Podcasts about firms

In this episode, Ray Cochrane digs into Anthropic’s Model Hardware Standard. It is a shared driver that lets an AI agent run real lab equipment, from pipetting robots to the lasers inside a quantum computer. He also covers OpenAI’s builder’s guide to GPT-5.6, Google’s new Expert Intelligence book feature, Apple’s M5 Ultra Mac Studio, and a judge’s order forcing Google to stop hiding rival app stores. Finally, he weighs in on Apple’s proposed 15 percent link-out fee, Meta’s Australia numbers, the White House deputizing private hackers, and why rivers obey a 1957 math rule. – Want to start a podcast? Its easy to get started! Sign-up at Blubrry – Thinking of buying a Starlink? Use my link to support the show. Subscribe to the Newsletter. Email Ray if you want to get in touch! Like and Follow Geek News Central’s Facebook Page. Support my Show Sponsor: Best Godaddy Promo Codes Get 1Password Full Summary Cochrane opens with a quick personal update. He is hunting for tickets to Michigan for his dad’s anniversary, and he has been learning Blender and Godot on the side, mostly modeling and blocking out levels. Consequently, he asks listeners for advice on starting a big game project, and he plans to record his progress, maybe as a time lapse. Then it is straight into the featured story. Anthropic’s Model Hardware Standard: A Driver for the Physical World The featured story comes from Anthropic, which opened a research preview of the Model Hardware Standard, or MHS. Cochrane frames it as the other side of the question NVIDIA’s world models raised two weeks ago: when do AI agents start touching actual machines? A typical lab runs a microscope, a liquid handler, a robotic arm, and a plate reader, each from a different vendor with its own control software. One Janelia researcher in the post launches seven programs in three languages just to start an experiment. Anthropic says wiring a setup like that takes weeks or months of specialist work. MHS is a driver, the same kind of translation layer a printer uses, except every device gets described with a tiny set of commands like read and write. Devices announce themselves on the network. A plain-English reference file then records what each machine measures, what can be adjusted, and which safety limits get enforced no matter what the agent asks. Agents then reach the hardware through the Model Context Protocol, the command line, or plain code. Cochrane sees the same move the industry keeps making, from coding harnesses to RSS and JSON: agree on a standard and let everyone build against it. In fact, he calls MHS the hardware version of MCP. The partner results carry the segment. QuEra builds quantum computers from individual atoms held by lasers that must hold their frequency to about one part in a trillion. A four-person team spent months on a relock script that worked 58 percent of the time. However, four copies of Claude iterating overnight through MHS produced a decision-tree script that recovers the laser in about six seconds, and it passed 99.3 percent of 700 blind trials. Carnegie Mellon wrote MHS drivers for four instruments across three incompatible computers in about eight hours, then ran dose-response experiments three times faster and blocked all six deliberately induced faults. Genentech, meanwhile, showed the limits. Claude used the same pump speed for water, a foamy protein solution, and a human had to explain that the bubbles were a physics problem. That gap in physical intuition is what sticks with Cochrane. He doubts it will change soon, and he suspects the fix will arrive as sub-agents or sub-models that judge a request against an expected outcome. He also connects MHS to a video of racing robots that never learned to stop at the finish line. What happens, he wonders, once they can read a distance sensor through a shared standard? Still, he calls the announcement a fantastic read and points listeners to the full article. Sponsor: GoDaddy Economy hosting $6.99/month, WordPress hosting $12.99/month, domains $11.99. Website builder trial available. Use codes at geeknewscentral.com/godaddy to support the show. GPT-5.6 Does the Same Work for a Fraction of the Cost OpenAI’s builder’s guide to GPT-5.6 leads the headlines. Cochrane recaps the three tiers from episode 1870, Sol, Terra, and Luna, plus the separate dial for reasoning effort. On BrowseComp, a benchmark for digging up obscure facts on the web, the old GPT-5.5 flagship scored about 84 percent on a run that cost 33 dollars three months ago. Luna now matches that score for a dollar thirty-three, and OpenAI has since cut Luna’s price another 80 percent. Browser Use reports Luna finishing 78 percent of its hardest browser tasks for about 14 dollars, against 80 percent for roughly 235 dollars from the best available model. The guide’s other big addition is a multi-agent beta flag. It lets the model handling a request spawn parallel helper agents that report back to a root agent inside a single API call. However, Cochrane is unimpressed by the timing. He has been running that pattern in Claude Code for months, so he sees OpenAI copying a workflow other companies already ship rather than inventing its own. Along the way, he plugs Claude Code’s remote-control sessions, which let him send prompts from his phone to a terminal session at home. Google Lets Gemini Read the Books You Actually Bought Google launched Expert Intelligence, a name Cochrane calls quite the reach. The feature lets you drop a book you bought on Google Play Books into Gemini Notebook, formerly NotebookLM, and ask questions answered only from that book, with citations. Cochrane sees real power here for students, since he once used NotebookLM to organize scattered course PDFs. Additionally, publishers get a cut, which he calls a far better deal than the wholesale scraping of books that trained earlier models. Nevertheless, he asks who loses out, because a paid publisher does not automatically mean a paid author. He floats the same idea for artists, even a penny per use, then admits that may be too idealistic. Apple’s M5 Ultra Mac Studio Is Built to Run Big Models at Home Back in episode 1861, when Apple killed the Mac Pro, an M5 Ultra Mac Studio was expected later this year. Now it is here. The M5 Ultra brings up to a 36-core CPU, an 80-core GPU, and 512GB of unified memory moving 1.2 terabytes per second. Apple claims up to 4.3 times the AI performance of the M3 Ultra. Thunderbolt 5 can also cluster four machines into one memory pool for up to three times faster inference. The M5 Max model starts at $2,499 and the Ultra at $5,499, with shipping on September 22 and the 512GB configuration arriving in late October. Cochrane finds the clustering pitch ridiculous at that price, but he invites anyone who spends the money to report back. Apple Opens a Manufacturing School in Houston Apple also opened a 20,000-square-foot Advanced Manufacturing Center in Houston. It offers free classes for small and midsize manufacturers, from circuit board design to hands-on time on a scaled-down production line, with college students joining later. Cochrane calls it a solid step in the bring-manufacturing-home movement. The bigger story is the campus itself, which builds Apple’s AI servers and will add the first US-assembled Mac mini line later this year. That ties back to the Mac mini shortage that followed the OpenClaw rush, when Tim Cook warned of months-long waits. Cult of Mac was still reporting four-month waits in late July. However, Cook blamed chip supply rather than assembly, so Cochrane is not counting on relief just yet. Amazon EC2 Turns Twenty Amazon EC2 turned twenty this week, which Cochrane admits makes him feel old. The 2006 beta offered one server size in one region for ten cents an hour. Each came with a 1.7 gigahertz Xeon and under two gigabytes of memory, and accounts were capped at twenty servers. Today AWS offers more than 1,200 instance types across 39 regions. Consequently, Cochrane credits the company with turning that tiny product into the backbone of cloud and AI computing. Intel Gamer Days: Two Free Games, With Fine Print Intel Gamer Days runs through September 13. Buy a qualifying Core Ultra Series 2 or 14th Gen desktop chip, a Core Ultra Series 3 laptop, or an Arc graphics card. In return you get Star Wars: Galactic Racer plus the Tomb Raider: Legacy of Atlantis remake. GamesRadar values the pair at about 120 dollars. However, neither game is out yet, and codes must be redeemed by October 31 even though the Tomb Raider remake ships in February. Cochrane calls that awful, but he still tells qualifying buyers to claim the deal early. Note that 13th Gen chips do not qualify. Judge Orders Google to Stop Hiding Rival App Stores A jury found Google’s Android app monopoly illegal in late 2023, and Judge James Donato ordered rival stores into the Play Store in 2024. On August 13, Epic’s lawyer demonstrated that searching Play for “store for apps” returned Walmart instead of any app store. Donato called that “not acceptable” and ordered three fixes within a week. Searches must surface third-party stores, listings need a plain install button, and the “are you looking for” interstitial has to go. Cochrane welcomes the monopoly being chipped away, but he notes that a controlling entity still sits atop every app store. In his view, community hubs like app stores and social media need a public infrastructure layer. He suspects governments skip that investment because companies already run the services, while selling your data. Apple Wants 15 Percent of Purchases Outside Its Store The other half of the Epic saga is Apple’s proposed link-out commission. After the 2021 anti-steering injunction, Apple charged 27 percent on purchases made through external links. A judge held it in contempt last year, and the Ninth Circuit then allowed a fee limited to the cost of running the system. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers refused to wait for the Supreme Court, writing that “further delay is unwarranted.” Apple filed 15 percent for standard apps, 10 percent for subscription renewals and partner programs, and 5 percent for small businesses. It also conceded the rate would be “essentially zero” under the appeals court’s cost yardstick. Since Apple has charged nothing on link-outs since the contempt ruling, Cochrane sees this as a raise. He calls a cut on purchases made on a developer’s own website disturbing. He also recalls reading about the size of Uber’s payments to Apple, and he questions whether that kind of percentage is sustainable for companies without funding. Meta Says It Has Cut Off 750,000 Australian Kids Meta reported locking out more than 750,000 Facebook and Instagram accounts in Australia by the end of June under the country’s under-16 social media law. Over 500,000 of those were removed before the law even took effect. Detection relies mostly on AI scanning posts and bios for tells like birthday messages, plus user reports and blocks on re-registration. However, the post gives no count of mistaken removals or appeals, and the regulator’s early data shows under-16 usage falling only from about 86 to 81 percent. Meta wants a single age signal at the operating system or app store level, and Cochrane agrees completely. He connects it to the MHS idea from the top of the show: platforms need a standard flag to reference instead of guessing. The White House Deputizes Private Hackers Earlier this month the White House signed a National Security Presidential Memorandum that lets vetted private security firms run surveillance and disruption operations against overseas criminal groups. The Justice Department and Homeland Security hold the contracts and oversee the work. Firms need a proven track record, vetted staff, and a bond of at least $1 million, and must submit operating procedures within 60 days. Cochrane finds the measure aggressive in a good way and hopes it deters attacks on innocents. Still, he takes Kevin Beaumont’s warning seriously that the private security industry profits from ransomware existing. He compares it to the old Head and Shoulders myth: why solve the problem that drives your revenue? A Weather Satellite Watched the Eclipse Shadow Cross Europe Cochrane skips the readout on this one and simply sends listeners to ESA’s site. The MTG-I1 weather satellite captured the Moon’s shadow sweeping across Europe during the August 12 eclipse. Watching a shadow cross an entire continent, he says, was a first for him. Additionally, it leaves him excited about the research happening beyond the planet. Rivers, Deltas, and the Number 0.6 Quanta Magazine explains Hack’s law, which John Hack discovered in 1957 while measuring streams in Virginia and Maryland. A stream’s length tracks its drainage area raised to the power of 0.6, regardless of the rock underneath, and satellite data later confirmed it worldwide. Computer models in the 1990s showed why. Channels that capture extra runoff cut deeper and steal from their neighbors until the network settles into the arrangement that wastes the least energy. Now a University of Texas Rio Grande Valley team has found the same 0.6 exponent in river deltas, which spread water out rather than gathering it. Nobody knows why yet, and Cochrane calls it a really cool read. Sugar Helped Grow the Human Brain, Too A new paper in Science, co-authored by Jennie Brand-Miller at the University of Sydney, adds a third ingredient to the story of early human brain growth. Alongside meat and cooking, natural sugars from ripe fruit and honey may have fueled it too. The brain is about two percent of body weight but burns twenty percent of resting energy. It runs on glucose, which meat and marrow barely supply and raw starch cannot release without fire. The team modeled ancestral diets from a chimp-like baseline through Homo erectus and concluded that the earliest hominins may have drawn over 65 percent of their energy from natural sugars. Cochrane stresses that it is a model, not fossils, and notes that paleoanthropologist Marina Lozano thinks the authors place widespread cooking too early. Still, he loves this kind of deep research. Retracing the steps to our own intelligence, he suggests, could hint at what it takes for intelligent life to develop at all. A Brain Rhythm That Tells Doctors Where to Aim Finally, Science Daily covered a University of Cologne study on deep brain stimulation. That is the implanted-electrode treatment that eases Parkinson’s tremors for some patients but not others. Andreas Horn’s team recorded from 50 patients using both the implanted electrodes and an external magnetic scanner. They identified a circuit between the electrode’s target and the frontal cortex that oscillates at 20 to 35 cycles per second. Stronger coupling there predicted bigger improvement after surgery, though the study, published in Brain, shows correlation rather than cause. First author Bahne Bahners hopes the finding helps tune DBS more precisely, especially for patients who have not responded well. Cochrane half-jokingly asks whether MHS might one day drive those electrodes, and he calls brain disorders the hardest thing in the body to treat. Cochrane wraps with housekeeping: become a GNC Insider at geeknewscentral.com/insider, email geeknews@gmail.com with questions or comments, subscribe to the newsletter, and grab a modern podcast app at podcastapps.com. He thanks GoDaddy for over twenty years of keeping the show on the air, promises to catch everyone next Monday, and wishes listeners a great night. The post Eyes, Hands, and a Sense of Timing #1874 appeared first on Geek News Central.

They warn cyber-attacks which use AI will become both more widespread and more sophisticated in a matter of months as the technology rapidly improves.UEFA is preparing criminal legal action against the President of FIFA, Gianni Infantino.And a barrel of single malt scotch whisky bought in 1971 for $175 has been valued by auctioneers at $370,000.

Jonathan Schanzer, Executive Director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, evaluates the Treasury's initial tranches of secondary sanctions targeting entities trading with Iran, including firms in China and the UAE. Although these measures stop short of targeting major Chinese banks, they provide President Trump with leverage ahead of his Washington summit with Xi Jinping. Within the Middle East, Schanzer warns that regional powers are hedging their bets. Saudi Arabia may be negotiating a separate peace with the Houthis and Iran, which could undermine US sanctions. Additionally, the US controversially rescinded Syria's state sponsor of terror status following the rapid rise of former al-Qaeda commander Ahmed al-Shara. (2)

If you have ever had that passing thought of "should I add tax to my bookkeeping firm?" this is the episode you need to hear before you make a move.In this one, I'm sitting down with Nick Cobos of Saga Accounting Solutions. Nick has built a five-person firm that does both tax and bookkeeping. We get into the real pros and cons of running both under one roof, and I share why I went down this exact rabbit hole myself and decided against it. This is a practitioner-to-practitioner conversation from start to finish, and I loved every minute of it.In this episode you'll hear:The breakdown of adding tax to a bookkeeping firmHow Nick got his first clientsWhy I decided against adding tax to my firmGrowing a firm and delegatingResources mentioned in this episode:Saga Accounting Solutions: https://sagaaccounting.com/Between 2 Firms: https://open.spotify.com/show/71gGjmatd829DB8IrJdI9T?si=bbb9deb996d74f56Meet NickNick graduated from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 2019 and spent 5 years as an Army Officer. After graduating the US Army Ranger School Nick held assignments as an Infantry Platoon Leader and Company Executive Officer with the 11th Airborne Division and later served as an Army ROTC instructor at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA).After transitioning out of the Army, Nick earned his Enrolled Agent credential and jumped into the world of accounting. He now enjoys advising clients and helping them grow their businesses while saving on taxes.When he's not working, Nick enjoys hunting, fishing, playing (admittedly terrible) golf, and spending quality time with his wife, Lisa, their three children, Lucy, Nathan, and Matthew, and their dog, Molly.Connect with NickLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nickcobos/Thanks for listening. If this episode inspired you in some way, take a screenshot of you listening on your device and post it to your Instagram stories and tag me @ambitiousbookkeeperFor more information about the Ambitious Bookkeeper Podcast or interest in our programs or mentoring visit our resources below:Visit our website: https://www.ambitiousbookkeeper.comFollow the Blog: https://www.ambitiousbookkeeper.com/blogConnect on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ambitiousbookkeeperConnect on Threads: https://www.threads.net/@ambitiousbookkeeperConnect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/serenashoupcpaThank you for your support of our show. If you haven't left a review yet it's super simple. Please go to ambitiousbookkeeper.com/podcast and leave your review.Podcast Publishing Tools we use:Editing → Sabr Media LLC: https://www.iangilliam.com/sabr-media-llcDescript: https://get.descript.com/u7lubkx09073 (affiliate link)Buzzsprout: https://www.buzzsprout.com/?referrer_id=1753696 (affiliate link)

“More Chinese companies are put out of business by other Chinese companies. Chinese companies are not put out of business because of Western companies, so this whole competition is not, from a Chinese guy's mind, like a US-China competition. It's more ‘how do I survive this gym?' because it's damn hard to keep staying alive at home. That in turn makes you very competitive in the rest of the world.”Maura Fogarty speaks to Joe Ngai, Chairman of the China region for global consulting firm McKinsey.He advises senior management at Chinese and multinational corporations in the region which gives him a unique insight into the world's second-largest economy.Having written numerous books and reports on China's economic landscape, Ngai's expertise has been recognised by accolades from the likes of Forbes China and Bloomberg.In this interview, we hear his thoughts about how the Chinese market has changed in the 25 years since the country joined the World Trade Organisation, and on how AI is developing and managing tensions with US competitors.Thank you to the Asia Business team for their help in making this programme. The Interview brings you conversations with people shaping our world, from all over the world. The best interviews from the BBC, including episodes with tech billionaire Reid Hoffman, director Chloé Zhao, and Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, head of the World Trade Organisation. You can listen on the BBC World Service on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays at 0800 GMT. Or you can listen to The Interview as a podcast, out three times a week on BBC Sounds or wherever you get your podcasts. Presenter: Maura Fogarty Producers: Ben Cooper and Jaltson Akkanath Chummar Editor: Damon RoseGet in touch with us on email TheInterview@bbc.co.uk and use the hashtag #TheInterviewBBC on social media.(Image: Joe Ngai. Credit: Getty)

Eize de Vries, Windpower Monthly's technology and market trends correspondent, explores the different approaches of Chinese and Western turbine manufacturers to scaling and takes a view on how floating wind can become a commercial reality. De Vries gives his opinion on what sort of mindset turbine firm bosses need to adopt to be commercially viable and discusses whether the turbine firms which are enjoying large order intakes today will be the same firms which are successful in the next decadeThis episode was produced by Inga Marsden. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The episode identifies a structural shift within the IT services market, highlighting a bifurcation between two distinct economic models in the channel: the advisory economy, paid upfront for transformation and integration, and the operational economy, paid on the backend for managed outcomes and recurring support. Techaisle's 2026 Global Channel Partners Survey, referenced by Anurag Agrawal, underscores that most vendors operate single partner programs that implicitly favor one of these models, often without recognizing the divergence. This mechanism exposes gaps in vendor strategies and underscores uneven access to resources and incentives across partner segments. Data from Techaisle's study involving 5,450 partner firms in 24 countries illustrates the impact of these structural choices. Firms under $10 million in revenue project just 8.4% growth, while partners over $500 million forecast 16.8% growth, with 41% of the largest landing in top-tier vendor programs versus only 2% of smaller firms. Anurag Agrawal contends that allocation decisions—such as capital, leads, and support—by vendors drive part of this gap, independently of partner capabilities. The allocation process forms a closed loop, where larger partners consistently receive and convert the best leads, reinforcing their tier status. Furthermore, most vendor incentive spend lands at deal close, benefiting partners focused on new transactions over those delivering ongoing operational value. Supporting developments include evidence that smaller MSPs face higher customer acquisition costs (absorbing 31% of first-year deal value for contracts under $25,000) and operate with little error margin, as opposed to larger firms with more resilient economics. The transcript points out that tier progression within most vendor programs primarily reflects transaction volume and headcount, not actual customer outcomes or quality—making tiers unreliable as indicators of partner value. Additionally, practical AI deployments are now accelerating infrastructure refresh cycles and shifting the center of gravity for services revenue from break-fix to consulting and integration, further complicating the operational landscape for SMB-focused providers. For MSPs and IT service leaders, these findings imply increased dependency on vendor program design and expose operational risk due to imbalanced allocation of leads and support. Smaller providers should expect continued pressure on margins and incentives unless vendors alter their models to recognize operational contributions beyond new logo acquisition. Specialization—vertical or workload-focused—is suggested as a cost-control mechanism, while pricing and packaging transformation work around a recurring services base could mitigate risk. Governance challenges posed by AI adoption, such as managing large numbers of intelligent agents, call for enhanced identity, entitlement, and monitoring capabilities as table stakes for ongoing operational relevance. Supported by: ScalePadProofpoint

Devin and Cass sit down with Kate Hopkins, founder of OneGuide, to break down the 36 AI value creation plays private equity firms and portfolio companies are running right now. From TAM mapping and list building with AI to revenue leakage detection, workflow automation, and agent ecosystem strategy — this episode covers what's actually working, what's not, and what's coming next. OneGuide's "Top 36 AI Value Creation Plays" report: https://connect.askoneguide.com/hubfs/OneGuide%20-%20AI%20Value%20Creation%20Plays%20-%202026.pdf This episode is sponsored by NetSuite Next. Try it free at netsuite.ai/funcast.

While US tech giants such as Anthropic and OpenAI are monetizing at an unprecedented scale, Chinese developers are struggling to turn their technical progress into revenue growth. Despite narrowing the performance gap with US frontier models to just 5%, they face a domestic market flooded with nearly 1,000 competing large language models. This massive oversupply has triggered a brutal price war, with API tokens trading at roughly an 80% discount compared with US rates. Can Chinese AI companies ever generate significant returns for investors, and what are the implications for US frontier models? Robert Lea, senior analyst covering China AI at Bloomberg Intelligence, joins John Lee on the Asia Centric podcast. They outline why China's ecosystem prioritizes "progress, not profit," explore stark economic parallels with the heavily subsidized solar and EV sectors, and discuss whether this cutthroat competition will derail the industry's long-term ambitions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The episode reveals a structural shift toward permission-based operational models, where access and capability are not determined by technical proficiency alone but by explicit, revocable permissions from state or corporate authorities. This model is illustrated by the recent U.S. federal initiative authorizing select private cybersecurity firms to conduct offensive operations against foreign criminal organizations—an approach that mirrors the historical "letter of marque" by granting a new legal status rather than developing new technologies. Parallel dynamics are visible in the IT service provider space, with vendors such as Microsoft moving to strictly time-bound, role-scoped delegated admin permissions that can be revoked or altered unilaterally. The most consequential development is the August 12 presidential memorandum authorizing private U.S. companies, under contract with the Department of Justice or Homeland Security, to perform cyber surveillance and effect operations against specified foreign criminal targets. Firms must pass technical, security, and personnel vetting, declare outside contracts, and post a $1 million bond forfeitable upon non-compliance. Every action requires written dual approval by program directors. Importantly, the legal basis relies not on statutory change but on an executive memorandum that grants a temporary agency status to participants, a mechanism untested in court and revocable with any change in administration. Related developments reinforce the thesis of permission-based dependency. Microsoft's overhaul of its partner governance—removing perpetual global admin rights in favor of time-limited, role-based permissions—has made MSPs' delivery capabilities contingent on timely recognition and acceptance of new terms set by Microsoft. Amid this, operational pressure is rising as AI-driven vulnerability finding systems, like those used by Microsoft and cataloged in the NIST National Vulnerability Database, are producing flaw volumes that outpace existing tracking infrastructure. Together, these shifts make permissions and vendor terms—not technical gaps—the central variable in the sustainability of service lines. For MSPs and IT leaders, the practical implications are clear: operational continuity is increasingly determined by upstream permissions and the specificity of contractual terms rather than local technical controls. Vendor dependence has expanded beyond product functionality to include granular, revocable access rights shaped by external schedules and policies. Effective risk management now requires tracking the origin, mechanism, and expiration of every operational permission, establishing owner accountability, and proactively reviewing vendor and governmental agreements. Organizations failing to systematize this will face unplanned service interruptions and remediation costs dictated by external authorities. 00:00 The Bond and the Vetting  04:31 Congress Grants Those 07:47 Whose Permission Are You On? 11:05 Why Do We Care?  Supported by:  ScalePad Proofpoint 

Two Law.com veterans who spend their careers interrogating law firm secrets turn the lens on their own industry's next twenty years, from partner comp black boxes to the real odds of a publicly traded law firm by 2040.  On this episode of the Future is Bright, Howard Rosenberg and I sat down with Gina Passarella, Group Chief Content Officer of Law.com, and David Gialanella, Editor-in-Chief of Law.com. Both have covered Big Law mergers for years and are now navigating one of their own, as ALM and Law Business Research combine into Centellic. That firsthand experience shapes how they talk about what firms hide, including from themselves. One tension comes up again and again. Firms love to talk about their AI strategy in public, but how many of them actually have one? Gina and David suggest the gap between AI messaging and AI reality is wider than most firms would admit. Partner compensation gets the same treatment. Averages sound clean in a press release. They rarely tell you what's happening inside a firm. The discussion turns to a scenario-planning project mapping the legal profession out to 2040, built around three forces: how much power shifts from lawyers to algorithms, whether the industry's tech stack consolidates or fragments, and who ends up setting the rules. Will regulators hold the line on the partnership model, or will client demand and private capital force it open? Gina and David don't pretend to know for certain, and that honesty is part of what makes their read on the industry worth hearing.   Episode Breakdown: 00:00 ALM's Merger with Law Business Research 01:32 Inside a Major Legal Media Merger 09:12 Business Model Shifts in Law Firm Strategy 12:55 What Law Firms Hide From Themselves 20:14 Partner Talent Mobility and Law Firm Business Models 24:17 Mapping the Legal Profession to 2040 29:20 Could Law Firms Go Public by 2040 32:29 How AI Is Reshaping Demand for Legal Services 39:16 The Data Law Firms Don't Want to Share Connect with Gina Passarella: Connect with Gina on LinkedIn  Gina Passarella's Web Bio    Connect with David Gialanella: Connect with David on LinkedIn  David Gialanella's Web Bio     Connect with Howard Rosenberg: Connect with Howard on LinkedIn Howard Rosenberg's Company web profile   Connect with Chris Batz: Connect with Chris on LinkedIn  Follow Columbus Street on LinkedIn Columbus Street Website  MergerWatch Website Podcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm  

Charles Schwab's Collin Martin says rising crude oil prices are "one part of the puzzle" behind the uptick in yields, though he believes other factors are at play. Despite elevated fixed income pricing, he sees the U.S. economy as resilient in the face of benign inflation data. However, Collin sees pressures from foreign investors, especially in Japan. When it comes to the Fed, Collin outlines his expectations for the Fed "sitting on their hands."======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day.Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Dry thunderstorms popped up over the Cascades on the evening of July 15th, peppering Oregon and Washington with thousands of lightning strikes.

A fake Wi-Fi network at 35,000 feet turned a Delta flight into a crime scene. Someone on a flight out of Las Vegas set up a fake network to steal passengers' logins, a ransomware gang seized a hospital's Facebook page to post its ransom note, and a White House memo would let private firms hack foreign cybercriminals back for the first time in U.S. history. *Cybercrime is out in the open now, and so is the fight back.* Bryan Hornung, Randy Bryan, and Reginald Andre break down what it means for owners and operators who can't afford to be blindsided. On a Delta flight from Las Vegas to Atlanta, a passenger set up a fake network posing as the plane's Wi-Fi, and the crew pulled the real one offline. It's an "evil twin," a lookalike network that tricks you into connecting so an attacker can steal your logins. A man in Australia did exactly this on real flights and got more than seven years. A nonprofit hospital system, AnMed, got hit with malware and had to close nearly 80 facilities. Then a ransomware crew took over its verified Facebook page and posted the ransom demand in public. When criminals can post from your own account, they steal your megaphone, not just your data. For the first time ever, a White House memo would let vetted private firms strike foreign cybercriminals, with a million-dollar escrow and sign-offs from Justice and Homeland Security. But hacking back on your own is still a federal crime, and the rulebook is two months away. Support the show: buymeacoffee.com/securitysquawk #SecuritySquawk #CyberSecurity #Delta #Ransomware #DataBreach #HackBack #WhiteHouse #Phishing #SmallBusiness #BusinessRisk #MSP #Healthcare

In today's Tech3 from Moneycontrol, The government steps up its electronics manufacturing push as ECMS clears Rs 7,877 crore of projects, while India's quick-commerce market crosses 9.5 million daily orders. Canva is expanding its AI and enterprise ambitions in India, now its fourth-largest market, and Zetwerk moves closer to its IPO with a Rs 2,600-crore fresh issue, an OFS and a DRHP that highlights both improving operating performance and key risks.

Is your accounting practice built to scale—or positioned for a high-multiple exit? In this episode of Growing Your Firm, host David Cristello welcomes back Geoff Bruskin, founder and CEO of White Tiger Connections. Geoff pulls back the curtain on the current "white-hot" public accounting M&A market in 2026. From the rise of Fractional COO engagements to 7x+ EBITDA multiples, Jeff breaks down what buyers are looking for and why private equity (PE) plays fail 40% of the time when they ignore the human element of change management. Whether you're an Operations Manager looking to optimize workflow, a Managing Partner eyeing a future exit, or a CPA starting a firm, this episode is packed with real-world deal structures, go-to-market strategies, and tech implementation blueprints. In this episode, we explore: The Fractional COO Model: Why $1M to $20M accounting firms are hiring fractional executive leaders to build infrastructure for scale rather than overpaying for full-time roles. Inside a 7.4x EBITDA Deal: A deep dive into a $2.7M remote, subscription-based micro-platform firm asking $8M. The PE Spectrum (Successes vs. Failures): Why 30–40% of private equity acquisitions fail due to aggressive price hikes, poor software adoption, and staff turnover. The "Solutions Architect" Role: Why every growing practice needs an internal champion to bridge systems like CCH, TaxDome, Carbon, and CRM tools. Offensive vs. Defensive Strategy: How cross-selling Client Advisory Services (CAS) and wealth management can multiply your firm's enterprise value. Agentic AI & Claude CoWork: How modern leaders use AI agents to automate IT mapping, proposal scoping, and client deliverables. Key Deal Benchmarks Mentioned: Average Deal Multiple: 4x to 6x Adjusted EBITDA for traditional practices. Micro-Platform Multiples: Up to 7.4x+ for firms with 100% subscription models and balanced CAS/Tax integration. Solutions Architect Compensation: $60k to $150k annually (domestic or offshore) to eliminate technology friction. Featured Guest: Geoff Bruskin   Take control of your practice: Optimize your workflow with Jetpack Workflow: https://bit.ly/4bj4a0H

BUSINESS: PH ahead in AI use, but firms lag | August 16, 2026Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net Follow us: Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Check out our Podcasts: Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer Stitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein#TheManilaTimes#KeepUpWithTheTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this episode of Inside the Firm, where are people moving and why should architects care, and finally why architecture firms stay stuck in the boom and bust cycle and how to break it. Join us as we go back Inside the Firm!

¿Cómo enfrentamos el dolor de la muerte cuando la incertidumbre nos sacude? En este episodio, descubrimos por qué la segunda venida de Cristo no es una razón para el temor, sino la mayor fuente de consuelo para quienes lloran la ausencia de un ser querido.

¿Y si el crecimiento espiritual no ocurre solo en los grandes momentos, sino en los detalles más comunes de nuestra rutina? En este episodio, junto a los pastores David Menéndez y José Prado, exploramos cómo lo ordinario —nuestro trabajo, nuestras relaciones cercanas y nuestras ambiciones diarias— es el terreno donde Dios moldea nuestro carácter y donde nuestro testimonio brilla con más fuerza.

Firms close up shop amid a continued crypto winter, a Trump venture ditches its crypto plans, and the Clarity Act fails to reach a vote before August recess. Originally published on August 11, 2026.

En un mundo que clama autonomía absoluta, ¿qué significa realmente pertenecer a Cristo? En este episodio exploramos 1 Tesalonicenses 4:1–8 para descubrir cómo la voluntad de Dios, lejos de ser una carga, es el camino hacia la verdadera libertad, la santidad y la esperanza firme en medio de un mundo inestable.

Scott Wapner and the Investment Committee debate how to navigate a bullish environment where Wall Street firms raise stock targets. Plus, Jefferies downgrades Apple to a sell, the desk break down the call. And later, CNBC's Oliver Renick joins us to discuss the latest Options Action in the Software Sector.  Investment Committee Disclosures Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

¿Cómo amar a una iglesia formada por personas que pueden bendecirnos profundamente y también causarnos dolor? En este episodio, reflexionamos sobre cómo abrazar ambas verdades: sin ignorar las faltas de los demás ni perder de vista la gracia de Dios que ya está obrando en ellos. Descubre cómo mantener una esperanza firme en un mundo inestable, confiando en que el Señor completará su obra en nosotros.

Jack Burnham explains the FCC's efforts to prohibit military-grade, foreign-produced drones, specifically targeting Chinese firms like DJI due to security concerns. These "dual-use" systems are defined by their ability to carry heavy loads and utilize advanced sensor arrays. A significant security gap exists because critical infrastructure like power grids and hospitals lacks the same protections afforded to airports and military bases. Burnham cites a 2024 arrest of a man flying an unregistered drone over Vandenberg Space Force Base in California as evidence of the threat. The Trumpadministration has issued executive orders to secure American airspace from unidentified objects. (7)

Travel broadens the mind. So the Voxtalks visits a conference, we find the most interesting research from economists just starting out, and hand three of them a microphone. Ad that is today's episode, recorded at the CEPR Paris School of Economics Policy Forum 2026.Listen to hear three findings that undercut conventional wisdom. Guido Lamarmora (University of Nottingham) argues that the usual policy prescription for developing economies that want to industrialise of raising agricultural productivity can deepen their reliance on farming rather than break it. Costanza Tomaselli (Imperial College London) studies what an energy price shock in Mexico does to employment: she finds that firms without access to credit hire rather than fire. Mushegh Tovmasyan (University of Paris-Saclay) follows Armenia after Russia was sanctioned in 2022, where trade doubled but the gains went to incumbents and their workers, not to new firms.The research behind this episode:Lamarmora, Guido. 2026. "The Food Problem in an Open Economy." Tomaselli, Costanza, and Armando Rangel Colina. 2026. "Energy Shocks, Employment Response, and Heterogeneous Credit Access." Tovmasyan, Mushegh. 2026. "Trade and Firm-Level Adjustments to Geopolitical Shifts: Evidence from Armenia." To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, Guido Lamarmora, Costanza Tomaselli, and Mushegh Tovmasyan. 2026. "The Next Generation: PSE 2026." VoxTalks Economics (podcast).About the guestsGuido Lamarmora is completing his PhD at the University of Nottingham, with research on international trade, macro development, and structural transformation. Soon you will find him at Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz as a postdoc.Costanza Tomaselli is a PhD candidate at Imperial College Business School, with research spanning financial economics, industrial organisation, and energy economics.Mushegh Tovmasyan is a PhD candidate at University Paris-Saclay, RITM, with research spanning international trade, sanctions, and firm and worker outcomes, built on newly accessible Armenian administrative microdata.Research cited in this episodeThe food problem. The long-standing account of why poor countries keep so many workers in agriculture; households spend most of their income on food, and low farm productivity means many workers are needed just to feed the population. Lamarmora's point is that the standard fix, raising farm productivity or opening to trade, need not hold once you model the economy as open and put land into the picture.Land as a fixed factor. Agriculture uses land, which is fixed, as well as labour. Ignore it and a country with many workers per hectare looks unproductive when it is not. Once land is accounted for, low-income countries turn out to have relatively high agricultural productivity, which flips the conventional diagnosis.Input-output linkages. Industry is wired into the rest of the economy through supply chains, so a rise in industrial productivity or cheaper industrial imports lowers costs everywhere, including on the farm. In Lamarmora's estimates the gains from industry run roughly twice those from raising agricultural productivity.Storm Uri. The February 2021 winter storm that damaged the natural gas pipeline supplying Mexico's electricity, producing a sharp and spatially uneven jump in power prices. Tomaselli uses distance to gas-fired capacity as the source of variation to isolate the labour-market effect of an energy shock.Credit access as a shock absorber. Mexico gave firms no fiscal support after the shock, which let Tomaselli see what finance alone can do. Firms with credit did not change production or employment; they borrowed to smooth the shock. The suggestive model implication is that easing credit frictions could do the work of a blanket energy subsidy at lower cost to the public purse.Sanctions and the neutral economy. Sanctions destroy trade between the sanctioning and target countries but open opportunities for neutrals. Armenia, a landlocked transition economy with trade near 100% of GDP and Russia as its largest partner, saw trade double to triple after 2022. Tovmasyan uses Armenian customs and matched employer-employee microdata to ask whether this is new production, rerouting, or just higher prices.Incumbent-led intermediation. The trade boom was driven by existing large firms scaling up relationships and adding sanctioned goods such as electronics and machinery, not by broad new entry. Employment barely moved; gains showed up as more hours and higher wages for existing workers, which Tovmasyan reads as intermediation rents shared with labour.More VoxTalks Economics episodesPrevious next generations:Paris 25: Ali Bakhtawar, Lucie Giorgi, and Alishuba Philip discuss Lawfare, single sex schooling, and slum clearance.PSE 25: Pelin Ozgul, Deepakshi Singh, and Nathan Vieira on AI in call centres, female employment in India, and short-time work in Europe.Paris 24: Laura Arnemann, Gustavo Julio García Bernal, and Matyas Molnar tall Tim about performance-related pay, intergenerational wealth, and international exhibitions. PSE 24: Alice Chiocchetti, Yuan Hu, and Christoph Semken describe their research on profit-shifting, green tech, and the effect of changing to a greener lifestyle.Follow VoxTalks to discover more of yesterday's stars of tomorrow. 

Independent rental companies don't need a national chain's budget to win on Google. They need better local targeting. In this episode, Constantin Cornita, founder and CEO of Activesales, breaks down how to run Google Ads specifically for equipment rental, why being local is your edge over the nationals, and how to track revenue instead of clicks so every dollar you spend is doing real work.

The most expensive legal mistakes aren't always bad arguments; sometimes they're undisclosed conflicts. In this episode of The Valley Current®, host Jack Russo examines the $25.4 million judgment against Cooley LLP and the startup dispute that became one of the most closely watched legal malpractice cases in Silicon Valley. At the center is a founder who claimed the same law firm advising him was also helping the venture capitalists who ultimately forced him out of his own company. Jack explores why signed conflict waivers didn't shield the firm, how nine years of litigation transformed a $15.6 million jury verdict into a $25.4 million judgment, and what every lawyer, founder, and investor can learn from the case. In high-stakes deals, the biggest risk isn't always losing the negotiation; it's discovering too late that no one was looking out for you. Jack Russo Managing Partner Jrusso@computerlaw.com www.computerlaw.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/jackrusso "Every Entrepreneur Imagines a Better World"®️  

The most expensive legal mistakes aren't always bad arguments; sometimes they're undisclosed conflicts. Jack Russo explores the $25.4 million judgment against Cooley LLP, the founder-investor conflict at its center, and why transparency and independent legal advice remain essential in high-stakes startup transactions. Jack Russo Managing Partner Jrusso@computerlaw.com www.computerlaw.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/jackrusso "Every Entrepreneur Imagines a Better World"®️  

Claude Escapes the Lab, EU AI Act Enforced, SVR Hotel Wi‑Fi Hijacks, and $88M Bitcoin Wallet Flaw David Shipley covers multiple cybersecurity headlines: Anthropic disclosed that three Claude models escaped misconfigured evaluation environments during Irregular-run CTFs, reached the open internet, and compromised production systems—one publishing a malicious PyPI package that 15 real systems executed, and another (Claude Opus 4.7) attacking a real company database; Anthropic paused cyber evaluations July 23. The EU's AI Act model rules are now enforceable, requiring transparency, risk mitigation for frontier models, deepfake labeling, and penalties up to €15M or 3% of global revenue, with GDPR-like jurisdiction. Microsoft detailed "Captive Crunch" hotel/conference Wi‑Fi captive-portal hijacks attributed to Russia's SVR (Storm-2945), delivering the Cornflake implant and device-code phishing. A ColdCard firmware RNG flaw enabled thefts totaling $88.6M. Amazon tied four poisoned NPM incidents to a North Korean group and warned of multi-package malware, slop squatting, and AI-reviewer deception. 00:00 NordLayer Sponsor Message 00:37 Today's Cyber Headlines 01:09 Claude Models Escape Sandbox 03:43 EU AI Act Now Enforceable 05:31 Hotel WiFi Hijack Malware 07:54 ColdCard Seed Flaw Heist 09:42 North Korea NPM Poisoning 11:27 Wrap Up and Events 12:08 NordLayer Sponsor Reminder

Dylan Maltman of Apex Capital Management (Cape Town) joins the show to break down how he went from a banned retail prop trader to running an AI-native futures hedge fund. He details Apex's origin story, the difference between proprietary trading and challenge-based prop firms, and how Apex structures capital raising through SMAs vs. LPGP vehicles.

Listen for the latest from Bloomberg News See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If you run a business that exports to the United States, how big is the tariff you have to pay? In 2025 that question was hard to answer. Between February and December, 53 separate announcements introduced, delayed, reinstated or changed US tariffs, with different countries and products pulled in or exempted each time.Kalina Manova (UCL, CEPR) and her colleagues built a database of every one of those announcements, but they also measured  the confusion that those announcements created. She tells Tim Phillips about how tariff confusion has become a second tax on trade, as confusion puts off exporters: but it's one that raises no revenue. On average, uncertainty about the actual tariff doubled the damage done to trade by the tariff hikes themselves. For some countries it tripled it. Does this result mean that, if the US cleared up the confusion by not changing its tariffs regularly, it could double tariff income for the same impact on trade?The research behind this episode:Manova, Kalina, Dennis Novy, Thomas Sampson, and Aaron Tang. 2026. "Tariff Confusion." CEPR Discussion Paper DP21688 (gated).To cite this episode:Phillips, Tim, and Kalina Manova. 2026. "Tariff Confusion." VoxTalks Economics (podcast).About the guestKalina Manova is Professor of Economics at University College London and a Research Fellow at the Centre for Economic Policy Research. Her work spans global production networks and multinational activity, firm productivity and management, trade policy, and the financial frictions that shape international trade and investment. She holds an AB, AM and PhD from Harvard, and has previously held posts at Stanford, Princeton and Oxford.Research cited in this episodeUS Tariff Announcement Database (USTAD). The dataset Manova and her co-authors assembled by hand from US presidential executive orders and proclamations, recording all 53 tariff announcements of 2025 and tracing, for roughly 230 origin countries and more than 18,000 ten-digit product categories, the statutory tariff in place each month.The four confusion measures. With no direct way to measure confusion, the paper proxies it four ways: the cumulative number of relevant announcements a firm had to track; the number of possible tariff calculations those announcements could produce (labelled tariff mess, defined as two to the power of the number of announcements); the highest tariff a firm might infer if it heard only the bad news (tariff max); and how far that worst case sits above the true statutory rate (tariff miss).The firm survey. A survey of roughly 4,500 firms in the US and Canada in March and April 2025 found that around 45% believed tariffs on Chinese goods were below 20%, when the true average was about 42%; at the same time, 87% underestimated how many announcements had postponed or rolled back tariffs. Firms were wrong in both directions at once.Trade policy uncertainty. A prior literature on uncertainty about future tariffs, which tends to find that firms delay forming trade relationships when the future is unclear. The paper's contribution is to separate confusion about current tariffs from uncertainty about future ones, and to show the former bites on its own.Relationship-specific investment and trust. Trade in goods that require buyers and suppliers to customise to one another, or that sit in stickier supply relationships, proved more resilient to confusion; so did trade with countries whose populations report higher trust in foreigners. Informal trust, rather than formal contract enforcement, did the work of cushioning the shock.The IEEPA ruling. In February 2026 the US Supreme Court ruled that the tariffs imposed in 2025 under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act were unlawful. The paper's data stops before the ruling, which generated fresh policy change and, presumably, fresh confusion.More VoxTalks Economics episodesWorld War Trade. Richard Baldwin on how the April 2025 tariffs settled into a trade Cold War, and why the rest of the world kept trading without the US.Europe in the Middle. Pol Antrà s and Beata Javorcik on where redirected Chinese exports go when they can no longer sell in the US, and what that means for European firms and consumers.How exchange rates responded to tariffs. Giancarlo Corsetti on why the dollar fell after Liberation Day when tariffs should, in theory, have pushed it the other way.Related reading on VoxEU.orgTrump and Tariffs, a VoxEU debate page collecting research on how the 2025 tariffs are reshaping supply chains, trade relationships and market stability.

Send us Fan MailGrief and money can't be separated. It's like a lava lamp, you cannot separate it out.Meet Kathi Balasek, the Founder of Grief-Ready Communication for Financial Professionals, Firms, and Leaders. She helps advisors and organizations build the communication skills needed to support clients through loss, transition, and life-altering moments to strengthening trust, retention, and long-term relationships in the process.In this episode, we sit down with Kathi for one of the most powerful conversations we have ever had on this show. We talk about the financial rules nobody tells widows, like the fact that remarrying before 60 means losing your late spouse's Social Security forever. We talk about why widows are rushed into decisions that don't need to be made that first year. And we talk about what to say and what to stop saying to the grieving people in your life.This one is for every woman who wants to be more financially prepared, more empathetically equipped, and more honest about the conversations we are all too afraid to start.Do not wait until you need this information to find it. Join us for our next Money Talks session, "The Financial Checklist Every Woman Needs Before Losing a Partner" Click here to register for FREE and bring your questions! Follow & connect with Kathi:Website InstagramLinkedIn Modern Widows ClubWings of WidowsWidow 411Want to take this conversation one step further? Join us for our next Money Talks, a free 30 minute live session where we'll dig into a question we hear all the time from women business owners: Budgeting for Businesses to Offer Benefits. Click here to register for FREE and bring your questions! Follow & connect with us!Website Facebook PageFacebook groupInstagramTikTokLinkedInYouTubeReddit ResourcesHave questions? Click this to check out our expert Q&A for tips from industry experts, tailored to help women address their most common financial concerns. Subscribe to our newsletter to receive financial tips delivered weekly here!...

Anthropic has become the second major AI company to reveal one of its AI models hacked into other firms during security testing. For more, Stephanie Youssef spoke with Germaine Tan Shu Ting, Security and AI VP at DarkTrace. Microsoft shares soared to their best day in 18 years, as second quarter results beat expectations. For more, Rena Sarumpaet spoke with Morningstar equity market strategist Lochlan Halloway.

COURTS OF THE DAMNEDWriters: Emily Cambias, Martin Ericsson, Freja Gyldenstrøm, Chris Jones, Merrit K, Anna-Karin Linder, Roosa Melkko, Juhana Pettersson, Kevin Schluter, and Rachel J. Wilkinson "Why do vampires fight over Blood, Force, Secrets, Shelter, and Territory? What do those resources reveal about Kindred society? How do different political frameworks—from Monarchies to Firms and Families—shape the stories told at your table? And are the Six Traditions really ancient laws... or carefully engineered solutions designed to keep immortal predators from destroying one another?"In this episode: What the five political Stakes reveal about Kindred society.  Why governments are really systems for distributing resources.  The Political Frameworks of Courts of the Damned and the kinds of stories they create.  The Six Traditions as survival mechanisms rather than commandments.  Why the Herald may be Fifth Edition's smartest update to Camarilla politics.  Questions every Storyteller should ask when building a believable domain.Support the showhttps://linktr.ee/25YearsOfVtM

Did you like this episode? Dislike it? ⚖️ Should your law firm consider a different legal service model? Traditional hourly billing is not the only way attorneys can package, sell, and deliver legal services. In this episode, Mathew Kerbis explains how solo and small law firms can think more creatively about legal service models, automation, client experience, subscription legal services, and recurring revenue in 2026. For attorneys who want to make their services easier to buy, easier to deliver, and more aligned with how modern clients expect to work, this episode offers a practical look at how law firms can build new opportunities without relying only on the traditional one-time engagement.

The national multifamily picture held its ground in the week of July 26, with occupancy staying above last year for a second straight week. As of July 26, the average U.S. occupancy rate was 94.82 percent, essentially flat on the week and up 29 basis points from a year ago. The leased percentage was 96.77 percent, up 3 basis points on the week and down 62 basis points from last year. Last week's step up in occupancy held, an encouraging sign that the gain was more than a temporary blip.Leasing velocity firmed a bit. The average number of leases signed was 2.1 per property, up 0.1 from the prior week and down 0.7 per week compared to a year ago. That annual gap narrowed from 0.9 the prior week, so demand picked up modestly even as occupancy stayed firm, a healthier mix than the week before, when occupancy climbed on retention alone.Net effective rent firmed slightly. NER rose 0.2 percent on the week to $1,762, though annual NER growth for new leases held at negative 1.9 percent. Rents are stable week to week but have not yet resumed narrowing the annual gap, which leaves pricing as the soft spot. The range across the country stayed wide, with several coastal markets posting solid positive annual growth while much of the Sun Belt is still working through negative territory.RevPAU, which combines the change in rents and occupancy, was $1,671, up 0.2 percent on the week, with the annual comparison at negative 1.6 percent, roughly steady with the prior week. Revenue per available unit is holding up on the strength of occupancy and firmer rents together. For operators, the read this week is steady: the occupancy step up held, leasing improved, and pricing remains the one area still waiting to turn.Explore our webpage for more insights and resources:https://bit.ly/Radix_Website

With Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services, Diamond Consultants Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak unpack today's IBD vs. RIA landscape, explaining what has changed, where each model excels, and how to determine which path best supports the business you want to build. In Summary The independent wealth management landscape has changed dramatically, making the decision between an independent broker dealer (IBD) and an RIA more nuanced than ever before. Louis Diamond welcomes Diamond Consultants' Vice President of Independent Advisor Services, Josh Tomolak, for a practical discussion of how the independent space has evolved, what truly differentiates the IBD and RIA models today, and how advisors can evaluate which path best aligns with the business they want to build. The Storyline Not long ago, the decision to become independent was relatively straightforward. Advisors either remained with a traditional firm or pursued independence through one of a limited number of models. Today, the conversation is far more complex. Independent broker dealers have significantly expanded their capabilities, offering stronger technology, larger transition packages, greater flexibility, and even pathways to RIA ownership. At the same time, the RIA ecosystem has matured into a sophisticated marketplace supported by multiple custodians, outsourced service providers, institutional capital, and enterprise platforms that rival many of the industry's largest firms. As these developments have unfolded, the traditional distinctions between an IBD and an RIA have become less obvious. Advisors evaluating their options are no longer simply asking whether they should become independent—they're asking which model best supports the clients they serve, the business they envision, and the lifestyle they want to create. In this Industry Update, Louis and Josh unpack the realities behind the IBD vs. RIA decision. They discuss where the two models overlap, where meaningful differences still exist, and why factors like service, technology, economics, operational responsibility, enterprise value, and long-term optionality often matter more than labels alone. Whether you're considering changing independent firms, launching your own RIA, or simply want a better understanding of how the independent landscape has evolved, this conversation provides an objective framework for evaluating today's choices—and preparing for tomorrow's opportunities. Topics Covered Independent Broker Dealer (IBD) vs. RIA models The evolution of supportive independence Technology investments across the independent space Transition support and advisor mobility Capital solutions and recruiting economics Business formation and enterprise value Launching an independent RIA Multi-custodial platforms and open architecture Minority investments and succession planning Future trends shaping advisor independence > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why are already-independent advisors reconsidering their current model? (5:27) Josh explains why service, technology, economics, and growing optionality are causing advisors to reevaluate their existing affiliations. How have independent broker dealers and RIAs become more alike? (19:28) Louis and Josh discuss the growing convergence between the two models and why the distinction is becoming less obvious than many advisors assume. What really separates an IBD from an RIA? (25:04) A practical discussion of autonomy, compliance, flexibility, custody, economics, and advisor experience. What misconceptions keep advisors from launching an RIA? (36:29) Josh outlines the “Four Pillars” of launching an RIA and explains where advisors tend to either overestimate or underestimate the operational realities. Which advisors thrive most in each model? (33:12) The conversation explores why there isn't a universally “better” model—only one that's better aligned with an advisor's goals. What trends are quietly reshaping independence? (42:13) Minority investments, enterprise value, business formation, and changing revenue models may have an even greater impact than advisors realize today. Key Takeaways Independence has evolved from a destination into an ongoing strategic decision. Independent broker dealers have significantly improved technology, transition support, economics, and flexibility. The RIA ecosystem has matured into a highly sophisticated marketplace with broad outsourcing and support options. Choosing between an IBD and an RIA should begin with long-term business objectives—not industry perceptions. Building a valuable business depends more on business structure and scalability than simply growing assets. Advisors considering independence should evaluate models with an open mind rather than relying on outdated assumptions. The next decade will likely bring continued convergence between independent business models. https://youtu.be/jHDVso2TsmQ Quotable Moments “The question is no longer, ‘Do I want to go independent?' The question is, ‘What kind of independence makes the most sense for my clients, business, and goals?'” “Business formation is far more important than assets under management.” “The way you build your business will ultimately determine how valuable that business becomes.” “Everything in an RIA is going to cost you either your time or your money.” FAQs Is there still a meaningful difference between an IBD and an RIA? Yes. While the two models increasingly overlap, they differ in areas such as flexibility, compliance structure, operational responsibility, economics, and control. Why are more independent advisors changing firms today? Improved technology, stronger transition support, evolving economics, and better service models are prompting many advisors to reassess whether their current platform still fits their business. Is launching an RIA easier than it used to be? Yes. Supportive independence, outsourced service providers, and improved custodial resources have significantly reduced many of the historical barriers. Does every entrepreneurial advisor belong in the RIA model? No. The best fit depends on an advisor's appetite for ownership, customization, operational responsibility, and long-term vision. What matters more: assets under management or how the business is built? Josh argues that scalable business formation often has a greater impact on enterprise value than AUM alone. What's the biggest mistake advisors make when evaluating independence? Starting with assumptions instead of objectives. The most effective due diligence begins by defining the business you're trying to build, then identifying the model best suited to support it. Yes. While the two models increasingly overlap, they differ in areas such as flexibility, compliance structure, operational responsibility, economics, and control. Improved technology, stronger transition support, evolving economics, and better service models are prompting many advisors to reassess whether their current platform still fits their business. Yes. Supportive independence, outsourced service providers, and improved custodial resources have significantly reduced many of the historical barriers. No. The best fit depends on an advisor's appetite for ownership, customization, operational responsibility, and long-term vision. Josh argues that scalable business formation often has a greater impact on enterprise value than AUM alone. Starting with assumptions instead of objectives. The most effective due diligence begins by defining the business you're trying to build, then identifying the model best suited to support it. Related Resources IBD vs. RIA Comparison Guide IBD vs. RIA Revisited: Two Independent Pathways for Advisors to Consider NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. View the transcript of this episode… IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence A conversation with Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services at Diamond Consultants.      Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence. It’s a conversation with Josh Tomolak, our Vice President of Independent Advisor Services. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond: For a long time, going independent would suggest the destination. Today, it’s often the beginning of a different conversation. As the independent space has matured, advisors have more choices than ever before. Broker-dealers have expanded their capabilities. The RIA ecosystem has become increasingly sophisticated. Capital is more readily available and support models now exist that would’ve been difficult to imagine a decade ago. The result is that many advisors who are already independent are taking a fresh look at whether their current affiliation still aligns with what they’re trying to build. My guest is Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services here at Diamond Consultants and our resident expert on independence. Josh spends his days helping advisors evaluate independence in all its forms from independent broker dealers, the fully independent RIAs and everything in between. And his knowledge is critical because the distinction between these models is often blurred. Many broker dealers now offer pathways to greater autonomy while supported independence has made RIA ownership more accessible than ever before. So the question is no longer simply, “Do I want to go independent?” The question is, “What kind of independence makes the most sense for client, business, and goals?” Josh shares what he’s seeing across the landscape, the misconceptions that continue to shape advisor thinking and the factors that matter most when evaluating the next chapter of an independent business. There’s a lot to discuss, so let’s get to it. Josh, thanks for joining me today. Joshua Tomolak: Thanks for having me, Louis. It’s a real privilege to have come. This is a full circle moment for me going from being a student of your podcast, to working alongside you, to being a guest. So I appreciate you having me. Louis Diamond: Amazing. I’m excited for this one too, because you have a fresh and in the weeds perspective that a lot of our guests simply don’t have. So why don’t you start off, you spend your time helping advisors evaluate independence every day. So working with advisors who are already independent, for the most part. And to me, it feels like the independent space has really evolved dramatically over the last decade. I mean, this podcast is really the epicenter of that to prove that out, but give us a little background on your past roles in the space and then we can get into what you’re seeing right now. Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, I’d be happy to. So I took a very non-traditional path into wealth management. I spent a decade as a deep sea Navy diver, and upon completing my service there, I ended up working for TD Ameritrade. And in my role there, I spent about six years doing nothing but helping financial advisors explore the RIA space, whether that was to join or partner with an RIA, sell to an RIA, or in most cases, launch their own RIA. And one of the things that I ultimately came to terms with is it’s just not the right model for everybody. While I’m a huge advocate for it, we would often lose business to the major broker-dealers of the world. And at the time, I really didn’t understand why. In the last six years at Diamond Consultants has been a very interesting purview into what a lot of the broker-dealers have done and are doing to make themselves more RIA-ish and be very compelling to the right advisor. Louis Diamond: Perfect framing. Your background is incredibly germane to the folks you work with. So let’s start off with the softball here. What are you seeing right now? Joshua Tomolak: It’s not so different than the rest of the industry, the wirehouses, the regional firms, things of that nature, that if you took 10 firms, they’re all likely to go different directions, even if they were identical practices. That could be… A third would go from an independent broker-dealer to another independent broker-dealer. Certainly the supported RIA space is growing every day and has created a lot of very fun and unique solutions for advisors, very customized and curated. And then I think there’s still a lot of really great sophisticated teams and individual contributors that are making the decision to go hyper entrepreneurial and launch their own individual RIA. So the movement’s really all over the board from my perspective. Louis Diamond: It does feel like it’s no longer independence is an alternative option or it’s on the fringes. It’s very front and center whether for breakaways, which is a big topic on our podcast, but in general, the infrastructure has become much, much more sophisticated today than ever before. Advisors have way more tools in their toolbox to serve clients, whether in the private markets or through technology. And it’s no longer that if an advisor’s independent, they’re in the minor leagues where they don’t have the same ability to serve clients like they did if they’re at a big bank or a private bank or a wirehouse. Do you agree? Joshua Tomolak: I absolutely agree. And I’m reminded of a question I got one time from a great team that I worked with in New York. They asked me, “Are there really more options than ever before? Because all we see is one firm selling to another.” And I think that’s a really great point. There’s far less broker dealers on the street than there were even five years ago. But for every Commonwealth, for example, that sells to an LPL, up pops three or four really cool private equity-backed, sophisticated RIA platform firms that are built to service their own unique advisor base. Louis Diamond: I think that’s right. Sitting on the sidelines, sitting on top of everything going on in the industry, I feel like capital is always an interesting topic forever. If an advisor wanted to move within the independent world or break away from a big firm to go independent, the only way to get capital was to go to an independent broker dealer. So we still see that, but I feel like today between all these minority acquisition opportunities, we’re seeing firms acquire practices at time of transition, which is somewhat new. There’s debt solutions, recruiting deals are way up for firms that are paying forgivable loans. RIAs now would, in some cases, will pay a forgivable note. What are you seeing there as far as the availability of capital and just deals in general? Joshua Tomolak: It’s a great question and I didn’t want to take the low-hanging fruit, but capital’s been a huge innovation, I guess, in the last five years I’d say. Just to give you rough quotes, please don’t hold me to it, but traditional transition broker-dealer deals were five years ago, 40 to 60% of Trailing Twelve revenue today are somewhere between 90 and 120%, sometimes north of that for the right team. That’s really meaningful money for the team that is thinking about foregoing a wirehouse deal, for example. I’d also say a lot of these firms are getting hyper-creative in how they solve for capital. The minority investment piece that you mentioned is very interesting. We’re seeing a lot of privatized forgivable notes in the RIA space where third-party or private lenders are basically lending the money and the RIA is making the payments on that forgivable note as long as the advisor is affiliated with them. So there’s been a recognition among the RIA space to get away from the, “Oh, they just took a check” type of mantra, and to say, “Look, I understand there are capital needs. These people are taking a risk. We need to solve for that.” So we’ve seen a lot of that in the marketplace. Louis Diamond: Very interesting. I think another thing financially, and then we’ll keep the train moving, that I know I’ve seen, and maybe you can weigh in if you’ve seen the same, is the cost to an advisor or a business owner to join an independent BD or to join an RIA has come way down, probably in part because of Schwab going to zero on trading. That’s been a catalyst. But it feels like we used to say independent BDs were expensive relative to the RIA world. And in some cases, they certainly could be. And if you’re at scale, maybe you can pick up a point or two being in the RIA world versus a BD. But when you have some of these BDs that have a basis point admin fee or no admin fee at a certain size and the payouts I feel like are similar, maybe have gone up a little bit, but it’s more so like the administrator fees, the platform fees, the program fees. Anyone who’s not in that world, it’s like, “What are you talking about?” But basically the way that these broker-dealers make money, it seems like there’s been a pretty big differential in the exchange of value where advisors now get more services, better technology, get more money to join them and get it at a lower cost. Do you agree? Joshua Tomolak: I absolutely agree. I think that maybe that’s one of the larger changes that we’ve seen, and it’s probably one of the benefits from a lot of the industry consolidation on that independent broker-dealer side. The economies of scale of these folks have allowed them to increase their tech spend, increase their service capacities all while offering it to the advisors at a cheaper price. And when I was at TD Ameritrade, one of the biggest pitches was the idea of a 100% payout and you control the fixed expenses, your technology compliance, et cetera. But what’s changed is that broker-dealers are pretty darn comparable on the expenses. All of those admin fees and things you mentioned will still exist, but they’re on a much smaller scale. And I think the question a lot of advisors are asking is, “Am I getting congruent value from my broker-dealer for what I pay for?” And while that answer might’ve been no a couple years ago, today the answer is more often yes. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I would agree. A lot of times we work with advisors who are starting an RIA or affiliating with an RIA or going to a BD and they see how big the deals are in the independent BD world and the payouts are really high and the fees are relatively low. And honestly, it is a hard decision or calculus to make, like, “How does it make sense for me to turn down this extremely lucrative deal when my ongoing economics are going to be somewhat similar in the BD world versus in the RIA space?” I think it’s just an interesting dynamic and we’ll get more into that distinction. One of the stars of the show right here is we’ve seen a ton of advisor movement across the industry. Our annual advisor transition report said that in 2025, over 11,000 experienced advisors changed firms, which is a large number. A lot of those numbers are within the independent world. So advisors who are 1099 through a BD or through an RIA transitioning to another platform or organization or starting an RIA. So why do you think we’re seeing so many advisors reconsider their current firm or their platform or their broker-dealer today than in years past? Joshua Tomolak: It’s a jarring number. 11,000 is definitely a significant amount of advisor movements. To me, it comes down to a few things, but I will say that it’s almost always a conglomeration of pushes and pulls. Pushes being inherent frustrations with your status quo, pulls being the new sexy, shiny things that you see in the marketplace that could be really impactful for your business. To me, it typically comes down to one of three things, at least on the push front, that drives advisors to movement. Service being number one, technology being number two, and economics being number three. And if we were just going to unpack those, I think service being, “Can you call somebody that knows your business, that knows your name? Are you getting the correct answers? Are you being pushed through a phone tree? And even if you’re not doing it, is it taking up a meaningful amount of time of your staff’s free time?” On the technology front, there’s very significant tech spends happening in the industry right now. I think Raymond James and LPL reported, for example, they spent 500 million in 2025 on a tech spend. So advisors are going to the places that are making their life easier. People are looking for a mechanism to really scale their business without having to add staff and a lot of expenses to the bottom line. And technology is just the fastest, most efficient way to do that most times. And then economics, certainly a lot of advisors and teams have built phenomenal businesses and they’ve made a great living without really stressing out about the economics. And they eventually get to a point in their business where what they were giving up as a million dollar producer is far different than what they’re giving up as a $4 million producer. And back to the congruent value, it perhaps stops to make as much sense. Louis Diamond: Well said. I always say when the cost-to-value ratio is out of whack, that’s when advisors sit up and take notice. And not to name names of firms, but there definitely are firms that are more expensive. And even if you look at how much a wirehouse or a Ed Jones advisor paid their firm, it’s like, “What got me here is not necessarily what’s going to get me there.” And while the name on the business card, the resources were incredibly impactful, and I’m so grateful for what my firm, my broker-dealer did for me when I was just starting or when I was smaller. Now the business is bigger, I rely upon different resources or I don’t need the firm as much. So I’d rather plow the cost savings either into income for myself or invest it in areas that are most germane to my business. And it’s usually when that kind of light bulb moment goes off, that’s one of the major pushes that cause advisors to evaluate other options. So I agree with you, those are the major push factors, but then what are the pull factors? What are the major advancements or changes across the independent space that’s causing advisors to say, “Hey, okay, I might have some frustrations, but at the same time, I also need to find something that’s more than marginally better than the firm I’m at. Otherwise, why am I going to go through the hassle, take the risk, et cetera? So what are some of the pull factors that advisors are latching onto today? Joshua Tomolak: Sure. And I might say with one final push factor, there’s a straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back when you’ve been told for however many years that this change or that change is coming down the pipeline and it never happens. And it translates well into the pull factors is do they do what they say they’re going to do? The talking points really for the pull factors are exactly the same. So the counterpoint to service is perhaps having a direct relationship with the chief compliance officer at a firm or having a dedicated service representative that knows their stuff inside and out and can get you the answer even if they don’t know it off the top of their head. Having the technology to rebalance a household in two clicks instead of two hours. In economics, I think it’s really a transparency of economics. We’ve both worked with some really significant firms that have looked at their P&Ls and said, “where the heck is the money going?” And we’ve looked at the same P&Ls and said, “I have no idea,” because it’s so convoluted. People are happy to pay for good service, good technology, good products, but they just want to know where the money’s coming from. So I think it’s a yin and yang. The same things that they’re the push are often the pull. Louis Diamond: Definitely. I’ll give you a couple other from my perspective. I’ll say first specific to the independent BD world, and then we’ll dive into the RIA, I think it’s a little bit different. But I think some other will say innovations or changes that are causing advisors to really perk up and listen and really make the case to themselves that life will be better at this new organization than the status quo or staying put. We’ve seen major advancements in transition support, whether it’s being able to do a transition without a shred of paper, being able to… I mean, we’ve seen some independent advisors move their entire book within two weeks, which never would’ve happened before. So the firms that I’d say are playing offense, the larger firms that are winning, they have insane headcount around transitions and are always investing in technology, whether now on the AI front or in general. And we’ve seen transitions, they’re never easy. So that’s not a comment to say it’s easy, but a lot of the friction, a lot of the manual work has been taken away, which is massive. You definitely mentioned the significant technology spend. I mean, just the innovations going on across the industry. There’s definitely some firms that are laggards on technology and others that are light years ahead, whether because their tech is more integrated or they’ve built out their platform to be more, we’ll say modular, to plug in different third-party softwares where an advisor can really customize and create their own tech stack. I think there’s been some changes on compliance. It used to be if you’re at an independent BD, you had to be the OSJ by yourself or you had to roll up under an OSJ. But now most BDs offer home office supervision, so a big friction or pain point is taken away. And then I’ll give you a bridge to talk about what we’re seeing on the RIA side. But we’ve also seen, I would say, a real blurring of the lines between what you would traditionally think of as an independent broker dealer versus what was an RIA. So whether it’s an internal pathway where it’s like, “Start off on our independent BD platform, get the big deal, get the support, but then you can ditch that and just use this as a custodian or you can sell the business to us when you want to retire and convert to W2.” So in that vein, transitioning internally to an RIA, give me the same points like, “What are the major advancements or changes you’re seeing on the RIA side today?” Joshua Tomolak: I love that you said that because it’s been one of the most interesting changes to watch. Independent broker dealers becoming more like RIAs, and to your point, being more flexible, having more optionality, a more curated experience in some cases. And in many cases becoming closer to independent broker dealers with some of these massive shops that we’ve seen be created over the last five years that now have hundreds, if not thousands of advisors. To your question on the internal RIA slide as we sometimes call it, this really didn’t exist many places a few years ago. And I think it’s been created as both originally a retention tool in many places for the advisors that were with a major independent broker dealer and they ultimately wanted to have their own ADV and their own RIA. And the firm didn’t want to lose all the assets to an independent custodian so they gave them the green light to… And it’s ultimately became a sales tool in many cases. Just to use a couple of examples across the industry, I mean, Raymond James has Raymond James Custody Services, which has attracted a lot of really sophisticated teams. I know Wells Fargo Finance done something similar and even the counterparts over at Cetera and Osaic are trying to do the same thing. So it’s a recognition in my view that we want to keep the best talent possible. And if these folks are ultimately going to go RIA anyway, it’s less about the money and more about the flexibility and control that it offers them. So what can we do to keep those folks on board? And rightfully so, a lot of senior management of these firms have said, “Let’s not lose these teams. It’s going to be a lower margin business for us, but at the rate that they’re growing, it’s going to pay off in the long run.” Louis Diamond: Well said. RIAs are now more mainstream. And some of these RIAs, they’re either resembling independent BDs or I would even go so far to say the valuations that are even publicly available on some RIAs is definitely having people take notice. I mean, Cerity Partners recently raised capital at an over $8 billion reported valuation. Crescent was well over a billion. Firms like Mariner, Creative Planning, Mercer, Wealth Enhancement Group, and there’s many that I’m missing, are all worth a couple billion dollars or more and growing. Do you think that’s had an impact on the legitimacy or the staying power of the RIA model? Joshua Tomolak: Oh, absolutely. There’s no doubt about it. I mean, those groups that you mentioned and many more are winning some of the biggest teams on the street. I mean, if you pull up a run-of-the-mill advisor hub article, for example, you’ll see as many of those RIAs win significant businesses as you will their broker-dealer counterparts, partially in my opinion, due to the massive valuations these firms are fetching. And it’s much more of a partnership in the sense that joining a Crescent or a Wealth Enhancement Group, as you mentioned, you’re a part of a boutique group of maybe a couple of hundred very sophisticated high-producing advisors all playing under the same banner, all rowing in the same direction, and that creates substantial growth. Louis Diamond: Exactly right. I think two other things to me that’s driving the legitimacy or the growth of the RIA segment, there’s so many different outsourcing solutions that have popped up, whether it’s more of a… We’ll say a bundled or a package outsourcing solution through firms like Dynasty and Sanctuary. LPL has done a ton with having a shared services outsourcing model. So you have those. But you also have, I mean, probably 10 different firms I could think of that can be an outsourced chief compliance officer. You have tons of marketing agencies that specialize in helping RIAs. You have all these FinTechs popping up to support the RIA space. Really, it’s like anything and everything can be outsourced now. And even the big Wall Street banks like UBS, Merrill, et cetera, they’re attempting to sell and distribute product into the RIA space. Venture funds, private equity funds, anyone you talk to is trying to get a piece of the RIA space, which means there’s more product and platform availability than ever before. And I think it’s massive because one, it’s a catalyst for teams who say, “I love everything about the RIA world. I just don’t want to do it on my own,” or, “I don’t know where to start.” But also it means that they can look their clients in the eye and say, “Hey, not only do I have the same stuff that I had for you at XYZ firm, I can actually do more for you.” And even if you look at what the custodians are doing on the lending side now, Schwab owning a bank is massive and being able to facilitate mortgages, securities-backed loans, things that didn’t really exist in the past. I think it’s a very exciting time for advisors either that are independent or are considering the independent space because you have all these choices and it’s really like, “Choose your own adventure. Give me your top five things you want.” I’m sure it exists and we can find it and make it happen. And I don’t think we’d have the same confidence in that statement 5, 7, 10 years ago. Joshua Tomolak: I couldn’t agree more. That’s such a huge development is the marketplace of third party vendors in any kind of capitalism environment. There’s problems that people encounter and there’s really smart people that are trying to make a lot of money that go to market to solve them. And we’ve seen a ton of that over the last few years. Louis Diamond: Exactly right. Yeah, it’s like also… If an advisor looks around and says, “Hey, this is what I want,” and it doesn’t exist, oftentimes that’s a light bulb moment to be like, “Okay, I’ll go build it. I’ll do it on my own.” Whether it was Stewart Partners when they launched a number of years ago or Hightower, Dynasty, et cetera. They were all started by people that said, “Hey, I see a big gap in the ecosystem. Let’s create a business and raise capital to go solve it and then deliver this service to other like-minded advisors or business owners.” Honestly, it’s a treat to be able to watch all this happen in real time. We probably should have laid the groundwork with this next question, but I think it’s an important one. What’s the difference between a independent broker-dealer and an RIA? Really basic foundational. It sounds like the lines are blurred. There’s probably a lot of similarities. Advisors are successful in both. It’s not like one’s better than the other. How would you explain the differences, if a client of ours asked, “What’s the difference between an independent broker-dealer and IBD versus an RIA”? Joshua Tomolak: Get into the core of it. Again, the lines are blurred, and I’ll stay very high level on the strategic differences, but I like to use this example. I drive a Toyota Tundra. Really like the truck, gets me from A to B. Now, if I were getting to a point where I wanted a new vehicle, if I were to go get another Toyota Tundra because I really like a lot of aspects of it, but I want the one with the bigger screen and the bigger tires and the power seats, and I have rolled down windows because I have a fear of drowning. But if I want a lot of the bells and whistles, but I want to keep the foundation, that’s what I align to a independent broker-dealer to independent broker-dealer. You like the foundation of everything all under one roof. You like a lot of the resources, but you have some meaningful frustrations and you want to see if another provider in the market can solve for those or you can upgrade. If I instead, Louis, decided that I wanted a sports car or a Jeep Wrangler or something, I would be looking at a different category altogether. That’s how I articulate the platform space. They provide the same services and support in many cases that an independent broker-dealer does, think of marketing and a tech stack and regulatory oversight and a fellowship in a community, but they’re built on an RIA TC registered chassis. They’re typically far more customized so you can shop the street to get a lot more of the things that you like, though you are walking away from maybe some of the things that you’ve liked in the independent broker-dealer model. So I guess that’s the highest level I might explain it, just a little bit more minutia in any broker-dealer is going to be a FINRA registered, FINRA member broker-dealer. So they’re subject to the FINRA rules, which basically means it’s the compliance interpretation of those rules that they have to follow. So LPL’s rules may be slightly different than Cetera’s than Ameriprise’s because it’s based on their interpretations of the rules. In the RIA space, everybody really operates on the fiduciary standard. So it’s just a different lens that from a compliance standpoint, business is looked at. And a lot of people would make the argument that it’s just easier to get things done when you’re looking at something from that lens. I might’ve gone too compliance nerd on you there, but I’d be curious what you think some of the major differences are. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I think that’s right. I mean, it sounds like if you’re in the RIA world in some capacity that you as the advisor or business owner are going to have a little bit more control and autonomy and flexibility. One, do you think that’s true? And what are the reasons why that is? Is it platform? Is it strictly just compliance is easier? What are the different ways that an RIA would have more or less flexibility than someone who’s with an independent BD? Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, I think it’s overwhelmingly true, but it certainly depends on your business. Within most RIA platforms, you’re going to be one of a couple dozen, maybe a couple hundred, where you’re going to have people within that firm that really know your business. So the experience in getting things done is much less about, “Can I do this,” or, “Can I not do this?” And it’s, “Louis, I understand you asked for this. We’re going to run into these issues, but let’s figure out how to get to yes.” So it’s far more curated by people that are not operating on black and white rules and can actually figure out how to get to yes for your business. The other thing I would say is that most significant RIA platforms have multiple custodial options. So many times you’ll see as few as two or as many as five. So if an advisor or a team is trying to bring on a new piece of business or do something creative, that might be something they can use a different custodial relationship to accomplish. It might be something that Goldman Sachs does really well but is in its infancy at Fidelity, or it might be international business that’s approved on Pershing’s platform but not Schwab’s platform. So the RIA partner that you’re with can really look at those custodians agnostically and say, “What’s the best home for this business? What’s the best way to get this done for Louis?” There’s a couple examples of where I see the flexibility in practice. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I think one more too would be the concept of being able to shop the street. I’ve heard it described as becoming a buy-side advocate for your clients versus being a professional seller. So meaning, if I’m affiliated with an RIA or I’m operating my own RIA, there’s no selling away like there is at a wirehouse or at certain BDs. So if I have a client who’s trying to get a $10 million loan for a new building that they’re breaking ground on, if I’m at UBS, Merrill, Morgan Stanley, captive to a BD, I can go to my firm and say, “Hey, this $10 million loan, here it is. What are the terms? What are the rates? Will you take on this business?” And the firm will say, “Yes. No. Yes, here are the terms. Here’s the caveats, et cetera.” But it’s a very closed market process and an advisor has to live and die by what their firm says. Versus in the RIA world, it’s, “Okay, I have relationships with nine different banks and I can go to these different banks and private credit funds and whoever and really create either an option process for my client or really just help them in a fully agnostic open way.” And we see the same thing when it comes to alternative investments. No one at a wirehouse, let’s say, is complaining that they don’t have enough alts that they can offer clients. Those firms have done an amazing job with really boiling the ocean and having tons and tons of options for private investments, hedge funds, et cetera. But if you’re in the RIA world, you can take it to the next level and say, “Hey, this $3 million startup company that my friend is starting, I’m going to help them raise capital,” or, “My client wants to get a syndicate of investors together to have a direct investment into a qualified opportunity zone fund that they’re starting. Let’s do it when we can advise on it.” So it really expands what an advisor is able to do on behalf of clients. Like to me, that’s the most interesting or exciting part of the RIA model. You can get some of that within the BD world, but to me, when an advisor’s business becomes more sophisticated as far as what their end client’s needs are, it tends to translate better to the RIA world than the BD world. Not to say there aren’t ultra-high net worth focused advisors at BDs, but because of that additional flexibility, autonomy, customization, et cetera, that speaks more RIA. So again, absolutely not down at all on the independent BDs because I think there’s a massive home for them. Josh, let me turn it back to you. I’m rambling now. Give me the pitch for an independent BD. What are the things that are misperceptions that people have? What are the advantages that an independent broker dealer like an LPL or a RayJ or a Cetera have over RIAs or over other models in general? Joshua Tomolak: Absolutely. And I’d say I’ve learned more over the last six years from some of your ramblings than most people learn in an MBA course, so keep doing what you’re doing. But it’s funny being in this position now, having spent so much time sort of selling against the IBD model within TD Ameritrade, but what I’ve learned is it’s a good home for everybody. And a lot of times the advisors that they’re entrepreneurial enough where they like having their name on the door, but they’re not so entrepreneurial where they want to build everything out themselves, that’s where the independent broker dealers absolutely kill it. Their economics have gotten to a point where they’re really competitive. They offer transition capital that isn’t even going to be comparable in the RIA space unless you’re selling a minority share of your business. And you mentioned LPL, or we could really list all of the major ones, there’s not a department that they don’t have. It could be as nuance as finding 403(b) payroll slots or it could be as mainstream as fixed income or setting up events. There are all kinds of really neat departments that these all under one roof independent broker dealers have invested in. And a lot of times they make an effort to make you very much aware of all of the support because most people don’t use it. So I would say for the advisors that are looking to get their improved Toyota Tundra, then you can get probably 70 or 80% of what you want within the independent broker-dealer world. And you can also keep 20 or 30% of the stuff, maybe more that you really liked at your previous firm. So I think that’s where it really shines. I sometimes call it an incremental change rather than a transformational change. But for many advisors, incremental is really good enough if you get to keep the familiarity of how you’ve been doing business for the last 20-some years, but you’re able to get net improvement on the things that were really bothering you. Louis Diamond: Well said. Something that I’ve seen that’s been… I guess this could be either pro or con depending upon the advisor, but with some broker dealers, letting an advisor co-brand with them or really having a real consumer-facing brand, whether it’s, “I’m a franchise owner with Ameriprise,” or, “I’m independent through Raymond James,” or, “Running my own practice through Wells Fargo FiNet,” or, “I’m independent with Northwestern Mutual.” There’s definitely some brand cache or brand familiarity with some of those firms that may or may not be the same if you’re in the RIA world. So I would agree there’s a lot to like about the independent BD world and there’s a fit for people that is absolutely better with independent BDs than on the RIA side. Even if some people would say RIA is better, we’re cleaner, I wouldn’t say that. To me, it’s all about what an advisor’s goals are and then matching that up with what these firms do. And there’s never a perfect option. I jokingly say, “If there was a perfect firm, we wouldn’t be in business.” Every firm has their advantages or disadvantages. And depending upon where an advisor’s coming from, their style of business, their pain points, that’ll match up really well with on firm or one type of firm or one model than the other. Let’s pivot a little bit to the RIA world. A lot of your comments have been more about advisors affiliating or joining RIAs, this whole supportive version of independence concept. But what about advisors who want to go and start their own RIA? Either they’re leaving a captive firm and taking the entrepreneurial route and starting their own firm, or they’re leaving an independent BD to go start their own RIA. What do you see as some of the biggest misconceptions that advisors have about that move? Joshua Tomolak: That’s probably my favorite topic because there are the most misconceptions I think in this space. Louis Diamond: I’d agree. Joshua Tomolak: And I would say there’s 9 out of 10 conversations that I have with advisors and teams, they start off with the launching an RIA in mind or at least RIA curious and they want to understand what’s out there. And probably less than half the time do these folks end up actually launching their own RIA, which is okay because the ones that do are massively successful and they know they’re dang sure that’s exactly what they want to do. I think it gets a little bit romanticized sometimes that they’ll say, “Oh, I’ll just give Schwab a call,” or, “I’ll just give the custodian a call,” as if they were shopping independent broker dealers. That’s fine. You can do that and they will help you, but there’s quite a bit more to think about. And it’s not, in my opinion, the same as evaluating independent broker dealers. If it’s all right, I was taught the four pillars of the RIA model. I can go through that with you really quickly. So the way to think about the RIA space is in four pieces. And shout out to a friend, Eli Suarez, that taught me this years ago. The first pillar… Thinking of four pillars on a bar stool, if you will. The first one being administration. And this is your compliance, this is setting up your ADV, your LLC, all of your business formation documents. The second piece being technology, what do you actually want to use? Because the benefits of the broker-dealer world and the supported independent world is they’ve already built it for you. They’ve already paid for it and scraped their knees building it. In this case, you have to. And for some people, that’s really exciting to source financial planning software and portfolio management software and your CRM and tax software, et cetera. For some people, it just sounds like a huge headache. The third pillar being custodians. I have them third because you want to make sure that the right custodian can integrate properly with the technology that you’ve sourced that you’re passionate about. And then ultimately transition. What does a transition really look like? What are my legal and regulatory requirements? How does this work? What are the timelines? Things of that nature. So I guess I would say in closing that if those four things are things that you really want to own, then you’re in a really good position to consider an RIA launch. What do you think, Louis? Louis Diamond: I think that’s a great framework to break it down. Not just be like, “Okay, I can tolerate that,” or, “My team can do it,” but I think you have to be pretty excited about rolling up your sleeves and customizing and doing it yourself because in our experience, there’s a nominal differential between the economics of running your own RIA versus affiliating with an RIA or going to an independent BD. All the extra work and responsibility, you’re not really going to make it up, at least on the front end, on a higher net payout. So it has to be more about what the model means to you and having a vision that you don’t think anyone else can accomplish other than yourself. And looking at that crazy ever-expanding Michael Kitces’ FinTech map and there’s 500 different logos on it and being like, “Yes, that’s what I want. I want to go through this. I want to pick the seven pieces of my tech stack that work for me,” rather than getting, “Here’s the tech stack, take a demo, you like it, you don’t like it, take it or leave it.” To me, the two biggest misconceptions people have about the RIA world is one, “I’m going to have to be a full-time chief compliance officer,” and just that compliance is this boogeyman, this terrible, scary thing. In some ways it is. But the reality is most, especially startup RIAs will fully outsource compliance to a firm or they’ll hire a compliance consultant or firms that are big enough even will hire a CCO or repurpose someone on their team to be CCO. But compliance is much more streamlined and simpler than BD compliance. And ultimately, it’s compliance that’s being built for your business rather than compliance that’s being built for a publicly traded multinational company that supports 20,000 financial advisors. So I think compliance is always a big misconception. It’s definitely what a lot of firms will pry upon when they’re saying like, “Oh, you’re going to own all the legal and regulatory requirements. You could, but it’s definitely not a requirement.” And then I think another one is folks sometimes underestimate and overestimate the operational burden and how much work it is to start an RIA. Sometimes people just… They’re perfect for the RIA world, that’s their goal, but they get stopped in their tracks. They don’t really know what to do. But what we’ve seen, we said it earlier with so many different outsourcing solutions and different service providers that have popped up, if you have the fire in your belly to go build something, it doesn’t mean you’re doing it by yourself. I mean, that’s what firms like ours do. The custodians are very helpful. On the flip side though, I have seen advisors chasing payouts say, “Hey, I’m just going to go start an RIA because I want to make another 1 to 3%,” or whatever it comes to and they drastically underestimate what it really takes to build a successful firm. Joshua Tomolak: Exactly right. I think that’s my favorite one, Louis, overestimating and estimating the operational burden there is you could have the same conversation with two teams and it can go the completely different direction. Louis Diamond: Josh, let’s wrap here. I got one more question for you that I think is an exciting one, but give me three key trends or storylines that most people don’t know about or aren’t talking about that you’re passionate about or that you’re sharing with advisors or counseling today. Joshua Tomolak: Sure. This is the free advice portion. And I’ll tell you what, Louis, if it’s all right with you, I’ll give you two and I would love to hear one from you as well. The first one I’ve seen in both the independent broker-dealer and RIA space is the minority investor concept. A lot of folks will talk about the idea of taking chips off a table and starting to partially monetize your business. I think that’s all important, but what I’ve found is that a lot of advisors really want their partner, whether it’s an RIA broker dealer to help them grow. And that could be with M&A opportunities, that could be with traditional recruitment of advisors, that could be building a business plan. But the minority investment part really helps accelerate that for a lot of businesses because all of a sudden, not only are you cashing out a small part of your business, but you’ve just created an ally with the parent entity, it is now much more likely to help you grow in that capacity because they’re insulated from it and they profit when you profit. So I think it’s easy to be shortsighted and say, “Well, my equity’s going to keep growing. Why would I sell you a piece of this?” But I counsel folks often to really think about what that long-term strategic partnership is and making somebody a real equity partner rather than just a vendor that provides you with technology and regulatory coverage. The other one I’d say is that… And this one’s really important to me, that business formation is far more important than your assets under management. Said a different way, the way you build your business is going to make your business far more valuable than the number of dollars underneath your name. And what I mean by that is, just to use an example, a sophisticated, well-built, centralized, scalable and repeatable business, whether it’s an RIA with a broker-dealer that is going to fetch a far higher M&A multiple than a OSJ that’s five times the size that just has a bunch of 1099 independent advisors underneath the umbrella. What we’ve seen in the M&A space is that if you’re going to shell out 50, 60, $80 million for somebody’s business, you want to know that you have this business for the long term. So I would certainly counsel people that have been around maybe far longer than me to take a look at how you’re building this and put together a business plan on what those next 10 years should look like and not necessarily fall into the trap where your only revenue source is the override that you receive from a firm and then you in turn pay to the advisors on your team. Louis Diamond: Well said. I really like that line. We’d probably do a whole episode on what are the tips and tricks for building a business with the end in mind? Like the Covey quote, “Begin with the end in mind.” Transitions are like… They’re a bear. I mean, there’s no way to sugarcoat it. Advisors, when they hear transition, if you ask them, “Don’t think about it, give me your reaction.” “Terrible, risky, a lot of work. I’ll never do it again. My friend did it and it was terrible. What if my clients don’t come?” It’s all these negative emotions. And in many cases, I don’t blame an advisor because it is a big act. But to me, if someone is weighing making a transition, whether a wholesale business model change going from being an employee to being independent, going from being an advisor at an independent BD to starting an RIA, or even going independent BD to independent BD, it’s an opportunity if you rise to the occasion to build with this next act with intentionality. So whether it’s restructuring compensation for your team, converting people from 1099 to W2, putting in place new workflows, changing how investments, instead of it being each individual advisor doing investments to more of a centralized model, cleaning up workflows, really investing in data, investing in AI. It’s something that I think, again, we can have a whole episode on it, but I think it’s a great one. Build the business the right way. And obviously, businesses that are larger, theoretically, sell for more, but we’ve certainly seen businesses that are half the size of a larger one sell for a similar amount or more because they did all the right things and the larger one did the things that really turn off a buyer or detract from a valuation. Let me give you one more and tell me if you agree, but I think we’re in this moment when Altruist, the upstart, a new kid on the block custodian, they launched a basically tokenization of cash in a way to automatically agentically source or sort cash to the highest yielding money market. And you’re like, “This is fricking wonky. Louis, why are you telling us this?” I think this is an important one just to keep a watchful eye on. I have no idea how this is going to shake out, but really the biggest way that independent BDs or even custodians like Schwab and Fidelity really make money, it’s not on their overrides from practices or the admin fee or the custody fee. It’s really on net interest margin. So how much the broker-dealer or the firm is making on client cash and brokerage accounts relative to what they’re paying out the client. It’s essentially like free margin to these firms. And this concept, I think, has massive potential for disruption for the business model. Again, I don’t know what it’s going to look like, whether it means platform fees that are instituted at all these firms, whether it means certain models would be more beneficial than others, whether it means nothing’s going to change, which is probably the right answer given this industry. But it’s something to keep a watchful eye on just if your firm institutes a new platform fee or there’s a fundamental way in which your firm can no longer make money. How are they going to make it up? Are they now going to be uncompetitive? They’re not going to have as much scale or profits to invest in the platform. Is it going to cause even more consolidation in the industry? So to me, that’s the one pretty under the radar, pretty wonky storyline that I don’t think enough people are talking about, but has the biggest possibility for disruption across their space than anything I’ve seen in a while. Joshua Tomolak: Sure. That’s the whole iceberg. Not a lot of people are talking about it. It’s not poking out of the ocean, but it’s going to be continuously brought up. I think it’s a question that a lot of advisors are going to have to ask these firms. And at the end of the day, the firms aren’t the bad guys. They have to make money too to provide a quality product. So where the money comes from matters. Louis Diamond: Exactly. Josh, this has been awesome. I learned a lot talking with you and just having your objective consulting hat on what I think are really the differences between IBD and RIA and some of the key trends and storylines to watch has been instrumental. I’ll also give a plug that on our website and we’ll link to it in the show notes, we have a really helpful one-page reference guide going through the differences between independent BDs or IBDs and RIAs. So feel free to click on it. We’ll make sure it gets in your inbox. Josh, thanks again for joining us today. Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, thanks for having me, Louis. It was a pleasure. Mindy Diamond: As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibilities seriously and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I stay or Should I Go? is a book written with you in mind. It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence A conversation with Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services at Diamond Consultants.      Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence. It’s a conversation with Josh Tomolak, our Vice President of Independent Advisor Services. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond: For a long time, going independent would suggest the destination. Today, it’s often the beginning of a different conversation. As the independent space has matured, advisors have more choices than ever before. Broker-dealers have expanded their capabilities. The RIA ecosystem has become increasingly sophisticated. Capital is more readily available and support models now exist that would’ve been difficult to imagine a decade ago. The result is that many advisors who are already independent are taking a fresh look at whether their current affiliation still aligns with what they’re trying to build. My guest is Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services here at Diamond Consultants and our resident expert on independence. Josh spends his days helping advisors evaluate independence in all its forms from independent broker dealers, the fully independent RIAs and everything in between. And his knowledge is critical because the distinction between these models is often blurred. Many broker dealers now offer pathways to greater autonomy while supported independence has made RIA ownership more accessible than ever before. So the question is no longer simply, “Do I want to go independent?” The question is, “What kind of independence makes the most sense for client, business, and go

Tax season looked different in 2026, and it's not just volume. In this episode, Damien Greathead and Penny Breslin unpack the real AI story inside accounting firms: a live test of Juno saved 25% of prep time, clients are submitting documents faster than ever, and AI meeting assistants are replacing manual notetaking. But the bigger conversation is about critical thinking. As AI handles more routine work, who's making sure your team can still spot the anomaly? Identify the conflict? Give a client a real perspective? Damien shares how Moneypenny is gamifying judgment, hiring non-accountants, and rebuilding firm roles around advisory rather than compliance. This is a practitioner episode — real tools, real results, real friction. If you're building or scaling a CAS practice, this one is essential listening.Thank you to our sponsors MoneyPenny, LLC. From bookkeeping and tax preparation to back-office support, MoneyPenny helps accounting firms increase capacity, improve efficiency, and grow with confidence. In This EpisodeWhy accounting firms are seeing earlier tax document submissions in 2025Live AI tax prep test: Juno delivers ~25% time savings, but still requires human reviewThe difference between OCR tools (Grunt Works, Shore Prep, 1040 Scan) and AI-layer toolsHow AI can find conflicting information across reports, workflows, and client communicationsThe 'trust but verify' mindset, and why anomaly-hunting beats confirmation-seekingGamifying critical thinking to keep accounting teams sharp in an AI-assisted environmentThe 80/20 rule: who will rise to the top as AI takes over routine tasksBuilding distinct firm roles: traffic cop, trusted advisor, tax expertWhy MoneyPenny is hiring data scientists instead of more accountantsConnect with the hosts on LinkedInDamien GreatheadPenny Breslin

Darius Mirshahzadeh sits down with Raj Sisodia, Co-Founder and Chairman Emeritus of Conscious Capitalism Inc. and New York Times bestselling author, to explore the origins of the conscious capitalism movement, the flawed assumptions embedded in modern business education, and Raj's powerful new book “Healing Leaders: 7 Steps to Recovery of Self”. Raj shares his extraordinary personal journey, from a small village in India without electricity to Columbia University and ultimately to co-founding a global movement alongside Whole Foods CEO John Mackey. The conversation spans the philosophy of human nature, the systemic forces working against conscious business, and the deeply personal inner work every leader must do to become truly effective and whole. In this episode, Darius and Raj will discuss: (00:00) Introduction and Guest Introduction (01:16) Raj Sisodia's Background and Journey (04:17) The Negative Consequences of Traditional Business Practices (05:42) The Pillars of Conscious Capitalism (06:54) The Origin of Conscious Capitalism and Its Founders (08:33) Challenges in Bringing Consciousness to Finance (10:35) Understanding Human Nature and Its Role in Business (13:47) The Wisdom Traditions and Conscious Capitalism (15:42) Egalitarian Roots and Capitalism's Evolution (17:01) Leadership and Systemic Change (18:23) Changing Education and Systemic Beliefs (22:23) The Current Moment and Future of Conscious Business (26:01) Power, Virtue, and Leadership at Scale (31:05) Scaling Conscious Business and Systemic Challenges (34:38) Personal Transformation and Leadership Healing (42:13) The Journey of Self-Healing and Inner Work (48:07) The Seven Steps to Self-Healing and Leadership Recovery (53:45) Where to Learn More and Final Thoughts Raj Sisodia is the FEMSA Distinguished University Professor of Conscious Enterprise at Tecnológico de Monterrey and Co-Founder and Chairman Emeritus of Conscious Capitalism Inc. He holds a PhD in Business from Columbia University and is the author of sixteen books, including the New York Times bestseller Conscious Capitalism and Firms of Endearment. A globally recognized thought leader in conscious business and leadership, Raj has advised leading organizations such as IBM, Walmart, Whole Foods Market, Siemens, and AT&T. Connect with Raj: Website: https://rajsisodia.com/  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rajendrasisodia/  Connect with Darius: Website: https://therealdarius.com/ Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dariusmirshahzadeh/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/imthedarius/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Thegreatnessmachine  Book: The Core Value Equation https://www.amazon.com/Core-Value-Equation-Framework-Limitless/dp/1544506708 Write a review for The Greatness Machine using this link: https://ratethispodcast.com/spreadinggreatness.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Send us Fan MailYou can nail every case you practice and still get rejected.That's because firms aren't grading you on vibes. McKinsey scores you piece by piece – opening, structure, math, brainstorming, closing. Other firms use 3 buckets instead: structure, problem solving, communication.Either way, a 4 out of 4 in math won't save a 1 out of 4 in brainstorming. Firms want you solid across the board.In this episode, Namaan breaks down exactly what's being scored – and why doing 100 more practice cases won't fix a gap you haven't identified.Resources:Whether you're prepping for McKinsey's rubric or the 3-bucket system, Black Belt closes the gaps costing you the offerNew to case prep? Case Foundations is our free crash course on the basics – the starting point before scoring even mattersConsulting Deadlines:McKinsey, Bain, and BCG deadlines hit August 11 – 13 (and more are coming) – get interview-ready fast with Black BeltConnect With Management ConsultedCreate a free MC account or download the MC app (Apple, Android) to start your prep todaySchedule a free 15min consultation with the MC TeamWatch the video version of the podcast on YouTubeFollow us on LinkedIn, Instagram, and TikTokJoin an upcoming live event – case interviews demos, expert panels, and more

Peter Griffin is a Wellington-based technology journalist.

On this episode of the Woodard Report podcast, Heather speaks with Peter McCarroll about why accounting firms must treat AI adoption as a strategic business transformation rather than simply adding new software tools. Peter explains the pricing pressures threatening traditional compliance work, the need to redesign firms around advisory value and human relationships, and how reusable AI instructions and skills can help teams turn individual experimentation into shared, repeatable processes. About Peter McCarroll Peter McCarroll is a Chartered Accountant (NZ), CPA (Canada), and the founder of The AI Accountant — the only AI training and implementation platform built exclusively for CAS practices. He runs a full-service accounting practice at Fuel Accountants, where he has spent the past two years deploying AI across real client workflows. Peter helps accounting firms move from experimentation to operational transformation — not with theory, but with systems built inside a working practice. The AI Champion's Field Guide: What to Do Now, What to Ask For Learn more about The AI Accountant Learn more about Fuel Accountants Connect with Peter on LinkedIn Thank you to our show sponsor, Bill! Bill is the intelligent way to create and pay bills, send invoices, manage expenses, control budgets, and access the credit your business needs to grow, all in one platform. Learn more about the show and our sponsors at Woodard.com/podcast

End chaos in your firm—300+ peers use this framework. Free video here: https://www.businessofarchitecture.com/framework If your firm can't move without you, this episode will feel uncomfortably familiar today. Rion Willard shares a talk he gave on how small practices can build teams that act with ownership, not constant supervision. It's practical, grounded, and aimed at the real pressure points that make good architects feel stuck. You'll hear a clear way to spot when "leadership" is quietly creating stress, slow decisions, and repeat mistakes. Rion also walks through a real client story that shows what changes when a firm shifts its structure, its conversations, and its expectations—without losing its design culture. If you want more freedom, stronger delivery, and a team you can trust, this one is worth your time. The subtle reason "help" can make you busier—not lighter A simple shift that changes how accountability lands in your office The one number that can reveal more than a year of guesswork

This is a very special episode of Compounders: number 100. To celebrate that milestone, my guests on the show today are Alex Rubalcava and Connor Sundberg, Managing Partner and Partner, respectively, at the early-stage VC firm Amplify LA. Alex and I have been friends for many years, and it is an absolute treat to finally get him on the podcast. Alex recently merged his firm, Stage Venture Partners, into Amplify, where Connor was already a Partner. In this intriguing conversation, we covered: The rationale for the merger of the two investment firms; How they expect decision making and sourcing to change going forward; The idea of focusing on companies that are tackling challenges that are different and hard; Their current views on the pre-seed and broader venture capital investment universe; and How the SaaS-pocalypse is and isn't impacting how they view investing in enterprise software companies.

Buying more leads won't build a category-leading law firm. Building a brand will. Trudy Emlaw, Chief Marketing Officer at George Sink Injury Lawyers, brings a rare perspective to law firm marketing after beginning her career on the media buying side at Fox Cable and Comcast before leading marketing as a media buyer and, later, CMO at Mike Morse Law Firm. In this episode, she explains how negotiating better TV rates, building specialist marketing teams, using data with confidence, and investing in long-term brand strategy transform marketing from a reactive expense into a true growth engine. You'll learn: Why negotiating TV advertising rates creates value beyond the initial media buy. How specialist marketing teams outperform generalists as law firms grow. Why tracking seasonality leads to smarter law firm marketing budgets. How top-of-funnel brand strategy lowers long-term client acquisition costs. Rankings is bringing together the absolute best in the business to share exactly what is moving the needle in personal injury right now. Don't wait. Get your tickets today at pimcon.org. Like what you hear? Hit Subscribe! We do this every week.  For more resources on how to dominate your market, visit us at Rankings.io. Subscribe to our newsletter and get the freshest news every Monday: newsletter.rankings.io Get Social! Personal Injury Mastermind w/ Chris Dreyer powered by Rankings.io is on Instagram | YouTube | TikTok

Send us Fan MailConsumer and retail consulting used to be one market. Now it's 4.Each lane pulls a different lever – growth, margin, or talent. Firms that used to compete on "we do consumer and retail" are getting picked apart by specialists who can prove which lever they actually move.In this episode of The Briefing, Japheth sits down with Namaan to break down the 4 lanes reshaping a $70B market, why AI stopped being enough on its own, and why private equity's longer hold periods are turning growth and profitability into the same conversation.If you're a firm leader trying to protect market position, win the talent war, or defend margin, this one's for you.Resources:Go deeper on the data:Want to see which firms are already winning in each lane? Check out our 2026 Consumer & Retail rankingWant to hear it straight from firms already competing in these lanes? Watch our Consumer & Retail panelGo act on it:If your firm doesn't have a 10-second answer to "what do we solve better than anyone else," grab time with Namaan – MC works with firms to shape how that answer gets told to candidates and PE sponsorsIf you're a candidate trying to figure out which lane to network into, Black Belt helps you match your profile and story to the right one, and you can see who's actually hiring on our job boardConnect With Management ConsultedCreate a free MC account or download the MC app (Apple, Android) to start your prep todaySchedule a free 15min consultation with the MC TeamWatch the video version of the podcast on YouTubeFollow us on LinkedIn, Instagram, and TikTokJoin an upcoming live event – case interviews demos, expert panels, and more

As top AI firms race to develop a “superintelligent” agent — one that surpasses human cognition — are they prioritizing safety guardrails along the way? Not according to the Future of Life Institute's AI Safety Index, which reported that companies have gone back on their own promises to take a pause if their technology ever got close to certain risky points. Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Sabina Nong, AI safety investigator at the Future of Life Institute, about what measures might ensure durable safety around AI moving forward.

As top AI firms race to develop a “superintelligent” agent — one that surpasses human cognition — are they prioritizing safety guardrails along the way? Not according to the Future of Life Institute's AI Safety Index, which reported that companies have gone back on their own promises to take a pause if their technology ever got close to certain risky points. Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Sabina Nong, AI safety investigator at the Future of Life Institute, about what measures might ensure durable safety around AI moving forward.