He's a great guy, made us all proud. So, yes, he's done a great job as ambassador and as senator. So it's great that he's up there and it's great to work with him.
- [37:48]
A
Were you ever tempted to go into politics?
- [37:51]
B
No, I don't think my wife would take to that. But anyway. But yeah, I'll let people like Bill do that. And they're very successful and very good at that.
- [38:02]
A
Last question. You've met a lot of successful people and you're successful yourself. What are the secrets of success that you can impart?
- [38:12]
B
Well, I mean, there are a lot of different, again, different strokes for different folks. I think that a real important aspect is to listen and to try to. You don't necessarily know all the answers or have all the answers and to surround yourself with good, good people. I think successful people attract successful people because they empower them. And it's not like the mother hen always you have to let people experiment and try and fail. But then it's not so much like I remember from growing up, it's not so much that you fell down, but that you've picked yourself up and brushed yourself off and then go charging again and try again. And so those sorts of things, I think in the business world, just like in everyday life, are really important. So we need to. So for people who are trying to build a business and run a business, whether it be a small corner bakery or a multinational firm, you know, it's really about listening, encouraging, empowering people and setting, you know, a good tone from the top. Because obviously, you know, the, the culture of a company is extremely important and you can't cut corners, especially around rules. It's better to go, to go the extra mile to make sure you're complying because you never know what may happen. So those are kind of the rules of the road, I think, that are important.
- [39:48]
A
Terrific. One last bonus question. Just it was, what's ahead for 2026 for the economy, do you think?
- [39:56]
B
Well, I think we have good basics and all of that. So I'll leave that to the economists and in the administration, my colleagues Scott Besant and Howard Lutnick and the folks at the banking agencies and economists to talk about here at the sec, we again, will be focusing on getting back to basics in the capital markets. It's so important, again, to build the number of companies that are public because I think that a robust capital market is an essential part to our current economy and to grow it and to improve it. So I just, I'm so astounded at its growth over the last, you know, over during my lifetime. And I look forward to it continuing to grow.
- [40:44]
A
So am I hearing you right, that our 401ks are going to do even better in 2026?
- [40:50]
B
We'll see. I mean, the market is high, but again, if you look at the long term, there will be ups and downs. So people shouldn't get discouraged over that. But again, the capital markets reflect our economy as a whole. And so if we can encourage more companies to be in the and encourage people to invest in them, I think it is a very safe, it's a very sound way of investing for the future. And again, diversification. Diversification, diversification is so important. Don't put all your money in one basket of eggs and so make sure that you have diversified. And through that time you could look at the if you look at the history of the stock market, it has really proven a really good asset for investors as part of their overall savings and investment plans. But again, diversify is the real name of the game.
- [41:54]
A
Terrific. Thanks so much, Chairman Atkins, for your time.
- [41:57]
B
Well, thank you very much, Miranda. It's been fun to talk to you. Thank you.
- [42:01]
A
Thank you so much for watching. I'm Miranda Defend.
- [42:03]
B
Fine.
- [42:04]
A
We'll be back with more. Let us know what you thought of this episode by leaving a comment below. And please subscribe so you don't miss future episodes of Pod Force One.