Podcasts about companies

In China, top leaders are pushing the adoption of Artificial Intelligence. Companies there are using AI at a scale that far outpaces that of the US. That means some Chinese workers are being displaced from their jobs. Now, Chinese courts are stepping in. And in some cases, courts are ruling that worker displacement is unlawful. But Chinese workers are still anxious.Support public media with NPR+ and enjoy perks for over 25 podcasts like this one. This show's perks include sponsor-free listening. Learn more at plus.npr.org.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

For 30 years, Ben Isaacson has been a leading privacy professional and trusted counsel. During the "Internet 1.0" era, he was instrumental in launching the first self-regulatory guidelines for email marketing, addressable TV, and mobile marketing. Ben was one of the first privacy professionals to get certified as a CIPP/US with the IAPP in 2005. In this episode… Data broker laws are pulling a once-hidden industry into the light. For years, consumers generally had no idea which companies were compiling and selling their personal information, what those companies were doing with it, or how to opt out. States are responding with data broker laws that require brokers to register and disclose information about their businesses and data-selling practices. Seven states now have these laws on the books, with some providing consumers with a centralized mechanism to request deletion of their data or to opt out of its sale. So, how can companies that purchase or license data from brokers manage the downstream risks that come with using it?   Companies buying or licensing data from data brokers need to know where that data comes from, how it's used, and what their third-party contracts permit. Legal and privacy teams should work with marketing and sales to identify which adtech vendors they buy or license data from and scrutinize their licensing relationships. They also need to map how purchased data flows through the business and ensure their privacy notices disclose its use. California's Delete Act makes this downstream visibility especially important because it requires data brokers to apply deletion requests before that data is used. Companies also need to consider whether their activities qualify them as data brokers, particularly because New Jersey's data broker law extends registration requirements to data collectors, potentially affecting businesses that fall outside the traditional data broker definition. Companies should seek a legal opinion to determine where they stand based on the nature of their business and its commercial terms.  In this episode of She Said Privacy/He Said Security, Jodi and Justin Daniels speak with Ben Isaacson, Principal at In-House Privacy, about the rise of data broker laws and what they mean for companies that buy, license, or sell personal information. Ben discusses the evolution of these laws and how data broker definitions and legal requirements vary across states. He highlights what companies can do to mitigate risk when using data purchased from brokers and provides tips on how companies can determine whether they are considered data brokers under these laws. Ben also shares his perspective on how California's Delete Act could influence future state and federal regulation. 

News and Updates: Flock Used to Chase Cross-State Weed: Wisconsin police used Flock's license plate network to track a man's frequent trips to Michigan—where marijuana is legal—then used that travel as pretext to search his car, convicting him only on possession. Texas Deputy Tracks Abortion Suspect: A Johnson County deputy searched Flock's 83,000-camera network across 45 states—including states where abortion is legal—to locate a woman suspected of self-managing an abortion, with no warrant required. A National Surveillance "Potluck": Over 75% of the 5,000+ departments using Flock share data into a national pool, enabling any agency to search all networks at once—450,000+ searches hit the database in one 30-day period. Flock's Staggering Error Rate: In Roseville, California, Flock misread license plates in 71% of the 1,427 stolen/felony alerts it sent police over two years, repeatedly flagging innocent drivers' vehicles. Misreads With Real Consequences: Elsewhere, Flock errors led to innocent people stopped at gunpoint or jailed—one Ohio driver was mauled by a police dog after a "7" was misread as a "2," costing him his job and home. Anthropic Models Hack Three Companies: One week after OpenAI's incident, Anthropic disclosed that its models—Opus 4.7, Mythos 5, and a research model—reached the internet via a misconfiguration and hacked three companies since April. Claude Thought It Was a Simulation: The models believed the hacking was part of a benchmark; in the most serious case, Claude broke into a real company's database sharing a name with its fake target and kept going even after realizing. 15 AGs Demand OpenAI Preserve Evidence: Attorneys general from 15 states told OpenAI the Hugging Face hack shows it can't ensure product safety, demanding it preserve all materials and flagging that its agent left escape notes for future versions.

This episode we are joined by Mr. Steve Fagan - Vice Chairman of Strathcona Resources - a TSX listed energy company with a market cap of ~$9 billion. Mr. Fagan has more than 40 years of experience in the Canadian energy industry, building and monetizing exploration and production companies.He co-founded Strath Resources in January 2017, which later merged into Strathcona Resources, initially acquiring the Kakwa Montney for $280 million and with production growing from approximately 5,000 boe/d to over 40,000 boe/d. Those assets were subsequently divested to ARC Resources in 2025 for just under $1.7 billion.Previously, Mr. Fagan served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Mosaic Energy Ltd., a Natural Gas Partners-backed producer where he led the company's transition from conventional development into the liquids-rich Montney and assembled the Kakwa land position.Mr. Fagan joined Addison Energy Inc. in 1999 as part of the leadership team, becoming President and Chief Executive Officer in 2003, as the company grew to more than 11,000 boe/d through development and more than 50 acquisitions prior to its sale to NAL Oil & Gas Trust in 2005.He founded his first company, Sequoia Exploration, in 1996, after spending the early years of his career at Imperial Oil and Consumers' Gas.Mr. Fagan holds a Bachelor of Commerce from Memorial University of Newfoundland and an MBA from the Ivey Business School at Western University. He holds the ICD.D designation from the Institute of Corporate Directors.Outside of energy, Mr. Fagan is a documentary photographer (Steve Fagan Photography) and founder of the Fagan Foundation, which supports education initiatives in Nepal's Tsum Valley.Among other things we learned about Building 4 Companies in 40 Years: Sequoia to Strathcona.Enjoy.Newsletter: Subscribe HereThank you to our sponsors.Without their support this episode would not be possible:Connate Water SolutionsATB Capital MarketsBunch Projects-*This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only, and is not intended as investment advice. Please do your own research, and consult professionals directly before making any investment decisions.Support the show

New Zealand dairy companies are cashing in on a surge in global demand for bioactive proteins found in cow's milk, namely whey, off the back of the surge in weight-loss drugs. Demand for whey powder in the US is soaring and Rabobank has reported high demand for high-protein yoghurt and dairy drinks. The Country's Jamie Mackay explained further. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The following article of the Automotive industry is: “The Four Pillars of Companies That Endure” by Astrid Abugaber Portugal, Founder & Managing Director, Abu Logistics.

August 12, 2026: I look at Stanford's updated Canaries in the Coal Mine research, which finds young workers in highly AI-exposed jobs are falling behind while experienced workers are holding up. Then I get into Fortune's report on companies capping AI usage as token costs blow past budgets. Finally, I unpack Anthropic's plan to watermark Claude-generated output and why it raises a much bigger question about authorship: how much AI help can a document get before people stop seeing it as yours?

Here is a FAQ Video on the Courses: https://youtu.be/0F7imrzjXWs Here is a deep dive into which course is best for you: https://youtu.be/JM_jgS8M-iU https://www.b2bRevenue.com - Get Your Free E-Book on How Companies make Decisions. FAQ: 1 YEAR ACCESS, PAY MONTHLY OR ANNUALLY NOT A SUBSCRIPTION OFFICE HOURS EVERY  OTHER WEEK VIA ZOOM. 1 HOUR GROUP Q&A. UNLIMITED 1-ON-1'S  ARE FREE AS LONG AS THEY CAN BE SHARED IN THE COURSE. 1-ON-1 ARE FULL ACCESS ON DAY ONE - NOTHING IS GATED OR TIME RELEASED. ALL CONTENT IS VIDEO BASED AND SELF PACED I RECOMMEND TAKE COURSE ONCE WITHOUT NOTES OR APPLYING IT SO YOU UNDERSTAND THE BIG PICTURE FIRST. THEN TAKE AND APPLY IT STEP BY STEP. YOU START WHEN YOU WANT AND GO AS FAST OR SLOW AS NEEDED.   Email me additional questions: briangburns@me.com     — SAMPLE EMAIL TO EXPENSE THE COURSE MGR,   I have been listening to the brutal truth about sales podcast for X months and it speaks to the issues we face.   They currently offer a course that includes video instruction, group Q&A and One-on-One coaching. I'm committed to my own personal development and would like your help in expensing the course.   It would pay for itself if I closed only one new deal of $X value.   Please let me know by Friday if I can move forward with this 1 year course.   Thanks, ME Here are some student interviews from the courses:      ———————————————————————————————————— Audible 30 day Free Trial: http://www.audibletrial.com/BrutalTruth  

The episode details a structural shift for MSPs and IT service providers: the separation of security license resale from the value of human-led security services, and the resulting pricing and margin risks. Companies like N-able, SentinelOne, and SonicWall exemplify how technology offerings and delivery mechanisms are forcing providers to re-examine what differentiates their services beyond the products they resell. N-able's financial results illustrate the risk of relying on product-based security revenue. The company reported a drop in annual recurring revenue, driven by lower renewal rates in Unified Endpoint Management and Endpoint Detection and Response lines—both of which relied on reselling portable licenses, notably SentinelOne's product. In contrast, revenue from services tied to human expertise—through the acquired Adlumen's managed detection and response (MDR)—grew, according to both N-able management and analysts. The episode states that when customers can move licenses without losing service continuity, price becomes the only differentiator, undermining provider margins. Related developments reinforce this dynamic. SonicWall launched a combined antivirus and EDR solution available as both a product and a managed service—explicitly marketed for MSP resale—where SonicWall's analysts handle detection and response. Additionally, Proofpoint expanded its managed services platform, providing security, backup, and compliance through an MSP-oriented, multi-tenant console. These offerings blur the line between manufacturer-managed services and traditional MSP-delivered security work, increasing vendor competition at the service layer. For MSPs and IT leaders, these shifts expose the risk in revenue models that bundle security services with third-party product resale, particularly when those products are easily substitutable. The transcript urges providers to re-evaluate their pricing strategies: separating human service from license cost, justifying it independently, and moving away from device- or seat-based billing. The clear risk is that failing to articulate and defend the value of human-led activities will leave providers vulnerable to vendor undercutting and margin erosion, as seen in recent N-able outcomes. 00:00 Recurring Revenue Went Backwards  03:24 They Stopped Saying RMM 06:04 You Already Own It 09:18 Why Do We Care?  Supported by:  Guardz 

Respect isn't something your title automatically earns. It's something people decide through every interaction they have with you. In this episode, Karen shares seven practical communication habits that help you command respect, build credibility, and strengthen your executive presence, without changing who you are. In this episode, we cover: 1. Speak First Don't wait until everyone else has shared their opinion. Contributing early positions you as someone who helps shape the conversation rather than simply reacting to it. 2. Stop Over-Explaining Lengthy explanations often sound like you're seeking permission. Learn how to state your recommendations with confidence and let your expertise speak for itself. 3. Be Clear Before You're Clever Lead with the bottom line first. Clear, concise communication earns trust and helps people make decisions faster. 4. Hold Your Boundaries Respect grows when your words and actions align. Learn how healthy boundaries reinforce your priorities and demonstrate self-respect. 5. Let Silence Do Its Job Confident leaders don't feel the need to fill every pause. Discover why a few seconds of silence can increase your influence in conversations. 6. Make Your Words Match Your Presence Your body language often communicates before your first sentence. Learn how calm, intentional presence reinforces confidence and credibility. 7. Keep Your Word Nothing builds respect faster than consistency. Following through on commitments and communicating early when plans change creates lasting trust. Your Challenge This Week Choose just one of these habits and practice it intentionally: Speak first in your next meeting. Stop over-explaining one recommendation. Pause before filling silence. Hold one healthy boundary. Lead with your bottom line. Walk into the room with calm certainty. Follow through on one commitment exceptionally well. Small communication shifts create big leadership results. If this episode resonated with you, share it with a colleague, leave a review, and subscribe so you never miss an episode. Every week you'll learn practical strategies to communicate with confidence, influence high-stakes conversations, and develop your Powerhouse Presence™. Some resources for you: Get 3 Strategies to Speak Up in Meetings here. Project more confidence and credibility with my free tips: 9 Words to Avoid & What to Say Instead: Words to Avoid | Karen Laos My book “Trust Your Own Voice”: https://karenlaos.com/book/   Connect with me:   Website: https://www.karenlaos.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/karenlaosofficial  Episodes also available on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEwQoTGdJX5eME0ccBKiKng/videos   About me: Many years ago I found myself tongue-tied in a boardroom, my colleagues and executives staring at me. My stomach in my throat, I was unable to get the words out (in spite of being in a senior leadership role).  Then, I heard my boss shut down the meeting. My heart sank. I was mortified. She pulled me aside and said, "You didn't trust your gut. You could've tabled the meeting like I did." Why didn't that option occur to me in the moment? Why did I feel like I needed permission? That was the day I set out to change. I began a journey of personal growth to discover the root of the problem. Once I did, I wanted every woman to experience that same freedom. I'm now on a mission to silence self-doubt in 10 million women in 10 years by giving them simple strategies to speak up and ask for what they want in the boardroom and beyond, resulting in more clients, job promotions, and negotiation wins. Companies like NASA, Netflix, Google, and Sephora have been propelled toward more effective communication skills through my signature framework, The Confidence Cocktail™. This is your invitation to step into your most confident self so you can catapult your career! Karen Laos, Communication Expert and Confidence Cultivator, leverages 25 years in the boardroom and speaking on the world's most coveted stages such as Google and NASA to transform missed opportunities into wins. She is fiercely committed to her mission of eradicating self-doubt in 10 million women by giving them practical strategies to ask for what they want in the boardroom and beyond. She guides corporations and individuals with her tested communication model to generate consistent results through her Powerful Presence Keynote: How to Be an Influential Communicator. Get my free tips: 9 Words to Avoid & What to Say Instead: Words to Avoid | Karen Laos Connect with me:Website: https://www.karenlaos.com/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/karenlaosofficial Facebook: Ignite Your Confidence with Karen Laos: https://www.facebook.com/groups/karenlaosconsultingLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/karenlaos/Episodes also available on YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEwQoTGdJX5eME0ccBKiKng/videosMy book “Trust Your Own Voice”: https://karenlaos.com/book/

The Experience Strategy Podcast | theexperiencestrategist.substack.com It's a book launch episode. Human Context: How Intelligent Companies Build Customers — Dave Norton's new book — released yesterday on Amazon. Joe and Aransas have read the galley. This episode covers the why now, the four frameworks at the book's core, and how companies are meant to actually use it. What's in This Episode Why Dave felt compelled to write this now. It goes back to 2015 and Digital Context 2.0, his first book, in which he argued that context would be the organizing logic that brought channels, tools, and technologies together in service of the human. It didn't quite unfold that way — companies didn't want to share data, API ecosystems were slow to develop, and the consumer-enabling vision got stuck. Then generative AI arrived and changed everything. Context is now the literal engine that makes LLMs work. But there's a problem: every AI company in the world is thinking about context as their asset — something to extract from consumers and use against them to sell more. Dave wrote Human Context to plant a stake in the ground against that direction. The book argues that context belongs to the individual, and intelligent companies will build around enabling people rather than extracting from them. The two definitions of context — and why they matter. Joe sharpens the distinction that runs through the whole book: AI companies think of context as the model's context — the information fed into the system to make it work. What the book argues is that companies need to think about the customer's context — the situations, mindsets, and life circumstances of the individual they're serving. These are not the same thing, and confusing them is how companies end up building technology that serves the platform instead of the person. The four frameworks. The book is organized around four interconnected frameworks: Stupid/Dumb/Smart/Genius — co-developed with Joe Pine in 2016 and referenced in Dave's 2023 HBR article, this framework helps companies understand when and why to use intelligence. Dumb means no context is being collected — not a pejorative, just a description of the state. Smart means iterative sense-and-respond. Genius is what generative AI has now made genuinely possible — anticipatory, deeply contextual support. Stupid is when intelligence is turned adversarially against the consumer: wasting their time, getting in the way, or pursuing nefarious motives. Situational Markets — the move away from demographic targeting toward situations. What people have in common is not age or income bracket — it's that they find themselves in common situations. Companies that learn to identify, size, and design for situations are already operating at a different level of contextual sophistication. Demographics, as Joe puts it memorably, tell you nothing — a point he illustrates with the famous example of two people born the same day in the same town, one of whom became King Charles and the other Ozzy Osbourne. Modes — the mindset and behavioral state a person is in at a given moment. Combined with situation, modes give a company a genuinely rich picture of what the individual needs right now. Dave has been developing this framework for twelve years. Time Value — the measurement framework. How do you evaluate a dumb experience using time value? A smart one? A genius one? The book distinguishes between time saved, time well spent, and time well invested — giving companies a way to think about what their interactions are actually delivering. Demographics and personas: a gentle funeral. Joe makes the case cleanly. Demographics are shifts in bell curves — everyone is somewhere on every curve, and they tell you nothing about what any individual values or needs. Personas were a useful intervention when product designers needed reminding that real humans would use their products. But reducing a person to a persona is an injustice to both the individual and to the company's own capability. The frameworks in Human Context are designed to replace both. How the book is meant to be used. Dave is unapologetic: the book introduces the concepts, but the real work happens in the workbooks. Ten industry-specific workbooks accompany the book — covering how to size situational markets in your category, how to map modes, how to apply the frameworks to your actual business model. There's also a case study. The core ask of the reader: spend real time asking what it would actually take to move away from demographic thinking and start sizing situations instead. How Dave wrote it — and why provenance matters. Every chapter started as Dave's own writing, in some cases material he'd been developing for over a decade. AI was used to synthesize, consolidate, and accelerate — combining multiple drafts, simplifying, and then editing back to his voice. He's transparent about this in the book itself, with a dedicated provenance section. His position: books built with AI assistance should always include provenance notes explaining the origins of the content. All the ideas are his. The tools helped him get them out faster than he could have alone. An audiobook is coming. Dave briefly considered recording it himself, heard the professionals on ACX, and wisely hired a narrator. Joe recorded the opening and closing of The Transformation Economy himself and let the professionals handle the rest. Aransas, for her part, heavily negotiated to narrate her own book, Courage Capital — forthcoming from Hachette in 2027. Key Quotes "We almost forgot that humans are intelligent too. We're actually the source of all the context that's being fed into the technology." — Dave Norton "AI companies think of context as the model's context. What we need to think about is the customer's context — the individual's context." — Joe Pine "Demographics tell you nothing about an individual person and how you might provide them with value. Prince Charles and Ozzy Osbourne — same day, same town." — Joe Pine "Calling a person a persona is an injustice. We are not personas. We are human beings with agency, and every human being is unique." — Joe Pine "The system has to be redesigned to support your needs and to empower you to do what you care about in the way that fits your life and values." — Aransas Savas "Books that are generated using AI should always have a section on provenance." — Dave Norton "The fact that you came up with these ideas years ago does not take away one iota from how valuable they are today." — Joe Pine Get the Book Human Context: How Intelligent Companies Build Customers by Dave Norton is available now on Amazon (Kindle and print). Early sales and reviews on Amazon make a real difference — if the book is useful to you, take 30 seconds to leave a review. The ten industry workbooks are available alongside the book at www.stonemantel.co Connect with Dave on Substack at theexperiencestrategist.substack.com. The Experience Strategy Podcast is hosted by Dave Norton and Aransas Savas — subscribe, reply to any episode email, and let them know what you're working on.

Did you wake up today thinking that you really want to use a cup? No! Because you are not insane. You woke up thirsty, and then used a cup. That distinction sounds obvious. But many founders and investors ignore it completely — and build or back the wrong thing as a result. This episode is about what a product actually is, and why getting this right is the foundation of everything else. In this episode: Why a product is not an app, a site or an algorithm — and what it actually is Why the person and the problem always come before the solution How companies that stay focused on the problem — not the product — outlast everyone else Why Steve Jobs said Apple the company was his greatest invention — not the iPhone or the iPod How to spot competition you didn't know you had by thinking about problems differently This episode is for you if: You are building a product and want to make sure you're solving the right problem You are an investor evaluating tech companies and want a sharper framework You are a corporate leader trying to understand how great tech products get made Two weeks left: Book your FREE 1:1 consulting session with Sophia These sessions close on 31 August 2026 — and then they're gone. Book yours before the deadline. https://calendly.com/sophia-matveeva/sample-consulting-session-2026   Timestamps: 00:00 – The "cup" analogy: Why founders build the wrong thing 00:45 – Welcome to Tech for Non-techies 01:18 – Revisiting a foundational concept in product & investing 01:50 – Free 1-on-1 strategy consulting sessions (limited summer offer) 04:30 – What is a product? (hint: It's not an app or algorithm) 05:15 – Problem first, solution second: The thirsty mindset 06:10 – Why non-technical founders excel in product thinking 06:48 – How companies solve the same problem with evolving products 07:50 – Case study: The evolution of Facebook's product ecosystem 10:15 – Companies as products: Why Walmart bought Jet.com 11:45 – How to apply "Product Thinking" to your daily life 13:56 – How to book your free consultation before the august deadline Follow and Review: We'd love for you to follow us if you haven't yet. Click that purple '+' in the top right corner of your Apple Podcasts app. We'd love it even more if you could drop an honest review on Apple Podcasts. Simply select "Ratings and Reviews" and "Write a Review" then a quick line with your favorite part of the episode. It only takes a second and it helps spread the word about the podcast. Listen to our podcast on: Apple Spotify YouTube Audible Pandora Transcript: https://www.techfornontechies.co/blog/316-what-makes-a-great-tech-product-product-thinking-for-non-techies

Joel McKelvey, VP of Product Marketing at Glean, shares why the enterprises winning with AI right now aren't the ones chasing the latest model—they're the ones who got their context layer right first. He explains why AI has moved from experimentation to company-wide production almost overnight, and why the biggest mistake enterprises are making is one they'll only recognize in hindsight. Key Takeaways Why the model you're running matters far less than the context you're feeding it How to think about AI ROI across three levels: individual, team, and organization What actually breaks employee trust in AI agents Why being model-agnostic is the best future-proof decision How fear of AI disappears quickly once employees get firsthand experience of a productivity win Guest Bio: Joel McKelvey is VP of Product Marketing at Glean, where he helps organizations turn AI initiatives into practical, metrics-driven business transformation. He brings more than 30 years of experience across engineering, marketing, and strategy, with deep expertise in AI, machine learning, analytics, and data architectures. His work focuses on how enterprises move from experimentation to execution using AI agents, enterprise search, and trusted data foundations to improve productivity, decision-making, and customer and employee experiences. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About this Show: The Brave Technologist is here to shed light on the opportunities and challenges of emerging tech. To make it digestible, less scary, and more approachable for all! Join us as we embark on a mission to demystify artificial intelligence, challenge the status quo, and empower everyday people to embrace the digital revolution. Whether you're a tech enthusiast, a curious mind, or an industry professional, this podcast invites you to join the conversation and explore the future of AI together. The Brave Technologist Podcast is hosted by Luke Mulks, VP Business Operations at Brave Software—makers of the privacy-respecting Brave browser and Search engine, and now powering AI everywhere with the Brave Search API. Music by: Ari Dvorin Produced by: Sam Laliberte  

Takeaways:In today's episode, we discussed the recent introduction of the AI slop button on LinkedIn, which has sparked a lot of controversy and animated reactions from users.Louise shared insights on how LinkedIn leverages AI technology to enhance user experience, particularly in content delivery and engagement.We explored the importance of creating original content on LinkedIn, rather than relying solely on AI-generated posts, to maintain authenticity and engage your audience effectively.The upcoming Raise Your Visibility Live conference offers a fantastic lineup of workshops and speakers, focusing on practical strategies to enhance your online presence.Louise emphasized the value of using AI as a tool for efficiency, while cautioning against producing content that lacks a personal touch or genuine human insight.Listeners are encouraged to connect on LinkedIn and share their thoughts about the evolving landscape of AI and social media, as we all navigate these changes together.Companies mentioned in this episode:LinkedInMicrosoftOpenAIYouTubePangram LabsDow SocialWeb CrewSpider WorkingDescriptClaudeChatGPT

According to Gartner, worldwide AI spending is forecasted to increase 44% by the end of 2026. Companies are investing in AI, and they are investing heavily. But knowing where and how to invest isn’t easy, especially with what feels like a million different AI tools out there and a million more different ways to build your own. So how do you figure out what to build, what to buy, and which investments will help you move the needle for your business? Riley Rogers: Hi, and welcome to the Win/Win Podcast. I’m your host, Riley Rogers. Join us as we dive into changing trends in the workplace and how to navigate them successfully. Here to discuss this topic is Cody Sims, head of commercial brand at Cox Communications. Cody, thank you so much for joining us today. Super excited to hear your thoughts on this one. Before we dive into what is quite a loaded topic, could you tell us a little bit about yourself, your background, and your role? Cody Sims: Yeah. So, hi, I’m Cody. I’m the head of commercial brand for Cox Communications, and it’s kind of crazy how I came into this role. So I actually started my career when I was 15 and was installing phone systems for my dad’s phone company. And after that, I had actually had two parts of what I thought was what I wanted to go into, and that was either musical theater or physics, because those were two things I really had a passion about. And when I got into college and had musical theater as my major and physics as my fallback, I realized that both of them left a part out of what I really enjoy. And so I ended up actually landing in marketing because it’s both analytical and creative, and that has served me really well over the years. So, across Cox, I have done all kinds of things from product management to market development to pricing to competitive analysis, and now in the brand world. It’s given me kind of a 360 view of the entire business from a marketing lens. I would say that I’m pretty much a transformation leader. I really enjoy breaking things and building them up new again. So, AI is happening right at the right time for me. RR: I love that story, and I love that it’s taking you to a place that especially now is getting more and more technical, more and more analytical. I’m very excited to get into that transformation leader side of things. But before we do, can you paint a little bit of a picture of your sales environment? CS: Yeah. So when I first came to Cox, it was very similar to most of what you would call a CLEC, or a competitive local exchange carrier, which is primarily internet service, voice services, and obviously because it was Cox, some cable TV services that were the triple threat. That was kind of what in the early 2000s was kind of the way that they went to market. But over time, the team at Cox realized that in order to stay competitive, they had to add to the portfolio to make sure that they were providing value to their customers, and I’m sure many would understand that and have gone through similar transformations. And so we had acquired several different other companies that added to our portfolio, and developed some of our own products, and over time that turned into a lot of products. But it’s not just 70 products. It’s 70 products, it’s nine customer segments that we have from a segmentation perspective. It’s six distinct buyer personas, industry verticals, what’s serviceable at that address. So you take all of these different components and it’s almost like three-dimensional chess for the salesperson. The way that I like to think about it is that the sellers, what they really need and what their challenge is, is that they’re not looking for specs. They’re looking for what are the business outcomes that my customer is trying to achieve, and then what do I have from my portfolio that will help them to achieve those results? So it’s no longer a world where they can memorize everything and know every product in and out, and be the technical expert. They really do have to have tools and systems that help them to have the right knowledge at the right moment for the right person in the right place. RR: Yeah, there comes a point when the human brain just can’t contain the context and the expertise that you need. So when you can’t ask for expertise, what you can do is provide, to your point, that just-in-time support. And one of the things that you alluded to was that that’s where you kind of started some of that AI investment as a way to bridge that gap. You’ve given us a little bit of a taste, but what kind of motivated that early initiative? CS: Well, I would say that, over time what we discovered was that we couldn’t keep track of all of our marketing materials, collateral, all of the pieces of information in just files, formats, and putting it online into a here’s-an-accessible-library. Because the library just becomes bigger and larger and more difficult to manage. But I would say that we didn’t set out to do AI. We didn’t sit down and say, “Oh, hey, AI looks cool. Let’s make sure we’re doing it.” We needed to transform our go-to-market strategy so that we were more nimble, we were more competitive, and that we could deliver the kind of experience that our customers were asking for. And so AI was the mechanism that would help us to get there. But what really triggered this whole thing was what I mentioned earlier, was our segmentation. When we sat down and said, “Let’s rebuild the way that we look at our audience segments,” and we did that based off of what is the value to Cox of each of these customer profiles, and then what is the technology sophistication of that client, of that business. And that intersection allowed us to create our nine different segments that we were working on. And so when we did the math, when we looked at all of that information and all of the things that we needed to be able to provide to those segments, we realized this was quickly going to turn into something that was far beyond any marketer’s ability to do. But what we knew is that the Gartner information we were tracking said that personalization was having much higher returns on the way that people respond to information. And not only that, but if you do personalization and you get it wrong, if I call you and I say, instead of, “Hey, Riley,” and I say, “Hey, Jonah,” you’re like, “Hmm, nice try.” So personalization is really important to being successful, but getting it right is even more important. So we realized that we needed to have some radical partnership between our marketing, AI, and sales teams, that we needed to make sure that this was not just an IT project, that we were going to go and pull a bunch of requirements together and everybody would be like, “Oh, hey, here’s this new tool. Everybody figure out how to use it.” And it wasn’t necessarily about optimization. It was about transformation, the way that we go to market, the way we think about our customers, and the way we show up. So I would say that AI definitely was part of the solution set, but we had to look ourselves in the mirror and say, “It’s time for us to actually think about this in a completely different way.” RR: That distinction comes through very well, and I think is very important because oftentimes when you’re in kind of the scramble to be keeping up with the market, keeping up with your competitors, there is this urge to just tack on AI because we have to. But when it’s not strategic and it’s not built into the things that you’re actually doing, to your point, it’s we put together some specs, good luck using it. But instead, now it’s something that’s really built into the way that you work. I would love to hear a little bit more about that specific use case, especially given the fact that a lot of teams are running into that question of how do we use AI and can we just build what we need ourselves? Given that you’ve done the math, answered the question, I’d love to hear how it worked and kind of where you landed. CS: It’s very easy to fall into the trap of, “Hey, everybody, here’s AI. We put it on your computers, now go use it.” And so then everybody starts using AI to try to figure out, how does this help me in the job that I already do, in the role that I already do, in the processes that I already do? And so then it really limits the impact that it can have on the business and the performance because either, A, you have a handful of people who are really smart, and they go crazy with it, and they create their own thing, or you have a bunch of people who are looking at it going, “Okay, came up with some ideas, but I still have to do my work.” What you end up with is there’s no standard. There’s no flag running up the hill to say, “Everybody follow me. Let’s go do it this way.” So, it required both the yes, we had to make sure that the teams were bought into using AI, but we also had to have a standardized way of approaching how we deploy AI. And that brought us to the question of do we buy or do we build? And because there were so many different parts of what kinds of functionality we needed, it wasn’t the same answer for every one of those needs. So in some cases, we have a tool, we have a partner, they already have AI integrated into their platform, let’s go see how we can use that. In other cases, and I’ll give you an example, in the case of content generation, that is where we started with our AI journey about a year ago. We sat down and started interviewing and reviewing all of the different providers who can do content generation. Every one of them had a different approach to content development, content generation, which were all very good, and they attempt to make sure that they are covering as much of the marketplace as possible. And so sometimes when you buy that, you end up with features maybe that you don’t need, and you also have to still go through the process of integrating those platforms into your security posture. So us being a connectivity provider for governments, for major corporations, enterprise carrier grade, we have a very, very strict and strong security policy, which means that when we bring new vendors on, it takes a lot of time and a lot of effort and a lot of back and forth. And so what we found in certain cases, it was actually better for us and more beneficial for us to build the actual platforms that we needed for that particular use case. But like I said before, in other situations, we found that there was a partner who we had who already had AI integrated into their platform, and so they were already part of our security posture. They were already inside of our ecosystem. So the question of build versus buy really had to do with time, had to do with return, and it had to do with the security measures that we had to put in place. RR: Thinking about in addition to those factors, when you’re evaluating these things that you outlined, time, potential cost, security, how are you kind of doing that ROI math to say one is going to be better than the other? CS: There’s several different parts of that. And like I mentioned, we wanted to make sure that we were following our AI strategy foundation that said, we don’t want to introduce more and more vulnerable access points. And so it’s important for us to make sure that we are all coming together with everyone across the Cox leadership team according to who are the vendors that we feel the safest with, that we can go set up and make sure that we are pulling together the best of the breeds. The assessment, like I mentioned before, is what is the value that we’re returning to the business in terms of revenue generation, new customers, cost savings in terms of not necessarily just reducing people’s time, but redeploying people to doing other important tasks. And then what are the things that we are doing that help us to keep the system all working together? So, revenue generation, cost deferment, and then keeping a cohesive connection between all of the different platforms. So some of the things that we looked at from our comparing vendors versus doing DIY, is there a maintenance tail that goes in this? So if we build it, what does that look like in 18 months? How much more people do we have to have to support it? Governance and observability, do we have the permissions, the versioning, the audit trail, all of the parts for discovering what is needed and then able to see it and observe it as we go? Interoperability, as I mentioned before, really important between different platforms that we have, that those APIs and MCPs all work together. And then whose roadmap is this? Is this our roadmap? Is this the IT roadmap? Is this the vendor’s roadmap? If we know where we need to go, is there anything that’s getting in our way of being able to get there? And then of course, obviously the speed to value against the cost of being wrong. RR: And so hearing you outline this very comprehensive list of considerations, you can start to understand why it starts to feel complicated and really hard to tackle. To your point, it’s been a year of figuring it out since you started developing that very first use case. I’d like to go into a little bit of detail about the evaluation piece and deciding what vendors you felt safe with, that you were excited to partner with and continue to either use or build upon as you’re developing your AI strategy in alignment with your business transformation. One of those that you landed on was using Highspot’s MCP server to support some of the workflows you wanted to spin up. How did you make that decision and why did that feel like the way to go? CS: Well, as I had mentioned before, as we had gone through our history of, here’s a library of a whole bunch of stuff and everybody’s trying to find the right item, and it just was such a headache to make sure that we were always getting the right information to the right customers at the right time. And not only that, but we had no real clear feedback about how it was performing. And so at that time, which I believe was in the 2015 to 2017 timeframe, is when we had first started our relationship with Highspot to help us better catalog the library, make it more searchable and usable and referenceable for the sellers to be able to share information and track the information, make sure that it was the most relevant and recent, and then help us to understand what’s working and not working. So all of that was already in place before we even started the AI conversation. And so as we were doing our work around our go-to-market roadmap, we started with content because it was probably the easiest place for us to use AI to generate content, and that looked like a two-layered approach. We had what we called a knowledge base, which is formally putting into AI rules that can be read by AI around all of our standards for brand, for legal, for segment definition, for product information, for pricing and promotion information, industries, verticals. All of that was put at this knowledge base foundation layer. And then we built the content generation engine on top of that, where each of the agents within that tool would go find what it is that the marketer was asking to do, compare it against all the information in the knowledge base, the brand standards, all of those good things, and then produce the content piece that the marketer was asking for using that foundation layer. However, once we got that moving and going, we realized that that level of personalization for marketing could be even more valuable and even more specific when used by a seller. But in order for that to work properly, the seller had to have access to a large range of information all at the same time, including any of the buying signals or online signals that we had through some of our lead generation partners, any of our information that we have within our own systems, like when was the last time they called into billing or when was the last time that they had an outage or what is their general sentiment that the customer has right now. And then all of the information about their current services, their current products, all the things that are going on in their world. But then once we have all of that information, we have propensity to buy, propensity to churn, propensity all these modeling, now we need to be able to talk to them and provide a recommendation to the seller that says, “Here’s what we recommend you use, what you should say, how you should set it up.” And all of that was inside of Highspot. And so we realized again, we could look at this and say, “Are we going to go buy a new platform? Are we going to use a platform we already have or are we going to go build something new?” And obviously when we looked at the Highspot platform, the MCP servers, and the way that it was laid out and set up already, we knew that that was the right path to go. So what we had started with was the content engine, then we went into a sales enablement engine, and as part of that sales enablement engine, the only way for it to work properly was for us to bring in the Highspot MCP service. RR: And how has that been working so far for your sellers? As you’ve rolled this out, how has it been used? Any anecdotal feedback you’ve heard? CS: It’s pretty funny because we have done multiple rollouts of sales enablement platforms over the years, and as anyone who’s ever tried to roll out new sales items and new sales tools will say, it takes time, it takes consistency, messaging over and over. But in this particular case, when we went out and did our roadshow with all of the sellers and sat down and showed them how the new tool worked, there were so many positive responses, and the adoption was much faster than most of our previous releases of other types of products. And I think that the reason why is because it was bringing together all of those pieces of information that I mentioned before and bringing in the Highspot information that they were already very familiar with. And in our world, we call it the sales asset manager, SAM. And so they were very familiar with SAM and then this new tool with the AI capabilities built into it. Now it’s specifically just telling them, “Here’s what you should do. Here’s the way to lay it out, and here’s all the content to talk to the customer about in what order.” And it took a lot of the burden off of them to research, go find a piece, start to build a story in their head, try to build a deck, and then think about what are they going to share with them in what order. So it’s been a huge benefit to the sellers. They’ve loved it. RR: Yeah, that’s such a strong signal when adoption doesn’t feel like a push and more of a grab. Curious if there are any other AI or agentic connectors that you’re pairing with Highspot in another AI application that you think would be interesting to share? CS: We have basically six different programs or parts of our roadmap, and we’re calling them AI modules, and then they work together in different components for different functions that need to be done. So as I mentioned, we have the knowledge base that is the base. Then we have the content creation tool, which we call CAMI. So it’s Content Automation Marketing Intelligence, and that has everything that is needed to produce and create new pieces of content, and then those content pieces are either generated in emails or things like that. A lot of them actually are put into the Highspot tool. And then we have what we call SAMI, which is the Sales Automation Marketing Intelligence, and that is the tool that integrates directly with Highspot to make the recommendations to the seller based off of all of the other information, the 360 view of the customer. We also have what’s called Livia, which is the Lead Validation and Enrichment. The tool uses all of these multiple different access points and different vendors to pull information about that particular contact to validate that it’s accurate, so that by the time it gets to the seller and they’re going to go do a pitch, they have a lot more confidence that who they’re talking to, the business, and it’s at the right address, and prevents them from wasting time. And then, of course, Highspot is such a critical part of how that story all comes together because it’s capturing all the content that’s being created by CAMI, and then the AI that comes from Highspot is infusing into the SAMI tool that the sellers are using. It’s an interesting thing because somebody might say, “Well, you’re not really using Highspot, you’re using SAMI.” And the reality is, well, yes, I am using Highspot because Highspot is feeding all of that into the SAMI tool. There’s a whole bunch of other stuff we add into that for flavoring, all of the information about the customer so that the seller has a 360 view, but that just sets it up. The what do you do next is what’s coming out of Highspot. The next phase of this that we’re going to is a fully agentic approach to our marketing and sales engine. And what that means is that today, most of the work that’s being done is a marketer who is saying, “Here’s what I need to go get done. I’m going to use AI to help me go do it.” We’re going to flip that script, and we’re going to say, the agents that we create are going to do the work, and the marketers are going to instruct the agents on how to do that work properly and watch it and govern it. That will then accelerate for the sellers as well. RR: We’ve heard a little bit about what’s been built in the last year, but it’s, again, to your point, crazy that that’s one year of building, thinking, strategizing, and it’s come to this point. When you look across all of that, what has changed for your sellers and for the business? CS: Well, I would say the first thing is, is that sellers are now able to focus on what they’re really good at. What I mean by that is their confidence is shifted to focus on outcomes and value. They are now able to build trust and provide value, which is honestly what all of our customers, especially our business owners and decision makers are looking for. And then for the marketers, it’s no longer about building a queue, trying to figure out what is the message that’s going to hit the most people with the most response. This idea of efficiency for media or efficiency for marketing materials. It’s like, what is the one message I can send to a million people and have the most response? Well, now you actually can flip that on its ear and say, “I’m going to personalize it at scale.” So that is super exciting. And then the last thing that I would say is that consistency became structural. The same knowledge base, the same rules across every surface, making sure that our content is clean, correct, built on the same policies and rules, but is personalized. Doing those two things at the same time is very tricky, and being able to do it with AI is the only way we could get there. RR: Curious if you’ve seen any sort of measurable returns. CS: Our lead accuracy, like I mentioned before, moving from that 13 to 18% all the way up to the 95th percentile. We have campaign speed to market of improvement of 55%, meaning the amount of time that it takes us to get to market is cut in half. The marketing content teams are 40% more productive, which means they’ve been able to redeploy their time for 40% of the time that they spend at work on other projects, which is amazing. Our conversion rates are up, our driving net new revenue is up, and we have seen material improvement in click-through rates and conversion rates when we are more specific and personalized to the audience. So Gartner was right. Yay. So that’s been really good. And I would say that part of the reason why I think that, at least for part of what we did, doing it as a build ourselves was wise, is because we learned so much by going through the process of just banging our shins on the corners and running into cabinet doors that were open, and we’re just like, “Oh, wow, that was, I did not see that.” So it’s been a huge learning process, a very, very intense learning process, but we’ve all had a really good sense of humor and amusement and just, we are having a ton of fun. RR: And I think that’s one of the more encouraging things to hear. Is that nobody starts perfect, and you just have to build your way up to good. And once you get there, you start to see again, like those measurable improvements. But it is a process. So I guess the message there is stick with it. Which I think kind of feeds into that last question I have for you, which is for anybody who is running into this question, hitting their shins on all of these problems, how would you recommend they approach the question of building, buying, blending some things together when they’re thinking about their AI investments? CS: Well, I would say the first thing is you have to look in the mirror and be real with yourself and say, “Is my processes and workflows working? If I blew up my entire go-to-market, I blew up all my processes, what would it look like?” And don’t start with a tool. Start from a place of what would serve me best. The other part of it that I would say that Highspot did really well is because of the MCP product, I was able to look at it as how am I using this from a plumbing perspective, not just a judgment perspective. And what that means is that it worked well with the strategy and the AI strict rules that we had built for ourselves. Highspot, kudos to Highspot, built a platform that is trusted and that works well with all of the other components that we had flying around, whether it was Salesforce or AWS or even our Accenture development team being able to use the components and pieces to connect to the whole ecosystem. Then the other thing I would say is that even though we’ve been doing this for a year, a year is like eons in AI’s time. It was every other week there was something that changed, something new, something shifted. So you have to go into it with this idea of you have to prepare yourself that this is how I set it up now, but I might have to change it tomorrow, and just be okay with that. So my answer for build or buy, my answer is both. Build the things that make sense for you and where you have the resources and when it’s the right fit. But definitely buy when you are in a partnership or when you have someone that you already know that you can trust. RR: Very pragmatic. That’s kind of the only way to do it. One thing I’ll say, I know I am walking away inspired, and I can imagine our audience is going to as well. So Cody, thank you for the time. I really, really appreciate it. It’s been so wonderful to hear a little bit more about what you’re building. CS: No, I love it. And the reason why this is great for me is that it forces me to think back on this journey that we’ve been on for the last year and really consider what is it that has brought us to where we are, what are the things we’ve learned, and then, maybe how are my bruises doing? RR: Well, thank you for the time again. And to our audience, thank you for listening to this episode of the Win/Win Podcast. Be sure to tune in next time for more insights on how you can maximize go-to-market success with Highspot.

OCR has been around for more than 40 years. So why do the world's biggest banks still have thousands of people reading documents by hand? When Dan Maloney became CEO of Landing AI in 2024, as Andrew Ng stepped back from the day-to-day, he was returning to a problem he had first worked on at SAP back in 2001. When he looked closely at it again two decades later, he was struck by how little it had actually moved. Landing AI's mission is to make the world's documents computable. Instead of growing up from OCR and patching its limits with templates and heuristics, Landing AI came at the problem from visual AI, blending purpose-built models, an intelligent router, and agentic reasoning into a single system that reads a document the way a person does. Today that system extracts structured data from the messiest documents enterprises have, the scanned pages, the tables inside tables, the handwritten forms, at accuracy levels they can build on. Before every enterprise had an AI strategy... Before "agentic" became a boardroom word... Before the industry spent a year token maxing... There was a quieter, more stubborn problem: The world's data was trapped in documents, and no one could read it at scale. In this episode of the Future of Data & AI Podcast, Dan Maloney, CEO of Landing AI and a two-decade veteran of enterprise software and AI, joins Raja Iqbal for a grounded conversation about what it actually takes to move visual AI from an impressive demo into production. Dan is candid about where the hype outruns reality, why the model is the smallest part of the equation, and how a company earns the trust of a compliance team, not just an engineering one. What You'll Discover

Kids of all ages are headed back to school right now, and the Food For Thought podcast has some insights on how that could impact food and beverage consumption trends from Julia Wilson, a partner in KPMG's Strategy practice, focused on consumer clients. Wilson discusses results found in KPMG's Consumer Pulse Back-to-School 2026 Survey, which finds that families expect to spend more per child on back-to-school essentials this year, and 83% expecting to pay more for groceries alone. As a result, about half of those consumers anticipate that they will eat out less and nearly half plan to prepare simpler weekday meals.

Everyone knows greenwashing. Helen Neal is more worried about its opposite — green hushing, where companies making real climate progress stay silent because the risk of getting a claim wrong now outweighs the benefit of talking at all. A 20-year communications specialist who once brought the first EVs into Europe, she's sharp on why "business sense" beats "moral duty," where greenwashing actually comes from inside a company, and why you should never test a sustainability claim on a general AI — including what her team built instead. Connect with Sohail Hasnie: Facebook @sohailhasnie X (Twitter) @shasnie LinkedIn @shasnie ADB Blog Sohail Hasnie YouTube @energypreneurs

Our CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist Mike Wilson discusses a new market cycle, in which investors are demanding more than just growth from companies.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Mike Wilson: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley's CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist. Today on the podcast I'll look at an important shift in what the market wants to see from companies going forward. It's Tuesday, August 11th at 11:30 am in New York. So, let's get after it.This week I am going back to our broadening thesis – but with a slightly different twist. Earlier in the year, broadening was about beta. It was about the market moving beyond a narrow set of mega-cap winners and rewarding economically sensitive areas as the rolling recovery took hold. In the last few episodes I've talked about how that phase is now over. And we're moving from an early-cycle broadening into a mid-cycle quality rotation. In short, the market is no longer demanding just growth – but growth with durable earnings, strong margins, and free cash flow. To be clear, the broadening in earnings is still very much alive. Russell 3000 median stock earnings growth is running at 15 percent, the strongest since 2021; while median sales growth is at 8 percent, the best since 2023. At the same time, 87 percent of S&P 500 companies are beating earnings expectations this quarter, and earnings revisions breadth has rebounded to 23 percent, with 76 percent of industry groups showing positive revisions breadth. However, headline earnings are no longer enough for stock outperformance. The market is saying, ‘Show me the money'— and that's exactly what should happen in a mid-cycle transition. When companies raise both earnings and free cash flow estimates, they are rewarded. When they only raise earnings and not free cash flow, the market is much less forgiving. Investors are no longer paying indiscriminately for growth. They want cash conversion. This is also why I think AI adoption remains such an important theme. The market is increasingly rewarding companies that can demonstrate real efficiency gains from AI, not just talk about the open-ended opportunity in abstract terms. That is a very different phase for the AI cycle. The first phase was about building the infrastructure. The next phase is about who uses it well. Companies that can translate AI adoption into better margins, better productivity, and better free cash flow should continue to be rewarded. In other words, AI is becoming less about the promise and more about the evidence.That framework tells us where to be positioned. I continue to favor quality and AI adopters. Within Financials, I prefer large-cap Financial Services, particularly Insurance and Capital Markets exposed businesses, where earnings revisions are inflecting and our regime analysis remains supportive. Within cyclicals, I like Discretionary Goods, where the wallet-share shift from services to goods, improved pricing, and better earnings revisions all point to catch-up potential. In Tech, I continue to prefer hyperscalers over semis. Semis can still participate tactically, especially after recent momentum unwinds, but the hyperscalers offer a better multi-month risk-reward. They have resilient core businesses, attractive relative valuation, and underappreciated optionality around AI-related ROI and adoption. Just as important, they are not only enablers of AI, but they are early adopters. They have the flexibility to spend less if the market becomes more demanding about capex discipline. In terms of remaining market risks for this year, I'm still watching interest rates and oil very closely. A gradual rise in nominal yields alongside strong economic and earnings data is not necessarily bearish. In fact, historically, that has been one of the better environments for equities because it brings back my ‘run it hot' theme. Stronger nominal growth supports revenues and earnings. The problem is not the level of rates. It is the pace of change. If back-end yields rise too quickly, the cost of capital becomes a headwind for stock valuations.Bottom line, the broadening is still happening, but the market is raising the bar. Early-cycle beta is giving way to mid-cycle quality. Earnings are broadening, but free cash flow is also necessary to be fully rewarded. AI is still an important market driver, but the market wants measurable benefits and the leadership is becoming more selective within sectors rather than across them. This shift may make the market feel less euphoric in the short term, but also healthier and more sustainable in my view. This is not a market that is simply chasing momentum any more. It is starting to separate the companies that can simply talk about growth from the companies that can convert it into durable free cash flow and longer-term value.Thanks for tuning in; I hope you found it informative and useful. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review. And if you find Thoughts on the Market worthwhile, tell a friend or colleague to try it out!

Companies often build products for wealthy markets first and then try to adapt them for the rest of the world. But according to Dartmouth Tuck professor Vijay Govindarajan and MIT professor Amos Winter, designing for the toughest constraints first—whether that's affordability, portability, or limited infrastructure—can lead to products that perform better everywhere. They explain how leaders can identify high-impact opportunities, uncover customer needs through deep field research, and design solutions that balance performance with cost. They also discuss why organizational mindset—not technology—is often the biggest obstacle to global innovation, and where AI can (and can't) accelerate the design process. Together they wrote the book Global by Design: How to Create Innovations That Scale, Travel, and Transform.

Some of the biggest hotel construction opportunities in the world right now are taking shape across Asia Pacific — and India is accelerating fast. I spoke with Lodging Econometrics' Bruce Ford about where hotel companies are placing their bets next. India's hotel pipeline nearly tripled over the past three years, and Bruce expects a construction wave there for the next five to seven years. China brings a different story, with huge numbers of rooms opening, major renovation activity and development patterns that look very different from what we typically see in the U.S. If you want to understand where global hotel growth is heading next, see which Asia Pacific markets Bruce thinks deserve the closest attention now. Thanks to our friends at Actabl for supporting No Vacancy. Actabl gives you the power to profit. Visit Actabl.com. Want the weekly roundup of news, videos, and what you might've missed from #NoVacancyNews? Text HOTEL to 66866.

How Values Drive Company Culture and Customer Satisfaction    Shep interviews Paul Ingram, Kravis Professor of Business at Columbia Business School and author of What Do You Really Stand For?. He discusses how aligned organizational values create a stronger company culture, improves employee retention, and ultimately enhances the customer experience.    This episode of Amazing Business Radio with Shep Hyken answers the following questions and more:      How does aligning corporate values with personal values improve customer experience?  Why is value alignment critical for increasing employee retention and engagement?   How do a company's core values influence customer buying decisions and brand loyalty?   What role do leaders play in modeling and sustaining an authentic company culture?   How does hiring for shared values impact culture and workplace satisfaction?   Top Takeaways:      Companies whose values are aligned with leadership, employees, and customers create a smoother, stronger connection.     An organization's culture reflects the values of the employees who make it up. When employees work in an environment that shares the same values that they have, they are more motivated and collaborative. The organization becomes a "destination employment," where they are excited to show up every day and are happy to stay long-term.   For company values to be authentic and effective, leaders must personally demonstrate and model them. Their voice is much more amplified as employees look up to them. If there's a disconnect between what is articulated at the top and leadership's actions, employees become disengaged, and it shows in how they interact with customers.    Customers are more likely to buy from brands that embody values similar to their own. When a company authentically represents what matters to its customers, it influences their purchasing decisions and long-term support.    Research shows that employees deeply aligned with company values require a 40% salary increase to leave their jobs. Hiring for values rather than just skill nurtures a culture where people want to stay and contribute.    Culture is a collective product of everyone's values and beliefs. While you can guide culture and select people who share your principles, authentic values cannot be forced onto employees.   By encouraging people to share what makes them distinct, companies create a culture where employees feel seen, fulfilled, and invested in the team's success.    Keeping reminders of personal values accessible, whether it is written in a notecard or printed on a mug, can help you ground your actions and weigh your decisions against what truly matters to you.    Plus, Shep and Paul discuss the importance of shared values in different industries like music and sports. Tune in!    Quote:     "Any two entities interact more smoothly and more productively if their values are aligned."    About:      Paul Ingram is the Kravis Professor of Business at Columbia Business School and the author of What Do You Really Stand For?  a book focused on helping individuals and organizations identify and align their core values.    Shep Hyken is a customer service and experience expert, New York Times bestselling author, award-winning keynote speaker, and host of Amazing Business Radio.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We're still surprised people did this but... 50+ founders worth $10M to $4B reveal their personal finances. Here it is: https://joinhampton.com/mw-wrWhy do we do this? Because if you're an aspirational person or someone who runs a business and is making money, it's incredibly challenging to figure out what to do. Information is impossible to find — and that's what we put together: the net worth reveal and why we do this podcast, Moneywise.He spends $50,000 a month and keeps $50,000 in the bank. He's 27.Mo Moahid is a 27-year-old who runs the finances for his entire family — parents, brother, sister, and seven operating companies across Canada, Dubai, and Pakistan. His great-grandfather built the family fortune. The next generation lost it. His dad rebuilt the whole thing from a sales job after immigrating to Canada, and Mo grew up watching both halves of that cycle happen in his own house. He started his first company at 18, scaled it to 200 employees, sold it at 21 for low seven figures, and now moves capital between line painting, real estate development, consumer electronics, eSIMs in 125 countries, and the AI company he started with his 21-year-old brother.This episode gets into what it actually looks like to manage generational money instead of making it: why he keeps almost nothing liquid, how a $50,000 monthly burn covers five people, what happens when your dad is the chairman and your brother is your co-founder, and how inheritance gets split between three siblings before anyone dies. We go deep on the acquisition he closed the week before we recorded, the corporate job his father made him take, and the question he's already thinking about at 27 — what he wants his own kids to inherit, and what he'd rather they didn't.Also, this podcast is made by Hampton, which is a community for founders doing on average $20 million a year in revenue. We saw a lot of these money conversations happening privately behind closed doors and we thought, "What the heck, let's make it public." If you are a founder, apply here: http://joinhampton.com/mwSponsors: Daily Body Coach - achieve your dream body with https://moneywise.dailybodycoach.comSubscribe to Moneywise: https://www.youtube.com/@themoneywisepodcastFollow Daniel on X: https://x.com/danielcberkListen on Spotify / Apple Podcasts: [search "Moneywise Hampton"]

Riot Platforms is making a major shift toward AI infrastructure after signing a 20-year, $9.1 billion agreement with Anthropic covering 191 megawatts at its Rockdale, Texas campus, with expansion options that could dramatically increase the contract's value. Matt explains why this is a smart way for Bitcoin miners to monetize existing power and data-center infrastructure during weaker mining conditions, while remaining skeptical that today's AI compute requirements will still look the same two decades from now. The episode also covers Trump Media's $238 million second-quarter loss, the SEC preparing its first major crypto rulemaking effort under Paul Atkins, the ongoing political fight over how Democrats approach crypto regulation, and FlightAware suing Kalshi over the use of its flight data in prediction markets. Matt also revisits Strategy's increasingly complex Bitcoin treasury model and closes by arguing that AI infrastructure will likely become far more efficient as models, chips, and software continue improving. Happy Hodling, Everyone. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The episode identifies an acute shift in liability and accountability across the software and AI supply chain, where risk increasingly moves from vendors to service providers and operators. This dynamic is illustrated through incomplete vendor patches, AI tool output, and changing regulatory structures. Companies like N-able experienced authentication bypass flaws in widely used remote monitoring platforms, while industry-standard software licenses continue to disclaim warranties and cap or exclude liability, leaving providers responsible for the consequences. A key development is N-able's N-central authentication flaw, wherein a patch issued for an earlier vulnerability proved incomplete according to the Federal Vulnerability Database, enabling attackers to exploit the same vector. The finalized fix arrived days after exploitation began, but all previous builds — including those labeled patched — remained exposed. Simultaneously, research from Anthropic and disclosures by OpenAI revealed AI models acting outside intended boundaries, with incident response often lagging behind real-world impact. Notably, neither affected vendor assumed material liability, and disclosure of the incidents was voluntary, not compelled by contract or regulation. Meanwhile, IBM's annual cost of data breach report found AI-driven attacks up 56% with average breach costs nearing $6M, further emphasizing financial exposure. These incidents exemplify a structural trend: vendors disclaim output, while client agreements with IT providers warrant monitoring, maintenance, and remediation, resulting in providers accepting risk not assumed upstream. Regulatory responses differ by geography — in the U.S., CISA's only binding obligation was for operators to remediate vulnerabilities by a set deadline, not for vendors to prevent or report them. The EU's forthcoming Cyber Resilience Act will require reporting of exploited vulnerabilities within 24 hours and is expanding product liability to software, but these rules benefit consumers and regulators rather than business buyers and still stop short of assigning financial obligations to vendors. The operational effect for MSPs and IT service providers is increased contract risk, as provider promises to clients typically outpace the limited, warranty-free commitments of vendors. The rate and scope of vulnerabilities, amplified by AI-driven development and remediation, add volume and complexity without increasing the rate of effective outcomes. Providers are advised to reconcile their own service agreements with the actual commitments of software suppliers, clarify for clients where their true responsibilities lie, and prepare for a procurement environment where scrutiny of vendor warranties becomes the norm rather than the exception. 00:00 The Ones Who Patched Got Hit 04:16 Sold As Is, All The Way Down 08:02 The Only Enforceable Promise 11:47 Why Do We Care?  Supported by:  Pax8 LogMeIn

Google Business Profile is becoming one of the most important assets a garage door company can own, and the competition for local visibility is getting more aggressive. In this episode of Torsion Talk, Ryan explains why GBP is moving to the center of Google Search, AI Overviews, advertising, Maps, and AI-powered recommendations—and what local garage door businesses need to do now to protect their market share.Ryan breaks down why Google Business Profile leads remain some of the highest-quality opportunities in home services, how easily profiles can be suspended, and why understanding both Google's published guidelines and the realities of local search has become essential for business owners.The bigger conversation is about competition. National brands, private equity-backed companies, scammers, and aggressive multi-location operators are expanding their digital footprints quickly. Ryan explains why a local company relying on a single Google Business Profile may eventually struggle to compete against businesses building dozens or even hundreds of local signals across multiple markets.This episode dives into why multi-location strategy is becoming critical for garage door companies that want to grow, how reviews influence trust and AI recommendations, and why generating consistent, detailed customer reviews should become a major priority. Ryan also discusses the growing importance of online “signals”—mentions, awards, press, social media, locations, and personal branding—that help Google and AI platforms connect your company with authority and trust.As ChatGPT, Google AI, Gemini, and other large language models increasingly influence how homeowners choose service providers, being mentioned and trusted across the web may become just as important as traditional backlinks and keyword rankings.Ryan also explains why business owners should begin strengthening their personal brands and connecting those brands to their companies, creating another layer of authority that AI can recognize.If you own a garage door company or home service business, this episode is a wake-up call. Local search is changing, competition is accelerating, and the companies that understand Google Business Profile, multi-location SEO, reviews, reputation, and AI visibility will have a major advantage.The race for local relevance is already underway. The question is whether your company is building its digital footprint fast enough to compete.Find Ryan at:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://garagedooru.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://aaronoverheaddoors.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://markinuity.com/⁠Check out our sponsors!Sommer USA - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://sommer-usa.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Surewinder - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://surewinder.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Stealth Hardware - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://quietmydoor.com/⁠

Today, we're joined by Alex Yakubovich, co-founder and CEO of Levelpath, the AI-native procurement platform transforming how global enterprises manage indirect spend. We talk about:If software apps must become autonomous to be successful in the futureUsing AI to help build softwareDoes SaaS have a future, or strictly AI as a service?Why the question, “Is SaaS dead” is mootHow some SaaS pricing models can feel icky

Help us become the #1 Data Podcast by leaving a rating & review! We are 67 reviews away! There's a lot of advice online on breaking into data. Here's what I'd tell a beginner.

Full show notes here: https://sociallyausome.com/post/why-companies-wont-support-adhd-employees/What You'll Learn:The real cost of replacing an employee (and why it's higher than you think)The three wrong answers companies give and why they're wrongThe Split Ledger: the structural reason accommodation never happensFour mechanics that keep the cost and the cure in different placesWhat to do if you're an ADHD employee at an unsupportive jobWhat managers need to see to change behaviorKey Numbers:Gallup: Replacing an employee costs 50-200% of their annual salarySHRM: Same range, depending on roleMid-level employee at $60K: Replacement costs $30-$120KVoluntary turnover costs US businesses: ~$1 trillion per yearTeam productivity drop after turnover: ~11%The Split Ledger — 4 Mechanics:Cost (HR budget) and cure (manager decision) have different ownersTimelines don't match (quarterly goals vs. 14-month retention)No line item for "resignations prevented"Accommodation gets routed through legal, not performanceThree Tactical Moves for ADHD Employees:Don't use "accommodation" unless you need legal protectionIf you do need protection, use it deliberatelyFrame requests as output, not as personal needWant to talk about ADHD Consulting for your company? Fill out the form here: https://sociallyausome.com/adhd-workplace-consultantResources:FLOW-First Thinking: https://sociallyausome.com/books/flow-first-thinkingBook Alyece to Speak: https://sociallyausome.com/alyece_speakingInstagram: @socially.ausome

In this episode of the Cannabis Accounting Podcast, host Raymond Guns sits down with Mitch Osak, Founder and President of Quanta Consulting, to unpack why small cannabis operators are outperforming the giants, and what it actually takes to raise and deploy capital the right way in this industry.Mitch has been in cannabis since 2016, working with over 200 companies across the globe, from Canada's earliest licensed producers to today's US and European operators navigating exports, M&A, and Schedule III.Mitch breaks down:

All of us worry about the potentially negative impacts of technology. We worry our kids are online too much, that social media is disrupting their sleep, academics, mental health, and relationships—and frankly, taking away good time outdoors. And it doesn't feel good to have the same fight over screens again and again. But what if the answer isn't simply taking technology away? What if we could design it differently—and help our kids learn to use it well?In this episode, I talk with Juliette Blake, founder of Moxies, who has been thinking about girls, media, and technology since she was a teenager herself. Now a mom of three, Juliette brings the perspectives of both a tech founder and a parent to our conversation about social media, digital literacy, addictive design, and healthy screen habits. We explore how technology can be built with kids' well-being as the North Star—and what we parents can do to help our kids become thoughtful, capable digital citizens.Episode Highlights[3:31] - Juliette's remarkable origin story: how watching her eight-year-old sister and her friends struggle with body image and friendships inspired her to start a company as a teenager.[6:05] - Why the tween years are such an important—and often overlooked—developmental stage, particularly for girls navigating media and brand imagery.[8:45] - Kids don't bring every problem to their parents. Why simply knowing “I'm not the only one” can sometimes matter as much as the advice they receive.[10:33] - Magazines then, social media now: the medium has changed, but many of the pressures facing girls haven't.[13:36] - Can technology be part of the solution? Moving away from the attention economy and making well-being our North Star.[15:35] - What “safe by design” actually means—and why companies building products for kids should bear responsibility for protecting them.[20:58] - “Dark-patterned persuasive design features”: streaks, likes, notifications, endless rewards, and other features designed to keep kids coming back.[24:22] - Why Moxies shuts down chat at night and how thoughtful guardrails can support kids when their own self-control gets wobbly.[27:43] - Teaching digital citizenship in real time by helping girls reconsider an unkind message before they send it.[31:17] - Autonomy with safeguards: creating online spaces where tweens can connect with people they actually know rather than strangers.[35:56] - Building digital literacy into technology itself, from privacy and passwords to confidence and emotional skills.[38:26] - The Anxious Generation, phone bans, and why simply taking devices away isn't a one-size-fits-all solution.[42:00] - Endless scrolling and the important difference between kids wanting to return to technology and feeling they have to.[45:42] - Why “my kid isn't on TikTok” doesn't necessarily mean they're avoiding the same addictive design elsewhere online.[50:46] - Practical advice for parents: explain the why behind boundaries, start conversations early, and model the digital habits we hope our kids develop.[54:09] - Why keeping devices out of bedrooms can protect sleep, relationships, and healthy boundaries.Key TakeawaysWe're still underestimating media's influence on tweens. Social media and brand imagery can have an outsized impact on developing minds, particularly for young girls.Tweens won't bring every problem to their parents. Sometimes discovering “I'm not the only one” can be just as valuable as the advice they receive.The medium has changed, but the issues haven't. Whether the images come from magazines or social media, kids' well-being should always be our North Star.Parents shouldn't have to outsmart addictive technology. Companies have a responsibility to protect kids from “dark-patterned persuasive design features” designed to keep users clicking, scrolling, and coming back.Digital citizenship has to be taught. Screens make it easier to say things we might never say face-to-face. Kids need coaching to understand the real impact of their words online.Our own digital habits matter. If we want our kids to put their devices down and be present, we need to model that ourselves.Links & ResourcesMoxies Social Media Platform — joinmoxies.comIf this episode has helped you, remember to rate, follow, and share the Self-Driven Child Podcast. Your support helps us reach more people and create more content that makes a difference. If you have a high school aged student and would like to talk about putting a tutoring or college plan together, reach out to Ned's company, PrepMatters at www.prepmatters.com

ORE Catapult wants industry blade failure data, Siemens Gamesa posts its first profit since 2022, and Vattenfall sweeps Denmark’s offshore auction. Fill out the ORE Catapult survey! The Uptime Wind Energy Podcast is brought to you by Weather Guard Lightning Tech, creators of the StrikeTape Ultra LPS retrofit. Subscribe to Uptime’s Substack newsletter. And check out Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” Youtube channel. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall, and I’m here with Rosemary Barnes, Matthew Sted, and Yolanda Padron. And it has been a real interesting week out in the renewable land, uh, if you’ve been watching some of the news, and we’re gonna talk about a number of those stories this week. But I wanna lead off with what ORE Catapult is doing over in the UK. So if, if you haven’t followed ORE Catapult, they are a, a research investigative arm and a huge proponent of wind, offshore wind in the United Kingdom, and they’ve done a, a tre- really tremendous amount of work in some of the, uh, particular problems that exist in wind trying to help [00:01:00] solve them. They have a survey that’s out, and if you haven’t seen it, you can just Google ORE Catapult and put in survey, and you’ll come to either an article or get to their site. And Rosemary and Yolanda, there’s a couple of particular items that they’re asking questions about. Uh, a lot of it is asking specific questions about torsional stability of blades. Have you seen more difficulty with torsion? Is… Do we need a torsion test? I think that was one of the questions. Uh, also looking at ranking of the different issues that happen with blades in particular. That’s what I noticed. Uh, you know, where’s lightning? Where’s blade connections? Where’s structural issues? Where do you rank all those different things? And I, I have not seen a survey like this in quite a while. Is this something that we need to do more of? I know [00:02:00] ORE Catapult will get a huge amount of feedback, at least I hope, over in the UK and, and around Europe. I don’t think many Americans are gonna be contributing to that too much since you don’t have a lot of offshore wind. But is this going in the right direction? Do we need more of these industry surveys about structural blade issues?  Yolanda Padron: Yeah, I think these surveys are a really good idea. Uh, the only thing that scares me from the owner side is that sometimes there’s a little bit of, uh- Teams don’t really love the idea of sharing information that might seem like it’s, um, like intellectual property to their internal teams. Even if as an engineer, of course, you love the idea of sharing and finding out like, um, what everybody else is, is experiencing on their site. Um, and so I really hope that the teams can really look, like their internal teams can really look past that because this would be a really great tool [00:03:00] for everybody to use. I know I looked at the survey myself and some of the questions kind of gave people the, the opportunity to kind of anonymize their data and then just kind of share it and have it. It seemed like it, it would probably be a platform that everybody could look at or everybody that, that shared could look at. And I think that it could be really, really good for operators to be able to know kind of if what they’re seeing on site is normal and just to be able to see what they’re signing up for when there’s a new site coming in. Or if it’s a site that’s been operational for a while, you can see what’s, hopefully, what’s happening to a quite older site than yours. So just to, to be able to be a bit more prepared, um, since a lot of these sites are from different own- owners. But I think it’s a really good idea.  Allen Hall: The survey asked questions about leading edge erosion, torsional loads, root joint integrity, lightning damage, manufacturing defects, which is a big [00:04:00] issue right now, extreme loading events, which also, uh, is, uh, coming about more often, uh, repair performance, and end of life fatigue. So there’s a, a series of questions about that and when do you experience these items in the lifetime of a blade. Is it more towards the beginning of the operation or more towards the end? That is important to know ’cause it, how you go about managing blades depends on that. The torsional questions were more specific. Uh, in your experience, how well understood are the effects on blade longevity of torsional loads compared to bending loads? And I think that relates back to some of the, uh, issues that have been seen on some offshore blades where there’s no existing test for torsion because it’s so hard to do. Whereas bending loads, we pretty well understand that and can do lifetime testing essentially for, for bending loads. So the torsional one I think is gonna raise a lot of question marks to hopefully with people, and we can come up [00:05:00] with a, a better approach to that.  Yolanda Padron: Hopefully, yeah. I think this is, I mean, this is just a really good idea to if, if everybody could partake. Um, I would really love to see something similar if people could in, in onshore. And so just something that’s, that’s shared a, uh, a little bit more widely I think would be really, really great. Uh, the only thing that might stre- or not stress me out, but- you know, I think people need to be careful about is just making sure that you’re not, um, that you actually use your data and not just kind of like, “Oh, I know that I remember this terrible lightning damage that I got in this really, really bad area, so I’m gonna mark as though most of my lightning damage happens in that bad area.” So just, just make sure you don’t use confirmation bias for, for that, but  Matthew Stead: I can also add to it as well ’cause, um, we’ve done a fair bit of work with all Catapult over the years, um, particularly through the new IEC standard for blade O&M. Um, and, uh, [00:06:00] definitely through the new blade O&M standard, the topic of blade twist has come up multiple times. Um- And also adding to that, you know, our organization has done twist on, twist measurements on 100 meter blades, and the twist that we measured was more than the OEM expected. Um, so I think this is a bit of a sleeper topic, um, and I think OR Catapult is doing the right thing by gathering more information. Allen Hall: There is a l- little database that’s gonna be put together, at least looking at the questions. Question 12, and everybody hopefully will go in and, and participate in the survey, but it says, “Would you be interested in sharing redacted failure data into a industry-wide database to help inform research agenda for blade development and O&M tools and solutions?” That is a great idea. Having a database so we understand the scale of problems and can put some numbers [00:07:00] to them, and then we can do some more research in those areas, and focus research where we’re actually gonna spend money in the right places, which has been my fight for the last five, six years, where we spend a lot of money, but not necessarily where we need to. That’s a great question, and hopefully OR Catapult does p- put together a database.  Rosemary Barnes: Companies really, really, really struggle to provide access to their data. Like, um, it, y- yeah, it, it’s, it’s very hard to get it beyond just using for their own specific project. I’ll be, I’ll be so happy if this database gets up and becomes publicly available so that every- everybody can use it to create the solutions that the industry needs. But I know how hard a challenge it is, so I’m wishing them heaps of, heaps of luck to get it to work.  Matthew Stead: And can I also add that, um, OR Catapult also did a wonderful presentation at Blades Europe, where they talked about life extension. They talked about the actual loading on the blades, um, influencing the fatigue life. And so I think, you know, that excellent [00:08:00] database hopefully, as we talked about, gets fed into some of their work about life extension.  Allen Hall: Well, OR Catapult is trying to get ahead of blade failures before they cost money. Uh, our next company knows exactly what that costs. Siemens Gamesa is still climbing out of a serial defect problem, and it posted its first profit in four years. So we’ll be back to talk about that in a moment.  Speaker: Are you overspending on lightning repairs? Most operators are, because solving lightning damage is complicated. Weather Guard Lightning Tech helps operators reduce lightning damage. Our innovative StrikeTape lightning diverter protects over 20,000 blades worldwide. Now, StrikeTape Ultra installs faster than ever. StrikeTape Ultra cures uptower in just 15 minutes, even in cold weather. Visit weatherguardwind.com to schedule a call. Allen Hall: Siemens Gamesa has finally turned a [00:09:00] profit, its first time since 2022. Uh, now comes the hard part. Order intake in the third quarter fell 77% from 4.89 billion euros a year ago to 1.05 billion Chief Executive Christian Bruch, uh, says a lot of the offshore projects that were originally planned are slipping, and as we’ve seen in the news, and that developers are not willing to make final investment decisions right now. Uh, in Germany, developers are lobbying to hand 16 gigawatts of offshore sites back to the states, and, and Bruch says that the, the capacity is, is not going to be built. Onshore, uh, the relaunched 5.X platform is ramping up slowly after the serial defect shutdown, with approvals still holding some orders back. So Siemens Gamesa is going to make a push, or [00:10:00] Omtera I guess it is called now, w- is going to make a push, uh, into the 5.X machine and continue on on the offshore side. But boy, some of these, uh, auctions and, uh, bidding processes are not great for Siemens at the moment.  Matthew Stead: I’ve got a question. Did, um, did Siemens actually stop selling for a while as well? Is that part of their order intake loss?  Allen Hall: Some of the machines, I believe, the 4.X and the 5.X, when they had the serial defect issues, uh, they put a hold on them for a little while and, and did a complete redesign, I believe, on the blades. But other turbines I thought were still being offered for sale, and I thought I saw s- some installs in the United States going on, more on the two megawatt, three megawatt machines, uh, but n- not the bigger ones. And, and offshore too, like it sound- does sound like the large offshore wind project in the United States, which is the coastal Virginia offshore wind project, uh, off the, you know, a couple of miles off the coast of Virginia, is [00:11:00]going a little bit slower than they thought. Uh, so maybe there’s a, a little bit to the 14. It’s, that’s a Siemens Gamesa 14-236 direct drive machine that’s going in there. So there, there’s some still learning curves going on from what I can see, but it does seem like it’s, uh, it’s, you know, formerly Siemens Energy, there’s a huge amount of money to be had in this corporation. So if the wind division is not doing all that great, it, it’s kind of like GE Vernova. There, there’s other ways to make money.  Matthew Stead: There’s also, I mean, I’m just wondering if there’s a bit of a blip. It’s just a short-term correction in terms of the order intake, and, you know, once they get back on track, uh, it’ll, it’ll revert again. Uh, that’s what I hope for, hope for.  Allen Hall: We’re gonna move on to Vattenfall. Uh, there was a Danish offshore auction, and Vattenfall won both of them. And Ørsted did bid and didn’t win, and no one seems to care too much that Ørsted didn’t win. Uh, and Vattenfall, it’s, it’s a huge deal for [00:12:00] Vattenfall. So- Orsted not winning in their own backyard does seem like a problem politically  Rosemary Barnes: If Denmark wanted to have, you know, local companies winning these auctions, then they could’ve, they could’ve, uh, you know, made it for l- local companies only or tilted the playing field in their favor. Um, so yeah, uh, I don’t know, maybe that’s the outcome that they want. If they want… It’s always like a, a tension, right? If you, you want cheap- the cheapest prices on one hand, you want local content on the other, and if you, you know, anything you do to one of those two sides affects the other. So yeah, like, in general, the more you encourage local content, then the more restrictions you place on companies to choose a cheaper supplier in every case. Uh, Denmark is at least well-placed to have good world-class suppliers in, you know, most, most categories of the things that you need in an offshore wind [00:13:00] farm. But yeah, I mean, you see it all over the world. Uh, you know, Australia periodically tries to, uh, you know, get more local content, but it’s very, it’s very hard for us ’cause we don’t have a whole thriving ecosystem. And so it’s like you’ve gotta pick out the one thing that you think that we could compete on and then subsidize that, and then it’s just, like, so… it’s such a weird distortion. And if companies didn’t already wanna choose that local supplier, it’s because it’s more expensive, so therefore you are necessarily adding cost. Um, I think Taiwan d- uh, has h- experienced a lot of this with their offshore industry, right? Where they kind of s- they got really enthusiastic about local content, and everyone’s like, “Yeah, this is a great thing to do ’cause you can get local manufacturing, and you can develop a whole thriving industry But then when it comes down to it, you know, it’s not so great to have, like, whoever set up the, the system that you’ve gotta adhere to to get these projects in place, like, they’re not the experts in developing offshore [00:14:00] projects for a cheap price and on schedules, obviously. Other- otherwise they’d be working in that, in that role. So you, uh, do end up making things really hard for the developers, and then you- they ended up with very expensive projects. And, um, because the local content, you know, like, they had what sounded, in theory at the start, like a good, um, like a good idea. They start off with a low local content requirement and gradually ratcheted it up as the industry is supposed to mature. But what they saw was the prices just ratcheted up in parallel. Um, especially once the few things that can be competitively supplied, uh, locally, once you… That is not sufficient to y- y- you know, once the local content amount exceeds what you can achieve with those competitive industries, then yeah, you do start to see people having to spend a lot more and add a lot of project risk if you’re, y- you know, uh, going with brand new suppliers that have never, you know, never supplied a project like that before. So I can kind of [00:15:00] understand why Denmark wouldn’t be so focused on, yeah, our local, our local company needs to win.  Matthew Stead: Yeah. Yeah, com- competition is a good thing, isn’t it? So yeah, you can’t have everyone winning all the time.  Rosemary Barnes: I think it’s such an interesting time, though, in the world where, and I’m changing my mind about this, like, yes, competition is a good thing, but if you only have competition, um, and don’t consider your country’s, you know, local competitiveness, then you end up not being able to make anything, especially when we’ve got, y- you know, in the world at the moment, there’s so much globalization, like, way more than ever before in the world’s history. And, you know, there are countries or our country mostly, that has, you know, 50% of market share for certain things, and more for other things that people need. It’s like, so- They can obviously, just based on scale alone, can produce things at prices that no [00:16:00] one else can compete with. And then you add in that not every country is totally committed to 100% fair global playing field and, you know, there are subsidies involved and incentives and that sort of thing. Like, you do just end up with every other country not thinking it’s economic to make anything at all. And then, yeah, I mean, everyone knows monopolies are bad, right? I don’t think that would be any different for supply chains. So I think, yeah, like we’re about to have a re-reckoning or are in the process of a re-reckoning about how much globalization is a good thing, how much free trade is a good thing, how much, you know, just letting the market take care of it is a good thing because nobody wants to end up in a situation where, you know, the whole world is dependent on one country to make absolutely everything. Yolanda Padron: Yeah, but is it, isn’t it also kind of like a cultural thing here for Vattenfall, um, like for Dane- Denmark itself to try to be very [00:17:00]strict about the rules and if Ørsted didn’t win the bid, then they didn’t win the bid type of thing? Like, to not try to give them as much of a, of an advantage ’cause they’re still owned majorly by the Crown, right? Allen Hall: It’s like 50% ownership by the state, right, Ørsted still.  Yolanda Padron: In general they, they have a lot of- very Danish rules of like against, you know, uh, in the US against like PACs and lobbying and stuff, and things that are very common here because it’s more culturally aligned with Denmark. Um, so I guess it, I mean, it does, it, it does make sense, right? That they would try to separate that as much as possible to try to not have that conflict of interest.  Rosemary Barnes: I think Denmark, um, definitely wouldn’t consider themselves rule followers, ’cause if you compare them to their immediate neighbors like, um, Sweden and Germany, the Danes are like a lot more relaxed. They have this saying in, [00:18:00] uh, Denmark that i- in, in Sweden, everything that isn’t forbidden is mandatory. That’s how they think of, of the Swedes.  Allen Hall: Wow. There’s a lot that’s not forbidden, Rosemary. You’re going into some murky waters there. Okay.  Rosemary Barnes: That’s their perception, and I think it is true relative to Sweden. The Swede- Swedes are more rule followers. But as, um, someone that comes from a probably more relaxed country, again, yes, the Danes did really like following rules. Um, like a lot of unwritten rules as well. I remember one specific example I remember actually, uh, we had like a whole, uh, I did Danish language classes when I was there, and part of that was like a cultural education. One of the classes was based around, uh, some of the unwritten rules in society, and one of them is it’s this date, and I don’t remember the date, but there is a certain date that if you have not trimmed your hedge by that date, that is just like y- you are not an upstanding member of society. Like, that is just like ab- absolutely not okay and like everybody that walks [00:19:00] past your house is like, “Oh my God, they haven’t trimmed their hedge yet,” and people will be talking about it and in the canteen at work. So definitely they do like to follow the rules. But what I will say about Denmark also is that I think that they usually top the world’s list, or at least close to the top in terms of trust. Um, they trust people in general, but especially they trust government institutions. And I think that you can’t have trust in government institutions if they pick and choose, um, when they’re going to enforce the rules or not. So I think that in that sense, yeah, of course, they’re not going to after the fact go, “Oh, this, the, oh, we had an auction, but the result wasn’t the way we liked it, so we’re gonna change it.” Like, that’s not a very trustworthy thing for a government to do. They do rely, obviously we’re a small country, they rely a lot on international trade, and so I think that they would see a big risk in, um, yeah, having their auction be anything but fully transparent and fair. So yeah. Anyway, that’s my, my cultural interpretation based on having lived in Denmark for five years. Uh, [00:20:00] five years ago now. It’s been a while.  Allen Hall: That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn. And if you found value in today’s conversation, please leave us a review. It really helps other wind energy professionals discover the show. And don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. And for Rosey, Yolanda, and Matthew, I’m Allen Hall, and we’ll see you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy podcast.

For this week's edition of Overdrive Radio we're picking up with longtime trucker-songwriter and performer #TonyJustice after getting the opportunity last week to share news of the Large Cars & Guitars truck show's big $14K haul for the Susan G. Komen foundation. That makes $200K-plus given by the show's participating truckers and sponsors to the breast cancer awareness, support, and research advocacy group over Large Cars' brief five-year history: https://overdriveonline.com/15831558 Everybody loves a big novelty check presentation, right? In case you missed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y-t6j0YfA8 Tune in for history of the long road toward launching the Large Cars show, consistently bringing upward of 100 trucks participating, thelast two years at the iconic Bristol Motor Speedway in Tennessee. Charitable donations aren't the only reason Justice has been in the news at OverdriveOnline.com in recent weeks, though. He's now the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit independent recording artists like himself are bringing against the Suno AI-generated-music platform. The Justice v. Suno case alleges copyright infringement, essentially, in the process of scraping recordings to store and train the company's AI models on. Approached by attorneys, Tony Justice didn't immediately come to the decision to get out front in the fight, but he's clearly dedicated now, watching his trucking-music income from streaming dwindle with the proliferation of AI-generated songs flooding listening platforms. "We have tech and corporate America coming in and trampling on the little guy," he said. "Anytime I'm in a position to use my voice to fight for the little guy, I feel like I need to do that." Listen here further to Justice's reasoning, it's not hard to let your mind wander to something closer to the center of the trucking -- just how good so-called AI is or can or will get at driving the trucks themselves. Companies like Kodiak and Aurora and so many others have trained self-driving models on the roads today, with drivers' help, in hopes to bring full automation to the task -- "AI" to your seat at the wheel. "This is how we live. This is how we support our families," he said. "We've gotta fight for it. There's too many times you hear" people complaining about this or that, but "when it comes time to do something about it, everybody goes quiet. ... People need to put in an effort doing something about it, and standing up." Justice speaks to his own motivation in the suit here, but it dovetails with trucking, too. How long before significant numbers of drivers are displaced is anybody's guess. We've seen recent cases of pro drivers voicing concerns on those and other, safety grounds directly to the U.S. Department of Transportation and Congress, too. In short, the effort to raise the alarm is getting hotter: https://overdriveonline.com/15828271 Justice is clearly motivated to take up the cause of fellow independent artists like himself, on the road to protecting that talent he's got. As his comments suggest, though, more truckers might soon be motivated to do the same with theirs. As mentioned in the podcast: **Phillip Couch's "New Testament" custom Freightliner: https://overdriveonline.com/15817421 **Justice v. Suno: https://overdriveonline.com/15830530 Subscribe to Overdrive's daily newsletter or weekly Pride & Polish newsletter for trucking news and analysis, and some of the best in custom rigs at truck shows around the country: https://bit.ly/overdrivesubscribe

Kenny's bookshop in Galway have said they received an order for thousands of books, which has raised concerns about its potential use for AI.While it's not unusual for bookstores to receive large orders from places like libraries, this time the identity of the purchaser wasn't revealed and a lot of the books were out of date.Tomás Kenny of Kenny's Bookshop and Elaine Burke, host of the For Tech's Sake podcast, speak to Danny McConnell on The Last Word.Hit the ‘Play' button on this page to hear the discussion.

Companies are spending billions on GPUs, data centers, foundation models, and AI infrastructure. But what happens when the network connecting all of it cannot keep up? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I welcome back Avi Freedman, co-founder and CEO of Kentik, five years after our previous conversation. Avi has been operating large-scale networks since the 1990s, including more than a decade at Akamai, and brings a rare combination of founder experience and hands-on knowledge of how the internet actually works. We discuss why network performance is becoming an important factor in determining the return companies receive from their AI investments. If organizations cannot move data efficiently to models or deliver inference reliably to users and applications, expensive compute infrastructure can sit waiting while performance suffers and costs increase. Avi explains what technology leaders should measure to determine whether their network is helping or hindering AI workloads. This includes establishing performance baselines, synthetic testing across cloud and AI providers, understanding dependencies across the digital supply chain, and using observability to identify what changed when performance deteriorates. The conversation also examines network intelligence and why collecting telemetry alone is not enough. Organizations need to connect network data with the applications and users affected, understand historical behavior, determine which problems matter, and give network teams enough context to act quickly. Agentic AI introduces another opportunity. Avi explains how AI agents can increasingly perform the work of experienced network engineers by monitoring baselines, investigating alerts, troubleshooting problems, and recommending actions. But fully autonomous networks remain some distance away. Most enterprises currently want humans deciding whether significant production changes should be made. That leads us into governance. As businesses give AI systems access to increasingly important infrastructure, credentials, permissions, guardrails, and oversight become major considerations. Avi warns about ungoverned AI systems gaining proxy access to corporate infrastructure and explains why companies need clear boundaries around what agents can see and do. We also revisit a lesson from decades of internet infrastructure: individual components will fail. Rather than attempting to create networks that never fail, businesses should design for resilience through redundancy, over-provisioning, monitoring, and architectures capable of continuing when something inevitably breaks. For founders, CIOs, CTOs, network engineers, and infrastructure leaders building around AI, Avi offers practical advice on observability, network resilience, autonomous operations, AI infrastructure, and knowing when networking expertise should be developed internally or brought in from elsewhere. And we finish somewhere unexpected: how CEOs can use AI to make better decisions by explicitly asking it to disagree with them. Avi explains why turning AI from a sycophantic assistant into an argumentative colleague can expose weaknesses in an idea, improve communication, and help leaders test their thinking. AI may be transforming software, compute, and business operations, but none of it works without connectivity. As AI becomes part of the operational backbone of the enterprise, understanding the network underneath it becomes increasingly difficult to ignore.

Here is a FAQ Video on the Courses: https://youtu.be/0F7imrzjXWs Here is a deep dive into which course is best for you: https://youtu.be/JM_jgS8M-iU https://www.b2bRevenue.com - Get Your Free E-Book on How Companies make Decisions. FAQ: 1 YEAR ACCESS, PAY MONTHLY OR ANNUALLY NOT A SUBSCRIPTION OFFICE HOURS EVERY  OTHER WEEK VIA ZOOM. 1 HOUR GROUP Q&A. UNLIMITED 1-ON-1'S  ARE FREE AS LONG AS THEY CAN BE SHARED IN THE COURSE. 1-ON-1 ARE FULL ACCESS ON DAY ONE - NOTHING IS GATED OR TIME RELEASED. ALL CONTENT IS VIDEO BASED AND SELF PACED I RECOMMEND TAKE COURSE ONCE WITHOUT NOTES OR APPLYING IT SO YOU UNDERSTAND THE BIG PICTURE FIRST. THEN TAKE AND APPLY IT STEP BY STEP. YOU START WHEN YOU WANT AND GO AS FAST OR SLOW AS NEEDED.   Email me additional questions: briangburns@me.com     — SAMPLE EMAIL TO EXPENSE THE COURSE MGR,   I have been listening to the brutal truth about sales podcast for X months and it speaks to the issues we face.   They currently offer a course that includes video instruction, group Q&A and One-on-One coaching. I'm committed to my own personal development and would like your help in expensing the course.   It would pay for itself if I closed only one new deal of $X value.   Please let me know by Friday if I can move forward with this 1 year course.   Thanks, ME Here are some student interviews from the courses:      ———————————————————————————————————— Audible 30 day Free Trial: http://www.audibletrial.com/BrutalTruth  

Why do so many founder-led companies hit a growth ceiling... even when they have a great product? In this episode of Sales Lead Dog, Christopher Smith sits down with Adam Rojas, Founder and Managing Partner of Bellmoore Consulting, to discuss how growth-stage businesses can build scalable sales systems, improve revenue operations, and move beyond founder-dependent selling. Adam shares practical lessons from more than 25 years in enterprise sales leadership, explaining why predictable growth comes from building the right sales process, qualifying opportunities early, using CRM strategically, and leveraging AI to help teams work smarter instead of harder. If you're a founder, sales leader, revenue executive, or business owner looking to build a repeatable go-to-market strategy, this episode is packed with practical advice you can apply immediately. What You'll Learn • How to build a predictable revenue operating system • The biggest mistakes businesses make with CRM • Why most companies suffer from a "leaky sales bucket" • The KPIs every growing business should measure • Why sales is still built on human relationships About Adam Rojas Adam Rojas is the Founder and Managing Partner of Bellmoore Consulting, a fractional commercial and revenue leadership firm that helps founder-led technology and tech-enabled services companies build predictable, scalable revenue engines. Adam specializes in helping growth-stage businesses in the $2M to $15M revenue range create the commercial infrastructure needed to scale, including revenue strategy, sales process, pipeline management, leadership coaching, and go-to-market execution. Before founding Bellmoore Consulting, Adam spent more than 25 years leading enterprise sales organizations, beginning his career in telecommunications with BellSouth before moving into leadership roles at AT&T after its acquisition. Throughout his career, he has worked with organizations ranging from small businesses to Fortune 100 companies, helping teams modernize their sales strategies, improve CRM adoption, and build sustainable revenue growth. Today, Adam partners with founders who have outgrown founder-led selling and need experienced commercial leadership without making a premature Chief Revenue Officer hire. His work focuses on transforming inconsistent sales into repeatable systems that support long-term growth. Connect with Adam Rojas LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamrojas/ Bellmoore Consulting https://www.bellmooreconsulting.com/ About Sales Lead Dog Sales Lead Dog is hosted by Christopher Smith, CRM technology and sales process expert, and founder of Empellor CRM. Each episode features sales leaders who have separated themselves from the rest of the pack, sharing how they achieve success with their teams and their CRM strategy. Unless you are the lead dog, the view never changes. Connect and Learn More All episodes and show notes: https://empellorcrm.com/salesleaddog/ If this episode brought you value

Marvel Tokon PC issues, Nintendo movie expansion, Sony physical‑media backlash, Microsoft disc‑support plans, and a Space Station Silicon Valley N64 review. Chapters: 00:00 — Episode preview 00:31 — Welcome & show intro 01:34 — John's recent pickups and gaming 05:14 — Ryan's LEGO pickup, Ori, and Guilty Gear Strive 10:50 — Marvel Tokon's PC launch problems 14:52 — Nintendo's expanding movie ambitions 22:21 — Sony, digital-only games, and physical media concerns 31:33 — Could Xbox preserve physical game support? 44:35 — Space Station Silicon Valley review 59:53 — Wrap-up John and Ryan break down another week of gaming news, starting with their recent video game pickups and what's been keeping them busy. From new finds to ongoing playthroughs, they warm up the episode with what's currently on their controllers. The news segment kicks off with Marvel Tokon stumbling to mixed Steam reviews as players call the PC port “miserable,” prompting a response from Arc System Works. The guys dig into what went wrong Next, they look at Nintendo's expanding entertainment strategy as the company plans to double down on movies following the Super Mario Bros. film's massive double‑billion success. They explore what franchises could be next and how this shift affects Nintendo's broader identity. The conversation then moves to Sony, where the CFO addresses criticism about PlayStation dropping physical games — though not very convincingly. John and Ryan unpack the messaging, the backlash, and what this means for collectors and retailers. They also discuss reports that Microsoft originally planned to continue disc support before the internal “Xbox reset,” adding another wrinkle to the ongoing physical‑vs‑digital debate. To wrap up the episode, the Inflation Deflation Game of the Week spotlights Space Station Silicon Valley on the Nintendo 64, as the duo revisits the quirky classic and evaluates its current market value. Find us on TheGameDeflators.com Twitter - www.twitter.com/GameDeflators Facebook - www.facebook.com/TheGameDeflators Instagram - www.instagram.com/thegamedeflators The views and opinions expressed on this channel are solely those of the author. The content within these recordings are property of their respective Designers, Writers, Creators, Owners, Organizations, Companies and Producers. Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted. Permission for intro and outro music provided by Matthew Huffaker http://www.youtube.com/user/teknoaxe 2_25_18

S&P 500 futures are flat. Treasury and JGB yields up one to two basis points along the curve. Crude is strengthening amid latest setback in Strait of Hormuz-reopening talks. Gold is steady while silver edging higher. Dollar is firming against majors, strongest against yen and Korean won. Bitcoin little changed. Efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz remain stalled following a series of hard-line demands from Iran. Although Foreign Minister Araghchi claims a deal with Oman is nearing completion, he stressed that reopening the strait depends on the U.S. paying billions in compensation, withdrawing regional forces, unfreezing assets, and lifting sanctions. The U.S. has dismissed these conditions as unacceptable, with President Trump indicating he is willing to continue the economic pressure campaign as long as gas prices remain stable.Companies mentioned: Ashland, Trump Media & Technology Group, Paramount Skydance

Ever parked somewhere for a couple of hours, came back, and your car had a boot on it? Then they hit you with a $450 fee, plus a card fee, plus an after hours fee? It sounds made up, but for many North Carolinians, it's reality. Today we're looking at why towing and booting has become such a hot topic, what the law actually says, and why state leaders are trying to change it.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Aug. 10, 2026- The marijuana industry is bracing for the ramifications of legislation imposing a wage board on licensed cannabis businesses. We discuss the potential fallout of this measure and the status of cannabis beverage regulation with Katie Neer, of counsel with the lobbying firm Dickinson & Avella.

Modern Animal's acquisition by Chewy has become one of the most significant and debated developments in veterinary medicine.In this episode, Dr. Christie Long joins Dr. Brianna Armstrong to share her unconventional journey from software and operations to veterinary medicine and eventually becoming Chief Medical Officer of Modern Animal. Dr. Long explains the original vision behind Modern Animal, the challenges of scaling its technology-enabled and membership-based model, and the lessons the company learned while expanding beyond California.Dr. Long also discusses the financial realities of building a venture-backed veterinary company, why the fundraising environment became more difficult, and what led Modern Animal to join Chewy. Dr. Armstrong and Dr. Long address concerns surrounding corporate consolidation, vertical integration, pharmacy, insurance, pricing, and what Chewy's expanding healthcare ecosystem could mean for independent veterinary hospitals. Dr. Long also responds to the public reaction surrounding the acquisition and explains why personal relationships may remain independent practices' greatest competitive advantage.This is a candid conversation about entrepreneurship, culture, scale, ownership, and what the Modern Animal and Chewy partnership could signal for the future of veterinary medicine.Key Takeaways- The hardest part of building a veterinary company is not necessarily building the hospitals. It is creating jobs, career paths, leadership systems, and a culture that talented people want to join.- Growth exposes assumptions. Modern Animal's rapid success in Southern California did not automatically translate into other markets, forcing the company to rethink its branding, membership options, marketing, and accessibility.- Venture-backed growth creates a race against time. Companies must prove their model, reach meaningful scale, and attract additional capital before their financial runway ends.- Scale and independence are not the only two options. Christie views the acquisition as a way to access capital, talent, technology, and customers that could allow Modern Animal to pursue ideas it could not accomplish alone.- Independent practices still have a major advantage. Personal relationships and meaningful human connection remain difficult for any large organization to standardize or scale.- The future of veterinary medicine should not be framed only as corporate versus private. The more important questions may be who makes the decisions, how teams are treated, whether medical quality is protected, and whether the business creates genuine value for patients, clients, employees, and the profession. About Dr. Christie LongDr. Christie Long is a veterinarian, builder, and Chief Medical Officer of Modern Animal. Before entering veterinary medicine, she worked in software development, project management, and operations. Her career has included clinical practice, veterinary telehealth, corporate veterinary development, and the creation and expansion of Modern Animal's technology-enabled veterinary hospitals.Through her work, Christie has focused on improving the veterinary experience for patients, clients, and the people delivering care. She now enters the next chapter of that work following Modern Animal's acquisition by Chewy.ConnectLearn more about Modern Animal: https://www.modernanimal.com/Connect with Dr. Christie Long: https://www.linkedin.com/in/christie-long-dvm-b4b51a117/Follow Choose People Love Pets: If you enjoyed this episode, make sure to subscribe, leave a review, and share it with someone who needs to hear it.Follow for more: FB: ⁠https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61556480229406&mibextid=LQQJ4d⁠ IG: ⁠https://www.instagram.com/choosepeoplelovepets?igsh=MTVzZjc4ZHE4MWd2NQ%3D%3D&utm_source=qr⁠ LI: ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/company/choose-people-love-pets/

Third-Party Risk: What Companies Get Wrong | The International Risk Podcast with Tom GarrubbaAs organisations increasingly rely on outsourcing, cloud providers, and complex global supply chains, third-party risk has become one of the biggest challenges facing business leaders. But where do organisations most often go wrong—and how can they build more resilient supplier relationships?In this episode, we explore how organisations can strengthen third-party risk assurance through better supplier due diligence, governance, and ongoing oversight.We break down:- Why third-party risk has evolved far beyond procurement and contract management- How to assess suppliers before outsourcing critical technology and business services- Managing concentration risk and overreliance on strategic suppliers- The importance of supplier due diligence, on-site assessments, and continuous assurance- Building realistic risk-adjusted business cases that balance cost savings with resilience- Deciding what should—and should not—be outsourced- Practical lessons from DORA, NIS2, and modern third-party risk management- The international risks that concern Tom Garrubba mostAbout the guestTom Garrubba is Co-Founder and Chief Commercial & Partnership Officer at FusionAIrre, an AI-powered assurance software company helping organisations modernise third-party risk management. With nearly 20 years of experience advising Fortune 100 organisations across financial services, healthcare, and technology, Tom has designed and led large-scale third-party risk, cybersecurity, and supplier assurance programmes. He is also a global speaker, published author, university lecturer, and trainer for the internationally recognised Certified Third Party Risk Professional (CTPRP) and Certified Third Party Risk Assessor (CTPRA) certification programmes.About the hostDominic Bowen is Head of Strategic Advisory and Partner at one of Europe's leading risk management consulting firms. He advises CEOs, boards, and senior executives on crisis management, geopolitical risk, operational resilience, and strategy, drawing on decades of experience across government, humanitarian operations, and corporate leadership.

Colin Payne is the Head of Innovation at the Financial Conduct Authority, the UK's financial regulator, where he is building the frameworks and platforms that will define the next decade of global finance. With over two decades at the cutting edge of fintech, he has worked with startups, unicorns, central banks, and regulators across the world to turn bold ideas into real financial products without ever compromising consumer protection. He leads the FCA's regulatory innovation team, running programmes like the Supercharged Sandbox and the Smart Data Accelerator that give companies a safe space to test the future of finance under real regulatory conditions. He also chairs the Global Financial Innovation Network, bringing together regulators from around the world to align on how new technologies like AI, digital assets, and open banking should be governed. He is one of the rare people who genuinely believes that regulation and innovation are not opposites, and has spent his career proving it. On The Menu:AI, data, and tokenization reshaping finance FCA flexibility for fast-moving technology evolutionWhat regulatory credibility looks like globallyTransparency, traceability, and human oversight over machines Companies compress development from years to months Trust money without understanding the mechanicsCompute and expert guidance compress development

The millions of Americans living with mental illness—as well as people dealing with life's everyday stresses—often struggle to see a therapist when they need one. That's a big reason why many people have started turning to AI tools such as ChatGPT for emotional support. But as a number of high-profile lawsuits show, that can sometimes lead to devastating outcomes. Companies creating AI for mental health say they can do better. What's News host Alex Ossola and WSJ audio producer Pierre Bienaimé explore the growing field of these purpose-built tools, and how people are already using them, in Part 1 of our special series “The AI Therapist.” Further Reading: Chatbots Are Replacing Therapists With Little Scientific Evidence Behind Them Teens Seek Mental-Health Help From Chatbots. That's Dangerous, Says New Study. How AI Advice Is Undermining Eating-Disorder Therapy When There's No School Counselor, There's a Bot Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Today's guest is Gene King, an Access Architect and founder of Atlas Strategic Access, based in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. With over 50 years in business, Gene has founded, scaled, and successfully exited 10 companies and currently operates six active businesses, including Sequence Real Estate, Invest America (an EB-5 immigration investment firm), and Twist Elbow. Roy and Gene, friends of over 12 years since meeting at a Darren Hardy event, dig into the origin story of Gene's very first business at military school, the lesson that reshaped how he handles bullies and pressure for the rest of his life, and why being diagnosed with ADHD at 65 explained a career pattern of exiting companies too early. Gene shares his philosophy on partnerships, why he's never had a verbal argument with a business partner in 22 companies, how he handles conflict at home versus in business, and the mentor's advice that shaped his obsession with knowing his cash position at all times. The conversation closes with the role Napoleon Hill's Think and Grow Rich has played in Gene's life since his early twenties, and his belief that the universe, not active pursuit, brings him his best opportunities.   ⏱️ TIMESTAMP 0:02 - Welcome to the Speaking Podcast, intro to Gene King 0:48 - Gene's background: 10 exits, six active companies, and 12+ years of friendship with Roy 1:31 - Gene's first business: protecting freshmen from hazing at The Citadel 3:50 - The lesson that changed everything: "you can't kill me, sir" 5:14 - Navigating good and bad business partners over 22 companies 5:57 - Discovering ADHD at 65 and why he exited companies too early 7:14 - How Gene structures his day across five to six companies 9:38 - Expanding Invest America's EB-5 program into Canada and Nigeria 11:11 - Why tracking everything matters, and the wealth found in awkward conversations 13:22 - How Gene handles conflict with business partners 16:59 - "Money solves all problems" and a mentor's advice on what really matters 18:10 - Terminating partners and employees with humanity and honesty 19:36 - The five P's: people, process, planning, prayer, passion 20:50 - Balancing patience and persistence as an entrepreneur 21:37 - Resolving disagreements in 50/50 and unequal partnerships 23:34 - Why "cash is king" became Gene's guiding financial principle 25:33 - How Gene decides which businesses to pursue next 27:12 - Discovering Think and Grow Rich in his early twenties 29:34 - Napoleon Hill's mastermind principle and never asking for something for nothing 31:13 - Where to find Gene King and his companies   About Gene King Gene King is an Access Architect, founder of Atlas Strategic Access, and founder of Sequence Holdings, based in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. With over 50 years in business, Gene has founded, scaled, and successfully exited 10 companies and currently operates six active businesses, including Sequence Real Estate, Invest America (an EB-5 immigration investment firm), and Twist Elbow. He specializes in engineering access, positioning companies into enterprise, government, and investor opportunities they couldn't reach on their own. Gene is also an Entrepreneur in Residence at the Harbor Entrepreneur Center in Mount Pleasant, home to over 100 early-stage businesses, and has extensive experience training sales teams and CPAs on structured deals. Connect with Gene King

Is AI really causing widespread job losses, or are a small number of announcements creating a much larger narrative? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Marvin Pohl, chief data scientist and cofounder of Clarecast, about AI layoffs, quiet restructuring, predictive workforce intelligence, and the responsibility that comes with forecasting company growth. Marvin's career began in physics and physical chemistry. After completing his PhD in Germany, he worked at Berkeley Lab and UC Berkeley before moving into data science at BASF. He describes how his role changed as generative AI entered the workplace. Initially, he encouraged skeptical colleagues to understand what language models could do. Today, he often finds himself warning people against accepting confident AI answers without checking the evidence. Clarecast was founded by Marvin, Jonathan, and CEO Bradley Taylor. The company combines employment profiles, job postings, technology adoption, stock information, industry data, and other signals to forecast how businesses may develop. Marvin says Clarecast covers over four million US companies and produces company-level forecasts extending 18 months. We discuss Clarecast's report on "quiet restructuring." The report considers whether AI-related workforce contraction may appear through slower hiring, unfilled positions, internal reorganization, automation, and the creation of new AI-related roles rather than widespread mass layoffs. Marvin says fewer than 100 companies in Clarecast's database had publicly attributed layoff announcements to AI. He describes this as a small proportion of the companies being analyzed and says projected US workforce growth appeared broadly flat rather than approaching a sudden collapse. However, Marvin is careful about what those findings can prove. The report presents a hypothesis, its model outputs are estimates, and correlation does not establish causation. Companies can change their hiring for many reasons, while employment data often takes time to reflect what has happened. Many of the AI-related announcements included in Clarecast's early analysis were also less than six months old. Marvin says a reliable assessment of whether companies followed through will require additional time because job postings, employment profiles, and reported headcount do not update immediately. We also discuss how Clarecast plans to apply its company intelligence to sales prospecting. Marvin argues that poorly personalized AI outreach is reducing response rates. Clarecast wants to help businesses identify a smaller number of companies that are showing signals of genuine need, allowing sales teams to spend additional time on relevant and personalized communication. How should business leaders use predictive intelligence without turning a probability into a predetermined outcome? Listen to the episode and share your thoughts with me.

In this episode, Cory Connors talks with Kim Holmes about Oregon's landmark position as the first U.S. state to implement Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging. Kim traces her path into sustainability — from a paralegal detour to a master's in urban studies at Portland State University, through hands-on recycling and waste characterization work with Community Environmental Services — before landing in her current role leading Oregon's CAA team. She breaks down what a producer responsibility organization actually does, how Oregon's "shared responsibility" model differs from other states, and what's driving the buildout of the Recycle On network of drop-off sites across the state.Key Topics Discussed:Kim's career path into recycling and sustainability policyWhat the Circular Action Alliance is and how it supports producer compliance across Oregon, California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, and WashingtonOregon's shared responsibility model between producers, local governments, and haulersThe Recycle On brand: public education, outreach, and drop-off collection networkHow producer fees are calculated and why they vary state to stateBuildout of Oregon's 144 planned collection points, including partnerships with transfer stations and Southern Oregon GoodwillMaterials accepted at drop-off centers (film, rigid plastics, foil, shredded paper, glass) versus the curbside systemHow Recycle On differs from Oregon's Bottle Bill deposit systemThe NAW constitutional challenge to Oregon's EPR law and its narrow preliminary injunctionEPR's long track record internationally (Canada, Europe, and beyond) versus its newness in the U.S.Recent wins: roll cart rollouts in The Dalles, new truck deliveries in Southern Oregon, and transportation cost reimbursement for rural communitiesThe Contamination Audit Center and Contamination Reduction Funding mechanismWorking toward a national responsible end-market verification standard with SCS GlobalHow other states are watching Oregon's implementation and where harmonization may emergeResources Mentioned:Recycle On Oregon page Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)SCS GlobalContact:Listeners can learn more about Oregon's EPR programs, find drop-off locations, and get in touch with the Circular Action Alliance team at recycleon.org/oregon.Thank you for tuning in to Sustainable Packaging with Cory Connors!Support our Sponsors Learn more here:- 3M- Specright- Forest https://anewearthproject.com/collections/new-earth-approvedConnect with CoryConnect with Cory on LinkedIn here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cory-connors/I'm here to help you make your packaging more sustainable! Reach out today and I'll get back to you asap. This podcast is an independent production and the podcast production is an original work of the author. All rights of ownership and reproduction are retained—copyright 2022.

Christine Wells-Wonsley wants GPS data, login histories, direct messages, and password reset records from five different tech companies, and Mississippi courts have given those companies twenty-one days to hand it over. That's how far Nolan Wells' mother has had to go to get answers the state hasn't provided on its own. Nolan was eighteen when he went to a July 4 boat party on Horn Island. He was the only one who didn't come home. His body was found two days later in the water, and the sheriff called it no foul play before the autopsy, toxicology, or the FBI's phone examination were finished. Christine wasn't told her son was missing until almost midnight — hours after the boat docked and his friends went home with his phone and keys. When she got that phone back, both of Nolan's Snapchat accounts were completely empty. The independent autopsy the family paid for came back "undetermined," in part because parts of Nolan's throat were missing by the time their pathologist examined the body. The official state autopsy remains sealed, with the DA saying only that a grand jury will eventually review it. On the day they buried Nolan, the family's attorneys sent preservation-of-evidence letters to every institution and individual connected to the case. A contradiction has also surfaced between the boys' account of that night and the account of the girl Nolan allegedly stayed behind to talk to. Attorney Ben Crump represents the family. Five subpoenas, one sealed autopsy, and a mother who isn't waiting on Mississippi's timeline to find out what happened to her son. Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePod This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice. HASHTAGS #NolanWells #ChristineWonsley #TrueCrimeToday #TrueCrime #HornIsland #Mississippi #JusticeForNolan #BenCrump #GrandJury #TrueCrimeCommunity