Podcasts about john oh

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh the latest reversal of tariff measures between the US and China. They delve into the impact on Australian grains and cattle markets.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh the latest reversal of tariff measures between the US and China. They delve into the impact on Australian grains and cattle markets.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski, CBA's agricultural economist, as he discusses with John Oh, sustainability economist, what's behind the recent run up in Australian cattle prices.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh the latest on trade war developments, Ukraine-Russia war negotiations and weather around the world.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh the weakening global economic outlook, a surprise reduction in Ukraine's grain production for this season and declining Chinese oilseed stocks.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski, Agricultural and sustainability economist, and John Oh, Sustainability Economist, as they delve into the temporary pause in cattle and beef markets. They go into cattle supply and demand developments in the US, and check in on Chinese beef imports so far in 2025.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh on weakened Chinese crop imports and the latest on crop developments around the world. Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski, agricultural economist, and John Oh, Sustainability economist, as they discuss the latest behind the upward moves in cattle and beef markets. The US and China continue to push demand and prices higher, however, stormy economic clouds are forming over the horizon.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Global markets are closely watching crop developments in the US and Black as crops develop prior to mid-year harvest. In this podcast, CBA's Agricultural economist, Dennis Voznesenski, and Sustainability Economist, John Oh, delve into crop conditions, biofuels, global grain markets and the latest on tariffs.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh why global wheat prices have been weakening, and why canola prices increased.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh the improved outlook for Australian grain markets.     Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski as he discusses with John Oh why global wheat prices have been rising, the latest on US tariffs, and the recent bird flu outbreak.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve US tariff impacts on Australian agriculture.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast

Trucks contribute to 27% of road transport emissions although being only 3% of vehicles in Australia.  Despite low uptake of low-emission vehicles in Australia and globally, logistics and freight corporates are leading the way with various electric truck trials. In this episode, John Oh, Sustainable Economist, and Joseph Capurso, Head of International and Sustainable Economics, sit down to discuss the opportunities and challenges with decarbonising trucking.    Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve into the latest on grains and oilseed markets. This week we delve into the impact on canola markets from both a possible repeal of the US biofuel 45z tax credit and President Trump's tariffs on Canada. We also look into the key factor that will drive wheat prices moving forward.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve into the outlook for Australian cattle and beef markets for the year ahead.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve into the outlook for crop markets in 2025. The podcast covers everything from Black Sea wheat exports, Indian tariffs on pulses, poor beer demand and the impact of biofuels on canola.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Our 2025 outlook assesses how changing global politics will impact Australian agricultural markets. We delve into the impact of President Trump's tariff plans, in addition to growing prioritisation of food security in import reliant markets. Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve into the details. A podcast on our 12 month commodity outlook will also soon be released.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

In 2025, mandatory climate reporting will be introduced and phased in over three years, impacting approximately 4,000 – 5,000 of the largest entities in Australia. In this episode, Commonwealth Bank's sustainability economist, John Oh, sit down with Dennis Voznesenski to breakdown what climate reporting is, why mandatory climate reporting is being introduced, and whether the impact will be positive for reducing emissions in Australia.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

It's been three weeks since the re-election of President Donald Trump.  Two key proposed taxation policies have been increased tariffs and increased tax cuts for businesses and consumers that will be likely be implemented in 2025 and 2026, respectively.  To put all of this into context, Joseph Capurso, Head of International and Sustainable Economics, and John Oh, Sustainable Economist sit down to discuss CBA's latest view on the implications of these policies for the FOMC in 2025 and 2026.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

US President Donald Trump has been re-elected. What does it mean for the grains and beef sectors in Australia. Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve into the upside, downside and uncertainties.   Disclaimer:   Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh delve into the challenges surrounding a US herd rebuild, and discuss heavier cattle being put to slaughter. They also look into the conflicting weather forecasts for the rest of the year on the east coast.   Disclaimer:    Important Information   This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”).  Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au.   No Reliance  This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes.  This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast.   The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  Liability Disclaimer  The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

The global interest rate cut cycle has started.  And there are many more interest rate cuts ahead across most major economies.  CBA's view is that the interest rate cuts will improve global economic outlook in 2025.  In the latest podcast, Joseph Capurso, Head of International and Sustainable Economics, and John Oh, Sustainable Economist sit down to discuss CBA's latest view and breakdown developments across the major economies.    ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  

Electrifying Australian cars have involved the uptake of various low-emission technologies ranging from hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), and battery electric vehicles (BEVs).  In the latest podcast, Joseph Capurso, Head of International and Sustainable Economics, and John Oh, Sustainable Economist sit down to discuss the themes of electrification in Australia's car market.  Looking to the future, they identify the different ways in which the supply of electric vehicles could help meet demand preferences for various buyers in Australia.   ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.  

This week Joseph Capurso and John Oh sit down to discuss a range of economic data and political events that could influence the Australian dollar. They discuss the recent announcement of President Biden stepping down from the elections, upcoming data releases in the US and Europe.   ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.

This Sunday we're excited to have guest speaker, Pastor John Oh, speak a message titled “Rejoice in the Gospel”.John Oh has been serving as the senior pastor of SaRang Church in Seoul for 21 years, overseeing a membership growth of over 100,000. He places a strong emphasis on intentional discipleship in the workplace, global networking, and the unification of the two Koreas. He received a Ph.D. from Potchefstroom University and was a Harvard University Fellow. He also currently serves as the president of SaRang Global Academy (SaGA) and as the chairman of the board at Soongsil University. John is married to Nan-young Oh and has two sons, Joseph and Timothy, and two granddaughters, Eden and Ayla.

This Sunday we're excited to have guest speaker, Pastor John Oh, speak a message titled “Rejoice in the Gospel”.John Oh has been serving as the senior pastor of SaRang Church in Seoul for 21 years, overseeing a membership growth of over 100,000. He places a strong emphasis on intentional discipleship in the workplace, global networking, and the unification of the two Koreas. He received a Ph.D. from Potchefstroom University and was a Harvard University Fellow. He also currently serves as the president of SaRang Global Academy (SaGA) and as the chairman of the board at Soongsil University. John is married to Nan-young Oh and has two sons, Joseph and Timothy, and two granddaughters, Eden and Ayla.

Joseph Capurso, Head of International and Sustainable Economics, joins John Oh, Sustainable Economist to discuss potential changes to Australia-Europe ties. In the episode, they find that the competition between the west and China in ‘green technology' may encourage greater trade and investment between Australia, the European Union and the United Kingdom.   ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.

Whilst electricity prices look to have settled in the coming 2024/25 financial year, further electricity rises look to be a credible risk.  However, there are several options available for small businesses to reduce their exposure to volatile electricity prices.  To discuss these options, John Oh, Sustainable Economist and Dennis Voznesenski, Agricultural and Sustainable Economist, sit down to discuss the findings of CBA's latest research note.    ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made

Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve in what the longer term outlook is for canola demand in the biofuel sector.   Disclaimer:  Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

This week on the blog, a podcast interview with the writer of a great new book, “London After Midnight: The Lost Film,” a book about the classic lost Lon Chaney film.LINKS A Free Film Book for You: https://dl.bookfunnel.com/cq23xyyt12Another Free Film Book: https://dl.bookfunnel.com/x3jn3emga6Fast, Cheap Film Website: https://www.fastcheapfilm.com/Daniel's Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/p/London-After-Midnight-The-Lost-Film-100075993768254/Buy the Book “London After Midnight: The Lost Film”: https://www.amazon.com/London-After-Midnight-Lost-Film/dp/1399939890Eli Marks Website: https://www.elimarksmysteries.com/Albert's Bridge Books Website: https://www.albertsbridgebooks.com/YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BehindthePageTheEliMarksPodcastTRANSCRIPTJohn: So, Daniel, when did you first become aware of London After Midnight? Daniel: I was about seven years old when I first stumbled into Lon Chaney through my love of all things Universal horror, and just that whole plethora of characters and actors that you just knew by name, but hadn't necessarily seen away from the many still photographs of Frankenstein, Dracula, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. And the Phantom was the one to really spark my interest. But this was prior to eBay. I couldn't see the film of Lon Chaney's Phantom of the Opera for a year. So, I kind of had the ultimate build to books and documentaries, just teasing me, teasing me all the time. And when I eventually did watch a few documentaries, the one thing that they all had in common was the name Lon Chaney. I just thought I need to learn more about this character Lon Chaney, because he just found someone of superhuman proportions just who have done all of these crazy diverse characters. And, that's where London After Midnight eventually peeked out at me and, occupied a separate interest as all the Chaney characterizations do.John: So how did you get into the Universal films? Were you watching them on VHS? Were they on tv? Did the DVDs happen by then?Daniel: I was still in the VHS days. My dad is a real big fan of all this as well. So he first saw Bela Lugosi's Dracula, on TV when he was a kid. And prior to me being born he had amassed a huge VHS collection and a lot of those had Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, Henry Hull, Claude Rains, Vincent Price, what have you.And a lot of them were dedicated to Universal horrors. And as a young curious kid, my eyes eventually crossed these beautiful cases and I really wanted to watch them. I think my first one I ever watched was The Mummy's Tomb or Curse of the Mummy. And it's just grown ever since, really.John: You're starting at the lesser end of the Universal monsters. It's like someone's starting the Marx Brothers at The Big Store and going, "oh, these are great. I wonder if there's anything better?" Jim: Well, I kinda like the fact that you have come by this fascination, honestly, as my father would say. You sort of inherited the family business, if you will. The book is great. The book is just great. And I'll be honest, I had no, except for recording the novel that John wrote, I really had no frame of reference for London after Midnight.John: Well, Jim, were you a monster guy? Were you a Universal Monster kid?Jim: Oh yeah. I mean, I had all the models. I love all of that, and certainly knew about Lon Chaney as the Phantom of the Opera, as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. I knew he was the man with a thousand faces. I knew he, when he died, he wrote JR. on his makeup kit and gave it to his kid. So, I knew stuff. But London after Midnight I didn't know at all, except for the sort of iconic makeup and that image, which I was familiar with. What was the inspiration for you in terms of writing this book?Daniel: Like you say, I really had no immediate go-to reference for London after Midnight, away from one or two images in a book. Really clearly they were very impactful images of Chaney, skulking around the old haunted mansion with Edna Tichenor by his side with the lantern, the eyes, the teeth, the cloak, the top hat, the webs, everything. Pretty much everything that embodies a good atmospheric horror movie, but obviously we couldn't see it.So that is all its fangs had deepened itself into my bloodstream at that point, just like, why is it lost? Why can't I see it? And again, the term lost film was an alien concept to me at a young age. I've always been a very curious child. Anything that I don't know or understand that much, even things I do understand that well, I always have to try to find out more, 'cause I just can't accept that it's like a bookend process. It begins and then it ends. And that was the thing with London after Midnight. Everything I found in books or in little interviews, they were just all a bit too brief. And I just thought there has to be a deeper history here, as there are with many of the greatest movies of all time. But same with the movies that are more obscure. There is a full history there somewhere because, 'cause a film takes months to a year to complete.It was definitely a good challenge for me. When we first had our first home computer, it was one of those very few early subjects I was typing in like crazy to try to find out everything that I could. And, that all incubated in my little filing cabinet, which I was able to call upon years later.Some things which were redundant, some things which I had the only links to that I had printed off in advance quite, sensibly so, but then there were certain things that just had lots of question marks to me. Like, what year did the film perish? How did it perish? The people who saw the film originally?And unlike a lot of Chaney films, which have been covered in immense detail, London after Midnight, considering it's the most famous of all lost films, still for me, had major holes in it that I just, really wanted to know the answers to. A lot of those answers, eventually, I found, even people who knew and institutions that knew information to key events like famous MGM Fire, they were hard pressed to connect anything up, in regards to the film. It was like a jigsaw puzzle. I had all these amazing facts. However, none of them kind of made sense with each other.My favorite thing is researching and finding the outcomes to these things. So that's originally what spiraled me into the storm of crafting this, initial dissertation that I set myself, which eventually became so large. I had to do it as a book despite, I'd always wanted to do a book as a kid.When you see people that you idolize for some reason, you just want to write a book on them. Despite, there had been several books on Lon Chaney. But I just always knew from my childhood that I always wanted to contribute a printed volume either on Chaney or a particular film, and London after Midnight seemed to present the opportunity to me.I really just didn't want it to be a rehash of everything that we had seen before or read before in other accounts or in the Famous Monsters of Filmland Magazine, but just with a new cover. So, I thought I would only do a book if I could really contribute a fresh new perspective on the subject, which I hope hopefully did.John: Oh, you absolutely did. And this is an exhaustive book and a little exhausting. There's a ton of stuff in here. You mentioned Famous Monster of the Filmland, which is where I first saw that image. There's at least one cover of the magazine that used that image. And Forrest Ackerman had some good photos and would use them whenever he could and also would compare them to Mark the Vampire, the remake, partially because I think Carol Borland was still alive and he could interview her. And he talked about that remake quite a bit. But that iconic image that he put on the cover and whenever he could in the magazine-- Jim and I were talking before you came on, Daniel, about in my mind when you think of Lon Chaney, there's three images that come to mind: Phantom of the Opera, Quasimoto, and this one. And I think this one, the Man in the Beaver hat probably is the most iconic of his makeups, because, 'cause it is, it's somehow it got adopted into the culture as this is what you go to when it's a creepy guy walking around. And that's the one that everyone remembers. Do you have any idea, specifically what his process was for making that look, because it, it is I think ultimately a fairly simple design. It's just really clever.Daniel: Yes, it probably does fall into the category of his more simplistic makeups. But, again, Chaney did a lot of things simplistic-- today --were never seen back then in say, 1927. Particularly in the Phantom of the Opera's case in 1925, in which a lot of that makeup today would be done through CG, in terms of trying to eliminate the nose or to make your lips move to express dialogue. Chaney was very fortunate to have lived in the pantomime era, where he didn't have to rely on how his voice would sound, trying to talk through those dentures, in which case the makeup would probably have to have been more tamed to allow audio recorded dialogue to properly come through.But with regards to the beaver hat makeup, he had thin wires that fitted around his eyes to give it a more hypnotic stare. The teeth, which he had constructed by a personal dentist, eventually had a wire attached to the very top that held the corners of his mouth, opening to a nice curved, fixated, almost joker like grin.You can imagine with the monocles around his eyes, he was thankful there probably wasn't that much wind on a closed set, because he probably couldn't have closed his eyes that many times. But a lot of these things become spoken about and detailed over time with mythic status. That he had to have his eyes operated on to achieve the constant widening of his eyelids. Or the teeth -- he could only wear the teeth for certain periods of time before accidentally biting his tongue or his lips, et cetera. But Chaney certainly wasn't a sadist, with himself, with his makeups. He was very professional. Although he did go through undoubtedly a lot of discomfort, especially probably the most, explicit case would be for the Hunchback of Notre Dame, in which his whole body is crooked down into a stooped position.But, with London After Midnight, I do highly suspect that the inspiration for that makeup in general came from the Dracula novel. And because MGM had not acquired the rights to the Dracula novel, unlike how Universal acquired the rights of the Hunchback or, more importantly, Phantom of the Opera, by which point Gaston Leroux was still alive.It was just a loose adaptation of Dracula. But nevertheless, when you read the description of Dracula in Bram Stoker's novel, he does bear a similarity to Chaney's vampire, in which it's the long hair, a mouth full of sharp teeth, a ghastly pale palor and just dressed all in black and carries around a lantern.Whereas Bela Lugosi takes extraordinary leaps and turns away from the Stoker novel. But it must have definitely had an impact at the time, enough for MGM to over-market the image of Chaney's vampire, which only appears in the film for probably just under four minutes, compared to his detective disguise, which is the real main character of the film.Although the thing we all wanna see is Cheney moving about as the vampire and what facial expressions he pulled. It's just something that we just want to see because it's Lon Chaney.John: Right. And it makes you wonder if he had lived and had gotten to play Dracula, he kind of boxed himself into a corner, then if he'd already used the look from the book, you wonder what he would've come up with, if Lugosi hadn't done it, and if Chaney had had been our first Dracula.Jim: You know, the other thing that I think of strictly like through my actor filter is here's a guy who -- take Hunchback or Phantom or even this thing -- whatever process he went through to put that makeup on, you know, was hours of work, I'm sure. Hunchback several hours of work to get to that, that he did himself, and then they'd film all day.So, on top of, I mean, I just think that that's like, wow, when you think about today where somebody might go into a makeup chair and have two or three people working on them to get the look they want. Even if it took a few hours, that person is just sitting there getting the makeup done. He's doing all of this, and then turns in a full day, uh, in front of the cameras, which to me is like, wow, that's incredible.Daniel: Definitely, it's like two jobs in one. I imagine for an actor it must be really grueling in adapting to a makeup, especially if it's a heavy makeup where it covers the whole of your head or crushes down your nose, changes your lips, the fumes of chemicals going into your eyes.But then by the end of it, I imagine you are quite exhausted from just your head adapting to that. But then you have to go out and act as well. With Chaney, I suppose he could be more of a perfectionist than take as much time as he wanted within reason. And then once he came to the grueling end of it all, he's actually gotta go out and act countless takes. Probably repair a lot of the makeup as well after, after a couple of takes, certainly with things like the Hunchback or the Phantom of the Opera.John: And, you know, it's not only is he doing the makeup and acting, but in, you know, not so much in London After Midnight, but in Phantom of the Opera, he is quite athletic. When the phantom moves, he really moves. He's not stooped. He's got a lot of energy to him and he's got a makeup on that, unlike the Quasimoto makeup, what he's attempting to do with the phantom is, reductive. He's trying to take things away from his face.Daniel: Mm-hmm.John: And he's using all the tricks he knows and lighting to make that happen, but that means he's gotta hit particular marks for the light to hit it just right. And for you to see that his face is as, you know, skull-like as he made it. When you see him, you know, in London After Midnight as the professor inspector character, he has got a normal full man's face. It's a real face. Much like his son, he had a kind of a full face and what he was able to do with a phantom and take all that away, and be as physical as he was, is just phenomenal. I mean, he was a really, besides the makeup, he was a really good actor.Daniel: Oh, definitely. Jim: I agree with that completely. I kind of in what I watched, I wonder if he was the makeup artist, but not the actor and he did exactly the same makeup on somebody else. And so we had the same image. If those things would've resonated with us the way they do today. I think it had everything to do with who he was and his abilities in addition to the incredible makeup. He was just a tremendous performer.Daniel: Absolutely. He was a true multitasker. In his early days of theater, he was not only an actor, but he was a choreographer. He had a lot of jobs behind the scenes as well. Even when he had become a star in his own time, he would still help actors find the character within them. like Norma Sheera, et cetera. People who were kind of new to the movie making scene and the directors didn't really have that much patience with young actors or actresses. Whereas Chaney, because of his clout in the industry, no one really interfered with Chaney's authority on set. But he would really help actors find the character, find the emotion, 'cause it was just all about how well you translate it over for the audience, as opposed to the actor feeling a certain way that convinces themselves that they're the character. Chaney always tried to get the emotions across to the audience. Patsy Ruth Miller, who played Esemerelda in in the Hunchback, said that Chaney directed the film more than the director actually did.The director was actually even suggested by Chaney. So, Chaney really had his hands everywhere in the making of a film. And Patsy Ruth Miller said the thing that she learned from him was that it's the actress's job to make the audience feel how the character's meant to be feeling, and not necessarily the actor to feel what they should be feeling based on the script and the settings and everything.So I think, that's why Chaney in particular stands out, among all of the actors of his time.John: I think he would've transitioned really well into sound. I think, he had everything necessary to make that transition.Jim: There's one sound picture with him in it, isn't there, doesn't he? Doesn't he play a ventriloquist? John: I believe so.Daniel: Yes, it was a remake of The Unholy Three that he had made in 1925 as Echo the ventriloquist, and the gangster. And yes, by the time MGM had decided to pursue talkies -- also, funny enough, they were one of the last studios to transition to, just because they were the most, one, probably the most dominant studio in all of Hollywood, that they didn't feel the pressure to compete with the burgeoning talkie revolution.So they could afford to take their time, they could release a talkie, but then they could release several silent films and the revenue would still be amazing for the studio. Whereas other studios probably had to conform really quick just because they didn't have the star system, that MGM shamelessly flaunted. And several Chaney films had been transitioned to sound at this point with or without Chaney. But for Chaney himself, because he himself was the special effect, it was guaranteed to be a winner even if it had been an original story that isn't as remembered today strictly because people get to hear the thing that's been denied them for all this time, which is Chaney's voice. And he would've transitioned very easily to talkies is because he had a very rich, deep voice, which, coming from theater, he had to have had, in terms of doing dialogue. He wasn't someone like a lot of younger actors who had started out predominantly in feature films who could only pantomime lines. Chaney actually knew how to deliver dialogue, so it did feel natural and it didn't feel read off the page.And he does about five voices in The Unholy Three. So MGM was truly trying to market, his voice for everything that they could. As Mrs. O'Grady, his natural voice, he imitates a parrot and a girl. And yeah, he really would've flourished in the sound era. Jim: Yeah. John: Any surprises, as it sounds like you were researching this for virtually your whole life, but were there any surprises that you came across, as you really dug in about the film?Daniel: With regards to London after Midnight, the main surprise was undoubtedly the -- probably the star chapter of the whole thing -- which is the nitrate frames from an actual destroyed print of the film itself, which sounds crazy to even being able to say it. But, yeah the nitrate frames themselves presented a quandary of questions that just sent me into a whole nother research mode trying to find out where these impossible images came from, who they belonged to, why they even existed, why they specifically existed.Because, looking for something that, you know, you are told doesn't exist. And then to find it, you kind of think someone is watching over you, planting this stuff as though it's the ultimate tease. To find a foreign movie poster for London After Midnight would be one thing, but to find actual pieces of the lost film itself. It was certainly the most out of body experience I've ever had. Just to find something that I set out to find, but then you find it and you still can't believe that you've actually found it.John: How did you find it?Daniel: I had connections with a few foreign archives who would befriend me and took to my enthusiasm with the silent era, and specifically Chaney and all the stars connected to Chaney films.And, quite early on I was told that there were a few photo albums that had various snippets of silent films from Chaney. They didn't really go into what titles these were, 'cause they were just all a jumble. All I knew is that they came from (garbled) widow. And he had acquired prints of the whole films from various, I suppose, junk stores in Spain.But not being a projectionist, he just purely took them at the face value that he just taken the images and snipping them up and putting them in photo albums, like how you would just do with photographs. And then the rest of the material was sadly discarded by fire. So, all we were left with were these snipped relics, survivors almost to several Chaney lost films. Some of them not lost, but there were films like The Phantom of the Opera in there, the Hunchback of Notre Dame, Mockery, The Unknown. But then there were several lost films such as London After Midnight, the Big City, Thunder. And All the Brothers were Valiant, which are mainly other than Thunder are all totally complete lost films.So, to find this little treasure trove, it was just finding out what the images meant and connecting them up, trying to put them in some sort of chronological scholarly order. Grueling, but it was very fun at the same time. And because I had identified myself with all of these surviving production stills from the film -- a lot of them, which formed the basis of the 2002 reconstruction by Turner Classic Movies -- it didn't take me too long to identify what scenes these surviving nitrate frames were from. But there were several frames which had sets that I recognized and costumes that I recognized, but in the photographic stills, they don't occupy the same space at the same time. So, it's like the two separate elements had crossed over. So that left me with a scholarly, question of what I was looking at. I was able to go back and, sort of rectify certain wrongs that have been accepted throughout the sixties as being the original, say, opening to London after Midnight. So I've, been able to disprove a few things that have made the film, I suppose, a bit more puzzling to audiences. Some audiences didn't really get what the plot was to begin with. So, it was nice to actually put a bit more order to the madness finally.John: At what point did you come across the original treatment and the script?Daniel: The treatment and the script, they came from a private collector who had bought them at auction a number of years ago who I was able to thankfully contact, and they still had the two documents in question. I had learned through Philip J Riley's previous books on London after Midnight that he had the two latter drafts of the script, the second edition and the third draft edition.And, again, the question of why and where. I just always wondered where that first draft of the script was, hoping it would contain new scenes, and open new questions for me and to study. And once I've managed to find those two documents, they did present a lot of new, perspectives and material that added to the fuller plot of the original hypnotist scenario, as opposed to the shortened, time efficient London After Midnight film that was ultimately delivered to audiences. So again, it helped to put a little bit more order to the madness.Jim: You found an actual piece of the film that you were able to, somebody got images from it? And then you found the scripts? But the images are terrific and they're all in your book. They came from what exactly?Daniel: The just below 20 images of the film came from originally a distribution print, a Spanish distribution print, from about 1928. Originally, they were on 35 millimeter indicating that they were from the studio and as is with a lot of silent films that have been found in foreign archives.Normally when a film is done with its distribution, it would have to be returned to the original studio to be destroyed, except for the original negative and a studio print, because there is no reason why a studio would need to keep the thousands of prints when they have the pristine copy in their vault. But, in a lot of smaller theater cases, in order to save money on the postage of the shipping, they would just basically declare that they had destroyed the film on the studio's behalf. There was no record system with this stuff and that's how a lot of these films ended up in the basements of old theaters, which are eventually when they closed, the assets were sold off to collectors or traveling showmen. And eventually these films found their ways into archives or again, private collections. Some of which people know what they have.A lot of times they don't know what they have because they're more obsessed with, naturally, more dedicated to preserving the films of their own culture that was shown at the time, as opposed to a foreign American title, which they probably assume they already have a copy of. But it's how a lot of these films get found.And, with the London After Midnight, example, there were the images that I found spanned the entire seven reels, because they came from different points in the film. It wasn't a single strip of film, of a particular scene. Having thankfully the main source that we have for London After Midnight is the cutting continuity, which is the actual film edited down shot for shot, length for length.And it describes, briefly, although descriptive enough, what is actually in each and every single shot of the film. And comparing the single frame images from the film with this document, I was able to identify at what point these frames came from during the film, which again spanned the entire seven reels, indicating that a complete seven reel version of the film had gotten out under the studio system at one point.As is the case, I'm assuming, 'cause these came from the same collection, I'm assuming it was the same with the other lost Chaney films that again, sadly only survive in snippet form.John: It's like somebody was a collector and his wife said, "well, we don't have room for all this. Just take the frames you like and we'll get rid of the rest of it." So, you mentioned in passing the 2002 reconstruction that Turner Classic Movies did using the existing stills. I don't know if they were working from any of the scripts or not. That was the version I originally saw when I was working on writing, those portions of The Misers Dream that mentioned London After Midnight. Based on what you know now, how close is that reconstruction and where do you think they got it right and where'd they get it wrong?Daniel: The 2002, reconstruction, while a very commendable production, it does stray from the original edited film script. Again, the problem that they clearly faced on that production is that there were not enough photographed scenes to convey all the photographed scenes from the film. So what they eventually fell into the trap of doing was having to reuse the same photograph to sometimes convey two separate scenes, sometimes flipping the image to appear on the opposite side of the camera. And, because of the certain lack of stills in certain scenes cases, they had to rewrite them.And sometimes a visual scene had to have been replaced with an inter-title card, merely describing what had happened or describing a certain period in time, as opposed to showing a photograph of what we're meant to be seeing as opposed to just reading. So, they did the best with what they had.But since then, there have been several more images crop up in private collections or in the archives. So, unless a version of the film gets found, it's certainly an endeavor that could be revisited, I think, and either do a new visual reconstruction of sort, or attempt some sort remake of the film even.Jim: That's an idea. John: They certainly have the materials to do that. I've got an odd question. There's one famous image, a still image from the film, showing Chaney as Professor Burke, and he is reaching out to the man in the beaver hat whose back is to us. Is that a promo photo? Spoiler alert, Burke is playing the vampire in the movie. He admits that that's him. So, he never would've met the character. What is the story behind that photo?Daniel: There are actually three photographs depicting that, those characters that you described. There are the two photographs which show Chaney in the Balfor mansion seemingly directing a cloaked, top hatted figure with long hair, with its back towards us. And then there is another photograph of Chaney in the man in the beaver hat disguise with a seemingly twin right beside him outside of a door.Basically the scenes in the film in which Chaney appear to the Hamlin residents, the people who are being preyed upon by the alleged vampires, the scenes where Chaney and the vampire need to coexist in the same space or either appear to be in the same vicinity to affect other characters while at the same time interrogating others, Chaney's character of Burke employs a series of assistants to either dress up as vampires or at certain times dress up as his version of the vampire to parade around and pretend that they are the man in the beaver hat. Those particular shots, though, the vampire was always, photographed from behind rather than the front.The very famous scene, which was the scene that got first got me interested in London After Midnight, in which the maidm played by Polly Moran is in the chair shrieking at Chaney's winged self, hovering over her. It was unfortunate to me to realize that that was actually a flashback scene told from the maid's perspective.And by the end of the film, the maid is revealed to be an informant of Burke, a secret detective also. So, it's really a strong suspension of disbelief has to be employed because the whole scene of Chaney chasing the maid through the house and appearing under the door, that was clearly just the MGMs marketing at work just to show Chaney off in a bizarre makeup with a fantastic costume.Whereas he is predominantly the detective and the scenes where he's not needed to hypnotize a character in the full vampire makeup, he just employs an assistant who parades around in the house as him, all the times with his back turned so that the audience can't latch on as to who the character actually is, 'cause it must have posed quite a fun confusion that how can Chaney be a detective in this room where the maid has just ran from the Vampire, which is also Chaney?John: Yeah, and it doesn't help that the plot is fairly convoluted anyway, and then you add that layer. So, do you think we'll ever see a copy of it? Do you think it's in a basement somewhere?Daniel: I've always personally believed that the film does exist. Not personally out of just an unfounded fanboy wish, but just based on the evidence and examples of other films that have been found throughout time. Metropolis being probably the most prominent case. But, at one point there was nothing on London After Midnight and now there is just short of 20 frames for the film. So, if that can exist currently now in the year 2023, what makes us think that more footage can't be found by, say, 2030? I think with fans, there's such a high expectation that if it's not found in their own lifetime or in their own convenience space of time, it must not exist. There's still a lot of silent lost treasures that just have not been found at all that do exist though. So, with London After Midnight, from a purely realistic standpoint, I've always theorized myself that the film probably does exist in an archive somewhere, but it would probably be a very abridged, foreign condensed version, as opposed to a pristine 35-millimeter print that someone had ripped to safety stock because they knew in the future the film would become the most coveted of all lost films. So, I do believe it does exist. The whole theory of it existing in a private collection and someone's waiting to claim the newfound copyright on it, I think after December of last year, I think it's finally put that theory to rest. I don't think a collector consciously knows they have a copy of it. So, I think it's lost until found personally, but probably within an archive.Jim: Lost until found. That's a great title for a book. I like that a lot. What do you think of the remake, Mark of the Vampire and in your opinion, what does it tell us about, London After Midnight?Daniel: Well, Mark of the Vampire came about again, part of the Sound Revolution. It was one of those because it was Chaney and Todd Browning's most successful film for the studio. And Browning was currently, being held on a tight leash by MGM because of his shocking disaster film Freaks, I suppose they were a little bit nervous about giving him the reign to do what he wanted again. So, looking through their backlog of smash silent hits, London After Midnight seemed the most logical choice to remake, just simply because it was their most, successful collaboration. Had it have been The Unholy Three, I'm sure? Oh no, we already had The Unholy Three, but had it have been another Browning Chaney collaboration, it might have been The Unknown, otherwise. So, I suppose that's why London After Midnight was selected and eventually turned into Mark of the Vampire. The story does not stray too much from London After Midnight, although they seem to complicate it a little bit more by taking the Burke vampire character and turning it this time into three characters played by three different actors, all of which happened to be in cahoots with one another in trying to solve an old murder mystery.It's very atmospherical. You can definitely tell it's got Todd Browning signature on it. It's more pondering with this one why they just did not opt to make a legit, supernatural film, rather than go in the pseudo vampire arena that they pursued in 1927. Where audiences had by now become accustomed to the supernatural with Dracula and Frankenstein in 1931, which no longer relied on a detective trying to find out a certain mystery and has to disguise themselves as a monster.The monster was actually now a real thing in the movies. So I think if Bela Lugosi had been given the chance to have played a real Count Mora as a real vampire, I think it would've been slightly better received as opposed to a dated approach that was clearly now not the fashionable thing to do.I suppose again, because Browning was treading a very thin line with MGM, I suppose he couldn't really stray too far from the original source material. But I find it a very atmospherical film, although I think the story works better as a silent film than it does as a sound film, because there's a lot of silent scenes in that film, away from owls, hooting and armadillos scurrying about and winds. But I do think, based on things like The Cat and The Canary from 1927 and The Last Warning, I just think that detective sleuth with horror overtones serves better to the silent world than it does the sound world away from the legit, supernatural.John: So, if Chaney hadn't died, do you think he would have played Dracula? Do you think he would've been in Freaks? Would Freaks have been more normalized because it had a big name in it like that?Daniel: It would've been interesting if Chaney had played in Freaks. I think because Todd Browning used the kinds of individuals that he used for Freaks, maybe Chaney would've, for a change, had been the most outta place.John: Mm-hmm.Daniel: I do think he might have played Dracula. I think Universal would've had a hell of a time trying to get him over because he had just signed a new contract with MGM, whereas Todd Browning had transferred over to Universal by 1930 and really wanted to make Dracula for many years and probably discussed it with Chaney as far back as 1920.But certainly MGM would not have permitted Chaney to have gone over to Universal, even for a temporary period, without probably demanding a large piece of the action, in a financial sense, because Universal had acquired the rights to Dracula at this point. And, based on the stage play that had, come out on Broadway, it was probably assured that it was going to be a giant moneymaker, based on the success of the Dracula play.But because of Cheney's, status as a, I suppose retrospectively now, as a horror actor, he was probably the first person to be considered for that role by Carl Laemmle, senior and Junior for that matter. And Chaney gone by 1930, it did pose a puzzle as to who could take over these kinds of roles.Chaney was probably the only one to really successfully do it and make the monster an actual box office ingredient more than any other actor at that time, as he did with. Phantom, Blind Bargain and London After Midnight. So, I think to have pursued Chaney for a legit, supernatural film would've had enormous possibilities for Browning and Chaney himself.You can kind of see a trend, a trilogy forming, with Browning, from London After Midnight, in which he incorporates things he used in Dracula in London After Midnight. So, he kind of had this imagery quite early on. So, to go from – despite it's not in that order -- but to have London After Midnight, Mark of the Vampire, and he also did Dracula, he clearly was obsessed with the story. And I think Chaney was probably the, best actor for someone like Browning who complimented his way of thinking and approach to things like silence. As opposed to needing dialogue all the time, loud commotions. So, I think they dovetailed each other quite well, and that's why their ten year director actor relationship was as groundbreaking as it was.Jim: If the film does surface, if we find the film, what do you think people, how are they gonna react to the movie when they see it? What do you think? What's gonna be the reaction if it does surface?Daniel: Well, the lure of London After Midnight, the power in the film is its lost status rather than its widespread availability. I think it could never live up to the expectation that we've built up in our heads over the past 40 to 60 years. It was truly people, fans like Forrest J Ackerman that introduced and reignited the interest in Chaney's career by the late fifties and 1960s. That's when London After Midnight started to make the rounds in rumor, the rumors of a potential print existing, despite the film had not long been destroyed at that point. So, it was always a big mystery. There were always people who wanted to see the film, but with no access to home video, or et cetera, the only way you could probably see the film would've been at the studio who held everything. And, by the time the TV was coming out, a lot of silent films didn't make it to TV. So again, it has just germinated in people's heads probably in a better form than what they actually remembered. But, the true reality of London After Midnight is one more closer to the ground than it is in it's people are probably expecting to see something very supernatural on par with Dracula, whereas it's more so a Sherlock Holmes story with mild horrorish overtones to it that you can kind of see better examples of later on in Dracula in 1930 and in Mark of the Vampire.It's a film purely, I think for Lon Chaney fans. For myself, having read everything I can on the film, everything I've seen on the film, I personally love silent, detective stories, all with a touch of horror. So, I personally would know what I am going in to see. I'm not going in to see Chaney battling a Van Helsing like figure and turn to dust at the very end or turning to a bat. I'm going to see a detective melodrama that happens to have what looks like a vampire. So, it certainly couldn't live up to the expectations in people's minds and it's probably the only film to have had the greatest cheapest, marketing in history, I would think. It's one of those films, if it was discovered, you really would not have to do much marketing to promote it.It's one of those that in every fanzine, magazine, documentary referenced in pop. It has really marketed itself into becoming what I always call the mascot of the genre. There are other more important lost films that have been lost to us. The main one again, which has been found in its more complete form, was Metropolis, which is a better movie.But unlike Metropolis, London After Midnight has a lot more famous ingredients to it. It has a very famous director. It has a very famous actor whose process was legendary even during then. And it's actually the only film in which he actually has his make-up case make a cameo appearance by the very end. And it goes on the thing that everyone in every culture loves, which is the vampirism, the dark tales and folklore. So, when you say it, it just gets your imagination going. Whereas I think if you are watching it, it's probably you'll be looking over the projector to see if something even better is going to happen.The film had its mixed reactions when it originally came out. People liked it because it gave them that cheap thrill of being a very atmospherical, haunted house with the creepy figures of Chaney walking across those dusty hallways. But then the more important story is a murder mystery.It's not Dracula, but it has its own things going for it. I always kind of harken it back to the search for the Lochness Monster or Bigfoot. It has more power in your mind than it does in an aquarium or in a zoo. Hearing someone say that they think they saw something moving around in Lochness, but there's no photographic evidence, you just have the oral story, that is much more tangible in a way than actually seeing it in an aquarium where you can take it for granted. And it's the same with London After Midnight, and I think that's why a lot of hoaxster and pranksters tend to say that they have seen London After Midnight more than any other lost film.Jim: For a film that I would say the majority of the world does not have any frame of reference, and I'm using myself as the sort of blueprint for that, no frame of reference for this film. That image is iconic in a way that has been, I mean, it at first glance could be Jack the Ripper. I was talking to John before we started the podcast, once I locked in on that image, then I started to think, oh, the ghosts in Disney's Haunted Mansion, there's a couple of ghosts that have elements of that. I mean, it was so perfectly done, even though we don't, I bet you nine out ten people don't know the title London After Midnight, but I bet you seven outta ten people know this image.Daniel: Definitely, it has certainly made its mark on pop culture, again, I think because I think it's such a beautiful, simplistic design. Everything from the simplistically [garbled] to the bulging eyes and the very nice top hat as well, which is in itself today considered a very odd accessory for a grotesque, vampire character.But it's one of those things that has really carried over. It's influenced what the movies and artists. It was one of the influences for the Babadook creation for that particular monster. It was an influence on the Black Phone. It's just a perfect frame of reference for movie makers and sculptors and artists to keep taking from.John: Yep. It's, it'll live long beyond us. Daniel, one last question. I read somewhere or heard somewhere. You're next gonna tackle James Whale, is that correct? Daniel: James Whale is a subject, again, coming from, I happen to come from the exact same town that he was born and raised in, in Dudley, England. So, it's always been a subject close to home for me, which is quite convenient because I love his movies. So, I'm hoping to eventually, hopefully plan a documentary feature on him, based on a lot of family material in the surrounding areas that I was able to hunt down, and forgotten histories about him and just put it together in some form, hopefully in the future.John: That would be fantastic, and we'll have you back at that point.Jim: So, let's pretend for a minute that the audience is me, and they'd have absolutely no idea who James Whale is or what he's done. Just for a minute, let's pretend.John: Pretend that you don't know that?Jim: Yeah.Daniel: James Whale is the most known for his work for directing Frankenstein with Boris Karloff in 1931. But he also directed probably some of the most important horror films that have ever existed in the history of motion pictures. The Old Dark House, which can be cited with its very atmospherical, and black comedy tones, The Invisible Man with Claude Rains and Gloria Stewart in 1933. And, the most important one, which is probably the grand jewel in the whole of the Universal Monsters Empire, which is Bride of Frankenstein in 1935, which is the ultimate, example of everything that he had studied, everything that he'd learned with regards to cinema and comedy, life and death, and just making a very delicious cocktail of a movie in all of its black comedy, horrific, forms that we're still asking questions about today. One of his first films that he did was for Howard Hughes Hell's Angels, in which -- because he'd coming over from theater -- when again, films in America were taken off with the sound revolution. They all of a sudden needed British directors to translate English dialogue better than the actors could convey.So, James Whale was one of many to be taken over to America when he had a hit play called Journeys End, which became the most successful war play at that point. And he did his own film adaptation of Journeys End. He also did a really remarkable film called Showboat, which is another very iconic film.And again, someone with James Whale's horror credentials, you just think, how could someone who directed Frankenstein directed Showboat? But, clearly a very, very talented director who clearly could not be pigeonholed at the time as a strictly horror director, despite it is the horror films in which he is remembered for, understandably so, just because they contain his very individualistic wit and humor and his outlooks on life and politics. And being an openly gay director at the time, he really was a force unto himself. He was a very modern man even then.

Is the cure for low prices, low prices? Planting of grain crops is starting to decline overseas, in part due to prices squeezing farm margins. Could this be the very early stages of a new global price cycle heading into mid-2025? Dennis Voznesenski, agri and sustainability economist and John Oh, sustainability economist, delve into the details.   Disclaimer:  Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

It's a story of three parts. The east coast has plentiful soil moisture, SA has plentiful sub soil moisture but limited top soil moisture, while WA is dry all the way through and waiting for a seasonal break by mid-May. On the whole, Australian winter cropping area is expected to rise 2% on last year, BUT, if WA stays dry, it could cause national are to sink into the negative. Join CBA's agri and sustainability economist Dennis Voznesenski and Sustainability economist John Oh as they delve into the numbers.   Disclaimer: Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Tommy John is all the talk right now, and rightfully so. We talk about its impact on the dynasty world. What is the right approach to take with such volatility? We break down our thoughts. A quick flash around the minors, is Norfolk good enough to beat the A's? And to finish the show we dive into a few names that are supporting our Dynasty rosters.

Global grain prices have come down considerably over the past 2 years, pressuring farmer margins. The USDA's just released prospective planting report forecast total US principal crop area to decline in 2024. Industry estimates for Brazil's second corn crop planting are also showing declines. Have prices come down to a point where farmers start planting less? Join CBA's Agri and Sustainability Economist Dennis Voznesenski and Sustainability economist John Oh as they discuss the latest in grains.   Disclaimer:   Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

Introduction to mandatory climate reporting in Australia could mean large businesses would need to estimate and report scope 3 emissions.  What are scope 3 emissions? And how do they differ by industry? To answer these questions, John Oh, Sustainable Economist and Joseph Capurso, Head of International and Sustainable Economics sit down to discuss their latest note ‘A guidebook to finding hot spots in Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions'.   ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.

Media coverage in the past month have highlighted diverging views towards the Government's New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).  The NVES will, for the first time in Australia's history, set tailpipe emission targets for new light vehicles sold in Australia.  Indeed, the NVES will send a strong signal that Australia will prioritise low-emissions vehicles.  But what are the likely short-term impacts and how does it all work?  To answer these questions, John Oh, Sustainable Economist and Dennis Voznesenski, Agricultural Economist, sit down to discuss the findings of the latest note on the NVES.   ------ DISCLAIMER ------   Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.

Catch up with Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they delve into the latest on global grain markets and what it means for Australian farmers and industry.     Disclaimer:   Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

With the exception of a temporary reprieve for global wheat prices, grains and oilseeds prices continued their decline over the last week. Locally, wheat and barley prices were subdued by lower global prices and local rainfall. Despite local canola prices declining below $600/mt in some port zones, the outlook later in the year and into first half 2025 remains positive. Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh for a brief update on local and global grain markets.   Disclaimer:  Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.  

It was a rough week for global and local grain markets. Prices were pressured by a myriad of factors from the USDA releasing a bearish 2024/25 outlook for US supply and demand, to forecasters upping their estimates for Russian wheat production and a positive outlook remaining for the South American crop. Join Dennis Voznesenski and John Oh as they wade through the latest global and local grain market drivers.   Disclaimer: Important Information This podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (“GEMR”), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full GEMR disclaimers, which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. No Reliance This podcast is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. Rather, this podcast is for informational purposes only and is not to be relied upon for any investment purposes. This podcast does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products, or as a recommendation, and/or investment advice. You should not act on the information in this podcast. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations made are reasonably held at the time given, and are based on the information available at the time of its compilation. No representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made. Liability Disclaimer The Bank does not accept any liability for any loss or damage arising out of any error or omission in or from the information provided, or arising out of the use of all or part of the podcast.    

This week on the blog, a podcast interview with magician Lance Burton about how he wrote (and directed and starred in) the delightfully comic “Billy Topit: Master Magician.”LINKSA Free Film Book for You: https://dl.bookfunnel.com/cq23xyyt12Another Free Film Book: https://dl.bookfunnel.com/x3jn3emga6Fast, Cheap Film Website: https://www.fastcheapfilm.com/Lance Burton Website: https://www.lanceburton.com/Billy Topit Website: http://www.billytopit.com/Eli Marks Website: https://www.elimarksmysteries.com/Albert's Bridge Books Website: https://www.albertsbridgebooks.com/YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/BehindthePageTheEliMarksPodcastLance Burton TranscriptJohn: I loved Billy Topit, both Jim and I did. I've made a number of low budget movies in my life, about a half dozen of them and the driving force behind them has almost always been, let's get together with some friends and make a movie. I got the sense that that was kind of part of the DNA of Billy Topit. Is that right?Lance: Well, yes, I just have to correct you on one thing: Billy Topit was not a low budget movie. It was a nobudget movie. We literally just decided, you know what, I'm not going to spend any money. Everyone volunteered. So, if it ever makes any money, I'll go back and pay the actors.John: Well, okay. But as someone who has done the same thing, I've done that a half dozen times with the no money. The results you got, given the no money status, were great. Your sound is exceptional. One of the things that's normally a big sign that it's a low budget movie is the sound is not good. It's a hard thing to get right and when you do get it right, it makes it sound like a big budget movie. The cinematography is terrific, the editing is fantastic. I don't know if you bought the music, or if someone did the music, but whatever it was it fit perfectly, and it just sailed along. So, for a movie that had no budget, you did an exceptional job of making a real movie.Lance: Oh, thank you. You're right, the sound is the one thing you really don't want to skimp on, because that's something you really can't fix in post a lot of the times. So, we did try to pay attention to the sound recording. As far as the music goes, some of the music was from my show that I already own. Some of the performance pieces, some of the music we use just for the movie, was rights free music that that I got from a company called Digital juice. They have all different sorts of music and it's searchable. So, you can find you know, rock and roll hard driving music, you can find, you know, instrumentals, you really have everything.Then there was a couple of pieces that a friend of mine, who's a musician wrote and recorded for me. And one of the pieces in the film, my lead actress, Joelle Rigetti, she had actually recorded an album a couple of years ago and she gave me the album during the production. She said, “Hey, anything on here you want you're welcome to use.” And I listened to it and there was one track, I went, this is perfect for this one scene I have. It's that it's the scene where the whole cast is waking up on the second day, brushing their teeth and getting ready to go out. That's actually the lead actress singing.John: The stuff you picked all really meshed well together.Lance: Oh, thank you. It was during the post-production process when it really struck me—as we were editing and doing that—how much the music adds to a production, not just a live show. I already knew that for a live show. But as I was making the film, it really just struck me again, you know, wow, music really does add a whole new dimension to the movie or live show.John: Yeah. So, where did the idea for the movie come from?Lance: Well, I'll tell you exactly where it came from. When I was a kid, there was a television series on TV called The Magician starring Bill Bixby. It only lasted one season, because the network got a new president that came in and he just, you know, cancelled all his predecessors' shows. But it actually did good in the ratings. But it only lasted 22 episodes.The magic consultant on The Magician was Mark Wilson and so when I moved out west, I met Mark Wilson, and became friends with him. Then when I was shooting Knightrider, guess who they hired to provide all of the large illusions and props for the episode? Mark Wilson. He was sort of the magic advisor on that television show. So, Mark, and I got to hang out for seven days on the set as we were shooting. He's actually in the episode. You can see shots of him. He's sitting in the audience during one of the opening performances. In fact, I get him up on stage at one point as a volunteer. So, anyway, one day after filming, Mark and I are going out to dinner and we're in his car and we're driving along. And he says to me, “Lance, how do you like doing this work?” And I said, “What do you mean, Mark? You mean like this episode?” He says, “Yeah, how do you like, you know, acting on this, this TV show?” And I said, “I'm having the time of my life. I get to do magic. I get to act. I get to work with a stuntman, and this is great.” And he says, “Well, you're doing a good job and you ought to think about doing more of this.” And I said, “More of this, so what do you mean?” He says, “You ought to start a notebook, start keeping some ideas of how you could incorporate your magic into a TV series or movie, you know, like with the Bill Bixby series.” And I thought, Oh, that's a good idea. So, I did, I started writing, every time I had an idea about how to use magic within the context of the drama series, or, you know, a story, I would write it down. So, after a few years, I had all these sort of clever things that I came up with, to use magic and propelling the story forward, or to get out of this sticky situation or whatever. And every few years, I've pulled that out, and I'd go, “You know, I'm going to try and go pitch this,” and I would go to Los Angeles and set up some meetings. And I was trying to pitch to do a series every few years and we got close a couple of times, but we never were able to sell it. But the area I was working in was so similar to things that would pop up on my TV screen later. I kept thinking, “Man, I've got something here, I just need to, like any kind of magic trick, you know, I get it in my head and it's frustrating, I just I gotta get it out, I got to put it on the stage because it's like in my brain is like scratching the inside of my skull and it's really annoying.” By that time, the technology had progressed to the point where we had these high-definition cameras that weren't, you know, astronomically expensive. And we had editing software so that somebody on their laptop could put out a professional looking product. So, I finally just said, hey, you know what, I'm gonna do this. And I called my buddy, Michael Goudeau and he came over and we fleshed out the story. And then we wrote the screenplay within, like two or three months. And then we eventually just started casting it and shot it. So, it all goes back to Bill Bixby and The Magician from 1973. John: Well, most things do. Most things do go back that. Were you always planning on directing?Lance: You know, directing and acting at the same time is really difficult. But I had been doing it all my life, you know, with my live show. And we started in on this thing and then at some point, I heard an interview with Barbra Streisand, and someone asked her that question, and they said, “Is it difficult to act and direct in the same production?” And she had a great response. She said, “No, it's easier that way. That's one less person I have to argue with.”Jim: She's right. Absolutely right. So, talk a little bit about how the movie changed, you know, from your initial script and then through shooting and editing. Were there a lot of kind of, oh, let's do this. Oh, that didn't work. Lance: I'll tell you what: when I first had the idea, I didn't have a real clear idea of the tone I wanted to take, you know? As far as it could have been a drama, it could have been a comedy or whatever. But I started chatting with my buddy, Michael Goudeau. Now, Michael worked in my show, as my special guest star. We've been friends for, you know, since the mid-80s and Michael said, this was his idea. So, I gave him credit. He said, we should write this is a family film and I said, why is that? He says, because I have two small children and about two or three times a year, I have to take them to the movies and we have to pick a family film, and they're always horrible. That's why I'd like to see a good family film. Something good, we can take the kids to see. And I said okay, that's fine. You know, that fits. Magic's always been considered a good family entertainment. So, we chose to write it as a family friendly movie, and as a comedy, but I give credit to Michael for that, and it didn't alter that much. Once we had the script completed, the idea was, you know, to keep to the script as close as we can within reason. Now, there were some scenes that were improvised and there were some things that I added during the course of the movie. I'll tell you one thing that we added: the film starts with a dream sequence, with Billy floating a lady in the air. And then he wakes up in bed and you realize, oh, that was just a dream. He doesn't really have a big Las Vegas show. He's a birthday party magician and that was the first thing we shot. So, as we were shooting, I read a book by Robert Rodriguez about his experience shooting El Mariachi. That was recommended to me by Rory Johnston, who played the bad guy in my movie. When I explained to Rory what we were going to do, he said, oh, you're doing like a no budget movie, like Robert Rodriguez. And I said, Who's Robert Rodriguez? He said, he is just a director, he started out by making this movie called El Mariachi. He had $7,000. That was it and he made a whole film. And so, I bought the DVD to watch. I wanted to see what a $7,000 movie look like. And then I read his book and he had some really interesting advice and thoughts. He was talking about the power of three—which magicians will do also—where you have a callback, or something keeps popping back up, and it happens three times. In El Mariachi, there's like this sort of dream sequence. But it happens three times. And I started thinking, he's got a really good point there. So, I started thinking, where else could I insert, I need two more dream sequences? And I've got to find a place to insert them. So, we wrote two more dream sequences and found the right place to put them. And we shot that, but that kind of happened once we started once we started shooting.Jim: You know, John, as he's mentioned, has shot some low budget movies here and there, populated largely by friends of John. And I get the sense that, in watching your movie, that these people are all your buddies, that they're all your pals, these are all your friends. Lance: Oh, yeah, they're all my friends. The only time there were people in their movie, really, that I didn't know, like extras in the restaurant. We would just ask people, do you have any friends that you can come over and be background actors? And a lot of them are my friends. Like the birthday party scene: those kids are all kids of friends. Like, hey, if you got kids, bring them over to my stage manager's house.John: It really looks like you guys are having fun throughout the whole movie. I don't mean to denigrate it in any way, but it's a really goofy movie. It is surprisingly silly in a really fun way.Lance: It's a silly movie and a lot of that stuff is Michael Goudeau. Everybody loves Michael and loves his comedy and kids especially love him. So, that's we wanted to go for. For instance, when we were writing the date scene, you know, that was a silly scene and they were doing the game with the milk, the little milk containers. And Michael said, listen, when I take my kids to a movie, when it gets to the romantic the date scene, they are bored. They are like, oh, they're falling asleep going, oh, when is this over? So, let's beef this up with something silly. Hey, great. That sounds great. So, again, a lot of that stuff was just the purpose of the movie was to keep everybody's interest.John: And that's probably something you've learned from being on stage forever, is feeling when the audience might be getting bored and being ahead of them. Lance: Yeah, you don't want to get to that point. You want to keep it moving. Jim: Your friend Michael is in the movie?Lance: Yes, he is in the movie. He's one of the jugglers. Jim: Okay. But the taller one or the shorter one?Lance: The shorter one. He was my co-writer on the screenplay and also co-executive producer.Jim: At the very end, in the credits, there's some very clever, funny, little teases about the possibility and it was sort of like, gosh, I hope there is a sequel. Is there talk of that--?John: And I will say, I'm going to speak from my podcast partner here. We're standing by ready to help you if you want to do.Jim: Absolutely. I'll drop everything. Lance: Billy Topit Part Two, The Empire Strikes Back. Billy Topit Part Two, the Search for Spock. I tell you, that was just me getting at the end of the editing process and doing the credits and it's just going out. This will be funny. Just me just making up silly stuff.John: And the image of you doing that of sitting on a computer and editing, do you have the filmmaking bug now or you going to it doesn't have to be a sequel, Billy Topit, but...Lance: I've enjoyed. Here's the thing that I enjoyed the most on the whole process was learning to edit. My good buddy Bob Massey was our photographer and our editor. But in the process of editing, I would go over to his house, and we would work on it and then he'd have to go do something. I was like, do we have to stop? And one day he said, you know, I can give you the software. I bought this and I can put it on two computers legally. So, if you want to, I'll show you how. I went, yeah. So, I went out, I bought this and I put this stuff on, and I started to learn how to edit. Bob was there to help me, show me. I really loved it. I really, really loved the process. And a lot of it is very similar to magic. I'll give you a good example of that: There's a scene at the end of the movie where they've opened the big show and I do the sawing a couple into eight pieces. So, we got the two, the boy and the girl and they get sawed apart and they come out of the boxes at the end. And the boys were in the girl's clothes and they chase each other offstage. And then they run past the camera and then the second shot, you see them run into view in the wings. And then they have a scene in the wings. Well, we shot the first part, with the doing the trick, and then running past the camera. We shot that at the Monte Carlo hotel in 2010. And the scene in the wings, we shot in 2013, on the other side of town at Rory Johnson's church that he went to. They allowed us to shoot there. So, the two scenes that are supposed to be at the same time were shot three years apart in different locations.As we were shooting the first one, I knew in my mind what I wanted to do: I wanted him to run past the camera, and then I would pick it up. And the rest of the cast hadn't even been cast yet by the way. I didn't even know who the other actors were going to be. But I knew there was a scene over there. So, as they run past, I'll pick it up. Whenever we get to that three years later, we shoot the thing. Now I'm editing it together. So, now I take the music from the first part of the shot, playing during the trick and the audience reaction. You get the audience applauding and cheering, and they run past the camera and we go to the second shot. But you still hear the audio, you still hear the music playing, and you hear me out on stage going thank you and the audience applauding. And so now when you put it all together, it's like it's seamless. No one knows that that scene was shot three years apart. It's like a magic trick. It's an illusion. There's a good example of how the sound helps enhance the illusion. And there are a few magic tricks that we do on stage where sound is a very big part of the illusion.John: I don't know at what point in the process you read Robert Rodriguez's book, but he based El Mariachi on what he had available. He wrote the script based on the town, the bar, the tortoise, the dog, all of that. You seem to have done a very similar thing, in that I'm guessing you already had some footage you on stage or was it a relatively easy thing to get. For an average person, that's a really hard thing to get.Lance: Exactly. And I had to shoot all that before the show closed, because we were getting ready to close the show. So, we captured all of that all the stuff that had to be shot in the theatre, we captured that. John: But for the average person writing a script, to write that in a scene, you can't shoot that. The lights alone in the ceiling are more than your budget.Lance: And I was well aware that. I had this opportunity that we'd written it into the script and it's like, okay, I gotta shoot this now, because if I wait another two months, it's all going to be gone.John: Exactly. And I felt the same with the scenes in the casino, which would be I think, normally a difficult thing to do. But you obviously had a relationship to make those happen.Lance: The casino scenes, those were all shot afterwards. That was my buddy, John Woodrum, who owned this little casino called the Klondike. We wanted it to be a locals type Casino. I talked to a few of the casinos and some of them were like, yeah, we'd let you come in here and shoot, we have a coffee shop. How many days do you need it? And I'm going to myself, I don't know how long this is going to take to shoot. I never shot a movie before. And then finally I went over to see my buddy, John and I said, John, I've got this movie I'm shooting, and some of the action takes place in the casino. And there's a coffee shop and you've got a coffee shop. What would you think about a shooting here? And he looks at me says yeah, whatever you want. Come on in. I'm like, what? Come on, anytime. That's like, Okay, I found this. I found our location. John: You are a low-budget filmmaker at heart. You got all the tricks that are necessary to be good at this and you did it on your first movie. That's exceptional.Lance: It was a fun process and it's not dissimilar to shooting a television special or a TV show, but it is a little different. There is obviously magic in it. But you know, there's also the whole second element of the story and doing the scene and the acting and getting all the actors on the same page.John: And speaking of the actors, I was thrilled to see our friend Louie Anderson in there. He was a Twin Cities guy who I knew back when he was here and I had the good fortune of working with him a couple times in the corporate arena. And to see Johnny Thompson obviously having so much fun, it was just great. And then to see Mac kind of turn up. I don't want to spoil it. But he does turn upLance: Mac turns up there near the end of the film. It was great fun, being able to work with Johnny. To be able to direct your mentor is a really special thing and that was just so much fun working with Johnny, and he was just so good in this role.John: He was such a good actor, he really had that ability to turn it on. Lance: And Pam too. John: Oh, yeah, Pam was in there as well. It was just so much fun to see them just pop up like that.Jim: A delight, the whole thing was from start to finish was a delight. I watched it by myself after my wife went to bed and I just was giggling through the whole thing.Lance: Thank you. Here's my favorite story from the whole process. I had this idea to do the trick on the telephone, The Wizard, that that anybody that is amateur magician knows the trick. Well, when Michael and I were coming up with a storyline, I had this idea of using The Wizard as part of the kidnapping thing, to find out where the assistant was being held. In order to do that, of course, I had to show what The Wizard was. The reason I wanted to include that was I wanted kids especially to be able to watch the movie and then after the movie, I wanted them to be able to perform The Wizard for their friends. After we had our premiere, my wardrobe lady from the Monte Carlo—and she also did wardrobe on the movie—she called me like a week later. Her stepdaughter, who was in junior high school at that time, the little girl had gone to school the next day and had performed The Wizard for her friends. And when I heard that, I was like, yes, touchdown.John: Mission accomplished. Lance: Mission accomplished. It's exactly what I wanted. I wanted kids to go and actually perform a magic trick for their friends.Jim: But I really liked how you then turn it around and use it as a plot device. Lance: It's integral to the story. Yes, and those are those are especially the kind of things I like with magic in movies or TV shows: where you can take something and bring it back in later as a practical device.

In our latest podcast, Joseph Capurso, Head of International Economics and Sustainable Economics, and John Oh, Sustainable Economist discuss some of the opportunities and challenges for electric vehicle charging in Australia.  The build out of electric vehicle charging looks different within and outside the major capital cities.  Inside the major cities, home and work places will provide significant charging for EV drivers.  Renters and apartment dwellers are segments of the population that will rely on public electric vehicle charging.  Outside the major capital cities, the progress of charging buildout will likely be dependent on government funding.  More details can be found in the report.   ------ DISCLAIMER ------ Before listening to this podcast, you are advised to read the full Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR) disclaimers which can be found at www.commbankresearch.com.au. Information in this podcast is of a general nature only. It does not take into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and does not constitute personal financial advice. This podcast provides general market-related information, and is not investment research and nor does it purport to make any recommendations. The information contained in this podcast is approved and distributed by Global Economic & Markets Research (GEMR), a business division of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia ABN 48 123 123 124 AFSL 234945 (“the Bank”). The information is solely for informational purposes and is not to be construed as a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities or other financial products. It does not constitute a personal recommendation or take into account the particular investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual clients. Where ‘CBA data' is cited, this refers to the Bank proprietary data that is sourced from the Bank's internal systems and may include, but not be limited to, home loan data, credit card transaction data, merchant facility transaction data and applications for credit. As analysis is based on CBA customer transactions,  it may not reflect all trends in the market. All customer data used or represented in this podcast is anonymised before analysis and is used, and disclosed, in accordance with the Group's Privacy Policy Statement. The Bank believes that the information in this podcast is correct and any opinions, conclusions or recommendations are reasonably held based on the information available at the time of its compilation but no representation or warranty, either expressed or implied, is made or provided as to accuracy, reliability or completeness of any statement made.

TOPIC: Back to MATTHEW, GABRIEL CANADA: "dating girl from church, she might be pregnant", RONNIE OH: "I would like to Bible Thump/biblical question", JOHN OH: "family issues, they say I'm paranoid", HAKE NEWS

Get ready for part two of our Retirement Cash Flow series! This time, we're diving into the income side of the equation. In our first two episodes, we tackled the ins and outs of your expenses in retirement. Now, it's all about understanding the crucial role of income analysis. We'll uncover the secrets of guaranteed income versus the uncertain stuff and shed light on the consequences of retiring without a clear income plan. Don't worry if you're feeling lost - we've got your back with practical solutions and expert guidance. Tune in and take charge of your retirement cash flow!   Helpful Information: PFG Website: https://www.pfgprivatewealth.com/ Contact: 813-286-7776 Email: info@pfgprivatewealth.com Disclaimer: PFG Private Wealth Management, LLC is a registered investment adviser. All statements and opinions expressed are based upon information considered reliable although it should not be relied upon as such. Any statements or opinions are subject to change without notice. Information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. Investment involve risk and, unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. Information expressed does not take into account your specific situation or objectives and is not intended as recommendations appropriate for any individual. Listeners are encouraged to seek advice from a qualified tax, legal, or investment adviser to determine whether any information presented may be suitable for their specific situation. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Transcript of Today's Show: For a full transcript of today's show, visit the blog related to this episode at https://www.pfgprivatewealth.com/podcast/ ----more---- Mark: Welcome into this week's edition of the podcast. It's Retirement Planning - Redefined with John and Nick from PFG Private Wealth, back with me again to talk about mastering retirement cash flow. So we're going to dive into the income side of the equation here a little bit on these things that we need to discuss, and go through this crucial role of income analysis. And we'll talk about, hopefully, some ways to highlight some points to think about when it comes to making sure you've got that cash flow taken care of. Because clearly, we've got to have income in retirement when we're no longer getting those paychecks. So that's on the docket this week on the show. Once again, guys, thanks for being here. John, what's going on buddy? John: Oh, not too much. Just starting to get this Florida heat hitting me and we're only about a month into it, but I think I'm already tired of it. Mark: Already tired of it? Yeah, you got a ways to go if that's the case. What about you, Nick? How are you doing, my friend? I know you're doing a little moving. Moving's always fun, right? You getting that all worked out? Nick: Yeah, yeah. Well, luckily the move wasn't too bad, but pretty much settled in and I got a little bit of break from the heat in July after going up north for a little bit, like I tend to do during the summer. Mark: Oh, yeah. Although it's been hot everywhere. It was probably hot up there too, wasn't it? Nick: It was, it was. But it was, for sure, cooler and the humidity less. Mark: Yeah. That's the kicker. Yeah. Nick: We definitely had some warm days for sure, but I do enjoy being able to go on the fresh water up there, because I don't do fresh water in Florida. And it's not like I go to the beach that much anyways, but the water at the beaches here right now is just insanely hot. It's not even worth going in. Mark: It's like you get in the bathtub. Nick: Yeah, yeah. It's ridiculous. Mark: You think, "The ocean! I'm going to cool off." No, you're not. But yeah, well, good. I'm glad you guys are doing all right. So let's get in and talk about this cash flow thing here a little bit. Why is understanding income, guys, in retirement critical for the stability of your financial strategy, and what could happen if you don't have that clear picture? Nick: Yeah, so I was actually having a conversation with a client earlier today and really kind of emphasizing ... We emphasize this with our clients quite a bit, that it's super important to have income. Obviously, income is king in retirement, but not completely in lieu of liquidity, of having other funds. So this one client had good direct income sources and then had a decision to make on a pension, on whether to lump sum, roll over or take it as an income. And because of the overall financial strategy, for her it made sense to take lump sum, roll it over into an IRA. And that would kind of give her the balance of having assets that she can dip into, versus just a stream of income that would limit her on other things. Creating that balance is different for every single person, but we really try to emphasize trying to make sure that you understand the different forms of income, and balancing that with making sure that you have access and accounts that are invested, but are also liquid. Mark: Yeah, okay. I mean, that makes sense, clearly. And so, when we're thinking about the stability of income streams, John, what are some examples of different sources? I mean, there's some that are pretty obvious, but we want to make sure we have more than just one, clearly. So what are some of the things to think about? John: Yeah. You definitely want to analyze where the money's coming from. I know the last podcast, we were talking about expenses, and that's really where you start, is getting to understand, "Hey, how much am I spending?" And the next step is, okay, now that I'm spending this, where's my income coming from to cover those expenses? And you want to make a clear picture of understanding what your income sources are, because the biggest risk going into retirement is making sure you do not outlive your money. And part of that is understanding, "Okay, where is my income coming from? And how do I make sure that I maintain my lifestyle without running out at age 80 years old, and now all of a sudden I'm looking to get a job at 80." Mark: Yeah, nobody wants to do that. So we're talking pensions, right? IRAs, 401(k)s, social security, annuities, so on and so forth, things like that. Is it advisable to try to rely more heavily on one versus the other? And I think for many years, John, people would kind of say, "Well, social security's going to make up half or more", but I don't know that that's the reliable source we want to go with anymore. What do you think? John: Definitely not, no. Especially with ... Not that anyone's done this yet, but a lot of talk of updating the social security program, cuts and things like that. You definitely want a good balance of retirement income sources, because if, let's say, there was an update to social security, you'd want to have something in your back pocket where you can say, "Okay, that's okay, that's not going to affect me too much. I can pull from this income source." Nick: And things like understanding ... One of the things that we walk people through as far as if they're taking distributions from their retirement accounts, as they're leading up to retirement, going over the whole concept of a safe withdrawal rate, being around 4%, maybe 4.5%. Rates are a little bit higher, but we don't know how long they'll stay that way. That helps people get a little bit of a grasp of how much money they can take from their investments safely, and look to make sure that any other sources kind of fill in the gap. Mark: Let's talk a little bit about some of those guaranteed sources versus non-guaranteed, Nick, I'll let you kick this off for a second here. What is a guaranteed income and what's the difference between that versus non-guaranteed? Nick: Sure. The way that we would look at something such as the term "guaranteed income", although there are issues with social security for the most part, we look at that as a guaranteed income source. That may be something that we toggle down as far as the percentage that they would receive, but we would look at that as a guaranteed income source. If they implemented an annuity strategy, dependent upon the type of strategy that it is, that could be considered a guaranteed income source. That would be something. It's always important to point out to them that, although the history is pretty strong for insurance companies, when it's an annuity, the guarantee is provided by the insurance company itself. So that's something that's important to know. Pension plans are usually considered pretty safe and a guaranteed source of income. Mark: Yeah. I mean, non-guaranteed is going to be ... I mean, when we think about a normal 401(k), right, where we're just pumping money away, but unfortunately, if you've got it weighted in the market or things of that nature, it's not necessarily guaranteed. If you're risking it, by having exposure to the markets, then that's where that non-guarantee comes from. Correct? Nick: Correct. Yeah. For example, the conversation I had earlier with the client as far as ... Because the question that she had was exactly that. Like, "Well, hey, if I do this lump sum rollover, is that guaranteed like the pension is?" And of course the answer is no. But I also did kind of point out to her, and this was somebody that doesn't have a spouse but has kids, that, hey, this single life option is guaranteed for your life. But if you pass away within five years, you haven't even gotten close to the lump sum balance and nothing would pass onto your children. So that's something else that can come into play, where the word "guarantee" can be tricky, because it can guarantee certain aspects, but not others. Mark: Right, yeah. And so John, listeners have probably heard of things like paycheck versus playcheck, right? So if we're talking about explaining, and as you mentioned, we did some expenses on the last show. If you can walk through some of the ways that we might do that. I would think that we would want to try to use our guaranteed income sources to cover, which would be our paychecks, to cover all the have-to-haves in life. And then we use the non-guaranteed, possibly the playcheck side, as the fun items. I guess every situation is different, but is that a simple way to break that down? John: Yeah. So your paycheck would be associated with your fixed expenses, the things you need. Your necessities, things that you really need to make sure that are covered. Taxes, groceries, things like that, that you cannot do without. Mark: Rent. Electricity. John: Yeah, exactly. Your playcheck is obviously, as you mentioned, discretionary income, your wants. Let's put it that way. And what we do when we're doing the plan, and everyone's situation's different of course, but we'll have a lot of people that, let's say they're very conservative and they just say, "Hey, I want to make sure that my paycheck items are covered on a guaranteed basis. That no matter what, I want to make sure I have this covered, so I stress a little bit less about what's going on with the markets." And we can adjust the plan to basically make sure that happens for them. And then what we end up doing is, anything that's tied to fluctuation, whether it's the market or anything else, or rents, then it'll be the playcheck scenario where, "Okay, this is going to cover it." And let's say where that comes into play is, if a year is down in the market or interest rates drop, well, all right. Maybe that specific individual might not do as much in discretionary spending in that given year. Mark: Yeah. And Nick, maybe depending on how you've saved for life or how your setup is, maybe you have a pension or not, there's a possibility that you could have your paycheck cover everything that you need in retirement, or most of it, and you're really just using those accounts that you've built up, your 401(k) or your IRA or something, as something to leave to heirs. So I mean, there's lots of options out there, lots of strategies. It just really comes back to, what have you done and what kind of a saver you been, and so on and so forth. Nick: Yeah, that's absolutely correct. And for clients that we have that did retire with maybe a substantial pension, and they've been a really good saver, and they don't really dip into those investments, we definitely put together ... And their main objective is to leave money, we can work together and put together strategies to try to do that as efficiently as possible and that sort of thing. Mark: Yeah, because a lot of people will say, with RMDs for example. I mean, I can't count on one hand or both hands how many advisors I talk to that have clients saying, "Yeah, I got to take this money out for the RMD and I don't need it. What am I supposed to do with it?" But you have to do it, right? Nick: Exactly. So it's like you got to take that hit from a tax perspective, but the money could always be reinvested, it can go into a different sort of investment vehicle. There's a way to continue to have it grow. Some people will use RMDs to fund a permanent life insurance policy, to kind of shift money from a taxable inheritance to a tax-free inheritance, that sort of thing. So it just kind of depends upon, just like anything else, the overall situation and the factors that are specific to their plan. Mark: Gotcha. Well, John, let's finish off with this. So, any strategies for maximizing, maybe some non-guaranteed income? Because we often think about, or hear, John, stuff like, "Hey, get your social security maximized, run a social security analysis, make sure that you're getting all that you can there." But how do we do something similar, I suppose, in the non-guaranteed space? John: Yeah. So this will be where, I'll give you a scenario. If we're doing a plan for somebody and all they have is social security and there's no other guaranteed income, and let's just assume this person's conservative, and they have a decent nest egg where we could look at it and say, "Okay, what we could do is, from the investment portfolio, whether that's a 401(k) or IRA or a Roth IRA, whatever it is, we could pull some money out of there, put it into one of these annuity companies that provide a guaranteed income", and of course, disclosure based on their paying ability. Mark: Sure. John: And from that we can say, "Okay, here's your social security. And based on the plan, we feel that together we come up with this number, you should have x amount of guaranteed income on top of social security." And we can basically take a chunk out of the investment portfolio and put it into one of these annuity products to give, in essence, some guaranteed income. And what that typically does, it'll provide the person with a little bit of peace of mind where they say, "Hey", back to that scenario of paycheck and playcheck, "I know that my paycheck items are now covered and I feel a little bit more secure about what's happening." Mark: You're kind of creating your own pension. John: Exactly. Mark: Yeah. Okay. And again, for some folks, Nick, that's where the strategy might play off. Because some people, obviously, especially when you think about the annuity term, some people are game to learn, some people are very hesitant because they've heard whatever it is that they hear. But it could be an option for folks who don't have a lot of other resources to tap into, especially if you're going to do something like a fixed index where you're going to tie it to an indices. And that way you're kind of experiencing some of the upside, but you're also having some of that protection on the downside, so that it's not quite as non-guaranteed as it could have been if you just left it straight in the market. Is that fair, is that accurate? Nick: Yeah, annuities are always a subject that can be ... Mark: It's a hot topic. Nick: Maybe volatile, yeah, hot topic sort of thing. And the way that we tend to approach the subject is, there are so many different options when it comes to annuities. There's kind of dividing up the decision-making process between strategy and then implementation. So what I mean by that is, oftentimes, integrating in an annuity strategy for somebody can make sense to really dovetail into what John talked about. "Hey, we've got an income gap that's needed of maybe $15,000 to $20,000 a year, and hey, we can carve out this amount of money and cover that." And then we'll see issues arise in the implementation, where the advisor that they had worked with uses a product that is maybe super expensive or the guarantees are not good, or it's been misunderstood or mis-sold, or the sales charge period's a really, really long time. So the implementation is poor, and that oftentimes sets off the red flags and that sort of thing. So just like anything else, we would look at it and we tell people upfront, "Hey, this might be a strategy that makes sense for you, it may not. We think our job is to explain to you how it works so that you understand it, so that you can say yes or no. And then we move forward with whatever you feel comfortable with." Mark: Yeah, so sometimes you may have to create some alternate sources using life insurance products or different things that are out there. But again, each situation's going to be different, so you want to identify what kind of income sources you need and then where you're going to be getting them from. So if you need some help, as always, make sure you're talking with a qualified professional, like John and Nick, before you take any action on anything you hear from our show or any other show. You always want to see how it's going to relate to your unique situation. Obviously, we're all affected by the same kind of things; we're going to have expenses in retirement, we're going to need income in retirement. But how you break that down and how you're able to utilize the things that you've done through your life, are going to be different from person to person. So, get yourself onto the calendar, have a conversation with John and Nick at pfgprivatewealth.com. That's pfgprivatewealth.com. That's where you can find them online. And don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Google, or Spotify, whichever podcasting platform app you like to use. Guys, thanks for hanging out. As always, I appreciate your time. For John and Nick, I'm your host, Mark, and we'll catch you next time here on Retirement Planning - Redefined.

Do you need help with technical problems during Zoom calls? In this episode, we'll cover common tech problems in Zoom meetings and how to handle them using helpful phrases. And you'll practice your speaking with a fun mini-story. Get the transcript on my website: Speakenglishpodcast.com/podcast/ Zoom has become a crucial tool for remote work and communication. But, as you may have experienced, technical problems can pop up during a Zoom call. As an English learner, it's important to feel comfortable using the app and handling any problems that may come up. Don't worry if you're not a tech expert. Learning the basics of Zoom will help you communicate better with your coworkers and clients. It's a good idea to practice using Zoom's simple features, like sharing your screen, using the chat, and muting your microphone. These features can make your Zoom meetings run more smoothly. To help you tackle these issues, I've prepared an example conversation on Zoom addressing common technical problems. Participants: John from the United States; Maria from Brazil, and Yuna from South Korea John: Hello, everyone. Can you hear me clearly? Maria: Yes, I can hear you, John.  Yuna: Sorry, I'm having trouble hearing you. I may have a problem with the connection. John: No problem, Yuna. Can you check your internet connection or try refreshing your browser? Yuna: Sorry to interrupt, but my screen is blank. Is anyone else having this issue? Maria: No, my screen is working fine. John: Yuna, can you try exiting and then rejoining the meeting? Yuna: Okay, let me try that. Maria: John, I think you're frozen. I mean, your screen is frozen. Can you hear me?  John: Oh, sorry about that, Maria. I need to figure out what's going on. Let me turn off my camera and then turn it back on. Maria: I'm also having some issues. The image and sound are out of sync on my end. Yuna: I agree, Maria; I noticed the same thing. John: Hmm, that's strange. Let me check my internet connection to see if that's the issue.  Maria: You're breaking up a little bit, Yuna. Can you repeat what you just said? Yuna: Sorry about that. I said we needed to discuss the marketing strategy for the new product launch. Maria: There's an echo on the line. Can someone please mute themselves if they're not speaking? John: That's a good point, Maria. I am having trouble hearing you, Yuna. I think you're on mute.  Yuna: Oh, sorry about that. Can you hear me now? John: Yes, we can hear you now, Yuna. Let's continue with the meeting.   Get the transcript on my website: Speakenglishpodcast.com/podcast/

Welcome to March 4th, 2023 on the National Day Calendar. Today we celebrate playing outside and a chip off the old block. Marlo: Hey Anna, it's National Play Outside Day, let's get out of here, what do you want to do today? Anna: Oh! I'd like to go for a hike, let's go! Marlo: This is great! Fresh air, sunshine, not a care in the world! Anna: Yup, taking the show on the road! Playing outside is so good for us too, fresh air and exercise! Marlo: And it's so nice that the technology allows us to work AND play…hey John, you doing okay with all that gear? John: Oh…sure…no problem…  Marlo: Let us know if we can help with anything… Anna: On National Play Outside Day go get some fresh air and stretch your legs, right John? John: Right.  John Adams played an important role in the birth of America. And all the while, his son John Quincy observed him and took mental notes. As a child, he watched the Battle of Bunker Hill. By the age of 14, he was already involved in politics, serving as secretary to the American ambassador to Russia. A couple years later, he joined his father in Paris to aid the men working out the Treaty of Paris, which formally ended the American Revolution. Over the next few decades, he served as an ambassador, then a Senator, and eventually became the 6th president of the United States. Although he wasn't a very popular Commander in Chief, his parents were very proud of their son. On National Sons Day, remember that the kid following your footsteps today, will likely be leading others tomorrow.   I'm Anna Devere and I'm Marlo Anderson. Thanks for joining us as we Celebrate Every Day. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to January 16th, 2023 on the National Day Calendar. Today we celebrate making something out of nothing and a man with a dream.  John: Uh, Anna, We're recording. What are you eating? Anna: Nothing.  John: No you're eating something. Anna: No nothing. Marlo? Marlo: Yeah? John: Marlo, what are you eating? Marlo: Nothing either actually. John: So who's eating? Anna: Alright, alright. It's me. I'm eating a fig newton. I'm celebrating National Fig Newton Day and I'm sorry. I didn't bring enough for everybody. John: But they're ooey, gooey rich and chewy inside! Anna: I know, I'm sorry. Marlo, what are you celebrating? Marlo: Because of you I'm celebrating National Nothing Day. John: Oh, I'm celebrating nothing with you too, Marlo. Anna: That's a good call. Somebody's gotta do it. John: Yeah, way to be a team player. Marlo: Yeah, thanks, Anna! President Johnson once called Martin Luther King Jr. the apostle of nonviolence because of his legendary service through civil disobedience. As a clergyman, activist and leader of the civil rights movement, Dr. King is perhaps best known for his “I Have A Dream” speech. Hallowed in our history books as one of the all time greats, this speech was almost heard by no one. Right before the event the sound system was sabotaged and reportedly fixed on orders by Attorney General Robert Kennedy. What's more, King had not planned to “share the dream,” but improvised this portion upon the encouragement from singer Mahalia Jackson. On Martin Luther King Jr. Day we honor the unifying spirit of a man who changed the world by speaking from his heart. I'm Anna Devere and I'm Marlo Anderson. Thanks for joining us as we Celebrate Every Day!  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to December 16, 2022 on the National Day Calendar. Today we celebrate rooting for the underdog and the tradition of poor taste.  It's an accepted fact that people love cheering for an underdog. Whether in movies or sports or movies about sports, nothing engages our emotions like watching someone win against all odds. Do you guys have a favorite underdog story?   John: The 1980 Winter Olympics Hockey Team. Miracle on Ice. Marlo: I grew up watching Underdog as a kid. John: Oh, it was such a great cartoon. Why can't you find Underdog in reruns? Anna: I don't know but what's the story about that guy Rudy, that movie? John: Notre Dame football, Rudy Ruettiger. Marlo: That's a great story too. We have plenty of them actually. Lots of underdogs. On National Underdog Day, celebrate your favorite unlikely hero that inspires you to go the distance. Anna: Marlo, what's with that outfit? Marlo: Well, what? That's an interesting outfit you have. Anna: John, back me up. Are you color blind, Marlo? I don't know what's going on with you there. Marlo: I'm not sure either, actually. John: The lights and glitter are an interesting touch. Marlo: Maybe that's why I can't see so well right now. Hang on a second. Let me dim the lights a little. John: Wait a second, is that panel on the front an advent calendar?! Anna: That's what it is. Marlo, are you celebrating Ugly Sweater Day by any chance? Marlo: Ta Da! Anna: Okay. Well it's that time of year when some people have parties to raise money for charity or Toys for Tots donations with an ugly sweater dress code. On National Ugly Christmas Sweater Day show your holiday spirit with something fun and hideous. I'm Anna Devere and I'm Marlo Anderson. Thanks for joining us as we Celebrate Every Day. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Augmented reveals the stories behind the new era of industrial operations, where technology will restore the agility of frontline workers. In this episode of the podcast, the topic is "How Academia Shapes Manufacturing". Our guest is John Hart (https://www.linkedin.com/in/ajhart/), Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Director at the Center for Advanced Production Technologies at MIT. In this conversation, we talk about John's research on micro and nanotechnology and material science, which universities and colleges that teach manufacturing, the role of MIT in this ecosystem, and why now is a key moment in manufacturing history. If you like this show, subscribe at augmentedpodcast.co (https://www.augmentedpodcast.co/). If you like this episode, you might also like Episode 92 on Emerging Interfaces for Human Augmentation (https://www.augmentedpodcast.co/92). Augmented is a podcast for industry leaders, process engineers, and shop floor operators, hosted by futurist Trond Arne Undheim (https://trondundheim.com/) and presented by Tulip (https://tulip.co/). Follow the podcast on Twitter (https://twitter.com/AugmentedPod) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/75424477/). Trond's Takeaway: There has never been a more interesting time to be in manufacturing or to watch manufacturing. The tremendous breakthroughs that we are about to witness have been made possible by a confluence of emerging technologies and startup innovations, as well as a growing awareness of the importance of building human-centric technologies. We are indeed at a crossroads with profound challenges in the growing talent shortage, the need for workforce training, an aging industrial base, and the demands for manufacturing competency from the wider innovation ecosystem. We have to make progress fast, and innovations are just maturing to be able to do so at the scale and pace required. It will, again, be amazing to watch the manufacturing industry. Parts of it will perhaps, again, become the industry of industries. Transcript: TROND: Welcome to another episode of the Augmented Podcast. Augmented reveals the stories behind the new era of industrial operations where technology will restore the agility of frontline workers. Technology is changing rapidly. What's next in the digital factory, and who is leading the change? And what are the skills to learn and how to stay up to date on manufacturing and industry 4.0. In this episode of the podcast, the topic is How Academia Shapes Manufacturing. Our guest is John Hart, Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Director at the Center for Advanced Production Technologies at MIT. In this conversation, we talk about John's research on micro and nanotechnology and material science, which universities and colleges that teach manufacturing, the role of MIT in this ecosystem, and why now is a key moment in manufacturing history. Augmented is a podcast for industrial leaders, for process engineers, and for shop floor operators hosted by futurist Trond Arne Undheim and presented by Tulip. John, how are you? Welcome. JOHN: I'm well, Trond. Great to see you. Thank you for having me. TROND: Well, I'm excited to have you talking about...well, hopefully, a lot of different things, but how academia gets to shape manufacturing, this fascinating venture that is manufacturing. But you yourself, John, you grew up in Michigan, is that right? You were close to this from an early age. JOHN: I was close to it. Yeah, I grew up in Royal Oak, Michigan, a suburb north of Detroit. If you know the Detroit Metro area, there are the mile roads, and the Detroit River is sort of Zero Mile. And I grew up between 14 and 15 Mile Roads, so in the hotbed of the good, old U.S. auto industry. TROND: Well, exactly. Because looking a little bit at your background here, you spent quite a few years as a summer intern at General Motors before you got yourself to...or actually perhaps in the beginning, in your undergrad years from UMichigan, is that right? JOHN: I did. After my first year at UofM, I worked as a summer intern at GM and went back a few years in a row in different roles in different areas. And honestly, when I decided to pursue a graduate degree and ended up at MIT, I thought I might just get my master's and go back and work in the auto industry, but things changed, and here we are today. TROND: Well, here we are today. You got yourself an undergrad from UMichigan. And you worked there for a little while, I believe, but then came to MIT with a master's, Ph.D. This is way back. But you won the prize for the best doctoral thesis in micro and nanotechnology. So that set you off on the path to rediscover nanomaterials, I guess. JOHN: Yeah, well, it's a really maybe exotic combination of topics. My master's thesis was on precision machine design, the design of these large mechanical couplings for industrial robots. And then, for my Ph.D., with the same advisor, I worked on carbon nanotube synthesis. But there you have the dipoles of manufacturing research, materials, processing, and mechanical design that have shaped how I've taken things forward since then. TROND: Well, but it is in these unique combinations that innovation starts to occur, right? JOHN: Yeah, exactly, combining different topics. And that's one reason I love manufacturing is that it is the union of materials processing, and automation, and software, and now also getting more interested in the organizational workforce aspects. It's a very rich, multidisciplinary layered topic. TROND: Yeah. And we'll explore this both from the organizational angle, and, indeed, I'm super interested in this material angle on things because it seems to me like you're exploring the very, very small nanostructures, but then you're then printing them on the very large canvas. So you're exploring materials from one extreme to the other. JOHN: Yeah. Well, it depends on your objective and what topic you're working on. There are cases in our research where we need to understand the formation of materials, not quite from the atom up but from the nanoscale or microscale up. And there are cases where we more or less abstract or coarse grain those link scales and focus on macroscale properties. TROND: Well, and then you also focus quite a bit on teaching. I noticed that you actually launched the first massive online course on manufacturing processes, and hopefully, we'll get to this a little bit as well. JOHN: Sure. TROND: But teaching and basically working on the next generation of manufacturers, whether they be the engineers or really anybody else, has certainly been one of the big challenges in manufacturing really forever. What is it that fascinates you so much about teaching this to a grander audience than the usual university audience? JOHN: Well, first, I'll say I believe that the top priority of universities, including in the area of manufacturing, is to educate future leaders and engineers. That said, the number of people we educate on our campus is a small fraction of those who could really benefit from what we teach and the way we teach. And that's not just geographically, but it's also in terms of their role in the workforce. So I believe manufacturing education should address all levels of the workforce. And to get at your question more directly, when I came to MIT, I was asked to take over our core undergraduate manufacturing class in the Department of Mechanical Engineering. And as I learned to teach the class for myself, I was intrigued by this emerging trend of digital learning, and this was 2015, 2016. And I was able to get some funding from MIT internally to create an online version of the course that would be offered free to the world, and probably 100,000 People have taken it so far. And it's been a great experience and evidence of how there is very broad interest in manufacturing really across the world. TROND: 100,000 people have taken this course. JOHN: Yeah. Well, I'll say 100,000 people have signed up for the course. This is the classic trade-off with online courses. It doesn't mean 100,000 people complete the course. It means that number signs up and hopefully took something away from it. It also speaks to the flexibility. You can sign up for a course and maybe just listen to one lecture, but if you take something valuable away from it, that's great. TROND: So I wanted to talk a little bit about how academia shapes manufacturing. And I know that there are, you know, you and I work at MIT, and you've had experiences obviously at University of Michigan. But there are other manufacturing centers and institutes all around the world. Could you lay out this landscape a little bit for us so that we get a sense of where the excellent centers of manufacturing are located? I mean, one structure, just to pick that, is manufacturing institutes, and I know that's sort of dear to your heart for a couple of different reasons that we'll get into. But what are some of the centers beyond MIT where there is activity that is organized in a way that really is something to focus on? JOHN: First, I think of in the U.S., Carnegie Mellon, Georgia Tech, Purdue, Michigan, Stanford, places that have defined manufacturing centers or have a body of work that relates to manufacturing that I would say there's a critical mass of faculty, and students, and affiliation with industry. Also, Penn State in the area of additive manufacturing and product design. It's hard to be comprehensive. I don't want to forget anyone big, but that's a sample of some of the notable ones. Internationally, a lot of activity in Europe; I admire the University of Cambridge, the Institute for Manufacturing there, where manufacturing is more or less a department, or it's within the Department of Engineering, which is analogous to what we would say is a school or college of engineering here in the U.S. And they have a broad set of activities that have been there for decades focused on manufacturing at the IFM. TROND: And if you think about the best schools to get educated in this topic, is it necessarily only the top brands? I mean, certainly, they have different roles. So when it comes to undergrads or even shorter, or I guess even community colleges have a really fundamental role in the formation of this sector, can you talk a little bit about that? JOHN: Oh, for sure. When you think of manufacturing education, we must think of the full stack of institutions that educate the workforce, from vocational institutions to community colleges where the student's goal may just be to complete a vocational program or complete a two-year degree and then exit the workforce, all the way to the four-year degrees, advanced degrees, and executive education. And given how manufacturing is paramount in the workforce and the economy, we need to educate folks at all those levels. But by far, the largest number of people are at those vocational community college levels and then to the bachelor's level. So I have a Ph.D. I love to mentor Ph.D. students. But that's a small fraction of the manufacturing workforce. TROND: What about in the U.S. setting? There's something called the Manufacturing USA, and there are these institutes that have sponsorship from various government agencies, most of them through the Department of Defense. But there's also a bunch at the Department of Energy and one, I guess, from the Department of Commerce. What is the role of basically government-sponsored sort of research and innovation activities in this field? It would strike me, I guess, that historically, it's quite important. JOHN: Certainly. You're alluding to the manufacturing innovation institutes, the MIIs that were started during President Obama's administration. Actually, MIT's work, the Production in the Innovation Economy study, and the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, which emerged from that, was key in scoping the MIIs, and now there are 16 or so around the country. It's one example of public-private partnership. Public-private partnership is key to cultivating interest in manufacturing and also providing resources for technology translation and commercialization. I think the MIIs have had a great impact on awareness of manufacturing, on R&D, and really applied research in some critical technology areas. But it's only a small part of what we need to do to regrow and expand our industrial base in the U.S. TROND: So I want to move us shortly to MIT to discuss both your own research activity and how extensively you are now aiming to take a more organizing role to kind of get more out of all of the exciting work that's happening at MIT. But before that, I just spotted perhaps an older project of yours that I thought was extremely cool. You were once called a nanoartist, and you had this NanoArt Nanobliss gallery with visualizations. You previously mentioned Obama. I believe you made a NanoArt structure called Nanobama or something of that sort. How did this come about? And, again, I mean, I'm guessing this just sort of testifies to your interest in science communication as much as in the depths of science, which we'll get into in a moment. JOHN: You got it. The inspiration was how do we communicate what we're doing in the lab to broader audiences just to make them aware of what's happening in new technology, new materials? In that case, it was nanotechnology. If you don't mind, I'll tell you a bit more of the story. When I was an assistant professor at Michigan, we were doing a lot of work on carbon nanotube manufacturing, which was a follow-on from my graduate work at MIT. And I admired President Obama, or he was a presidential candidate at that time. And without implying a political inclination, I somehow put together the words nano and Obama in my mind. TROND: [laughs] JOHN: And I said, wow, it would be cool to have a Nanobama. So one thing led to another, and I actually worked with some students in my group to fabricate these little portraits out of carbon nanotubes representing Shepard Fairey's portrait of Obama that was used widely during that first presidential campaign. And I just posted it online, I think one day after the election, and it took off. It went viral, so to say, and was featured as Nature's Image of the Year. It was printed on the newspapers you used to get as you walk onto the subway in the morning around the world. There was a company that would syndicate this stuff, and they just sent it around. So it got a lot of attention. And it showed me the power of an image in communicating something. And, of course, President Obama, that was a historic election. The play on words was exciting, and also the fact that it was a little bit intriguing science and technology that was nano was interesting. And one more thing, a colleague of mine at Michigan then was working in the White House, and he said, "Hey, can you send us a Nanobama?" So I made this frame with a little piece of the real material, and a picture of it from the microscope sent it to Washington. I didn't hear anything about it until I got a call from the White House asking me to declare the value for the President's tax return because he decided to keep it; I kid you not. And then, after Obama left office, I was with my family at a bookstore in Wellesley, and I saw the book, the retrospective book of Pete Souza, the White House photographer. And I opened up the book, and I see a picture of Obama and John Boehner in the Oval Office in the middle of this book. And right on the doorframe is the Nanobama. So it actually made it to the White House, which was a pretty awesome feeling. TROND: It must be an awesome feeling, and, again, I think that, especially in this field of manufacturing which is so challenged at times, right? And people are talking about how these factories are greedy, or is this a great job, or whatnot. And there have been all of these historical moments. But then there is also this fascination around the topic of certainly of technologies and the excitement around it. Why don't we continue a little bit on this strand before we get into sort of the overall role of MIT? I'm really curious about how your research has evolved. So generally, I get that you're combining these nanostructures with manufacturing and materials research, and certainly, you have applied it to additive manufacturing. How would you say that your research has evolved over these years? What are the things that you have been doing? I've picked up on a few things that I definitely wanted to cover. I mean, certainly, you've been working on this industrialization of 3D printing, both as a research area and as a commercial area. Carbon nanotubes must have been kind of where you started. I'm curious where that work is going. And then I saw that very recently, with a student, you've been doing some work that I'm personally very enthused about, which is a plant-derived composite that might replace, hopefully, plastics with sort of a hardness and stiffness that is somewhere at the boundary between conventional plastics and metals. I mean, for me, I don't quite see how all of these things are intimately connected. Where do you go for, you know, where's my next proposal here, and where's my next patent? JOHN: They aren't necessarily closely connected. But I like to say that the themes are typically one or more of materials, manufacturing, and mechanical systems or automation. And what I love about manufacturing, especially in the materials domain, is to control a process, to understand a process, and then to do something new, you need to investigate its fundamentals. And sometimes, you need to design a new instrument or machine to get the job done. So our work is often problem-inspired or opportunity-inspired. Like, the cellulose work that you mentioned recently was actually sponsored by a large consumer products company interested in a more sustainable composite material that could be used in packaging. And we looked at potential routes to formulating different materials, and we landed on cellulose. And then, we developed a formulation, a mixture of cellulose nanocrystals and polymers that ended up having exciting mechanical properties, particularly very high hardness, and toughness, more so than existing polymers. And another unifying theme is scalability. It's important not to worry too much about scalability in the early stage of research, and there's lots of amazing research that's just for science. But we like to do things that we hope will be scalable one day, so choosing ingredients that would be cost-effective or using techniques that could be industrialized, even if the techniques look very different in the lab. And maybe I've lacked to give a precise definition or focus, but I think it's also indicative of the broad span of manufacturing. And manufacturing has many, many dimensions beyond the ones that we work on in my lab at MIT. TROND: Well, you kind of answered a question that I was going to ask, too, which is it doesn't seem like you start in a linear fashion, you know, in other words, you start with some sort of basic problem that everybody in their literature has established and then you move to this, that, or the other. Sometimes it comes from a company. The challenge comes from a company, but you formulate the solution completely. It seems to me that students also have lots of ideas and kind of formulate projects. Talk to me a little bit about this process of where the problem comes from versus where the solution and impact comes from because you seem to...sometimes the output truly is just, you know, like, in this case, art or a physical prototype, and you're sort of happy with that outcome. Other times, you're actually delivering something into, presumably, eventually, an assembly line. JOHN: Yeah. And we work as hard as we can on technology translation, both in terms of the knowledge that we publish but also in terms of the steps that we take to spin technology out. You're right; the early stage is very important. And I like to often see the early stage as a collaboration between myself and the researchers. And in many cases, the core idea we end up pursuing comes largely from the research or the research team. In many cases, it might be seeded by the interest of a sponsor or an idea I have, and then we work together on actually figuring out what's the approach, what are the outcomes, and what's the path to success. MID-ROLL AD: In the new book from Wiley, Augmented Lean: A Human-Centric Framework for Managing Frontline Operations, serial startup founder Dr. Natan Linder and futurist podcaster Dr. Trond Arne Undheim deliver an urgent and incisive exploration of when, how, and why to augment your workforce with technology, and how to do it in a way that scales, maintains innovation, and allows the organization to thrive. The key thing is to prioritize humans over machines. Here's what Klaus Schwab, Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, says about the book: "Augmented Lean is an important puzzle piece in the fourth industrial revolution." Find out more on www.augmentedlean.com, and pick up the book in a bookstore near you. TROND: You have commercialized at least two ventures together with others at MIT and external people as well that I know about for sure. I wanted to just briefly mention both Desktop Metal and VulcanForms. Let's perhaps cover Desktop Metal first, so that's a 3D printing company. Tell me how that got started and what your role was there. JOHN: So I was very fortunate to be a member of the founding team of Desktop Metal. So there were seven co-founders, and we launched the company in early fall of 2015. And Ric Fulop, who's the lead founder and CEO, approached me at that time, and he heard that I was interested in working on 3D printing and, of course, knew a bit about my background in manufacturing and machine design and asked me to jump on board. And funny story, how just connections persist over the years; I actually knew Ric when I was a grad student because I was doing my carbon nanotube work using the space of now my colleague, Yet-Ming Chiang. And at that time, Yet and Ric were launching A123 Systems, a successful battery company. So that was a reason why I think Ric knew to get in touch with me when he heard about me. And serendipity was a great experience. TROND: Serendipity when you are in the right places, right? If you're hanging around Yet-Ming Chang, yeah, that's right, very special serendipity. Tell me a little bit about VulcanForms. Until very recently, you couldn't talk so much about it. Nowadays, you did go out in New York Times. I've read that piece. So there is a little bit more detail around it. Let me ask a very basic and perhaps dumb question, large-scale metal 3D printing, what's the big deal there? I thought didn't Desktop Metal do 3D printing? So it's kind of a dumb question. Why is there a second company? Is there really such a variety? I think that the regular person just thinks 3D printing is 3D printing. JOHN: 3D printing is a broad and deep subject. Like, first of all, 3D printing processes exist for polymers, for metals, for many other materials. And there are even several 3D printing technologies for metals. I'll tell the origin story for VulcanForms quickly if that's okay, and then get back to the question. So when I came to MIT as faculty in 2013, I had been a professor at Michigan for a few years. And I landed, and one of the topics I thought of looking into was 3D printing. I was actually asked by a colleague to teach a class not on 3D printing, but I was able to propose the topic. And in that class, there were many incredible students. One of them, named Martin, stuck around at MIT after finishing his master's in manufacturing, and we ended up comparing notes and launching VulcanForms in 2015, a little bit before Desktop Metal came to be, but not that long before. And we stayed quiet for seven years. We raised our seed round a couple of years ago. And the focus of the company is number one, laser-based metal additive manufacturing. And second, while we've built our own additive technology, we're a manufacturing company. So we produce parts at scale, and that is a real need and has been a barrier to growth of the additive industry. There's so much interest and uptake in additive. But the ability to achieve high-quality production using additive as the formative step in the process at scale has largely been untouched. So from the early days, we thought that we could approach the market with that plan to become a manufacturing company. TROND: Staying quiet for seven years that can't have been [laughs] particularly easy. JOHN: Yeah, it's not easy, but it's very, very worth it because we got to focus. And also, there are different boundary conditions that allow you to keep your head down and get work done, and one of them is having great and patient investors who believe in your approach and who see the progress behind the curtain. And as a result, we felt we would hold off launch. And we were fortunate to get picked up by the New York Times earlier this summer. And now we're excited to talk about what we do. TROND: Yeah, that article did hint a little bit at what your printers can print that others cannot and kind of at what scale. Can you give some examples of the kinds of things that you are now contracted to print or are perhaps already printing? JOHN: So the company is focused on a variety of industries, generally industries where high-value metal parts are difficult to manufacture and where there is a real pent-up need for more agile, high-value manufacturing medical devices such as medical implants, semiconductor components, not microchips but cooling devices for various computer systems. We have a lot of business in the aerospace and defense area, working with several of the defense primes, both on additive parts and on machining, honestly. The company, as described in the New York Times article, we acquired a machine shop in Newburyport, Massachusetts, earlier this year. And that was twofold, one because in order to deliver finished parts, you need to often integrate additive with machining. So it's not just 3D printing; it's building a stack of software and physical processes to create a finished part. Second, advanced machining is also a digital manufacturing technology, and as a company, we're very interested in applying our capabilities as a digital manufacturing organization to the area of CNC machining as well. TROND: So, taking that experience then from these two companies and your vast interest and research area plus your interest in communication, what is it that you're now focused on at MIT more largely? That's another kind of secret that's slowly being let out. But you have had this notion and have shared this with me and others, obviously. There was a seminar open to whoever was invited, I think, but not a full public launch. Manufacturing at MIT has historically been quite important, but you think that there's even more, to be done. You lined up a couple of the projects, but there are many more things that MIT has done. Could you maybe just briefly address the role of MIT historically in influencing manufacturing? And what else is it that you now want to accomplish? JOHN: Yeah, for sure. And since I came to MIT nine years ago, I've learned of the incredibly rich history that the institute has in manufacturing, both on the technology side, you know, in the mid-1950s, building among the first CNC machines, ultimately transformed commercial aviation in 1980 building one of the first 3D printers in the world, and so on. But not only that, but also, historic accomplishments in the social sciences, understanding the globalization of manufacturing, you know, what delineated the U.S. versus the Japanese auto industry in the 1980s. What is the intrinsic role of manufacturing in innovation, the production, and innovation economy led by my colleague Suzanne Berger in around 2010. And then broader than manufacturing, though, the work of the future study just a couple of years ago looking at the connection between technology and work. So looking at all those accomplishments and understanding the present moment that we're in, which I can also reflect on later, I've been exploring how to create a new presence for manufacturing at MIT. And the term manufacturing at MIT is more or less a placeholder representing the community of faculty and students across disciplines, both technology and social sciences, that touch on all the dimensions of manufacturing. So as we've returned from Zoom life to more in-person life, I've been making my way around campus and building a team of folks, faculty advisors, external advisors, industry partners, and so on to hopefully put forward a new center at MIT that has a focus on manufacturing across the disciplines. And this is not to replace existing activities but just to augment those activities and bring industry together with us to support research, to lean deeply into workforce training programs, to collaborate with public organizations at the state and federal level and internationally, and also hope to cultivate more entrepreneurship. Because my experience, fortunate experience as an entrepreneur over the past several years tells me that there's opportunity for more new companies that contribute to the future of manufacturing, whether they're manufacturing companies actually making stuff, whether they be software and services companies. Or perhaps the biggest need is hardware companies for whom manufacturing is a route to success. So you may not be manufacturing something yourself, or you may not be manufacturing goods for others, but understanding manufacturing and scaling a process is really key. And that intellectual DNA of manufacturing is more cross-disciplinary than ever. And I've observed over my nine years at MIT how there's just more engagement in manufacturing as a discipline, as this cross-disciplinary theme. And that's an area where I feel such a center can really play a role by adding something to the intellectual community across the institute. TROND: There are so many things that come to mind when you produce this narrative because, I guess, on the one hand, manufacturing is a little bit of everything. On the other hand, it is clearly very delineated because it's all about making things and making them at scale. And there's a whole industry, but, of course, every industry almost has a manufacturing arm. How do you delineate the subject of manufacturing? And I'm sort of curious, you know, at MIT, if you use a broad church definition, almost everybody there contributes to manufacturing. So that would be both a challenge and an opportunity, I guess. JOHN: Yeah, you're exactly right. So, first, within MIT, we have many collaborations with different departments and other research centers. And the nature of the collaboration depends on what the focus is. Second, when it comes to interfacing with industry, I've come to look at industry as kind of a grid where you could say the columns are the end users, say, aviation and space or consumer or construction. And then, the horizontal lines in the grid are technologies, robotics and automation, 3D printing, software and IT, et cetera. And getting a little bit in the weeds of the organization here, so first, we're working on launching a flagship industry consortium, or we're recruiting flagship industry partners for a new center. And those will be companies, world-leading manufacturing companies across the grid. Second, we will operate consortia in different technology in industry areas that may be located within our center that may be in collaboration with others around MIT to really drive focus. And when industry comes and interacts with us, I want them to understand how their business fits into the broader spectrum. And we find particularly in the work related to 3D printing that companies appreciate being connected with peers across the value chain. They say 3D printing is materials at the frontend and finished parts at the backend, and there are some machines and software, and so on. When you bring companies together across their value chain, across their supply chain, under the umbrella of an academic organization with this sort of problem-solving mindset, we find that that can be valuable to the companies that we partner with. TROND: And, John, there's obviously a scale at MIT that's hard to replicate for any university or school just because there are so many people involved in technical innovation. But on the other hand, I would say there has been a sense that other sectors if you could call them that, have always been moving much faster than manufacturing. And, you know, okay, fine, there are industrial revolutions, but the ones we talk about now as industrial revolutions are more, you know, they are maybe on the software side and stuff, but that the core of manufacturing it may be because of its inherent nature. It's complex; it's about physical infrastructure, at least a lot of it still. So it's hard to innovate in that sector. Would you say that one of the ambitions you have with this manufacturing at MIT initiative is to speed up that innovation? And if so, what are the mechanisms that would bring manufacturing as a whole, I guess, on an even faster sort of clip? JOHN: First, if I look within MIT, we see the opportunity to combine the physical side, the mechanical engineering, the material science, with the digital side, with software, and controls, and computation. And that's an area where it's clear that new technologies can be de-risked, can be scaled more quickly. And it really requires this symbiosis of the physical processes and the digital intelligence. Second, I think we can do better research. I can do better research by understanding where the big problems and opportunities are. And by connecting closely with industry, forming networks with various stakeholders, we can define better problems that we can ask our students to solve. And third, I've noticed, especially over the past year with all the geopolitical discussions and the imperative for sustainability, that we're at a time where there's this alignment between industry and government and the investment community and manufacturing, physical manufacturing, physical industry is vital. We can't do enough there to catch up, to grow. And I think that's a real opportune moment to recognize that while I think the pendulum has swung to the digital world and software over the past 10, 20 years, life has changed for the better in so many ways. We have to focus on the physical world now, especially to address the climate crisis, and also think of how we can improve economic equality across our communities, how we can provide better job opportunities, how we can deliver education to individuals who don't have the opportunity to go to university or don't have the resources to travel, all those things. So that's another reason why, one, I see manufacturing as this rich, cross-disciplinary topic that I can file a patent and write some exciting papers and graduate with a Ph.D., but it means so much more to feel technology at scale. And second, you need the intersection of these disciplines to understand not just technology but organizations and human dynamics to create change and create positive impact. TROND: So I realized that we're going to have to cover... there are so many other questions I have for you is what I'm trying to say here. But my last question in this round, I think, is going to be one on...we briefly mentioned, or you briefly talked about augmentation. And you know that I have a special interest; obviously, the topic of the podcast and the title is augmentation. So there is something here about the tension, perhaps between augmentation and automation. How do you see that tension or the relationship between working from the human-centric perspective that technologies are in service to perhaps augment people and processes versus this automation perspective which maybe takes, and I'm paraphrasing here, a little bit more of an efficiency approach and tries to go for machine scale first and then just adjust everything later? How do you see those two things now, as perhaps, you know, manufacturing is coming into another kind of growth moment? JOHN: If I understood you correctly, I don't think they're mutually exclusive, right? Certainly -- TROND: No. Not necessarily. Not necessarily. JOHN: Certainly, manufacturing will become more automated in places where automation makes sense. Certainly, automation is challenging to implement to scale, to get right. But in some cases, the driver to more efficient technology-first manufacturing is automation. In other cases, and hand in hand with that, human workers and businesses, organizations can only become more effective and efficient, working in synergy with data and automation. I'll use the example of someone overseeing a 3D printer, a state-of-the-art 3D printer, and watching the screens to make sure everything is going well and doing a better job by being presented with information that shows, hey, this might be a problem, or there are no problems here, but being empowered to make that data-driven decision. And also, from my work outside of MIT, we find that folks who do best operating that advanced equipment with digital data might have a machining background. They might also have a passion for gaming on the side. So they might be used to sensing and responding to dynamic digital events. And that's another comment on skills evolving in the workforce too. TROND: Well, I mean, one thing that is for certain is that if MIT gets its act together on manufacturing, things will happen. I trust that we're going to have to come back and talk about a lot of emerging projects here in the coming years if you get people lined up. So very exciting. Thank you for speaking to me. Is there sort of a challenge that you want out there to the community when it comes to how, you know, not just academics can contribute to shaping manufacturing but how we all should think of these manufacturing challenges? Is it something that we should leave to experts right now because it's so complicated? Or are there ways that the broader interested public can get engaged in this problem? Is it possible to engage, and where should one engage? JOHN: That's a great question. First, to the general public, I'd say stop and think about what manufacturing means to you, or find one of your favorite things and look up how it's manufactured. Imagine the life, the journey of the product as it comes to your door. And second, I'd say the area where most of us can make an impact is in education and learning and contributing to our communities. Perhaps if you're an engineer working somewhere, you might want to teach at a community college one night a week if you have time in a future semester or explore ways that you can bring new knowledge, new technology to your organization if it makes sense. TROND: Exciting challenges. Thank you so much for sharing a little bit of what you're up to with us, John. JOHN: Thank you, Trond. TROND: You have just listened to another episode of the Augmented Podcast with host Trond Arne Undheim. The topic was How Academia Shapes Manufacturing. Our guest was John Hart, Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Director at the Center for Advanced Production Technologies at MIT. In this conversation, we talk about John's research on micro and nanotechnology and material science, which universities and colleges that teach manufacturing, the role of MIT in this ecosystem, and why now is a key moment in manufacturing history. My takeaway is that there has never been a more interesting time to be in manufacturing or to watch manufacturing. The tremendous breakthroughs that we are about to witness have been made possible by a confluence of emerging technologies and startup innovations, as well as a growing awareness of the importance of building human-centric technologies. We are indeed at a crossroads with profound challenges in the growing talent shortage, the need for workforce training, an aging industrial base, and the demands for manufacturing competency from the wider innovation ecosystem. We have to make progress fast, and innovations are just maturing to be able to do so at the scale and pace required. It will, again, be amazing to watch the manufacturing industry. Parts of it will perhaps, again, become the industry of industries. Thanks for listening. If you liked the show, subscribe at augmentedpodcast.co or in your preferred podcast player, and rate us with five stars. If you liked this episode, you might also like Episode 92 on Emerging Interfaces for Human Augmentation. Hopefully, you'll find something awesome in these or in other episodes, and if so, do let us know by messaging us. We would love to share your thoughts with other listeners. The Augmented Podcast is created in association with Tulip, the frontline operation platform that connects the people, machines, devices, and systems used in a production or a logistics process in a physical location. Tulip is democratizing technology and empowering those closest to operations to solve problems. Tulip is also hiring, and you can find Tulip at tulip.co. To find us on social media is easy; we are Augmented Pod on LinkedIn and Twitter and Augmented Podcast on Facebook and YouTube. Augmented — industrial conversations that matter. See you next time. Special Guest: John Hart.

John: I'm worried about China. Jane: Oh yeah? What about it? John: Well more I'm worried about the example they're setting, and that western governments will start implementing their technocratic oppression style to turn us all into a bunch of brainwashed, homogeneous obedience machines. Jane: What makes you think Chinese people are all brainwashed and homogeneous?  John: Oh my God, don't you watch the news? Have you not heard of their social credit score system? The state censorship and propaganda those people are subjected to? The CCP literally doesn't let them have access to western social media platforms because our free thought and democratic values might interfere with their conformity policing. How have you not heard about this? It's in the news constantly. Jane: Constantly? John: Oh yeah, it's like a major news story all the time. All across the political spectrum, too. Fox News, CNN, The Washington Post. Alternative media too like Infowars and The Epoch Times; even lefty YouTubers like Vaush talk all the time about how bad it is in China. Jane: So because you're being given the same message by all the western media you consume, you're worried about the enforcement of thought conformity in... China? John: Yeah. Of course. Jane: And this is why you're worried that, at some point in the future, that kind of brainwashing and homogeneity might someday be inflicted upon us by powerful people in the west? John: I mean yeah, if the CCP doesn't do it to us first. Did you know they're trying to take over the world? Jane: They are? John: Oh yeah! The Chinese want to take over the world and give us all a social credit score so we'll all think the same. How do you not know about this? Don't you ever watch TV? Jane: How do you know it's true though? John: That they want to conquer us and give us a social credit score? Come on! Open your eyes! Have you seen how they treat their own population? They're genociding the Uyghurs as we speak! Millions and millions of them in Nazi-style extermination camps! Plus they deliberately released the Covid virus to hurt us after cooking it up in a lab, they're taking over Hollywood and infiltrating our political and academic institutions, and they've colonized the entire continent of Africa! Of course the CCP wants to rule us! Don't you ever watch Tucker Carlson? They're truly, deeply evil, and we've got to do something to stop them. Jane: Sounds like you've got this China thing all figured out. You're right, that sounds really scary. I can't imagine what it would be like, living in a thought-controlled dystopia where your rulers are brainwashing everyone into obedience and making sure everybody thinks the same way about stuff. John: Yeah! Finally you get it! I'm glad you've come around. Honestly you're the first person I know who didn't already understand these things about China.  Jane: I'll bet. John: So do you think it will happen? Do you think our government will implement a social credit score system to make us all believe lies and propaganda, like the Chinese? Jane: You know, I wouldn't worry about it. ___________ Reading by Tim Foley and Caitlin Johnstone.