Podcasts about mike there

On this episode of GoalChat, host Debra Eckerling talks about community with Mike Brennan, Creative Chats; Jessie-Sierra Ross, Straight to the Hips, Baby; and David Shriner-Cahn, Smashing the Plateau. You can't reach your goals on your own; you need like-minds, supporters, and resources. Mike, Jessie-Sierra, and David share their experiences creating - as well as finding - communities, advice for making the most out of those experiences, and more. What is Community? - David: Being in a place with like minded people where you feel like you belong - Mike: There is a reciprocal quality; everyone rooting for each other - Jessie-Sierra: It's something you opt into, rather than something you are born into Goals - Jessie-Sierra: Find a volunteer opportunity - David: Visit a community where you think you can make an impact - Mike: Start small Final Thoughts - David: Remember, when you share your gifts, the world prospers - Mike: Clarity comes through action - Jessie-Sierra: Ask yourself why not? Learn More About Mike Brennan: MikeBrennan.me Jessie-Sierra Ross: StraighttotheHipsBaby.com David Shriner-Cahn: SmashingthePlateau.com Debra Eckerling: TheDEBMethod.com/blog 52SecretsBook.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

ROUNDING UP: SEASON 3 | EPISODE 8 As a field, mathematics education has come a long way over the past few years in describing the ways students come to understand number, quantity, place value, and even fractions. But when it comes to geometry, particularly concepts involving shape, it's often less clear how student thinking develops. Today, we're talking with Dr. Rebecca Ambrose about ways we can help our students build a meaningful understanding of geometry. BIOGRAPHIES Rebecca Ambrose researches how children solve mathematics problems and works with teachers to apply what she has learned about the informal strategies children employ to differentiate and improve instruction in math. She is currently a professor at the University of California, Davis in the School of Education. RESOURCES Geometry Resources Curated by Dr. Ambrose Seeing What Others Cannot See Opening the Mind's Eye  TRANSCRIPT Mike Wallus: As a field, mathematics education has come a long way over the past few years in describing the ways that students come to understand number, place value, and even fractions. But when it comes to geometry, especially concepts involving shape, it's often less clear how student thinking develops. Today, we're talking with Dr. Rebecca Ambrose about ways we can help our students build a meaningful understanding of geometry.  Well, welcome to the podcast, Rebecca. Thank you so much for joining us today. Rebecca Ambrose: It's nice to be here. I appreciate the invitation. Mike: So, I'd like to start by asking: What led you to focus your work on the ways that students build a meaningful understanding of geometry, particularly shape? Rebecca: So, I taught middle school math for 10 years. And the first seven years were in coed classrooms. And I was always struck by especially the girls who were actually very successful in math, but they would tell me, “I like you, Ms. Ambrose, but I don't like math. I'm not going to continue to pursue it.” And I found that troubling, and I also found it troubling that they were not as involved in class discussion. And I went for three years and taught at an all-girls school so I could see what difference it made. And we did have more student voice in those classrooms, but I still had some very successful students who told me the same thing. So, I was really concerned that we were doing something wrong and that led me to graduate school with a focus on gender issues in math education. And I had the blessing of studying with Elizabeth Fennema, who was really the pioneer in studying gender issues in math education. And as I started studying with her, I learned that the one area that females tended to underperform males on aptitude tests—not achievement tests, but aptitude tests—was in the area of spatial reasoning. And you'll remember those are the tests, or items that you may have had where you have one view of a shape and then you have a choice of four other views, and you have to choose the one that is the same shape from a different view. And those particular tasks we see consistent gender differences on. I became convinced it was because we didn't give kids enough opportunity to engage in that kind of activity at school. You either had some strengths there or not, and because of the play activity of boys, that may be why some of them are more successful at that than others.  And then the other thing that informed that was when I was teaching middle school, and I did do a few spatial activities, kids would emerge with talents that I was unaware of. So, I remember in particular this [student,] Stacy, who was an eighth-grader who was kind of a good worker and was able to learn along with the rest of the class, but she didn't stand out as particularly interested or gifted in mathematics. And yet, when we started doing these spatial tasks, and I pulled out my spatial puzzles, she was all over it. And she was doing things much more quickly than I could. And I said, “Stacy, wow.” She said, “Oh, I love this stuff, and I do it at home.” And she wasn't the kind of kid to ever draw attention to herself, but when I saw, “Oh, this is a side of Stacy that I didn't know about, and it is very pertinent to mathematics. And she needs to know what doorways could be open to her that would employ these skills that she has and also to help her shine in front of her classmates.” So, that made me really curious about what we could do to provide kids with more opportunities like that little piece that I gave her and her classmates back in the day. So, that's what led me to look at geometry thinking. And the more that I have had my opportunities to dabble with teachers and kids, people have a real appetite for it. There are always a couple of people who go, “Ooh.” But many more who are just so eager to do something in addition to number that we can call mathematics. Mike: You know, I'm thinking about our conversation before we set up and started to record the formal podcast today. And during that conversation you asked me a question that involved kites, and I'm wondering if you might ask that question again for our listeners. Rebecca: I'm going to invite you to do a mental challenge. And the way you think about it might be quite revealing to how you engage in both geometric and spatial reasoning. So, I invite you to picture in your mind's eye a kite and then to describe to me what you're seeing. Mike: So, I see two equilateral triangles that are joined at their bases—although as I say the word “bases,” I realize that could also lead to some follow-up questions. And then I see one wooden line that bisects those two triangles from top to bottom and another wooden line that bisects them along what I would call their bases. Rebecca: OK, I'm trying to imagine with you. So, you have two equilateral triangles that—a different way of saying it might be they share a side? Mike: They do share a side. Yes. Rebecca: OK. And then tell me again about these wooden parts. Mike: So, when I think about the kite, I imagine that there is a point at the top of the kite and a point at the bottom of the kite. And there's a wooden piece that runs from the point at the top down to the point at the bottom. And it cuts right through the middle. So, essentially, if you were thinking about the two triangles forming something that looked like a diamond, there would be a line that cut right from the top to the bottom point. Rebecca: OK. Mike: And then, likewise, there would be another wooden piece running from the point on one side to the point on the other side. So essentially, the triangles would be cut in half, but then there would also be a piece of wood that would essentially separate each triangle from the other along the two sides that they shared. Rebecca: OK. One thing that I noticed was you used a lot of mathematical ideas, and we don't always see that in children. And I hope that the listeners engaged in that activity themselves and maybe even stopped for a moment to sort of picture it before they started trying to process what you said so that they would just kind of play with this challenge of taking what you're seeing in your mind's eye and trying to articulate in words what that looks like. And that's a whole mathematical task in and of itself. And the way that you engaged in it was from a fairly high level of mathematics.  And so, one of the things that I hope that task sort of illustrates is how a.) geometry involves these images that we have. And that we are often having to develop that concept image, this way of imagining it in our visual domain, in our brain. And almost everybody has it. And some people call it “the mind's eye.” Three percent of the population apparently don't have it—but the fact that 97 percent do suggests for teachers that they can depend on almost every child being able to at least close their eyes and picture that kite. I was strategic in choosing the kite rather than asking you to picture a rectangle or a hexagon or something like that because the kite is a mathematical idea that some mathematicians talk about, but it's also this real-world thing that we have some experiences with.  And so, one of the things that that particular exercise does is highlight how we have these prototypes, these single images that we associate with particular words. And that's our starting point for instruction with children, for helping them to build up their mathematical ideas about these shapes. Having a mental image and then describing the mental image is where we put language to these math ideas. And the prototypes can be very helpful, but sometimes, especially for young children, when they believe that a triangle is an equilateral triangle that's sitting on, you know, the horizontal—one side is basically its base, the word that you used—they've got that mental picture. But that is not associated with any other triangles. So, if something looks more or less like that prototype, they'll say, “Yeah, that's a triangle.” But when we start showing them some things that are very different from that, but that mathematicians would call triangles, they're not always successful at recognizing those as triangles. And then if we also show them something that has curved sides or a jagged side but has that nice 60-degree angle on the top, they'll say, “Oh yeah, that's close enough to my prototype that we'll call that a triangle.”  So, part of what we are doing when we are engaging kids in these conversations is helping them to attend to the precision that mathematicians always use. And that's one of our standards. And as I've done more work with talking to kids about these geometric shapes, I realize it's about helping them to be very clear about when they are referring to something, what it is they're referring to. So, I listen very carefully to, “Are they saying ‘this' and ‘that' and pointing to something?” That communicates their idea, but it would be more precise as like, I have to ask you to repeat what you were telling me so that I knew exactly what you were talking about. And in this domain, where we don't have access to a picture to point to, we have to be more precise. And that's part of this geometric learning that we're trying to advance. Mike: So, this is bringing a lot of questions for me. The first one that I want to unpack is, you talked about the idea that when we're accessing the mind's eye, there's potentially a prototype of a shape that we see in our mind's eye. Tell me more about what you mean when you say “a prototype.” Rebecca: The way that that word is used more generally, as often when people are designing something, they build a prototype. So, it's sort of the iconic image that goes with a particular idea. Mike: You're making me think about when I was teaching kindergarten and first grade, we had colored pattern blocks that we use quite often. And often when we talked about triangles, what the students would describe or what I believed was the prototype in their mind's eye really matched up with that. So, they saw the green equilateral triangle. And when we said trapezoid, it looked like the red trapezoid, right? And so, what you're making me think about is the extent to which having a prototype is useful, but if you only have one prototype, it might also be limiting. Rebecca: Exactly. And when we're talking to a 3- or a 4-year-old, and we're pointing to something and saying, “That's a triangle,” they don't know what aspect of it makes it a triangle. So, does it have to be green? Does it have to be that particular size? So, we'll both understand each other when we're talking about that pattern block. But when we're looking at something that's much different, they may not know what aspect of it is making me call it a triangle” And they may experience a lot of dissonance if I'm telling them that—I'm trying to think of a non-equilateral triangle that we might all, “Oh, well, let's”—and I'm thinking of 3-D shapes, like an ice cream cone. Well, that's got a triangular-ish shape, but it's not a triangle. But if we can imagine that sort of is isosceles triangle with two long sides and a shorter side, if I start calling that a triangle or if I show a child that kind of isosceles triangle and I say, “Oh, what's that?” And they say, “I don't know.” So, we have to help them come to terms with that dissonance that's going to come from me calling something a triangle that they're not familiar with calling a triangle. And sadly, that moment of dissonance from which Piaget tells us learning occurs, doesn't happen enough in the elementary school classroom. Kids are often given equilateral triangles or maybe a right triangle. But they're not often seeing that unusual triangle that I described. So, they're not bumping into that dissonance that'll help them to work through, “Well, what makes something a triangle? What counts and what doesn't count?” And that's where the geometry part comes in that goes beyond just spatial visualization and using your mind's eye, but actually applying these properties and figuring out when do they apply and when do they not apply. Mike: I think this is probably a good place to shift and ask you: What do we know as a field about how students' ideas about shape initially emerge and how they mature over time? Rebecca: Well, that's an interesting question because we have our theory about how they would develop under the excellent teaching conditions, and we haven't had very many opportunities to confirm that theory because geometry is so overlooked in the elementary school classroom. So, I'm going to theorize about how they develop based on my own experience and my reading of the literature on very specific examples of trying to teach kids about squares and rectangles. Or, in my case, trying to see how they describe three-dimensional shapes that they may have built from polydrons. So, their thinking tends to start at a very visual level. And like in the kite example, they might say, “It looks like a diamond”—and you actually said that at one point—but not go farther from there.  So, you decomposed your kite, and you decomposed it a lot. You said it has two equilateral triangles and then it has those—mathematicians would call [them] diagonals. So, you were skipping several levels in doing that. So, I'll give you the intermediate levels using that kite example. So, one thing a child might say is that “I'm seeing two short sides and two long sides.” So, in that case, they're starting to decompose the kite into component parts. And as we help them to learn about those component parts, they might say, “Oh, it's got a couple of different angles.” And again, that's a different thing to pay attention to. That's a component part that would be the beginning of them doing what Battista called spatial structuring. Michael Battista built on the van Hiele levels to try to capture this theory about how kids' thinking might develop. So, attention to component parts is the first place that we see them making some advances.  And then the next is if they're able to talk about relationships between those component parts. So, in the case of the kite, they might say, “Oh, the two short sides are equal to each other”—so, there's a relationship there—“and they're connected to each other at the top.” And I think you said something about that. “And then the long sides are also connected to each other.” And that's looking at how the sides are related to the other sides is where the component parts start getting to become a new part. So, it's like decomposing and recomposing, which is part of all of mathematics.  And then the last stage is when they're able to put the shapes themselves into the hierarchy that we have. So, for example, in the kite case, they might say, “It's got four sides, so it's a quadrilateral. But it's not a parallelogram because none of the four sides are parallel to each other.” So now I'm not just looking at component parts and their relations, but I'm using those relations to think about the definition of that shape. So, I would never expect a kid to be able to tell me, “Oh yeah, a kite is a quadrilateral that is not a parallelogram,” and then tell me about the angles and tell me about the sides without a lot of experience describing shapes. Mike: There are a few things that are popping out for me when I'm listening to you talk about this. One of them is the real importance of language and attempting to use language to build a meaningful description or to make sense of shape. The other piece that it really makes me think about is the prototypes, as you described them, are a useful starting place. They're something to build on.  But there's real importance in showing a wide variety of shapes or even “almost-shapes.” I can imagine a triangle that is a triangle in every respect except for the fact that it's not a closed shape. Maybe there's an opening or a triangle that has wavy sides that are connected at three points. Or an obtuse triangle. Being able to see multiple examples and nonexamples feels like a really important part of helping kids actually find the language but also get to the essence of, “What is a triangle?” Tell me if I'm on point or off base when I'm thinking about that, Rebecca. Rebecca: You are right on target. And in fact, Clements and Sarama wrote a piece in the NCTM Teaching Children Mathematics in about 2000 where they describe their study that found exactly what you said. And they make a recommendation that kids do have opportunities to see all kinds of examples. And one way that that can happen is if they're using dynamic geometry software. So, for example, Polypad, I was just playing with it, and you can create a three-sided figure and then drag around one of the points and see all these different triangles. And the class could have a discussion about, “Are all of these triangles? Well, that looks like a weird triangle. I've never seen that before.” And today I was just playing around with the idea of having kids create a favorite triangle in Polypad and then make copies of it and compose new shapes out of their favorite triangle. What I like about that task, and I think can be a design principle for a teacher who wants to play around with these ideas and get creative with them, is to give kids opportunities to use their creativity in making new kinds of shapes and having a sense of ownership over those creations. And then using those creations as a topic of conversation for other kids. So, they have to treat their classmates as contributors to their mathematics learning, and they're all getting an opportunity to have kind of an aesthetic experience. I think that's the beauty of geometry. It's using a different part of our brain. Thomas West talks about Seeing What Others Cannot See, and he describes people like Einstein and others who really solved problems visually. They didn't use numbers. They used pictures. And Ian Robertson talks about Opening the Mind's Eye. So, his work is more focused on how we all could benefit from being able to visualize things. And actually, our fallback might be to engage our mind's eye instead of always wanting to talk [chuckles] about things.  That brings us back to this language idea. And I think language is very important. But maybe we need to stretch it to communication. I want to engage kids in sharing with me what they notice and what they see, but it may be embodied as much as it is verbal. So, we might use our arms and our elbow to discuss angle. And well, we'll put words to it. We're also then experiencing it in our body and showing it to each other in a different way than [...] just the words and the pictures on the paper. So, people are just beginning to explore this idea of gesture. But I have seen, I worked with a teacher who was working with first graders and they were—you say, “Show us a right angle,” and they would show it to us on their body. Mike: Wow. I mean, this is so far from the way that I initially understood my job when I was teaching geometry, which was: I was going to teach the definition, and kids were going to remember that definition and look at the prototypical shape and say, “That's a triangle” or “That's a square.” Even this last bit that you were talking about really flips that whole idea on its head, right? It makes me think that teaching the definitions before kids engage with shapes is actually having it backwards. How would you think about the way that kids come to make meaning about what defines any given shape? If you were to imagine a process for a teacher helping to build a sense of triangle-ness, talk about that if you wouldn't mind. Rebecca: Well, so I'm going to draw on a 3-D example for this, and it's actually something that I worked with a teacher in a third grade classroom, and we had a lot of English language learners in this classroom. And we had been building polyhedra, which are just three-dimensional shapes using a tool called the polydrons. And our first activities, the kids had just made their own polyhedra and described them. So, we didn't tell them what a prism was. We didn't tell them what a pyramid was or a cube. Another shape they tend to build with those tools is something called an anti-prism, but we didn't introduce any of those terms to them. They were familiar with the terms triangle and square, and those are within the collection of tools they have to work with. But it was interesting to me that their experience with those words was so limited that they often confused those two. And I attributed it to all they'd had was maybe a few lessons every year where they were asked to identify, “Which of these are triangles?” They had never even spoken that word themselves. So, that's to have this classroom where you are hearing from the kids and getting them to communicate with each other and the teacher as much as possible. I think that's part of our mantra for everything. But we took what they built. So, they had all built something, and it was a polyhedra. That was the thing we described. We said it has to be closed. So, we did provide them with that definition. You have to build a closed figure with these shapes, and it needs to be three-dimensional. It can't be flat. So, then we had this collection of shapes, and in this case, I was the arbiter. And I started with, “Oh wow, this is really cool. It's a pyramid.” And I just picked an example of a pyramid, and it was the triangular pyramid, made out of four equilateral triangles. And then I pulled another shape that they had built that was obviously not any—I think it was a cube. And I said, “Well, what do you think? Is this a pyramid?” And they'd said, “No, that's not a pyramid.” “OK, why isn't it?” And by the way, they did know something about pyramids. They'd heard the word before. And every time I do this with a class where I say, “OK, tell me, ‘What's a pyramid?'” They'll tell me that it's from Egypt. It's really big. So, they're drawing on the Egyptian pyramids that they're familiar with. Some of them might say a little something mathematical, but usually it's more about the pyramids they've seen maybe in movies or in school.  So, they're drawing on that concept image, right? But they don't have any kind of mathematical definition. They don't know the component parts of a pyramid. So, after we say that the cube is not a pyramid, and I say, “Well, why isn't it?,” they'll say, “because it doesn't have a pointy top.” So, we can see there that they're still drawing on the concept image that they have, which is valid and helpful in this case, but it's not real defined. So, we have attention to a component part. That's the first step we hope that they'll make. And we're still going to talk about which of these shapes are pyramids. So, we continued to bring in shapes, and they ended up with, it needed to have triangular sides. Because we had some things that had pointy tops, but it wasn't where triangles met. It would be an edge where there were two sloped sides that were meeting there. Let's see. If you can imagine, while I engage your mind's eye again, a prism, basically a triangular prism with two equilateral triangles on each end, and then rectangles that attach those two triangles. Mike: I can see that. Rebecca: OK. So, usually you see that sitting on a triangle, and we call the triangles the base. But if you tilt it so it's sitting on a rectangle, now you've got something that looks like a tent. And the kids will say that. “That looks like a tent.” “OK, yeah, that looks like a tent.” And so, that's giving us that Level 1 thinking: “What does it look like?” “What's the word that comes to mind?” And—but we've got those sloped sides, and so when they see that, some of them will call that the pointy top because we haven't defined pointy top. Mike: Yes. Rebecca: But when I give them the feedback, “Oh, you know what, that's not a pyramid.” Then the class started talking about, “Hmm, OK. What's different about that top versus this other top?” And so, then they came to, “Well, it has to be where triangles meet.” I could have introduced the word vertex at that time. I could have said, “Well, we call any place where sides meet a vertex.” That might be [a] helpful word for us today. But that's where the word comes from what they're doing, rather than me just arbitrarily saying, “Today I'm going to teach you about vertices. You need to know about vertices.” But we need a word for this place where the sides meet. So, I can introduce that word, and we can be more precise now in what we're talking about. So, the tent thing didn't have a vertex on top. It had an edge on top. So now we could be precise about that. Mike: I want to go back, and I'm going to restate the thing that you said for people who are listening, because to me, it was huge. This whole idea of “the word comes from the things that they are doing or that they are saying.” Did I get that right? Rebecca: Yeah, that the precise terminology grows out of the conversation you're having and helps people to be clear about what they're referring to. Because even if they're just pointing at it, that's helpful. And especially for students whose first language might not be English, then they at least have a reference. That's why it's so hard for me to be doing geometry with you just verbally. I don't even have a picture or a thing to refer to. But then when I say “vertex” and we're pointing to this thing, I have to try as much as I can to help them distinguish between, “This one is a vertex. This one is not a vertex.” Mike: You brought up earlier supporting multilingual learners, particularly given the way that you just modeled what was a really rich back-and-forth conversation where children were making comparisons. They were using language that was very informal, and then the things that they were saying and doing led to introducing some of those more precise pieces of language. How does that look when you have a group of students who might have a diverse set of languages that they're speaking in the same classroom? Rebecca: Well, when we do this in that environment, which is most of the time when I'm doing this, we do a lot of pair-share. And I like to let kids talk to the people that they communicate best with so that if you have two Spanish speakers, for example, they could speak in Spanish to each other. And ideally the classroom norms have been established so that that's OK. But that opportunity to hear it again from a peer helps them to process. And it slows things down. Like, often we're just going so fast that people get lost. And it may be a language thing; it may be a concept thing. So, whatever we can do to slow things down and let kids hear it repeatedly—because we know that that repeated input is very helpful—and from various different people. So, what I'll often do, if I want everybody to have an opportunity to hear about the vertex, I'm going to invite the kids to retell what they understood from what I said. And then that gives me an opportunity to assess those individuals who are doing the retell and also gives the other students a chance to hear it again. It's OK for them to see or hear the kind of textbook explanation for vertex in their preferred language. But again, only when the class has been kind of grappling with the idea, it's not the starting point. It emerges as needed in that heat of instruction. And you don't expect them to necessarily get it the first time around. That's why these building tasks or construction tasks can be done at different levels. So, we were talking about the different levels the learner might be at. Everybody can imagine a kite, and everybody could draw a kite. So, I'm sort of differentiating my instruction by giving this very open-ended task, and then I'm trying to tune into what am I seeing and hearing from the different individuals that can give me some insight into their geometrical reasoning at this point in time. But we're going to keep drawing things, and we're going to keep building things, and everybody's going to have their opportunity to advance. But it's not in unison. Mike: A few things jumped out. One, as you were describing the experiences that you can give to students, particularly students who might have a diversity of languages in the same classroom, it strikes me that this is where nonverbal communication like gesturing or using a visual or using a physical model really comes in handy.  I think the other piece that I was reminded of as I was listening to you is, we have made some progress in suggesting that it's really important to listen to kids' mathematical thinking. And I often think that that's taken root, particularly as kids are doing things like adding or subtracting. And I think what you're reminding [me] is, that holds true when it comes to thinking about geometry or shape; that it's in listening to what kids are saying, that they're helping us understand, “What's next?” “Where do we introduce language?” “How can we have kids speaking to one another in a way that builds a set of ideas?”  I think the big takeaway for me is that sometimes geometry has kind of been treated like this separate entity in the world of elementary mathematics. And yet some of the principles that we find really important in things like number or operation, they still hold true. Rebecca: Definitely, definitely. And again, as I said, when you are interested in getting to know your children, seeing who's got some gifts in this domain will allow you to uplift kids who might otherwise not have those opportunities to shine. Mike: I think that's a great place to stop. Rebecca, thank you so much for joining us. It's been a pleasure talking to you. Rebecca: This has really been fun. And I do want to mention one thing: that I have developed a list of various articles and resources. Most of them come from NCTM, and I can make that available to you so that people who are interested in learning more can get some more resources. Mike: That's fantastic. We'll link those to our show notes. Thank you again very much for helping us make sense of this really important set of concepts. Rebecca: You're welcome. Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling all individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2024 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

The National Security Hour with Col. Mike and Dr. Mike – There is a new drug that is stronger than fentanyl that is now being brought into America over the open southern border. Fentanyl is a drug on which it is easy for a person to overdose and die. Death is not a sure thing each time the drug is used, but nationally, we are currently losing nearly 100,000 American lives each year to fentanyl...

The National Security Hour with Col. Mike and Dr. Mike – There is a new drug that is stronger than fentanyl that is now being brought into America over the open southern border. Fentanyl is a drug on which it is easy for a person to overdose and die. Death is not a sure thing each time the drug is used, but nationally, we are currently losing nearly 100,000 American lives each year to fentanyl...

The National Security Hour with Col. Mike and Dr. Mike – There appears to be something of a “Get Trump Squad” reminiscent of teams of Democratic legal crusaders who conducted and won the Hoffa and Nixon prosecutions. Mr. Shepard noted that in the New York case the Manhattan District Attorney, the judge, the jury, and most Democrats appeared to prejudiced against Trump...

The National Security Hour with Col. Mike and Dr. Mike – There appears to be something of a “Get Trump Squad” reminiscent of teams of Democratic legal crusaders who conducted and won the Hoffa and Nixon prosecutions. Mr. Shepard noted that in the New York case the Manhattan District Attorney, the judge, the jury, and most Democrats appeared to prejudiced against Trump...

Rounding Up Season 2 | Episode 18 – Counting Collections Guest: Danielle Robinson and Melissa Hedges Mike Wallus: Earlier this season, we released an episode focused on the complex and interconnected set of concepts that students engage with as they learn to count. In this follow-up episode, we're going to examine a powerful routine called “counting collections.” We'll be talking with Danielle Robinson and Dr. Melissa Hedges from the Milwaukee Public Schools about counting collections and the impact that this routine can have on student thinking.  Mike: Well, welcome to the podcast, Danielle and Melissa. I can't tell you how excited I am to talk with y'all about the practice of counting collections.  Danielle Robinson and Melissa Hedges: Thanks for having us. Yes, we're so excited to be here. Mike: I want to start this conversation by acknowledging that the two of you are actually part of a larger team of educators who really took this work on counting collections. You introduced it in the Milwaukee Public Schools. And, Melissa, I think I'll start with you. Can you take a moment to recognize the collaborators who have been a part of this work? Melissa: Absolutely. In addition to Danielle and myself, we are fortunate to work with three other colleagues: Lakesha King, Krista Beal, and Claire Madden. All three are early childhood coaches that actively support this work as well. Mike: So, Danielle, I wonder for some folks if we can help them see this practice more clearly. Can you spend time unpacking, what does counting collections look like in a classroom? If I walked in, what are some of the things that I might see? Danielle: Yeah, I think what's really amazing about counting collections is there might be some different ways that you might see counting collections happening in the classroom. When you walk into a classroom, you might see some students all over. Maybe they're sitting at tables, maybe they're on the carpet. And what they're doing is they're actually counting a baggie of objects. And really their job is to answer this question, this very simple but complicated question of, “How many?” And they get to decide how they want to count. Not only do they get to pick what they want to count, but they also get to pick their strategy of how they actually want to count that collection. They can use different tools. They might be using bowls or plates. They might be using 10-frames. They might be using number paths. You might see kiddos who are counting by ones. Danielle: You might see kids who are making different groupings. At times, you might also see kiddos [who] are in stations, and you might see a small group where a teacher is doing counting collections with a few kiddos. You might see them working with partners. And I think the beautiful piece of this and the unique part of counting collections within Milwaukee Public Schools is that we've been able to actually pair the counting trajectory from Doug Clements and Julie Sarama with counting collections where teachers are able to do an interview with their students, really see where they're at in their counting so that the kids are counting a just right collection for them—something that's not too easy, something that's not too hard, but something that is available for them to really push them in their understanding of counting. So, you're going to see kids counting different sizes. And we always tell the teachers it's a really beautiful moment when you're looking across the classroom and as a teacher, you can actually step back and know that every one of your kids are getting what they need in that moment. Because I think oftentimes, we really don't ever get to feel like that, where we feel like, “Wow, all my kids are getting what they need right now, and I know that I am providing the scaffolds that they need.” Mike: So, I want to ask you a few follow-ups, if I might, Danielle. Danielle: Yeah, of course.  Mike: There's a bit of language that you used initially where I'm paraphrasing. And tell me where I get this wrong. You use the language “simple yet complicated,” I think. Am I hearing that right? Danielle: I did. I did, yeah. Mike: Tell me about that. Danielle: I think it's so interesting because a lot of times when we introduce this idea of counting collections with our teachers, they're like, “Wait a minute, so I'm supposed to give this baggie of a bunch of things to my students, and they just get to go decide how they want to count it?” And we're like, “Yeah, that is absolutely what we're asking you to do.” And they feel nervous because this idea of the kids, they're answering how many, but then there's all these beautiful pieces a part of it. Maybe kids are counting by ones, maybe they're deciding that they want to make groups, maybe they're working with a partner, maybe they're using tools. It's kind of opened up this really big, amazing idea of the simple question of how many. But there's just so many things that can happen with it. Mike: There's two words that kept just flashing in front of my eyes as I was listening to you talk. And the words were access and differentiation. And I think you didn't explicitly say those things, but they really jump out for me in the structure of the task and the way that a teacher could take it up. Can you talk about the way that you think this both creates access and also the places where you see there's possibility for differentiation? Danielle: For sure. I'm thinking about a couple classrooms that I was in this week and thinking about once we've done the counting trajectory interview with our kiddos, you might have little ones who are still really working with counting to 10. So, they have collections that they can choose that are just at that amount of about 10. We might have some kiddos who are really working kind of in that range of 20 to 40. And so, we have collections that children can choose from there. And we have collections all the way up to about 180 in some cases. So, we kind of have this really nice, natural scaffold within there where children are told, “Hey, you can go get this just right color for you.” We have red collections, blue collections, green and yellow. Within that also, the children get to decide how they want to count. Danielle: So, if they are still really working on that verbal count sequence, then we allow them to choose to count by ones. We have tools for them, like number paths to help do that. Maybe we've got our kiddos who are starting to really think about this idea of unitizing and making groups of 10s. So, then what they might do is they might take a 10-frame and they might fill their 10-frame and then actually pour that 10-frame into a bowl, so they know that that bowl now is a collection of 10. And so, it's this really nice idea of helping them really start to unitize and to make different groupings. And I think the other beautiful piece, too, is that you can also partner. Students can work together and actually talk about counting together. And we found that that really supports them, too, of just that collaboration piece, too. Mike: So, you kind of started poking around the question that I was going to ask Melissa.   Danielle and Melissa: ( laugh ) Mike: You said the word “unitizing,” which is the other thing that was really jumping out because I taught kindergarten and first grade for about eight years. And in my head, immediately all of the different trajectories that kids are on when it comes to counting, unitizing, combining … those things start to pop out. But, Melissa, I think what you would say is there is a lot of mathematics that we can build for kids beyond say K–2, and I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about that. Melissa: Absolutely. So before I jump to our older kids, I'm just going to step back for a moment with our kindergarten, first- and second-graders. And even our younger ones. So, the mathematics that we know that they need to be able to count collections, that idea of cardinality, one-to-one correspondence, organization—Danielle did a beautiful job explaining how the kids are going to grab a bag, figure out how to count, it's up to them—as well as this idea of producing a set, thinking about how many, being able to name how many. The reason why I wanted to go back and touch on those is that we know that as children get older and they move into third, fourth, and fifth grade, those are understandings that they must carry with them. And sometimes those ideas aren't addressed well in our instructional materials. So, the idea of asking a first- and second-grader to learn how to construct a unit of 10 and know that 10 ones is one 10 is key, because when we look at where place value tends to fall apart in our upper grades. My experience has been it's fifth grade, where all of a sudden we're dealing with big numbers, we're moving into decimals, we're thinking about different size units, we've got fractions. There's all kinds of things happening.  Melissa: So, the idea of counting collections in the early elementary grades helps build kids' number sense, provides them with that confidence of magnitude of number. And then as they move into those either larger collections or different ways to count, we can make beautiful connections to larger place values. So, hundreds, thousands, ten thousands. Sometimes those collections will get big. All those early number relationships also build. So, those early number relationships, part-whole reasoning that numbers are composed and decomposed of parts. And then we've just seen lots really, really fun work about additive and multiplicative thinking. So, in a third-, fourth-, fifth-grade classroom, what I used to do is dump a cup full of lima beans in the middle of the table and say, “How many are there?” And there's a bunch there. So, they can count by ones. It's going to take a long time. And then once they start to figure out, “Oh wait, I can group these.” “Well, how many groups of five do you have?” And how we can extend to that from that additive thinking of five plus five plus five plus five to then thinking about and extending it to multiplicative thinking. So, I think the extensions are numerous.  Mike: There's a lot there that you said, and I think I wanted to ask a couple follow-ups. First thing that comes to mind is, we've been interviewing a guest for a different podcast … and this idea that unitizing is kind of a central theme that runs really all the way through elementary mathematics and certainly beyond that. But I really am struck by the way that this idea of unitizing and not only being able to unitize, but I think you can physically touch the units, and you can physically re-unitize when you pour those things into the cup. And it's giving kids a bit more space with the physical materials themselves before you step into something that might be more abstract. I'm wondering if that's something that you see as valuable for kids and maybe how you see that play out? Melissa: Yes, it's a great question. I will always say when we take a look at our standard base 10 blocks, “The person that really understands the construction of those base 10 blocks is likely the person [who] invented them.” They know that one little cube means one, and that all of a sudden these 10 cubes are fused together and we hold it up and we say, “Everybody, this is 10 ones. Repeat, one 10. What we find is that until kids have multiple experiences and opportunities over time to construct units beyond one, they really won't do it with deep understanding. And again, that's where we see it fall apart when they're in the fourth and fifth grade. And they're struggling just to kind of understand quantity and magnitude. So, the idea and the intentionality behind counting collections and the idea of unitizing is to give kids those opportunities that to be quite honest—and no disrespect to the hardworking curriculum writers out there—it is a tricky, tricky, tricky idea to develop in children through paper and pencil and workbook pages. Melissa: I think we have found over time that it's the importance of going, grabbing, counting, figuring it out. So, if my collection is bears, does that collection of 10 bears look the same as 10 little sharks look the same as 10 spiders? So, what is this idea of 10? And that they do it over and over and over and over again. And once they crack the code—that's the way I look at it—once our first- and second-graders crack the code of counting collections, they're like, “Oh, this is not hard at all.” And then they start to play with larger units. So, then they'll go, “Oh, wait, I can combine two groups of 10. I just found out that's 20. Can I make more 20s?” So, then we're thinking about counting not just by ones, not just by 10s, but by larger units. And I think that we've seen that pay off in so many tremendous ways. And certainly on the affective side, when kids understand what's happening, there's just this sense of joy and excitement and interest in the work that they do, and I actually think they see themselves learning. Mike: Danielle, do you want to jump in here?  Danielle: I think to echo that, I just recently was speaking with some teachers. And the principal was finally able to come and actually see counting collections happening. And what was so amazing is these were K–5 kiddos, 5-year-olds who were teaching the principal about what they were doing. This was that example where we want people to come in, and the idea is what are you learning? How do you know you've learned it, thinking about that work of Hattie? And these 5-year-olds were telling him exactly what they were learning and how they were learning it and talking about their strategies. And I just felt so proud of the K–5 teacher who shared that with me because her principal was blown away and was seeing just the beauty that comes from this routine. Mike: We did an episode earlier this year on place value, and the speaker did a really nice job of unpacking the ideas around it. I think what strikes me, and at this point I might be sounding a bit like a broken record, is the extent to which this practice makes place value feel real. These abstract ideas around unitizing. And I think, Melissa, I'm going back to something you said earlier where you're like, “The ability to do this in an abstract space where you potentially are relying on paper and pencil or even drawing, that's challenging.” Whereas this puts it in kids' hands, and you physically re-unitize something, which is such a massive deal. This idea that one 10 and 10 ones have the same value even though we're looking at them differently, simultaneously. That's such a big deal for kids, and it just really stands out for me as I hear you all talk. Melissa: I had the pleasure of working with a group of first-grade teachers the other day, and we were looking at student work for a simple task that the kids were asked to do. I think it was 24 plus seven, and so it was just a very quick PLC. Look at this work. Let's think about what they're doing. And many of the children had drawn what the teachers referred to as sticks and circles or sticks and dots. And I said, “Well, what do those sticks and dots mean?” Right? “Well, of course the stick is the 10 and the dot is the one.” And I said, “There's lots of this happening,” I said, “Let's pause for a minute and think, ‘To what degree do you think your children understand that that line means 10 and that dot means one? And that there's some kind of a connection, meaningful connection for them just in that drawing.'” It got kind of quiet, and they're like, “Well, yep, you're right. You're right. They probably don't understand what that is.” And then one of the teachers very beautifully said, “This is where I see counting collections helping.” It was fantastic. Mike: Danielle, I want to shift and ask you a little bit about representation. Just talk a bit about the role of representing the collection once the counting process and that work has happened. What do you all ask kids to do in terms of representation and can you talk a little bit about the value of that? Danielle: Right, absolutely. I think one thing that as we continue to go through in thinking about this routine and the importance of really helping our students make sense and count meaningfully, I think we will always go back to our math teaching framework that's been laid out for us through “Taking Action,” “Principles to Action,” “Catalyzing Change.” And really thinking about the power of using multiple representations. And how, just like you said, we want our students to be able to be physically unitizing, so we have that aspect of working with our actual collections. And then how do we help our students understand that “You have counted your collection. Now what I want you to do is, I want you to actually visually represent this. I want you to draw how you counted.” And so, what we talk about with the kids is, “Hey, how you have counted. If you have counted by ones, I should be able to see that on your paper. I should be able to look at your paper, not see your collection and know exactly how you counted. If you counted by tens, I should be able to see, ‘Oh my gosh, look, that's their bowl. I see their bowls, I see their plates, I see their tens inside of there.'”  Danielle: And to really help them make those connections moving back and forth between those representations. And I think that's also that piece, too, for them that then they can really hang their hat on. “This is how I counted. I can draw a picture of this. I can talk about my strategy. I can share with my friends in my classroom.” And then that's how we like to close with our counting collections routine is really going through and picking a piece of student work and really highlighting a student's particular strategy. Or even just highlighting several and being like, “Look at all this work they did today. Look at all of this mathematical thinking.” So, I think it's a really important and powerful piece, especially with our first- and second-graders, too. We really bring in this idea of equations, too. So, this idea of, “If I've counted 73, and I've got my seven groups of 10, I should have 10 plus 10 plus 10, right? All the way to 70. And then adding my three.” So, I think it's just a continuous idea of having our kids really developing that strong understanding of meaningful counting, diving into place value. Mike: I'm really struck by the way that you described the protocol where you said you're asking kids to really clearly make sure that what they're doing aligns with their drawing. The other piece about that is it feels like one, that sets kids up to be able to share their thinking in a way where they've got a scaffold that they've created for themself. The other thing that it really makes me think about is how if I'm a teacher and I'm looking at student work, I can really use that to position that student's idea as valuable. Or position that student's thinking as something that's important for other people to notice or attend to. So, you could use this to really raise a student's ideas status or raise the student status as well. Does that actually play out in a reality? Danielle: It does actually. So, a couple of times what I will do is I will go into a classroom. And oftentimes it can be kind of a parent for which students may just not have the strongest mathematical identity or may not feel that they have a lot of math agency in the space. And so, one thing that I will really intentionally do and work with the teacher to do is, “You know what? We are going to share that little one's work today. We're going to share that work because this is an opportunity to really position that child as a mathematician and to position that child as someone who has something to offer. And the fact that they were able to do this really hard work.” So, that is something that is very near and dear to us to really help our teachers think of these different ways to ensure that this is a routine that is for all of our children, for each and every child that is in that space. So, that is absolutely something that we find power in and seek to help our teachers find as well. Mike: Well, I would love for each of you to just weigh in on this next question. What has really come to mind is how different this experience of mathematics is from what a lot of adults and unfortunately what a lot of kids might experience in elementary school. I'm wondering if both of you would talk a bit about what does this look like in classrooms? How does this impact the lived experience of kids and their math identities? Can you just talk a little bit about that? Melissa: I can start. This is Melissa. So, we have four beliefs on our little math team that we anchor our work around every single day. And we believe that mathematics should be humanizing, healing, liberating and joyful. And so, we talk a lot about when you walk into a classroom, how do you know that mathematics instruction is humanizing, which means our children are placed at the center of this work? It's liberating. They see themselves in it. They're able to do it. It's healing. Healing for the teacher as well as for the student. And healing in that the student sees themselves as capable and able to do this, and then joyful that it's just fun and interesting and engaging. I think, over time, what we've seen is it helps us see those four beliefs come to life in every single classroom that's doing it. When that activity is underway and children are engaged and interested, there's a beautiful hum that settles over the room. And sometimes you have to remind the teacher step back, take a look at what is happening. Melissa: Those guys are all engaged. They're all interested. They're all doing work that matters to them because it's their work, it's their creation. It's not a workbook page, it's not a fill in the blank. It's not a do what I do. It's, you know what? “We have faith in you. We believe that you can do this,” and they show us time and time again that they can.  Danielle: I'll continue to echo that. Where for Milwaukee Public Schools and in the work that we are seeking to do is really creating these really transformative math spaces for, in particular, our Black and brown children. And really just making sure that they are seeing themselves as mathematicians, that they see themselves within this work, and that they are able to share their thinking and have their brilliance on display. And also, to work through the mathematical processes, too, right? This routine allows you to make mistakes and try a new strategy.  Danielle: I had this one little guy a couple months ago, he was working in a pretty large collection, and I walked by him and he was making groups of two, and I was like, “Oh, what are you working on?” And he's like, “I'm making groups of two.” And I thought to myself, I was like, “Oh boy, that's going to take him a long time” cause they had a really big collection. And I kind of came back around and he had changed it and was making groups of 10. So, it really creates a space where they start to calibrate and they are able to engage in that agency for themselves. I think the last piece I'd like to add is to really come to it from the teacher side as well … is that what Melissa spoke about was those four beliefs. And I think what we've also found is that county collections has been really healing for our teachers, too. We've had teachers who have actually told us that this helped me stay in teaching. I found a passion for mathematics again that I thought I'd lost. And I think that's another piece that really keeps us going is seeing not only is this transformative for our kids, cause they deserve the best, but it's also been really transformative for our teachers as well to see that they can teach math in a different way.  Mike: Absolutely, and I think you really got to this next transition point that I had in mind when I was thinking about this podcast, which is, listening to the two of you, it's clear that this is an experience that can be transformative mathematically and in terms of what a child or even a teacher's lived experience with mathematics is. Can you talk a little bit about what might be some very first steps that educators might take to get started with this? Danielle: Absolutely. I think one thing, as Melissa and I were kind of thinking about this, is someone who is like, “Oh my gosh, I really want to try this.” I think the first piece is to really take stock of your kiddos. If you're interested in diving into the research of Clements and Sarama and working with the county trajectory, we would love for you to Google that and go to learningtrajectories.org. But I think the other piece is to even just do a short little interview with your kids. Ask each of your little ones, “Count as high as you can for me and jot down what you're noticing.” Give them a collection of 10 of something. It could be counters, it could be pennies. See how they count that group of 10. Are they able to have that one-to-one? Do they have that verbal count sequence? Do they have that cardinality? Can they tell you that there is 10 if you ask them again, “How many?”? Danielle: If they can do that, then go ahead and give them 31. Give them 31 of something. Have them count and kind of just see the range of kiddos that you have and really see where is that little challenge I might want to give them. I think another really nice piece is once you dive into this work, you are never going to look at the dollar section different. You are always just start gathering things like pattern blocks. I started with noodles. That is how I started counting collections in my classroom. I used a bunch of erasers that I left over from my prize box. I use noodles, I use beads, bobby pins, rocks, twigs. I mean, start kind of just collecting. It doesn't have to be something that you spend your money on. This can be something that you already use, things that you have. I think that's one way that you can kind of get started. Then also, procedures, procedures, procedures, like go slow to go fast. Once you've got your collections, really teach your kids how to respect those collections. Anchor charts are huge. We always say, when I start this with 4-year-olds, our first lesson is, “This is how we open the bag today. This is how we take our collections out.” So, we always recommend go slow to go fast, really help the kids understand how to take care of the collections, and then they'll fly from there.  Mike: So, Melissa, I think this is part two of that question, which is, when you think about the kinds of things that helped you start this work and sustain this work in the Milwaukee Public Schools, do you have any recommendations that you think might help other folks? Melissa: Yeah. My first entry point into learning about counting collections other than through an incredibly valued colleague [who] learned about it at a conference, was to venture into the TED. I think it's TED, the teacher resource site, and that was where I found some initial resources around how do we do this? We were actually getting ready to teach a course that at the time Danielle was going to be a student in, and we knew that we wanted to do this thing called counting collection. So, it's like, “Well, let's get our act together on this.” So, we spent a lot of time looking at that. There's some lovely resources in there. And since the explosion of the importance of early mathematics has happened in American mathematical culture, which I think is fantastic, wonderful sites have come up. One of our favorites that we were talking about is Dreme. D-R-E-M-E, the Dreme website. Fantastic resources. Melissa: The other one Danielle mentioned earlier, it's just learningtrajectories.org. That's the Clements and Sarama research, which, 15 years ago, we were charged as math educators to figure out how to get that into the hands of teachers, and so that's one of the ways that they've done that. A couple of books that come to mind is the [“Young Children's Mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction in Early Childhood Education”]. Fantastic. If you don't have it and you're a preschool teacher and you're interested in math, get it. And then of course, the “Choral Counting & Counting Collections” book by Franke, Kazemi, Turrou. Yeah, so I think those are some of the big ones. If you want just kind of snippets of where to go, go to the Dreme, D-R-E-M-E, and you'll get some lovely, lovely hits. There's some very nice videos. Yeah, just watch a kid count ( laughs ). Mike: I think that's a great place to stop. I can't thank you two enough for joining us. It has really been a pleasure talking with both of you. Danielle: Thank you so much.  Melissa: Thanks for your interest in our work. We really appreciate it. Mike: With the close of this episode, we are at the end of season two for Rounding Up, and I want to just thank everyone who's been listening for your support, for the ways that you're taking these ideas up in your own classrooms and schools. We'll be taking the summer off to connect with new speakers, and we'll be back with season three this fall. In the meantime, if you have topics or ideas that you'd like for us to talk about, let us know. You can reach out to us at mikew@mathlearningcenter.org. What are some things you'd like us to talk about in the coming year? Have a great summer. We'll see you all in the fall.  Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling all individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2024 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Patrick dives into a wide range of topics, from the relationship between St. John the Baptist and Jesus to the contentious issue of priests getting married. Listeners call in with thought-provoking questions, and host Patrick Madrid tackles them head-on. We also witness a passionate exchange between a caller and Patrick, reminding us that discussing challenging subjects can lead to intense moments. Marie - Can a Roman Catholic got to a Creek Orthodox Church? Alicia - Can you recommend a book about commentaries on what Jesus said? Patrick recommends getting a “red-letter” bible. Brian - If God created Jesus, who created God? Mike – There's a network tv show about women who can't get abortions. We were told we would lose our baby, and our doctor told us to abort our child. We didn't, and now he is alive and fine. Liz – Can you explain 1st Timothy 4:3 about the prophecy forbidding marriage? (26:40) Becky - Were Saint John the Baptist and Jesus close? Marty – Disagrees with Patrick: Why wouldn't the Church allow priests to get married? What are the downsides to married priests? (46:55)

Rounding Up Season 2 | Episode 8 – It's a Story, Not a Checklist! Guest: Dr. John Staley Mike Wallus: There's something magical about getting lost in a great story. Whether you're reading a book, watching a movie, or listening to a friend, stories impart meaning, and they capture our imagination. Dr. John Staley thinks a lot about stories. On this episode of Rounding Up, we'll talk with John about the ways that he thinks that the concept of story can impact our approach to the content we teach and the practices we engage in to support our students.  Well, John, welcome to the podcast. We're really excited to talk with you today. John Staley: I'm glad to be here. Thank you for the invitation, and thank you for having me. Mike: So when we spoke earlier this year, you were sharing a story with me that I think really sets up the whole interview. And it was the story of how you and your kids had engaged with the themes and the ideas that lived in the Harry Potter universe. And I'm wondering if you could just start by sharing that story again, this time with the audience. John: OK. When I was preparing to present for a set of students over at Towson University and talking to them about the importance of teaching and it being a story. So the story of Harry Potter really began for me with our family—my wife, Karen, and our three children—back in '97 when the first book came out. Our son Jonathan was nine at that time and being a reader and us being a reading family, we came together. He would read some, myself and my wife would read some, and our daughter Alexis was five, our daughter Mariah was three. So we began reading Harry Potter. And so that really began our journey into Harry Potter. Then when the movies came out, of course we went to see the movies and watch some of those on TV, and then sometimes we listened to the audio books. And then as our children grew, because Harry Potter took, what, 10 years to develop the actual book series itself, he's 19 now, finally reading the final book. By then our three-year-old has picked them up and she's begun reading them and we're reading. So we're through the cycle of reading with them.  But what they actually did with Harry Potter, when you think about it, is really branch it out from just books to more than books. And that right there had me thinking. I was going in to talk to teachers about the importance of the story in the mathematics classroom and what you do there. So that's how Harry Potter came into the math world for me, [chuckles] I guess you can say. Mike: There's a ton about this that I think is going to become clear as we talk a little bit more.  One of the things that really struck me was how this experience shaped your thinking about the ways that educators can understand their role when it comes to math content and also instructional practice and then creating equitable systems and structures. I'm wondering if we can start with the way that you think this experience can inform an educator's understanding for content. So in this case, the concepts and ideas in mathematics. Can you talk about that, John? John: Yeah, let's really talk about the idea of what happens in a math classroom being a story. The teaching and learning of mathematics is a story that, what we want to do is connect lesson to lesson and chapter to chapter and year to year.  So when you think about students' stories, and let's start pre-K. When students start coming in pre-K and learning pre-K math, and they're engaging in the work they do in math with counting and cardinality initially, and as they grow across the years, especially in elementary, and they're getting the foundation, it's still about a story. And so how do we help the topics that we're taught, the grade level content become a story? And so that's the connection to Harry Potter for me, and that's what helped me elevate and think about Harry Potter because when you think about what Harry Potter and the whole series did, they've got the written books. So that's one mode of learning for people for engaging in Harry Potter.  Then they went from written books to audiobooks, and then they went from audiobooks to movies. And so some of them start to overlap, right? So you got written books, you got audiobooks, you got movies—three modes of input for a learner or for an audience or for me, the individual interested in Harry Potter, that could be interested in it. And then they went to additional podcasts, Harry Potter and the Sacred Text and things like that. And then they went to this one big place called Universal Studios where they have Harry Potter World. That's immersive. That I can step in; I can put on the robes; I can put the wand in my hand. I can ride on, I can taste, so my senses can really come to play because I'm interactive and engaged in this story. When you take that into the math classroom, how do we help that story come to life for our students? Let's talk one grade. So it feels like the content that I'm learning in a grade, especially around number, around algebraic thinking, around geometry, and around measurement and data. Those topics are connected within the grade, how they connect across the grade and how it grows. So the parallel to Harry Potter's story—there's, what, seven books there? And so you have seven books, and they start off with this little young guy called Harry, and he's age 11. By the time the story ends, he's seven years later, 18 years old. So just think about what he has learned across the years and how what they did there at Hogwarts and the educators and all that kind of stuff has some consistency to it. Common courses across grade levels, thinking, in my mind, common sets of core ideas in math: number, algebra, thinking, geometry, measurement of data. They grow across each year. We just keep adding on.  So think about number. You're thinking with base ten. You then think about how fractions show up as numbers, and you're thinking about operations with whole numbers, base ten, and fractions. You think about decimals and then in some cases going into, depending if you're K–8 or K–5, you might even think about how this plays into integers. But you think about how that's all connected going across and the idea of, “What's the story that I need to tell you so that you understand how math is a story that's connected?” It's not these individual little pieces that don't connect to each other, but they connect somehow in some manner and build off of each other. Mike: So there are a couple of things I want to pick up on here that are interesting. When you first started talking about this, one of the things that jumped out for me is this idea that there's a story, but we're not necessarily constrained to a particular medium. The story was first articulated via book, but there are all of these ways that you can engage with the story. And you talked about the immersive experience that led to a level of engagement. John: Mm-hmm. Mike: And I think that is helping me make sense of this analogy—that there's not necessarily one mode of building students' understanding. We actually need to think about multiple modes. Am I picking up on that right? John: That's exactly right. So what do I put in my tool kit as an educator that allows me to help tap into my students' strengths, to help them understand the content that they need to understand that I'm presenting that day, that week, that month, that I'm helping build their learning around? And in the sense of thinking about the different ways Harry Potter can come at you—with movies, with audio, with video—I think about that from the math perspective. What do I need to have in my tool kit when it comes to my instructional practices, the types of routines I establish in the classroom?  Just think about the idea of the mathematical tools you might use. How do the tools that you use play themselves out across the years? So students working with the different manipulatives that they might be using, the different mathematical tools, a tool that they use in first grade, where does that tool go in second grade, third grade, fourth grade, as they continue to work with whole numbers, especially with doing operations, with whatever the tool might be? Then what do you use with fractions? What tools do you use with decimals? We need to think about what we bring into the classroom to help our students understand the story of the mathematics that they're learning and see it as a story. Is my student in a more concrete stage? Do they need to touch it, feel it, move it around? Are they okay visually? They need to see it now, they're at that stage. They're more representational so they can work with it in a different manner or they're more abstract. Hmm. Oh, OK. And so how do we help put all of that into the setting? And how are we prepared as classroom teachers to have the instructional practices to meet a diverse set of students that are sitting in our classrooms? Mike: You know, the other thing you're making me think about, John, is this idea of concepts and content as a story. And what I'm struck by is how different that is than the way I was taught to think about what I was doing in my classroom, where it felt more like a checklist or a list of things that I was tracking. And oftentimes those things felt disconnected even within the span of a year.  But I have to admit, I didn't find myself thinking a lot about what was happening to grade levels beyond mine or really thinking about how what I was doing around building kindergartners' understanding of the structure of number or ten-ness. John: Mm-hmm. Mike: How that was going to play out in, say, fifth grade or high school or what have you. You're really causing me to think how different it is to think about this work we're doing as story rather than a discrete set of things that are kind of within a grade level. John: When you say that, it also gets me thinking of how we quite often see our content as being this mile-wide set of content that we have to teach for a grade level. And what I would offer in the space is that when you think about the big ideas of what you really need to teach this year, let's just work with number. Number base ten, or, if you're in the upper elementary, number base ten and fractions. If you think about the big ideas that you want students to walk away with that year, those big ideas continue to cycle around, and those are the ones that you're going to spend a chunk of your time on. Those are the ones you're going to keep bringing back. Those are the ones you're going to keep exposing students to in multiple ways to have them make sense of what they're doing. And the key part of all of that is the understanding, the importance of the vertical nature as to what is it I want all of my students sitting in my classroom to know and be able to do, have confidence in, have their sense of agency. Like, “Man, I can show you. I can do it, I can do it.” What do we want them to walk away with that year? So that idea of the vertical nature of it, and understanding your learning progressions, and understanding how number grows for students across the years is important. Why do I build student understanding with a number line early? So that when we get the fractions, they can see fractions as numbers. So later on when we get the decimals, they can see decimals as numbers, and I can work with it. So the vertical nature of where the math is going, the learning progression that sits behind it, helps us tell the story so that students, when they begin and you are thinking about their prior knowledge, activate that prior knowledge and build it, but build it as part of the story.  The story piece also helps us think about how we elevate and value our students in the classroom themselves. So that idea of seeing our students as little beings, little people, really, versus just us teaching content. When you think about the story of Harry Potter, I believe he survived across his time at Hogwarts because of relationships. Our students make it through the math journey from year to year to year to year because of relationships. And where they have strong relationships from year to year to year to year, their journey is a whole lot better. Mike: Let's make a small shift in our conversation and talk a little bit about this idea of instructional practice. John: OK.  Mike: I'm wondering how this lived experience with your family around the Harry Potter universe, how you think that would inform the way that an educator would think about their own practice? John: I think about it in this way. As I think about myself being in the classroom—and I taught middle school, then high school—I'm always thinking about what's in my tool kit. I think about the tools that I use and the various manipulatives, the various visual representations that I need to have at my fingertips. So part of what my question would be, and I think about it, is what are those instructional strategies that I will be using and how do I fine-tune those? What are my practices I'm using in my routines to help it feel like, “OK, I'm entering into a story”?  Harry Potter, when you look at those books, across the books, they had some instructional routines happening, some things that happen every single year. You knew there was going to be a quidditch match. You knew they were going to have some kind of holiday type of gathering or party or something like that. You knew there was going to be some kind of competition that happened within each book that really, that competition required them to apply the knowledge and skills from their various courses that they learned. They had a set of core courses that they took, and so it wasn't like in each individual course that they really got to apply. They did in some cases, they would try it out, they'd mess up and somebody's nose would get big, ears would get big, you know, change a different color. But really, when they went into some of those competitions, that's when the collection of what they were learning from their different courses, that's when the collection of the content. So how do we think about providing space for students to show what they know in new settings, new types of problems? Especially in elementary, maybe it's science application type problems, maybe they're doing something with their social studies and they're learning a little bit about that. As an educator, I'm also thinking about, “Where am I when it comes to my procedural, the conceptual development, and the ability to think through and apply the applications?” And so I say that part because I have to think about students coming in, and how do I really build this? How do I strike this balance of conceptual and procedural? When do I go conceptual? When do I go procedural? How do I value both of them? How do I elevate that? And how do I come to understand it myself? Because quite often the default becomes procedural when my confidence as a teacher is not real deep with building it conceptually. I'm not comfortable, maybe, or I don't have the set of questions that go around the lesson and everything. So I've got to really think through how I go about building that out. Mike: That is interesting, John, because I think you put your finger on something. I know there have been points in time during my career when I was teaching even young children where we'd get to a particular idea or concept, and my perception was, “Something's going on here and the kids aren't getting it.” But what you're causing me to think is often in those moments, the thing that had changed is that I didn't have a depth of understanding of what I was trying to do. Not to say that I didn't understand the concept myself or the mathematics, but I didn't have the right questions to draw out the big ideas, or I didn't have a sense of, “How might students initially think about this and how might their thinking progress over time?” So you're making me think about this idea that if I'm having that moment where I'm feeling frustrated, kids aren't understanding, it might be a point in time where I need to think to myself, “OK, where am I in this? How much of this is me wanting to think back and say, what are the big ideas that I'm trying to accomplish? What are the questions that I might need to ask?” And those might be things that I can discover through reflection or trying to make more sense of the mathematics or the concept. But it also might be an opportunity for me to say, “What do my colleagues know? Are there ways that my colleagues are thinking about this that I can draw on rather than feeling like I'm on an island by myself?” John: You just said the key point there. I would encourage you to get connected to someone somehow. As you go through this journey together, there are other teachers out there that are walking through what they're walking through, teaching the grade level content. And that's when you are able to talk deeply about math. Mike: The other thing you're making me think about is that you're suggesting that educators just step back from whether kids are succeeding or partially succeeding or struggling with a task and really step back and saying, like, “OK, what's the larger set of mathematics that we're trying to build here? What are the big ideas?” And then analyzing what's happening through that lens rather than trying to think about, “How do I get kids to success on this particular thing?” Does that make sense? Tell me more about what you're thinking. John: So when I think about that one little thing, I have to step back and ask myself the question, “How and where does that one thing fit in the whole story of the unit?" The whole story of the grade level. And when I say the grade level, I'm thinking about those big ideas that sit into the big content domains, the big idea number. How does this one thing fit into that content domain? Mike: That was lovely. And it really does help me have a clearer picture of the way in which concepts and ideas mirror the structures of stories in that, like, there are threads and connections that I can draw on from my previous experience to understand what's happening now. You're starting to go there.  So let's just talk about where you see parallels to equitable systems and structures in the experience that you had with Harry Potter when you were in that world with your family. John: First, let's think about this idea of grouping structures. And so when you think about the idea of groups and the way groups are used within the classroom, and you think about the equitable nature of homogeneous, heterogeneous, random groupings, truly really thinking about that collectively. And I say collectively in this sense, when you think about the parallel to the Harry Potter story, they had a grouping structure in place. They had a random sorting. Now who knows how random it was sometimes, right? But they had a random sorting the minute the students stepped into the school. And they got put into one of the four houses. But even though they had that random sorting then, and they had the houses structured, those groups, those students still had opportunities as they did a variety of things—other than the quidditch tournaments and some other tournaments—they had the opportunity where as a collection of students coming from the various houses, if they didn't come together, they might not have survived that challenge, that competition, whatever it was. So the idea of grouping and grouping structures and how we as educators need to think about, “What is it really doing for our students when we put them in fixed groups? And how is that not of a benefit to our students? And how can we really go about using the more random grouping?”  One of the books that I'm reading is Building Thinking Classrooms [in Mathematics: Grades K–12: 14 Teaching Practices for Enhancing Learning]. And so I'm reading Peter [Liljedahl]'s book and I'm thinking through it in the chapter when he talks about grouping. I think I read that chapter and highlighted and tapped every single page in it multiple times because it really made me think about what's really happening for our students when we think about grouping. So one structure and one part to think about is, “What's happening when we think we're doing our grouping that's not really getting students engaged in the lesson, keeping them engaged, and benefiting them from learning?” Another part, and I don't know if this is a part of equitable systems and structures or just when I think about equity work: One of the courses that they had to take at Hogwarts was about the history of wizarding. I bring that up in this space because they learned about the history of what went on with wizards and what went on with people. And to me, in my mindset, that's setting up and showing the importance of us sharing the history and bringing the history of our students—their culture, their backgrounds, in some cases their lived experiences—into the classroom. So that's us connecting with our students' culture and being culturally responsive and bringing that into the classroom. So as far as an equitable structure, the question I would ask you to think about is, “Do my students see themselves in my mathematics classroom?”  And I say it that way versus “in the mathematics,” because some people will look at the problems in the math book and say, “Oh, I don't see them there. I don't see, oh, their names, their culture, their type of foods.” Some of those things aren't in the written work in front of you. But what I would offer is the ability for me as the educator to use visuals in my classroom, the ability for me to connect with the families in my classroom and learn some of their stories, learn some of their backgrounds—not necessarily learn their stories, but learn about them and bring that in to the space—that's for me to do. I don't need a textbook series that will do that for me. And as a matter of fact, I'm not sure if a textbook series can do that for you, for all the students that you have in your classroom or for the variety of students that you have in your classroom, when we think about their backgrounds, their culture, where they might come from. So thinking about that idea of cultural responsiveness, and really, if you think about the parallel in the Harry Potter series, the history of wizarding and the interaction, when you think about the interaction piece between wizards and what they call Muggles, right? That's the interactions between our students, learning about other students, learning about other cultures, learning about diverse voices. That's teaching students how to engage with and understand others and learn about others and come to value that others have voice also. Mike: I was just thinking, John, if I were to critique Hogwarts, I do wonder about the houses. Because in my head, there is a single story that the reader comes to think about anyone who is in Harry's house versus, say, like Slytherin house. John: Yes. Mike: And it flattens anyone who's in Slytherin house into bad guys, right? John: Mm-hmm. Mike: And so it makes me think there's that element of grouping where as an educator, I might tell a single story about a particular group, especially if that group is fixed and it doesn't change. But there's also, like, what does that do internally to the student who's in that group? What does that signal to them about their own identity? Does that make sense? John: That does make sense. And so when you think about the idea of grouping there at Hogwarts, and you think about these four fixed groups, because they were living in these houses, and once you got in that house, I don't think anybody moved houses. Think about the impact on students. If you put them in a group and they stay in that group and they never change groups, you will have students who realize that the way you did your groups and the way you named your groups and the way they see others in other groups getting more, doing different, and things like that. That's a nice caution to say the labels we put on our groups. Our kids come to internalize them and they come to, in some cases, live up to the level of expectations that we set for “just that group.” So if you're using fixed groups or thinking about fixed groups, really I'd offer that you really get into some of the research around groups and think, “What does it do for students?” And not only what does it do for students in your grade, but how does that play out for students across grades? If that student was in the group that you identified as the “low group” in grade 2, [exhales] what group did they show up in grade 3? How did that play with their mindset? Because you might not have said those words in front of students, but our students pick up on being in a fixed group and watching and seeing what their peers can do and what their peers can't do, what their group members can do and what their group can't do. As our students grow from grades 2 to 3, 4, 5, that really has an impact. There's somewhere between grade 3 and 5 where students' confidence starts to really shake. And I wonder how much of it is because of the grouping and types of grouping that is being used in the classroom that has me in a group of, “Oh, I am a strong doer [of mathematics]” or, “Oh, I'm not a good doer of mathematics.” And that, how much of that just starts to resonate with students, and they start to pick that up and carry that with them, an unexpected consequence because we thought we were doing a good thing when we put 'em in this group. Because I can pull them together, small group them, this and that. I can target what I need to do with them in that moment. Yeah, target what you need to do in that moment, but mix them up in groups. Mike: Just to go back and touch on the point that you started with. Building Thinking Classrooms has a lot to say about that particular topic among others, and it's definitely a book that, for my money, has really caused me to think about a lot of the practices that I used to engage in because I believed that they were the right thing to do. It's a powerful read. For anyone who hasn't read that yet, I would absolutely recommend it. John: And one last structure that I think we can speak to. I've already spoken to supports for students, but the idea of a coherent curriculum is I think an equitable structure that systems put in place that we need to put in place that you need to have in place for your students. And when I say a coherent curriculum, I'm thinking not just your one grade, but how does that grow across the grades? It's something for me, the teacher, to say, “I need to do it my way, this way…”. But it's more to say, “Here's the role I play in their pre-K to 12 journey.” Here's the chapter I'm going to read to them this year to help them get their deep understanding of whichever chapter it was, whichever book it happened to be of.  In the case of the parallel of Harry Potter, here's the chapter I'm doing. I'm the third grade chapter, I'm the fourth grade chapter, I'm the fifth grade chapter. And the idea of that coherent curriculum allows the handoff to the next and the entry from the prior to be smoother. Many of the curriculums, when you look at them, a K–5 curriculum series will have those coherent pieces designed in it—similar types of tools, similar types of manipulatives, similar types of question prompts, similar types of routines—and that helps students build their confidence as they grow from year to year. And so to that point, it's about this idea of really thinking about how a coherent curriculum helps support equity because you know your students are getting the benefit of a teacher who is building from their prior knowledge because they've paid attention to what came before in this curriculum series and preparing them for where they're going. And that's quite often what the power of a coherent curriculum will do.  The parallel in the Harry Potter series, they had about five to seven core courses they had to take. I think about the development of those courses. Boom. If I think about those courses as a strand of becoming a wizard, [laughs] how did I grow from year to year to year to year in those strands that I was moving across? Mike: Okay, I have two thoughts. One, I fully expect that when this podcast comes out, there's going to be a large bump in whoever is tracking the sale of the Harry Potter series on Amazon or wherever it is.  John: [laughs] Mike: But the other question I wanted to ask you is what are some books outside of the Harry Potter universe that you feel like you'd recommend to an educator who's wanting to think about their practice in terms of content or instructional practices or the ways that they build equitable structure? John: When I think about the works around equitable structure, I think about The Impact of Identity and K–8 Mathematics: Rethinking Equity-Based Practices by Julia Aguirre, Karen Mayfield-Ingram, and Danny Martin as being one to help step back and think about how am I thinking about what I do and how it shows up in the classroom with my students.  Another book that I just finished reading: Humanizing Disability in Mathematics Education[: Forging New Paths]. And my reason for reading it was I continue to think about what else can we do to help our students who are identified, who receive special education services? Why do we see so many of our students who sit in an inclusive environment—they're in the classroom on a regular basis; they don't have an IEP that has a math disability listed or anything along those lines—but they significantly underperform or they don't perform as well as their peers that don't receive special education services. So that's a book that got me just thinking and reading in that space.  Another book that I'm reading now, or rereading, and I'll probably reread this one at least once a year, is Motivated[: Designing Mathematics Classrooms Where Students Want to Join In] by Ilana [Seidel] Horn. And the reason for this one is the book itself, when you read it, is written with middle schools' case stories. Part of what this book is tackling is what happens to students as they transition into middle school. And the reason why I mentioned this, especially if you're elementary, is somewhere between third grade and fifth grade, that process of students' self-confidence decreasing their beliefs in themselves as doers of math starts to fall apart. They start to take the chips in the armor. And so this book, Motivated itself, really does not speak to this idea of intrinsic motivation. “Oh, my students are motivated.” It speaks to this idea of by the time the students get to a certain age, that upper fifth grade, sixth grade timeframe, what shifts is their K, 1, 2, 3, “I'm doing everything to please my teacher.” By [grades] 4 or 5, I'm realizing, “I need to be able to show up for my peers. I need to be able to look like I can do for my peers.” And so if I can't, I'm backing out. I'm not sharing, I'm not volunteering, I'm not “engaging.”  So that's why I bring it into this elementary space because it talks about five pieces of a motivational framework that you can really push in on, and not that you push in on all five at one time. [chuckles] But you pick one, like meaningfulness, and you push in on that one, and you really go at, “How do I make the mathematics more meaningful for my students, and what does it look like? How do I create that safe space for them?” That's what you got to think about. Mike: Thanks. That's a great place to stop. John Staley, thank you so much for joining us. It's really been a pleasure. John: Thank you for having me. Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. ©2023 The Math Learning Center - www.mathlearningcenter.org

Mike Perham is the creator of Sidekiq, a background job processor for Ruby. He's also the creator of Faktory a similar product for multiple language environments. We talk about the RubyConf keynote and Ruby's limitations, supporting products as a solo developer, and some ideas for funding open source like a public utility. Recorded at RubyConf 2023 in San Diego. -- A few topics covered: Sidekiq (Ruby) vs Faktory (Polyglot) Why background job solutions are so common in Ruby Global Interpreter Lock (GIL) Ractors (Actor concurrency) Downsides of Multiprocess applications When to use other languages Getting people to pay for Sidekiq Keeping a solo business Being selective about customers Ways to keep support needs low Open source as a public utility Mike Mike's blog mastodon Sidekiq faktory From Employment to Independence Ruby Ractor The Practical Effects of the GVL on Scaling in Ruby Transcript You can help correct transcripts on GitHub. Introduction [00:00:00] Jeremy: I'm here at RubyConf San Diego with Mike Perham. He's the creator of Sidekiq and Faktory. [00:00:07] Mike: Thank you, Jeremy, for having me here. It's a pleasure. Sidekiq [00:00:11] Jeremy: So for people who aren't familiar with, I guess we'll start with Sidekiq because I think that's what you're most known for. If people don't know what it is, maybe you can give like a small little explanation. [00:00:22] Mike: Ruby apps generally have two major pieces of infrastructure powering them. You've got your app server, which serves your webpages and the browser. And then you generally have something off on the side that... It processes, you know, data for a million different reasons, and that's generally called a background job framework, and that's what Sidekiq is. [00:00:41] It, Rails is usually the thing that, that handles your web stuff, and then Sidekiq is the Sidekiq to Rails, so to speak. [00:00:50] Jeremy: And so this would fit the same role as, I think in Python, there's celery. and then in the Ruby world, I guess there is, uh, Resque is another kind of job. [00:01:02] Mike: Yeah, background job frameworks are quite prolific in Ruby. the Ruby community's kind of settled on that as the, the standard pattern for application development. So yeah, we've got, a half a dozen to a dozen different, different examples throughout history, but the major ones today are, Sidekiq, Resque, DelayedJob, GoodJob, and, and, and others down the line, yeah. Why background jobs are so common in Ruby [00:01:25] Jeremy: I think working in other languages, you mentioned how in Ruby, there's this very clear, preference to use these job scheduling systems, these job queuing systems, and I'm not. I'm not sure if that's as true in, say, if somebody's working in Java, or C sharp, or whatnot. And I wonder if there's something specific about Ruby that makes people kind of gravitate towards this as the default thing they would use. [00:01:52] Mike: That's a good question. What makes Ruby... The one that so needs a background job system. I think Ruby, has historically been very single threaded. And so, every Ruby process can only do so much work. And so Ruby oftentimes does, uh, spin up a lot of different processes, and so having processes that are more focused on one thing is, is, is more standard. [00:02:24] So you'll have your application server processes, which focus on just serving HTTP responses. And then you have some other sort of focused process and that just became background job processes. but yeah, I haven't really thought of it all that much. But, uh, you know, something like Java, for instance, heavily multi threaded. [00:02:45] And so, and extremely heavyweight in terms of memory and startup time. So it's much more frequent in Java that you just start up one process and that's it. Right, you just do everything in that one process. And so you may have dozens and dozens of threads, both serving HTTP and doing work on the side too. Um, whereas in Ruby that just kind of naturally, there was a natural split there. Global Interpreter Lock [00:03:10] Jeremy: So that's actually a really good insight, because... in the keynote at RubyConf, Mats, the creator of Ruby, you know, he mentioned the, how the fact that there is this global, interpreter lock, [00:03:23] or, or global VM lock in Ruby, and so you can't, really do multiple things in parallel and make use of all the different cores. And so it makes a lot of sense why you would say like, okay, I need to spin up separate processes so that I can actually take advantage of, of my, system. [00:03:43] Mike: Right. Yeah. And the, um, the GVL. is the acronym we use in the Ruby community, or GIL. Uh, that global lock really kind of is a forcing function for much of the application architecture in Ruby. Ruby, uh, applications because it does limit how much processing a single Ruby process can do. So, uh, even though Sidekiq is heavily multi threaded, you can only have so many threads executing. [00:04:14] Because they all have to share one core because of that global lock. So unfortunately, that's, that's been, um, one of the limiter, limiting factors to Sidekiq scalability is that, that lock and boy, I would pay a lot of money to just have that lock go away, but. You know, Python is going through a very long term experiment about trying to remove that lock and I'm very curious to see how well that goes because I would love to see Ruby do the same and we'll see what happens in the future, but, it's always frustrating when I come to another RubyConf and I hear another Matt's keynote where he's asked about the GIL and he continues to say, well, the GIL is going to be around, as long as I can tell. [00:04:57] so it's a little bit frustrating, but. It's, it's just what you have to deal with. Ractors [00:05:02] Jeremy: I'm not too familiar with them, but they, they did mention during the keynote I think there Ractors or something like that. There, there, there's some way of being able to get around the GIL but there are these constraints on them. And in the context of Sidekiq and, and maybe Ruby in general, how do you feel about those options or those solutions? [00:05:22] Mike: Yeah, so, I think it was Ruby 3. 2 that introduced this concept of what they call a Ractor, which is like a thread, except it does not have the global lock. It can run independent to the global lock. The problem is, is because it doesn't use the global lock, it has pretty severe constraints on what it can do. [00:05:47] And the, and more specifically, the data it can access. So, Ruby apps and Rails apps throughout history have traditionally accessed a lot of global data, a lot of class level data, and accessed all this data in a, in a read only fashion. so there's no race conditions because no one's changing any of it, but it's still, lots of threads all accessing the same variables. [00:06:19] Well, Ractors can't do that at all. The only data Ractors can access is data that they own. And so that is completely foreign to Ruby application, traditional Ruby applications. So essentially, Ractors aren't compatible with the vast majority of existing Ruby code. So I, I, I toyed with the idea of prototyping Sidekiq and Ractors, and within about a minute or two, I just ran into these, these, uh... [00:06:51] These very severe constraints, and so that's why you don't see a lot of people using Ractors, even still, even though they've been out for a year or two now, you just don't see a lot of people using them, because they're, they're really limited, limited in what they can do. But, on the other hand, they're unlimited in how well they can scale. [00:07:12] So, we'll see, we'll see. Hopefully in the future, they'll make a lot of improvements and, uh, maybe they'll become more usable over time. Downsides of multiprocess (Memory usage) [00:07:19] Jeremy: And with the existence of a job queue or job scheduler like Sidekiq, you're able to create additional processes to get around that global lock, I suppose. What are the... downsides of doing so versus another language like we mentioned Java earlier, which is capable of having true parallelism in the same process. [00:07:47] Mike: Yeah, so you can start up multiple Ruby processes to process things truly in parallel. The issue is that you do get some duplication in terms of memory. So your Ruby app maybe take a gigabyte per process. And, you can do copy on write forking. You can fork and get some memory sharing with copy on write semantics on Unix operating systems. [00:08:21] But you may only get, let's say, 30 percent memory savings. So, there's still a significant memory overhead to forking, you know, let's say, eight processes versus having eight threads. You know, you, you, you may have, uh, eight threads can operate in a gigabyte process, but if you want to have eight processes, that may take, let's say, four gigabytes of RAM. [00:08:48] So you, you still, it's not going to cost you eight gigabytes of RAM, you know, it's not like just one times eight, but, there's still a overhead of having those separate processes. [00:08:58] Jeremy: would you say it's more of a cost restriction, like it costs you more to run these applications, or are there actual problems that you can't solve because of this restriction. [00:09:13] Mike: Help me understand, what do you mean by restriction? Do you mean just the GVL in general, or the fact that forking processes still costs memory? [00:09:22] Jeremy: I think, well, it would be both, right? So you're, you have two restrictions right now. You have the, the GVL, which means you can't have parallelism within the same process. And then your other option is to spin up a bunch of processes, which you have said is the downside there is that you're using a lot more RAM. [00:09:43] I suppose my question is that Does that actually stop you from doing anything? Like, if you throw more money at the problem, you go like, we're going to have more instances, I'll pay for the RAM, it's fine, can that basically get you out of these situations or are these limitations actually stopping you from, from doing things you could do in other languages? [00:10:04] Mike: Well, you certainly have to manage the multiple processes, right? So you've gotta, you know, if one child process crashes, you've gotta have a parent or supervisor process watching all that and monitoring and restarting the process. I don't think it restricts you. Necessarily, it just, it adds complexity to your deployment. [00:10:24] and, and it's just a question of efficiency, right? Instead of being able to deploy on a, on a one gigabyte droplet, I've got to deploy to a four gigabyte droplet, right? Because I just, I need the RAM to run the eight processes. So it, it, it's more of just a purely a function of how much money am I going to have to throw at this problem. [00:10:45] And what's it going to cost me in operational costs to operate this application in production? When to use other languages? [00:10:53] Jeremy: So during the. Keynote, uh, Matz had mentioned that Rails, is really suitable as this one person framework, like you can have a very small team or maybe even yourself and, and build this product. And so I guess from... Your perspective, once you cross a certain threshold, is like, what Ruby and what Sidekiq provides not enough, and that's why you need to start looking into other languages? [00:11:24] Or like, where's the, turning point, or the, if you [00:11:29] Mike: Right, right. The, it's all about the problem you're trying to solve, right? At the end of the day, uh, the, the question is just what are we trying to solve and how are we trying to solve it? So at a higher level, you got to think about the architecture. if the problem you're trying to solve, if the service you're trying to build, if the app you're trying to operate. [00:11:51] If that doesn't really fall into the traditional Ruby application architecture, then you, you might look at it in another language or another ecosystem. something like Go, for instance, can compile down to a single binary, which makes deployment really easy. It makes shipping up a product. on to a user's machine, much simpler than deploying a Ruby application onto a user's desktop machine, for instance, right? [00:12:22] Um, Ruby does have this, this problem of how do you package everything together and deploy it somewhere? Whereas Go, when you can just compile to a single binary, now you've just got a single thing. And it's just... Drop it on the file system and execute it. It's easy. So, um, different, different ecosystems have different application architectures, which empower different ways of solving the same problems. [00:12:48] But, you know, Rails as a, as a one man framework, or sorry, one person framework, It, it, I don't, I don't necessarily, that's a, that's sort of a catchy marketing slogan, but I just think of Rails as the most productive framework you can use. So you, as a single person, you can maximize what you ship and the, the, the value that you can create because Rails is so productive. [00:13:13] Jeremy: So it, seems like it's maybe the, the domain or the type of application you're making. Like you mentioned the command line application, because you want to be able to deliver it to your user easily. Just give them a binary, something like Go or perhaps Rust makes a lot more sense. and then I could see people saying that if you're doing something with machine learning, like the community behind Python, it's, they're just, they're all there. [00:13:41] So Room for more domains in Ruby [00:13:41] Mike: That was exactly the example I was going to use also. Yeah, if you're doing something with data or AI, Python is going to be a more, a more traditional, natural choice. that doesn't mean Ruby can't do it. That doesn't mean, you wouldn't be able to solve the problem with Ruby. And, and there's, that just also means that there's more space for someone who wants to come in and make an impact in the Ruby community. [00:14:03] Find a problem that Ruby's not really well suited to solving right now and build the tooling out there to, to try and solve it. You know, I, I saw a talk, from the fellow who makes the Glimmer gem, which is a native UI toolkit. Uh, a gem for building native UIs in Ruby, which Ruby traditionally can't do, but he's, he's done an amazing job at sort of surfacing APIs to build these, um, these native, uh, native applications, which I think is great. [00:14:32] It's awesome. It's, it's so invigorating to see Ruby in a new space like that. Um, I talked to someone else who's doing the Polars gem, which is focused on data processing. So it kind of takes, um, Python and Pandas and brings that to Ruby, which is, is awesome because if you're a Ruby developer, now you've got all these additional tools which can allow you to solve new sets of problems out there. [00:14:57] So that's, that's kind of what's exciting in the Ruby community right now is just bring it into new spaces. Faktory [00:15:03] Jeremy: In addition to Sidekiq, you have, uh, another product called Faktory, I believe. And so does that serve a, a similar purpose? Is that another job scheduling, job queueing system? [00:15:16] Mike: It is, yes. And it's, it's, it's similar in a way to Sidekiq. It looks similar. It's got similar concepts at the core of it. At the end of the day, Sidekiq is limited to Ruby. Because Sidekiq executes in a Ruby VM, it executes the jobs, and the jobs are, have to be written in Ruby because you're running in the Ruby VM. [00:15:38] Faktory was my attempt to bring, Sidekiq functionality to every other language. I wanted, I wanted Sidekiq for JavaScript. I wanted Sidekiq for Go. I wanted Sidekiq for Python because A, a lot of these other languages also could use a system, a background job system. And the problem though is that. [00:16:04] As a single man, I can't port Sidekiq to every other language. I don't know all the languages, right? So, Faktory kind of changes the architecture and, um, allows you to execute jobs in any language. it, it replaces Redis and provides a server where you just fetch jobs, and you can use it from it. [00:16:26] You can use that protocol from any language to, to build your own worker processes that execute jobs in whatever language you want. [00:16:35] Jeremy: When you say it replaces Redis, so it doesn't use Redis, um, internally, it has its own. [00:16:41] Mike: It does use Redis under the covers. Yeah, it starts Redis as a child process and, connects to it over a Unix socket. And so it's really stable. It's really fast. from the outside, the, the worker processes, they just talk to Faktory. They don't know anything about Redis at all. [00:16:59] Jeremy: I see. And for someone who, like we mentioned earlier in the Python community, for example, there is, um, Celery. For someone who is using a task scheduler like that, what's the incentive to switch or use something different? [00:17:17] Mike: Well, I, I always say if you're using something right now, I'm not going to try and convince you to switch necessarily. It's when you have pain that you want to switch and move away. Maybe you have Maybe there's capabilities in the newer system that you really need that the old system doesn't provide, but Celery is such a widely known system that I'm not necessarily going to try and convince people to move away from it, but if people are looking for a new system, one of the things that Celery does that Faktory does not do is Celery provides like data adapters for using store, lots of different storage systems, right? [00:17:55] Faktory doesn't do that. Faktory is more, has more of the Rails mantra of, you know, Omakase where we choose, I choose to use Redis and that's it. You don't, you don't have a choice for what to use because who cares, you know, at the end of the day, let Faktory deal with it. it's, it's not something that, You should even necessarily be concerned about it. [00:18:17] Just, just try Faktory out and see how it works for you. Um, so I, I try to take those operational concerns off the table and just have the user focus on, you know, usability, performance, and that sort of thing. but it is, it's, it's another background job system out there for people to try out and see if they like that. [00:18:36] And, and if they want to, um, if they know Celery and they want to use Celery, more power to Faktory them. Sidekiq (Ruby) or Faktory (Polyglot) [00:18:43] Jeremy: And Sidekiq and Faktory, they serve a very similar purpose. For someone who they have a new project, they haven't chosen a job. scheduling system, if they were using Ruby, would it ever make sense for them to use Faktory versus use Sidekiq? [00:19:05] Mike: Uh Faktory is excellent in a polyglot situation. So if you're using multiple languages, if you're creating jobs in Ruby, but you're executing them in Python, for instance, um, you know, if you've, I have people who are, Creating jobs in PHP and executing them in Python, for instance. That kind of polyglot scenario, Sidekiq can't do that at all. [00:19:31] So, Faktory is useful there. In terms of Ruby, Ruby is just another language to Faktory. So, there is a Ruby API for using Faktory, and you can create and execute Ruby jobs with Faktory. But, you'll find that in the Ruby community, Sidekiq is much widely... much more widely used and understood and known. So if you're just using Ruby, I think, I think Sidekiq is the right choice. [00:19:59] I wouldn't look at Faktory. But if you do need, find yourself needing that polyglot tool, then Faktory is there. Temporal [00:20:07] Jeremy: And this is maybe one, maybe one layer of abstraction higher, but there's a product called Temporal that has some of this job scheduling, but also this workflow component. I wonder if you've tried that out and how you think about that product? [00:20:25] Mike: I've heard of them. I don't know a lot about the product. I do have a workflow API, the Sidekiq batches, which allow you to fan out jobs and then, and then execute callbacks when all the jobs in that, in that batch are done. But I don't, provide sort of a, a high level. Graphical Workflow Editor or anything like that. [00:20:50] Those to me are more marketing tools that you use to sell the tool for six figures. And I don't think they're usable. And I don't think they're actually used day to day. I provide an API for developers to use. And developers don't like moving blocks of code around in a GUI. They want to write code. And, um, so yeah, temporal, I, like I said, I don't know much about them. [00:21:19] I also, are they a venture capital backed startup? [00:21:22] Jeremy: They are, is my understanding, [00:21:24] Mike: Yeah, that, uh, any, any sort of venture capital backed startup, um, who's building technical infrastructure. I, I would look long and hard at, I'm, I think open source is the right core to build on. Of course I sell commercial software, but. I'm bootstrapped. I'm profitable. [00:21:46] I'm going to be around forever. A VC backed startup, they tend to go bankrupt, because they either get big or they go out of business. So that would be my only comment is, is, be a little bit leery about relying on commercial venture capital based infrastructure for, for companies, uh, long term. Getting people to pay for Sidekiq [00:22:05] Jeremy: So I think that's a really interesting part about your business is that I think a lot of open source maintainers have a really big challenge figuring out how to make it as a living. The, there are so many projects that they all have a very permissive license and you can use them freely one example I can think of is, I, I talked with, uh, David Kramer, who's the CTO at Sentry, and he, I don't think they use it anymore, but they, they were using Nginx, right? [00:22:39] And he's like, well, Nginx, they have a paid product, like Nginx. Plus that or something. I don't know what the name is, but he was like, but I'm not going to pay for it. Right. I'm just going to use the free one. Why would I, you know, pay for the, um, the paid thing? So I, I, I'm kind of curious from your perspective when you were coming up with Sidekiq both as an open source product, but also as a commercial one, how did you make that determination of like to make a product where it's going to be useful in its open source form? [00:23:15] I can still convince people to pay money for it. [00:23:19] Mike: Yeah, the, I was terrified, to be blunt, when I first started out. when I started the Sidekiq project, I knew it was going to take a lot of time. I knew if it was successful, I was going to be doing it for the next decade. Right? So I started in 2012, and here I am in 2023, over a decade, and I'm still doing it. [00:23:38] So my expectation was met in that regard. And I knew I was not going to be able to last that long. If I was making zero dollars, right? You just, you burn out. Nobody can last that long. Well, I guess there are a few exceptions to that rule, but yeah, money, I tend to think makes things a little more sustainable for sure. [00:23:58] Especially if you can turn it into a full time job solving and supporting a project that you, you love and, and is, is, you know, your, your, your baby, your child, so to speak, your software, uh, uh, creation that you've given to the world. but I was terrified. but one thing I did was at the time I was blogging a lot. [00:24:22] And so I was telling people about Sidekiq. I was telling people what was to come. I was talking about ideas and. The one thing that I blogged about was financial experiments. I said bluntly to the, to, to the Ruby community, I'm going to be experimenting with financial stability and sustainability with this project. [00:24:42] So not only did I create this open source project, but I was also publicly saying I I need to figure out how to make this work for the next decade. And so eventually that led to Sidekiq Pro. And I had to figure out how to build a closed source Ruby gem, which, uh, There's not a lot of, so I was kind of in the wild there. [00:25:11] But, you know, thankfully all the pieces came together and it was actually possible. I couldn't have done it if it wasn't possible. Like, we would not be talking if I couldn't make a private gem. So, um, but it happened to work out. Uh, and it allowed me to, to gate features behind a paywall effectively. And, and yeah, you're right. [00:25:33] It can be tough to make people pay for software. but I'm a developer who's selling to other developers, not, not just developers, open source developers, and they know that they have this financial problem, right? They know that there's this sustainability problem. And I was blunt in saying, this is my solution to my sustainability. [00:25:56] So, I charge what I think is a very fair price. It's only a thousand dollars a year to a hobbyist. That may seem like a lot of money to a business. It's a drop in the bucket. So it was easy for developers to say, Hey, listen, we want to buy this tool for a thousand bucks. It'll ensure our infrastructure is maintained for the next decade. [00:26:18] And it's, and it's. And it's relatively cheap. It's way less than, uh, you know, a salary or even a laptop. So, so that's, that's what I did. And, um, it's, it worked out great. People, people really understood. Even today, I talk to people and they say, we, we signed up for Sidekiq Pro to support you. So it's, it's, it's really, um, invigorating to hear people, uh, thank me and, and they're, they're actively happy that they're paying me and our customers. [00:26:49] Jeremy: it's sort of, uh, maybe a not super common story, right, in terms of what you went through. Because when I think of open core businesses, I think of companies like, uh, GitLab, which are venture funded, uh, very different scenario there. I wonder, like, in your case, so you started in 2012, and there were probably no venture backed competitors, right? [00:27:19] People saying that we're going to make this job scheduling system and some VC is going to give me five million dollars and build a team to work on this. It was probably at the time, maybe it was Rescue, which was... [00:27:35] Mike: There was a venture backed system called IronMQ, [00:27:40] Jeremy: Hmm. [00:27:41] Mike: And I'm not sure if they're still around or not, but they... They took, uh, one or more funding rounds. I'm not sure exactly, but they were VC backed. They were doing, background jobs, scheduled jobs, uh, you know, running container, running container jobs. They, they eventually, I think, wound up sort of settling on Docker containers. [00:28:06] They'll basically spin up a Docker container. And that container can do whatever it wants. It can execute for a second and then shut down, or it can run for, for however long, but they would, um, yeah, I, yeah, I'll, I'll stop there because I don't know the actual details of exactly their system, but I'm not sure if they're still around, but that's the only one that I remember offhand that was around, you know, years ago. [00:28:32] Yeah, it's, it's mostly, you know, low level open source infrastructure. And so, anytime you have funded startups, they're generally using that open source infrastructure to build their own SaaS. And so SaaS's are the vast majority of where you see sort of, uh, commercial software. [00:28:51] Jeremy: so I guess in that way it, it, it gave you this, this window or this area where you could come in and there wasn't, other than that iron, product, there wasn't this big money that you were fighting against. It was sort of, it was you telling people openly, I'm, I'm working on this thing. [00:29:11] I need to make money so that I can sustain it. And, if you, yeah. like the work I do, then, you know, basically support me. Right. And, and so I think that, I'm wondering how we can reproduce that more often because when you see new products, a lot of times it is VC backed, right? [00:29:35] Because people say, I need to work on this. I need to be paid. and I can't ask a team to do this. For nothing, right? So [00:29:44] Mike: Yeah. It's. It's a wicked problem. Uh, it's a really, really hard problem to solve if you take vc you there, that that really kind of means that you need to be making tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars in sales. If you are building a small or relatively small. You know, put small in quotes there because I don't really know what that means, but if you have a small open source project, you can't charge huge amounts for it, right? [00:30:18] I mean, Sidekiq is a, I would call a medium sized open source project, and I'm charging a thousand bucks for it. So if you're building, you know, I don't know, I don't even want to necessarily give example, but if you're building some open source project, and It's one of 300 libraries that people's applications will depend on. [00:30:40] You can't necessarily charge a thousand dollars for that library. depending on the size and the capabilities, maybe you can, maybe you can't. But there's going to be a long tail of open source projects that just, they can't, they can't charge much, if anything, for them. So, unfortunately, we have, you know, these You kind of have two pathways. [00:31:07] Venture capital, where you've got to sell a ton, or free. And I've kind of walked that fine line where I'm a small business, I can charge a small amount because I'm bootstrapped. And, and I don't need huge amounts of money, and I, and I have a project that is of the right size to where I can charge a decent amount of money. [00:31:32] That means that I can survive with 500 or a thousand customers. I don't need to have a hundred million dollars worth of customers. Because I, you know, when I started the business, one of the constraints I said is I don't want to hire anybody. I'm just going to be solo. And part of the, part of my ability to keep a low price and, and keep running sustainably, even with just You know, only a few hundred customers is because I'm solo. [00:32:03] I don't have the overhead of investors. I don't have the overhead of other employees. I don't have an office space. You know, my overhead is very small. So that is, um, you know, I just kind of have a unique business in that way, I guess you might say. Keeping the business solo [00:32:21] Jeremy: I think that's that's interesting about your business as well But the fact that you've kept it you've kept it solo which I would imagine in most businesses, they need support people. they need, developers outside of maybe just one. Um, there's all sorts of other, I don't think overhead is the right word, but you just need more people, right? [00:32:45] And, and what do you think it is about Sidekiq that's made it possible for it to just be a one person operation? [00:32:52] Mike: There's so much administrative overhead in a business. I explicitly create business policies so that I can run solo. you know, my support policy is officially you get one email ticket or issue per quarter. And, and anything more than that, I can bounce back and say, well, you're, you're requiring too much support. [00:33:23] In reality, I don't enforce that at all. And people email me all the time, but, but things like. Things like dealing with accounting and bookkeeping and taxes and legal stuff, licensing, all that is, yeah, a little bit of overhead, but I've kept it as minimal as I can. And part of that is I don't want to hire another employee because then that increases the administrative overhead that I have. [00:33:53] And Sidekiq is so tied to me and my knowledge that if I hire somebody, they're probably not going to know Ruby and threading and all the intricate technical detail necessary to build and maintain and support the system. And so really you'll kind of regress a little bit. We won't be able to give as good support because I'm busy helping that other employee. Being selective about customers [00:34:23] Mike: So, yeah, it's, it's a tightrope act where you've got to really figure out how can I scale myself as far as possible without overwhelming myself. The, the overwhelming thing that I have that I've never been able to solve. It's just dealing with billing inquiries, customers, companies, emailing me saying, how do we buy this thing? [00:34:46] Can I get an invoice? Every company out there, it seems wants an invoice. And the problem with invoicing is it takes a lot more. manual labor and administrative overhead to issue that invoice to collect payment on the invoice. So that's one of the reasons why I have a very strict policy about credit card only for, for the vast majority of my customers. [00:35:11] And I demand that companies pay a lot more. You have to have a pretty big enterprise license if you want an invoice. And if the company, if the company comes back and complains and says, well, you know, that's ridiculous. We don't, we don't want to pay that much. We don't need it that much. Uh, you know, I, I say, okay, well then you have two, two things, two, uh, two things. [00:35:36] You can either pay with a credit card or you can not use Sidekiq. Like, that's, that's it. I'm, I don't need your money. I don't want the administrative overhead of dealing with your accounting department. I just want to support my, my customers and build my software. And, and so, yeah, I don't want to turn into a billing clerk. [00:35:55] So sometimes, sometimes the, the, the best thing in business that you can do is just say no. [00:36:01] Jeremy: That's very interesting because I think being a solo... Person is what probably makes that possible, right? Because if you had the additional staff, then you might say like, Well, I need to pay my staff, so we should be getting, you know, as much business as [00:36:19] Mike: Yeah. Chasing every customer you can, right. But yeah. [00:36:22] Every customer is different. I mean, I have some customers that just, they never contact me. They pay their bill really fast or right on time. And they're paying me, you know, five figures, 20, a year. And they just, it's a, God bless them because those are, are the. [00:36:40] Best customers to have and the worst customers are the ones who are paying 99 bucks a month and everything that they don't understand or whatever is a complaint. So sometimes, sometimes you, you want to, vet your customers from that perspective and say, which one of these customers are going to be good? [00:36:58] Which ones are going to be problematic? [00:37:01] Jeremy: And you're only only person... And I'm not sure how many customers you have, but [00:37:08] Mike: I have 2000 [00:37:09] Jeremy: 2000 customers. [00:37:10] Okay. [00:37:11] Mike: Yeah. [00:37:11] Jeremy: And has that been relatively stable or has there been growth [00:37:16] Mike: It's been relatively stable the last couple of years. Ruby has, has sort of plateaued. Um, it's, you don't see a lot of growth. I'm getting probably, um, 15, 20 percent growth maybe. Uh, so I'm not growing like a weed, like, you know, venture capital would want to see, but steady incremental growth is, is, uh, wonderful, especially since I do very little. [00:37:42] Sales and marketing. you know, I come to RubyConf I, I I tweet out, you know, or I, I toot out funny Mastodon Toots occasionally and, and, um, and, and put out new releases of the software. And, and that's, that's essentially my, my marketing. My marketing is just staying in front of developers and, and, and being a presence in the Ruby community. [00:38:06] But yeah, it, it's, uh. I, I, I see not a, not a huge amount of churn, but I see enough sales to, to, to stay up and keep my head above water and to keep growing, um, slowly but surely. Support needs haven't grown [00:38:20] Jeremy: And as you've had that steady growth, has the support burden not grown with it? [00:38:27] Mike: Not as much because once customers are on Sidekiq and they've got it working, then by and large, you don't hear from them all that much. There's always GitHub issues, you know, customers open GitHub issues. I love that. but yeah, by and large, the community finds bugs. and opens up issues. And so things remain relatively stable. [00:38:51] I don't get a lot of the complete newbie who has no idea what they're doing and wants me to, to tell them how to use Sidekiq that I just don't see much of that at all. Um, I have seen it before, but in that case, generally, I, I, I politely tell that person that, listen, I'm not here to educate you on the product. [00:39:14] It's there's documentation in the wiki. Uh, and there's tons of, of more Ruby, generic Ruby, uh, educational material out there. That's just not, not what I do. So, so yeah, by and large, the support burden is, is not too bad because once people are, are up and running, it's stable and, and they don't, they don't need to contact me. [00:39:36] Jeremy: I wonder too, if that's perhaps a function of the price, because if you're a. new developer or someone who's not too familiar with how to do job processing or what they want to do when you, there is the open source product, of course. but then the next step up, I believe is about a hundred dollars a month. [00:39:58] And if you're somebody who is kind of just getting started and learning how things work, you're probably not going to pay that, is my guess. And so you'll never hear from them. [00:40:11] Mike: Right, yeah, that's a good point too, is the open source version, which is what people inevitably are going to use and integrate into their app at first. Because it's open source, you're not going to email me directly, um, and when people do email me directly, Sidekiq support questions, I do, I reply literally, I'm sorry I don't respond to private email, unless you're a customer. [00:40:35] Please open a GitHub issue and, um, that I try to educate both my open source users and my commercial customers to try and stay in GitHub issues because private email is a silo, right? Private email doesn't help anybody else but them. If I can get people to go into GitHub issues, then that's a public record. [00:40:58] that people can search. Because if one person has that problem, there's probably a dozen other people that have that same problem. And then that other, those other 11 people can search and find the solution to their problem at four in the morning when I'm asleep. Right? So that's, that's what I'm trying to do is, is keep, uh, keep everything out in the open so that people can self service as much as possible. Sidekiq open source [00:41:24] Jeremy: And on the open source side, are you still primarily the main contributor? Or do you have other people that are [00:41:35] Mike: I mean, I'd say I do 90 percent of the work, which is why I don't feel guilty about keeping 100 percent of the money. A lot of open source projects, when they look for financial sustainability, they also look for how can we split this money amongst the team. And that's, that's a completely different topic that I've. [00:41:55] is another reason why I've stayed solo is if I hire an employee and I pay them 200, 000 a year as a developer, I'm meanwhile keeping all the rest of the profits of the company. And so that almost seems a little bit unfair. because we're both still working 40 hours a week, right? Why am I the one making the vast majority of the, of the profit and the money? [00:42:19] Um, so, uh, I've always, uh, that's another reason why I've stayed solo, but, but yeah, having a team of people working on something, I do get, regular commits, regular pull requests from people, fixing a bug that they found or just making a tweak that. that they saw, that they thought they could improve. [00:42:42] A little more rarely I get a significant improvement or feature, as a pull request. but Sidekiq is so stable these days that it really doesn't need a team of people maintaining it. The volume of changes necessary, I can easily keep up with that. So, I'm still doing 90 95 percent of the work. Are there other Sidekiq-like opportunities out there? [00:43:07] Jeremy: Yeah, so I think Sidekiq has sort of a unique positioning where it's the code base itself is small enough where you can maintain it yourself and you have some help, but primarily you're the main maintainer. And then you have enough customers who are willing to, to pay for the benefit it gives them on top of what the open source product provides. [00:43:36] cause it's, it's, you were talking about how. Every project people work on, they have, they could have hundreds of dependencies, right? And to ask somebody to, to pay for each of them is, is probably not ever going to happen. And so it's interesting to think about how you have things like, say, you know, OpenSSL, you know, it's a library that a whole bunch of people rely on, but nobody is going to pay a monthly fee to use it. [00:44:06] You have things like, uh, recently there was HashiCorp with Terraform, right? They, they decided to change their license because they, they wanted to get, you know, some of that value back, some of the money back, and the community basically revolted. Right? And did a fork. And so I'm kind of curious, like, yeah, where people can find these sweet spots like, like Sidekiq, where they can find this space where it's just small enough where you can work on it on your own and still get people to pay for it. [00:44:43] It's, I'm trying to picture, like, where are the spaces? Open source as a public utility [00:44:48] Mike: We need to look at other forms of financing beyond pure capitalism. If this is truly public infrastructure that needs to be maintained for the long term, then why are we, why is it that we depend on capitalism to do that? Our roads, our water, our sewer, those are not Capitalist, right? Those are utilities, that's public infrastructure that we maintain, that the government helps us maintain. [00:45:27] And in a sense, tech infrastructure is similar or could be thought of in a similar fashion. So things like Open Collective, things like, uh, there's a, there's a organization in Europe called NLNet, I think, out of the Netherlands. And they do a lot of grants to various open source projects to help them improve the state of digital infrastructure. [00:45:57] They support, for instance, Mastodon as a open source project that doesn't have any sort of corporate backing. They see that as necessary social media infrastructure, uh, for the long term. And, and I, and I think that's wonderful. I like to see those new directions being explored where you don't have to turn everything into a product, right? [00:46:27] And, and try and market and sale, um, and, and run ads and, and do all this stuff. If you can just make the case that, hey, this is, this is useful public infrastructure that so many different, um, Technical, uh, you know, applications and businesses could rely on, much like FedEx and DHL use our roads to the benefit of their own, their own corporate profits. [00:46:53] Um, why, why, why shouldn't we think of tech infrastructure sort of in a similar way? So, yeah, I would like to see us explore more. in that direction. I understand that in America that may not happen for quite a while because we are very, capitalist focused, but it's encouraging to see, um, places like Europe, uh, a little more open to, to trialing things like, cooperatives and, and grants and large long term grants to, to projects to see if they can, uh, provide sustainability in, in, you know, in a new way. [00:47:29] Jeremy: Yeah, that's a good point because I think right now, a lot of the open source infrastructure that we all rely on, either it's being paid for by large companies and at the whim of those large companies, if Google decides we don't want to pay for you to work on this project anymore, where does the money come from? [00:47:53] Right? And on the other hand, there's the thousands, tens of thousands of people who are doing it. just for free out of the, you know, the goodness of their, their heart. And that's where a lot of the burnout comes from. Right. So I think what you're saying is that perhaps a lot of these pieces that we all rely on, that our, our governments, you know, here in the United States, but also around the world should perhaps recognize as this is, like you said, this is infrastructure, and we should be. [00:48:29] Paying these people to keep the equivalent of the roads and, and, uh, all that working. [00:48:37] Mike: Yeah, I mean, I'm not, I'm not claiming that it's a perfect analogy. There's, there's, there's lots of questions that are unanswered in that, right? How do you, how do you ensure that a project is well maintained? What does that even look like? What does that mean? you know, you can look at a road and say, is it full of potholes or is it smooth as glass, right? [00:48:59] It's just perfectly obvious, but to a, to a digital project, it's, it's not as clear. So, yeah, but, but, but exploring those new ways because turning everybody into a businessman so that they can, they can keep their project going, it, it, it itself is not sustainable, right? so yeah, and that's why everything turns into a SaaS because a SaaS is easy to control. [00:49:24] It's easy to gatekeep behind a paywall and it's easy to charge for, whereas a library on GitHub. Yeah. You know, what do you do there? You know, obviously GitHub has sponsors, the sponsors feature. You've got Patreon, you've got Open Collective, you've got Tidelift. There's, there's other, you know, experiments that have been run, but nothing has risen to the top yet. [00:49:47] and it's still, it's still a bit of a grind. but yeah, we'll see, we'll see what happens, but hopefully people will keep experimenting and, and maybe, maybe governments will start. Thinking in the direction of, you know, what does it mean to have a budget for digital infrastructure maintenance? [00:50:04] Jeremy: Yeah, it's interesting because we, we started thinking about like, okay, where can we find spaces for other Sidekiqs? But it sounds like maybe, maybe that's just not realistic, right? Like maybe we need more of a... Yeah, a rethinking of, I guess the, the structure of how people get funded. Yeah. [00:50:23] Mike: Yeah, sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to think at a higher level. You know, we, the, the sustainability problem in American Silicon Valley based open source developers is naturally going to tend toward venture capital and, and capitalism. And I, you know, I think, I think that's, uh, extremely problematic on a, on a lot of different, in a lot of different ways. [00:50:47] And, and so sometimes you need to step back and say, well, maybe we're, maybe we just don't have the right tool set to solve this problem. But, you know, I, I. More than that, I'm not going to speculate on because it is a wicked problem to solve. [00:51:04] Jeremy: Is there anything else you wanted to, to mention or thought we should have talked about? [00:51:08] Mike: No, I, I, I loved the talk, of sustainability and, and open source. And I, it's, it's a, it's a topic really dear to my heart, obviously. So I, I am happy to talk about it at length with anybody, anytime. So thank you for having me. [00:51:25] Jeremy: All right. Thank you very much, Mike.

Rounding Up Season 2 | Episode 2 – Empathy Interviews Guest: Dr. Kara Imm Mike Wallus: If there were a list of social skills we hope to foster in children, empathy is likely close to the top. Empathy matters. It helps us understand how others are feeling so we can respond appropriately, and it can help teachers understand the way their students are experiencing school. Today on a podcast, we talk with Dr. Kara Imm about a practice referred to as an empathy interview. We'll discuss the ways empathy interviews can help educators understand their students' lived experience with mathematics and make productive adaptations to instructional practice. Mike: Well, welcome to the podcast, Kara. We're excited to have you join us. Kara Imm: Thanks, Mike. Happy to be here. Mike: So, I have to confess that the language of an empathy interview was new to me when I started reading about this, and I'm wondering if you could just take a moment and unpack, what is an empathy interview, for folks who are new to the idea? Kara: Yeah, sure. I think I came to understand empathy interviews in my work with design thinking as a former teacher, classroom teacher, and now teacher-educator. I've always thought of myself as a designer. So, when I came to understand that there was this whole field around design thinking, I got very intrigued. And the central feature of design thinking is that designers, who are essentially thinking about creating new products, services, interactions, ways of being for someone else, have to start with empathy because we have to get out of our own minds and our own experiences and make sure we're not making assumptions about somebody else's lived experience. So, an empathy interview, as I know it now, is first and foremost a conversation. It's meant to be as natural a conversation as possible. When I do empathy interviews, I have a set of questions in mind, but I often abandon those questions and follow the child in front of me or the teacher, depending on who I'm interviewing. Kara: And the goal of an empathy interview is to elicit stories; really granular, important stories, the kind of stories that we tell ourselves that get reiterated and retold, and the kinds of stories that cumulatively make up our identities. So, I'm not trying to get a resumé, I'm not interested in the facts of the person, the biography of the person. I'm interested in the stories people tell about themselves. And in my context, the stories that kids tell themselves about their own learning and their own relationship to school, their classrooms, and to mathematics. I'm also trying to elicit emotions. So, designers are particularly listening for what they might call unmet needs, where as a designer we would then use the empathy interview to think about the unmet needs of this particular person and think about designing something uniquely and specifically for them—with the idea that if I designed something for them, it would probably have utility and purpose for other people who are experiencing that thing. So, what happened more recently is that I started to think, “Could empathy interviews change teachers' relationship to their students? Could it change leaders' relationships to the teachers?” And so far, we're learning that it's a different kind of conversation, and it's helping people move out of deficit thinking around children and really asking important questions about, what does it mean to be a kid in a math class? Mike: There's some language that you've used that really stands out for me. And I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit more about it. You said “the stories that we tell about ourselves”; or, maybe paraphrased, the stories that kids tell themselves. And then you had this other bit of language that I'd like to come back to: “the cumulative impact of those stories on our identity.” Can you unpack those terms of phrase you used and talk a little bit about them specifically, as you said, when it comes to children and how they think about their identity with relation to mathematics? Kara: Sure. I love that kind of phrase, “the story we tell ourselves.” That's been a pivotal phrase for me. I think stories kind of define and refine our existence. Stories capture this relationship between who we are and who we want to become. But when I'm thinking about stories in this way, I imagine as an interviewer that I'm trying to paint a portrait of a child, typically. And so, I'm trying to interact with this child in such a way that I can elicit these stories, painting a unique picture of this kid, not only as a learner but also as a human. What inevitably happens when you do these interviews is that I'm interested in their experience in math class. When I listen to kids, they have internalized, “I'm good at math, and here's why” or “I'm bad at math, and here's why. I just know it.” But when you dig a little bit deeper, the stories they tell are a little more nuanced, and they kind of live in the space of gray. And I'm interested in that space, not the space of testing and measurement that would land you in a particular identity as meant for math or not meant for math. Mike: I think what I was going to suggest is, why don't we listen to a few, because you shared a couple clips before we got ready for the interview, and I was fascinated by the approach that you had in chatting with these children and just how much information I could glean from even a minute or two of the interview slices that you shared. Why don't we start and get to know a few of these kiddos and see what we can learn together. Kara: Sounds great. Mike: We've got a clip that I'm going to invite you to set it up and give us as much context as you want to, and then we'll play the clip and then we can talk a little bit about it. I would love to start with our friend Leanna. Kara: Great. Leanna is a third-grader. She goes to an all-girls school. I've worked in Leanna's school over multiple years. I know her teacher well. I'm a part of that community. Leanna was kind of a new mathematician to me. Earlier in the day I had been in Leanna's classroom, and the interview starts with a moment that really struck me, which I won't say much more about. And I invited Leanna to join me after school so we could talk about this particular moment. And I really wanted to know how she made sense of what happened. So, I think we'll leave it at that and we'll listen to what happened. Mike: Alright, let's give it a listen. Leanna: Hi, I'm Leanna, and I'm 8 years old. Kara: Hi, Leanna. Today when I was in your class, something interesting happened where I think the kids said to me, and they said, “Do you know we have a math genius in our class?” Do you remember that moment? Leanna: Yeah. Kara: Tell me what happened in that moment. Leanna: Um, they said, “We have a math genius in our class.” And then they all started pointing at me. Kara: And what was that like for you? Leanna: It was … like, maybe, like, it was nice, but also it was kind of like, all the pressure was on me. Kara: Yeah, I was wondering about that. Why do you think the girls today—I mean, I'm a visitor, right?—why do you think they use the word “math genius”? And why did they choose you? What do you think they think of you? Leanna: A mathematician … Kara: Yeah. Leanna: … because I go to this thing every Wednesday. They ask me what I want to be when I grow up, and I always say a mathematician. So, they think that I am a math genius. Kara: Gotcha. Do you think all the girls in your class know that you want to be a mathematician when you grow up? But do they mean something else? They didn't say, “We have a mathematician in our class.” They said, “We have a math genius.” Leanna: Maybe. Kara: Are you a math genius? Do think, what does that even mean? Leanna: Like, I'm really good at math. Kara: Yeah. Do you think that's a true statement? Leanna: Yeah, a little bit. Kara: A little bit? Do you love math? Leanna: Yeah. Kara: Yeah. Have you always loved math? Leanna: Yeah. Kara: And so, it might be true that, like, is a math genius the same as a mathematician? Leanna: No. Kara: OK. Can you say how they're different? Leanna: Like, a mathematician is, like … Like, when you're a math genius, you don't always want to be a mathematician when you grow up. A math genius is when you just are really good at math, but, like, a mathematician is when you really, like, want to be when you grow up. Kara: Yeah. Mike: That was fascinating to listen to. So, my first inclination is to say, as you were making meaning of what Leanna was sharing, what were some of the things that were going on for you? Kara: Yeah, I was thinking about how math has this kind of unearned status, this measure of success in our culture that in this interview, Leanna is kind of pointing to. I was thinking about the mixed emotions she has being positioned as a math genius. It called into mind the model minority myth in which folks of Asian descent and Asian Americans are often positioned as stereotypically being good at math. And people say, “Well, this is such a lovely and respectful stereotype, who cares if it's not true?” But she later in the interview talks about the pressure of living up to this notion of math genius and what means. I think about her status in the classroom and how she has the agency to both take up this idea of math genius, and does she have the agency to also nuance it or reject it? And how that might play out in her classroom? So yeah, those are all the things that kind of come to mind as I listen to her. Mike: I think you're hitting on some of the themes that jumped out for me; this sense that kids who are participating in particular activities have been positioned, either by their participation or by their kids' perceptions of what participation means. And I thought the most interesting part was when she said, “Well, it's nice”—but there was a long pause there. And then she talked about this sense of pressure. What it's making me think about as a practitioner is that there are perhaps ways that as a teacher, if I'm aware of that, that might change something small, some things big about the way that I choose to engage with Leanna in the classroom; that I choose to help her navigate that space that she finds herself in. There's a lot for me there as a practitioner in that small clip that helps me really see her, understand her, and think about ways that I can support her. Kara: Yeah. And, like, from a design perspective, I huddled with her teacher later in the day, and we talked about this interview, and we thought about what would it mean to design or redesign a space where Leanna could feel really proud of who she was as a mathematician, but she didn't feel the kind of pressure that this math genius moniker is affording her. And so, ultimately, I want these interviews to be conducted by teachers so that, as you said, practitioners might show up differently for kids or think about what we might need to think more deeply about or design for kids like her. She's certainly not the only one. Mike: Yeah, absolutely. And I think part of what's hitting me in the face is that the term “empathy interview” really is taking on new meaning, even listening to this first one. Because feeling the feelings that she's sharing with us, feeling what it would be like to be in those shoes, I've had kiddos in my class who have been identified or whose folks have chosen to have them participate in programming. And I have to confess that I don't know that I thought as much about what that positioning meant to them or what it meant about how kids would perceive them. I was just struck by how, in so many subtle ways doing an interview like this, might really shift the way that I showed up for a child. Kara: Yeah, I think so. Mike: Well, let's listen to another one. Kara: OK. Maybe Matthew, should we meet Matthew? Mike: I think we should meet Matthew. Kara: Yeah. Mike: Do you want to set up Matthew and give us a sense of what we might need to know about the context? Kara: Absolutely. Matthew is a fifth-grader who describes, in my conversation with him, several years of what he calls “not good” years in math. And he doesn't enjoy mathematics. He doesn't think he's good at it. He has internalized, he's really blamed himself and taken most of the responsibility for those “bad“ years of learning. When I meet him, he's a fifth-grader, and he has written a mathography at the invitation of his classroom teacher. This is a practice that's part of this school. And in his mathography as a fifth-grader, he uses the word “evolving,” and he tells the story of how he's evolving as a mathematician. That alone is pretty profound and beautiful that he has the kind of insight to describe this kind of journey with mathematics. And he really just describes a fourth-grade teacher who fundamentally changed his relationship to mathematics, his sense of himself, and how he thinks about learning. Mike: Let's give it a listen. Kara: Maybe we'll end, Matthew, with: If people were thinking about you as—and maybe there's other Matthews in their class, right—what kinds of things would've helped you back in kindergarten, first and second grade to just feel like math was for you? It took you until fourth grade, right … Matthew: Yeah. Kara: … until you really had any positive emotions about math? I'm wondering what could we have done for younger Matthew? Matthew: Probably, I think I should have paid a lot more attention. Kara: But what if it wasn't about you? What if it's the room and the materials and the teacher and the class? Matthew: I think it was mostly just me, except for some years it was really, really confusing. Kara: OK. Matthew: And when … you didn't really want in third grade or second grade, you didn't want to be the kid that's always, like, “Hey, can you help me with this?” or something. So that would be embarrassing for some people. Kara: OK. You just made air quotes right, when you did embarrassing? Matthew: Yeah. Kara: Was it embarrassing to ask for help? Matthew: It wasn't embarrassing to ask for help, and now I know that. But I would always not ask for help, and I think that's a big reason why I wasn't that good at math. Kara: Got it. So, you knew in some of these math lessons that it was not making sense? Matthew: It made no sense. Kara: It made no sense. Matthew: And then I was, like, so I was in my head, “I think I should ask, but I also don't want to embarrass myself.” Kara: Hmm. Matthew: But also, it's really not that embarrassing. Kara: OK, but you didn't know that at the time. At the time it was like, “Ooh, we don't ask for help.” Matthew: Yeah. Kara: OK. And did that include asking another kid for help? You didn't ask anybody for help? Matthew: Um, only one of my friends that I knew for a really long time … Kara: Hmm. Matthew: He helped me. So, I kind of got past the first stage, but then if he was absent on those days or something, then I'd kind of just be sitting at my desk with a blank sheet. Kara: Wow, so it sounds like you didn't even know how to get started some days. Matthew: Yeah, some days I was kind of just, like, “I'm not even going to try.” Kara: “I'm not” … OK. Matthew: But now I'm, like, “It's not that big of a deal if I get an answer wrong.” Kara: Yeah, that's true. Right? Matthew: “I have a blank sheet. That is a big deal. That's a problem.” Kara: So having a blank sheet, nothing written down, that is a bigger problem for you than, like, “Oh, whoops, I got the answer wrong. No big deal.” Matthew: I'd rather just get the answer wrong because handing in a blank sheet would be, that would probably be more embarrassing. Mike: Oh, my goodness. There is a lot in a little bit of space of time. Kara: Yeah. These interviews, Mike, are so rich, and I offer them to this space and to teachers with such care and with such a deep sense of responsibility 'cause I feel like these stories are so personal. So, I'm really mindful of, can I use this story in the space of Matthew for a greater purpose? Here, I feel like Matthew is speaking to all the kind of socio-mathematical norms in classrooms. And I didn't know Matthew until this year, but I would guess that a kid like Matthew, who is so quiet and so polite and so respectful, might've flown under the radar for many years. He wasn't asking for help, but he was also not making trouble. It makes me wonder, “How would we redesign a class so that he could know earlier on that asking for help—and that this notion that in this class, mathematics—is meant to make sense, and when it doesn't make sense, we owe it to ourselves and each other to help it make sense?” I think it's an invitation to all of us to think about, “What does it mean to ask for help?” And how he wants deep down mathematics to make sense. And I agree with him, that should be just a norm for all of us. Mike: I go back to the language that you used at the beginning, particularly listening to Matthew talk, “the stories that we tell ourselves.” The story that he had told himself about what it meant to ask for help or what that meant about him as a person or as a mathematician. Kara: Yeah. I mean, I am trained as a kind of qualitative researcher. So as part of my dissertation work, I did all kinds of gathering data through interviews and then analyzing them. And one of the ways that is important to me is thinking about kind of narrative analysis. So, when Matthew tells us the things that were in his head, he tells you the voice that his head is saying back to him. Kids will do that. Similarly, later in the interview I said, “What would you say to those kids, those kids who might find it?” And what I was interested in is getting him to articulate in his own voice what he might say to those children. So, when I think about stories, I think about when do we speak in a first person? When do we describe the voices that are in our heads? When do we quote our teachers and our mothers and our cousins? And how that's a powerful form of storytelling, those voices. Mike: Well, I want to listen to one more, and I'm particularly excited about this one. This is Nia. I want to listen to Nia and have you set her up. And then I think what I want to do after this is talk about impact and how these empathy interviews have the potential to shift practice for educators or even school for that matter. So, let's talk about Nia and then let's talk about that. Kara: You got it. Nia is in this really giant classroom of almost 40 kids, fifth-graders, and it's co-taught. It's purposely designed as this really collaborative space, and she uses the word “collaboration,” but she also describes how that's a really noisy environment. On occasion, there's a teacher who she describes pulling her into a quieter space so that she can concentrate. And so, I think that's an important backstory for her just in terms of her as a learner. I ask her a lot of questions about how she thinks about herself as a mathematician, and I think that's the clip we're going to listen to. Mike: Alright, let's listen in. Nia: No, I haven't heard it, but … Kara: OK. I wonder what people mean by that, “I'm not a math person.” Nia: I'm guessing, “I don't do math for fun.” Kara: “I don't do math for fun.” Do you do math for fun? Nia: Yes. Kara: You do? Like, what's your for-fun math? Nia: Me and my grandma, when we were in the car, we were writing in the car. We had this pink notebook, and we get pen or a pencil, and she writes down equations for me in the backseat, and I do them and she times me, and we see how many questions I could get right in, like, 50 seconds. Kara: Oh, my gosh. What's an example of a question your grandma would give you? Nia: Like, they were just practice questions, like, three times five, five times eight. Well, I don't really do fives because I already know them. Mike: So, we only played a real tiny snippet of Nia. But I think one of the things that's really sticking out is just how dense these interviews are with information about how kids think or the stories that they've told themselves. What strikes you about what we heard or what struck you as you were having this conversation with Nia at that particular point in time? Kara: For me, these interviews are about both storytelling and about identity building. And there's that dangerous thinking about two types of people, math people and non-math people. I encounter adults and children who have heard of that phrase. And so, I sometimes offer it in the interview to find out what sense do kids make of that? Kids have told me, “That doesn't make sense.” And other kids have said, “No, no, my mom says that. My mom says she's not a math person.” So, she, I'm playing into it to see what she says. And I love her interpretation that a math person is someone who does math for fun. And truthfully, Mike, I don't know a lot of kids who describe doing math for fun. And so, what I loved about that she, A: She a described a math person's probably a person who, gosh, enjoys it, gets some joy or pleasure from doing mathematics. Kara: But then the granularity of the story she offers, which is the specific pink notebook that she and her grandmother are passing back and forth in the backseat of the car, tell you about mathematics as a thing that she shares a way of relating to her grandmother. It's been ritualized, and really all they're doing if you listen to it is, her grandmother's kind of quizzing her on multiplication facts. But it's such a different relationship to multiplication facts because she's in relationship to her grandmother. They have this beautiful ongoing ritual. And quite honestly, she's using it as an example to tell us that's the fun part for her. So, she just reminds us that mathematics is this human endeavor, and for her, this one ritual is a way in which she relates and connects to her grandmother, which is pretty cool. Mike: So, I want to shift a little bit and talk about a couple of different things: the types of questions that you ask, some of the norms that you have in mind when you're going through the process, and then what struck me about listening to these is you're not trying to convince the kids who you're interviewing of anything about their current thinking or their feelings or trying to shift their perspective on their experience. And I'm just wondering if you can think about how you would describe the role you're playing when you're conducting the interview. 'Cause it seems that that's pretty important. Kara: Yeah. I think the role I'm playing is a deep listener. And I'm trying to create space. And I'm trying to make a very, very, very safe environment for kids to feel like it's OK to tell me a variety of stories about who they are. That's my role. I am not their classroom teacher in these interviews. And so, these interviews probably look and sound differently when the relationship between the interviewer and the interviewee is about teachers and students and/or has a different kind of power differential. I get to be this frequent visitor to their classroom, and so I just get to listen deeply. The tone that I want to convey, the tone that I want teachers to take up is just this fascination with who they are and a deep curiosity about their experience. And I'm positioned in these interviews as not knowing a lot about these children. Kara: And so, I'm actually beautifully positioned to do what I want teachers to do, which is imagine you didn't know so much. Imagine you didn't have the child's cumulative file. Imagine you didn't know what they were like last year. Imagine you didn't know all that, and you had to ask. And so, when I enter these interviews, I just imagine, “I don't know.” And when I'm not sure, I ask another smaller question. So I'll say, “Can you say more about that?” or “I'm not sure if you and I share the same meaning.” The kinds of questions I ask kids—and I think because I've been doing this work for a while, I have a couple questions that I start with and after that I trust myself to follow the lead of the children in front of me—I often say to kids, “Thank you for sitting down and having a conversation with me today. I'm interested in hearing kids' stories about math and their math journey, and somebody in your life told me you have a particularly interesting story.” And then I'll say to kids sometimes, “Where do you want to start in the story?” And I'll try to give kids agency to say, “Oh, well, we have to go back to kindergarten” or “I guess we should start now in high school” or kids will direct me where they think are the salient moments in their own mathematical journey. Mike: And when they're sharing that story, what are the types of questions that you might ask along the way to try to get to clarity or to understanding? Kara: Great question. I'm trying to elicit deep emotion. I'm trying to have kids explain why they're telling me particular stories, like, what was significant about that. Kids are interesting. Some kids in these interviews just talk a lot. And other kids, I've had to really pepper them with questions and that has felt a little kind of invasive, like, this isn't actually the kind of natural conversation that I was hoping for. Sometimes I'll ask, “What is it like for you or how do you think about a particular thing?” I ask about things like math community, I ask about math partners. I ask about, “How do you know you're good at math and do you trust those ways of knowing?” I kind of create spaces where we could have alternative narratives. Although you're absolutely right, that I'm not trying to lead children to a particular point of view. I'm kind of interested in how they make sense. Mike: One of the things that, you used a line earlier where you said something about humanizing mathematics, and I think what's striking me is that statement you made: “What if you didn't have their cumulative report card?” You didn't have the data that tells one story, but not necessarily their story. And that really is hitting me, and I'm even feeling a little bit autobiographical. I was a kid who was a lot like Matthew, who, at a certain point, I just stopped raising my hand because I thought it meant something about me, and I didn't want people to see that. And I'm just struck by the impact of one, having someone ask you about that story as the learner, but also how much an educator could take from that and bring to the relationship they had with that child while they were working on mathematics together. Kara: You said a lot there, and you actually connect to how I think about empathy interviews in my practice now. I got to work with Rochelle Gutiérrez this summer, and that's where I learned deeply about her framework, rehumanizing mathematics. When I do these empathy interviews, I'm living in this part of her framework that's about the body and emotions. Sometimes kids in the empathy interview, their body will communicate one thing and their language will communicate something else. And so, that's an interesting moment for me to notice how body and motions even are associated with the doing of mathematics. And the other place where empathy interviews live for me is in the work of “Street Data,” Jamila Dugan and Shane Safir's book, that really call into question this idea that what is measurable and what is quantifiable is really all that matters, and they invite us to flip the data dashboard. Kara: In mathematics, this is so important 'cause we have all these standardized tests that tell children about who they are mathematically and who they're about to become. And they're so limiting, and they don't tell the full story. So, when they talk about “Street Data,” they actually write about empathy interviews as a way in which to be humanizing. Data can be liberatory, data can be healing. I feel that when I'm doing these interviews, I have this very tangible example of what they mean because it is often the case that at the end of the interview—and I think you might've had this experience just listening to the interview—there's something really beautiful about having a person be that interested in your story and how that might be restorative and might make you feel like, “There's still possibility for me. This isn't the last story.” Mike: Absolutely. I think you named it for me, which is, the act of telling the story to a person, particularly someone who, like a teacher, might be able to support me being seen in that moment, actually might restore my capacity to feel like, “I could do this” or “My fate as a mathematician is not sealed.” Or I think what I'm taking away from this is, empathy interviews are powerful tools for educators in the sense that we can understand our students at a much deeper level, but it's not just that. It's the experience of being seen through an empathy interview that can also have a profound impact on a child. Kara: Yes, absolutely. I'm part of a collaboration out of University of California where we have thought about the intersection of disability and mathematics, and really thinking about how using the tools of design thinking, particularly the empathy interview can be really transformative. And what the teachers in our studies have told us is that just doing these empathy interviews—and we're not talking about interviewing all the kids that you teach. We're talking about interviewing a select group of kids with real intention about, “Who's a kid who has been marginalized?” And/or “Who's a kid who I don't really know that much about and/or I don't really have a relationship with?” Or “Who's a kid who I suspect doesn't feel seen by me or doesn't feel, like, a deep sense of belonging in our work together?” Teachers report that just doing a few of these interviews starts to change their relationship to those kids. Kara: Not a huge surprise. It helped them to name some of the assumptions they made about kids, and it helped them to be in a space of not knowing around kids. I think the other thing it does for teachers that we know is that they describe to do an empathy interview well requires a lot of restraint, restraint in a couple of ways. One, I'm not fixing, I'm not offering advice. I'm also not getting feedback on my teaching. And I also think it's hard for teachers not to insert themselves into the interview with our own narratives. I really try to make sure I'm listening deeply and I'm painting a portrait of this kid, and I'm empathetic in the sense I care deeply and I'm deeply listening, which I think is a sign of respect, but the kids don't need to know about my experience in the interview. That's not the purpose. Mike: We could keep going for quite a long time. I'm going to make a guess that this podcast is going to have a pretty strong on a lot of folks who are out in the field listening. Kara: Hmm. Mike: If someone was interested in learning more about empathy interviews and wanted to explore or understand more about them, do you have any particular recommendations for where someone might go to continue learning? Kara: Yes, and I wish I had more, but I will take that as an invitation that maybe I need to do a little bit more writing about this work. I think the “Street Data” is an interesting place where the co-authors do reference empathy interviews, and I do think that they have a few videos online that you could see. I think Jamila Dugan has an empathy interview that you could watch and study. People can write me and/or follow me. I'm working on an article right now. My colleagues in California and I have a blog called “Designing4Inclusion,” “4” being the number four, and we've started to document the work of empathy and how it shows up in teachers' practice there. Mike: Well, I want to thank you so much for joining us, Kara. It has really been a pleasure talking with you. Kara: Thank you, Mike. I was really happy to be invited. Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2023 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Rounding Up Season 2 | Episode 1 – Practical Ways to Build Strengths-based Math Classrooms Guest: Beth Kobett Mike Wallus: What if it were possible to capture all of the words teachers said or thought about students and put them in word clouds that hovered over each student throughout the day? What impact might the words in the clouds have on students' learning experience? This is the question that Beth Kobett and Karen Karp pose to start their book about strengths-based teaching and learning. Today on the podcast, we're talking about practices that support strengths-based teaching and learning and ways educators can implement them in their classrooms.  Mike: Hey, Beth, welcome to the podcast. Beth Kobett: Thank you so much. I'm so excited to be here, Mike. Mike: So, there's a paragraph at the start of the book that you wrote with Karen Karp. You said: ‘As teachers of mathematics, we've been taught that our role is to diagnose, eradicate, and erase students' misconceptions. We've been taught to focus on the challenges in students' work rather than recognizing the knowledge and expertise that exist within the learner.' This really stopped me in my tracks, and it had me thinking about how I viewed my role as a classroom teacher and how I saw my students' work. I think I just want to start with the question, ‘Why start there, Beth?' Beth: Well, I think it has a lot to do with our identity as teachers, that we are fixers and changers and that students come to us, and we have to do something. And we have to change them and make sure that they learn a body of knowledge, which is absolutely important. But within that, if we dig a little bit deeper, is this notion of fixing this idea that, ‘Oh my goodness, they don't know this.' And we have to really attend to the ways in which we talk about it, right? For example, ‘My students aren't ready. My students don't know this.' And what we began noticing was all this deficit language for what was really very normal. When you show up in second grade, guess what? There's lots of things you know, and lots of things you're going to learn. And that's absolutely the job of a teacher and a student to navigate. So, that really helped us think about the ways in which we were entering into conversations with all kinds of people; teachers, families, leadership, and so on, so that we could attend to that. And it would help us think about our teaching in different ways. Mike: So, let's help listeners build a counter-narrative. How would you describe what it means to take a strengths-based approach to teaching and learning? And what might that mean in someone's daily practice? Beth: So, we can look at it globally or instructionally. Like, I'm getting ready to teach this particular lesson in this class. And the counter-narrative is, ‘What do they know? What have they been showing me?' So, for example, I'm getting ready to teach place value to second-graders, and I want to think about all the things that they've already done that I know that they've done. They've been grouping and counting and probably making lots of collections of 10 and so on. And so, I want to think about drawing on their experiences, A. Or B, going in and providing an experience that will reactivate all those prior experiences that they've had and enable students to say, ‘Oh yeah, I've done this before. I've made sets or groups of 10 before.' So, let's talk about what that is, what the names of it, why it's so important, and let's identify tasks that will just really engage them in ways that help them understand that they do bring a lot of knowledge into it. And sometimes we say things so well intentioned, like, ‘This is going to be hard, and you probably haven't thought about this yet.' And so, we sort of set everybody on edge in ways that set it's going to be hard, which means, ‘That's bad.' It's going to be hard, which means, ‘You don't know this yet.' Well, why don't we turn that on its edge and say, ‘You've done lots of things that are going to help you understand this and make sense of this. And that's what our job is right now, is to make sense of what we're doing.' Mike: There's a lot there. One of the things that I think is jumping out for me is this idea is multifaceted. And part of what we're asking ourselves is, ‘What do kids know?' But the other piece that I want to just kind of shine a flashlight on, is there's also this idea of what experiences have they had—either in their home life or in their learning life at school—that can connect to this content or these ideas that you're trying to pull out? That, to me, actually feels like another way to think about this. Like, ‘Oh my gosh, we've done partitioning, we've done grouping,' and all of those experiences. If we can connect back to them, it can actually build up a kid's sense of, like, ‘Oh, OK.' Beth: I love that. And I love the way that you just described that. It's almost like positioning the student to make those connections, to be ready to do that, to be thinking about that and providing a task or a lesson that allows them to say, ‘Oh!' You know, fractions are a perfect example. I mean, we all love to use food, but do we talk about sharing? Do we talk about when we've divided something up? Have we talked about, ‘Hey, you both have to use the same piece of paper, and I need to make sure that you each have an equal space.' I've seen that many times in a classroom. Just tweak that a little bit. Talk about when you did that, you actually were thinking about equal parts. So, helping students … we don't need to make all those connections all the time because they're there for students and children naturally make connections. That's their job ( chuckles ). It really is their job, and they want to do that. Mike: So, the other bit that I want to pick up on is the subtle way that language plays into this. And one example that really stood out for me was when you examined the word ‘misconception.' So, talk about this particular bit of language and how you might tweak it or reframe it when it comes to student learning. Beth: Well, thank you for bringing this up. This is a conversation that I am having consistently right now. Because this idea of misconception positions the student. ‘You're wrong, you don't understand something.' And again, let's go back to that again, ‘I've got to fix it.' But what if learning is pretty natural and normal to, for example, think about Piaget's conservation ideas, the idea that a young child can or can't conserve based on how the arrangement. So, you put in a, you know, five counters out, they count them and then you move them, spread them out and say, ‘Are they the same, more or less?' We wouldn't say that that's a misconception of a child because it's developmental. It's where they are in their trajectory of learning. And so, we are using the word misconception for lots of things that are just natural, the natural part of learning. And we're assuming that the student has created a misunderstanding along the way when that misunderstanding or that that idea of that learning is very, very normal. Beth: Place value is a perfect example of it. Fractions are, too. Let's say they're trying to order fractions on a number line, and they're just looking at the largest value wherever it falls, numerator, denominator, I'm just throwing it down. You know, those are big numbers. So, those are going to go at the end of a number line. But what if we said, ‘Just get some fraction pieces out'? That's not a misconception 'cause that's normal. I'm using what I've already learned about value of number, and I'm throwing it down on a number line ( chuckles ). Um, so it changes the way we think about how we're going to design our instruction when we think about what's the natural way that students do that. So, we also call it fragile understanding. So, fragile understanding is when it's a little bit tentative. Like, ‘I have it, but I don't have it.' That's another part, a natural part of learning. When you're first learning something new, you kind of have it, then you've got to try it again, and it takes a while for it to become something you're comfortable doing or knowing. Mike: So, this is fascinating because you're making me think about this, kind of, challenge that we sometimes find ourselves facing in the field where, at the end of a lesson or a unit, there's this idea that if kids don't have what we would consider mastery, then there's a deficit that exists. And I think what you're making me think is that framing this as either developing understanding or fragile understanding is a lot more productive in that it helps us imagine what pieces have students started to understand and where might we go next? Or like, what might we build on that they've started to understand as opposed to just seeing partial understanding or fragile understanding from a deficit perspective. Beth: Right. I love this point because I think when we think about mastery, it's all or nothing. But that's not learning either. Maybe on an exam or on a test or on assessment, yes, you have it or you don't have it. You've mastered or you haven't. But again, if we looked at it developmentally that ‘I have some partial understanding or I have it and … I'm inconsistent in that,' that's OK. I could also think, ‘Well, should I have a task that will keep bringing this up for students so that they can continue to build that rich understanding and move along the trajectory toward what we think of as mastery, which means that I know it now, and I'm never going to have to learn it again?' I don't know that all things we call mastery are actually mastered at that time. We say they are. Mike: So, I want to pick up on what you said here because in the book there's something about the role of tasks in strengths-based teaching and learning. And specifically, you talk about ‘the cumulative impact that day-to-day tasks have on what students think mathematics is and how hard and how long they should have to work on ideas so that they make sense.' That kind of blows me away. Beth: Well, I want to know more about why it blows you away. Mike: It blows me away because there's two pieces of the language. One is that the cumulative impact has an effect on what students actually think mathematics is. And I think there's a lot there that I would love to hear you talk about. And then also this second part, it has a cumulative impact on how hard and how long kids believe that they should have to work on ideas in order to have them be sensible. Beth: OK, thank you so much for talking about that a little bit more. So, there's two ways to think about that. One is, and I've done this with teams of teachers, and that's bring in a week's worth of tasks that you designed and taught for two weeks. And I call this a ‘task autopsy.' It's a really good way because you've done it. So, bring it in and then let's talk about, do you have mostly conceptual ideas? How much time do students get to think about it? Or are students mimicking a procedure or even a solution strategy that you want them to use or a model? Because if most of the time students are mimicking or repeating or modeling in the way that you've asked them, then they're not necessarily reasoning. And they're building this idea that math means that ‘You tell me what I'm supposed to do, I do it, yay, I did it.' And then we move on to the next thing.  Beth: And I think that sometimes we have to really do some self-talk about this. I show what I value and what I believe in those decisions that I'm making on a daily basis. And even if I say, ‘It's so important for you to reason, it's so important for you to make sense of it.' If all the tasks are, ‘You do this and repeat what I've shown you,' then students are going to take away from that, that's what math is. And we know this because we ask students, ‘What is math?' Math is, ‘When the teacher shows me what to do, and I do it, and I make my teacher happy.' And they say lots of things about teacher pleasing because they want to do what they've been asked to d,o and they want to repeat it and they want to do well, right? Or do they say, ‘Yeah, it's problem-solving. It's solving a problem, it's thinking hard. Sometimes my brain hurts. I talk to other students about what I'm solving. We share our ideas.' We know that students come away with big impressions about what math means based on the daily work of the math class. Mike: So, I want to take the second part up now because you also talk about what I would call ‘normalizing productive struggle' for kids when they're engaged in problems. What does that mean and what might it sound like for an educator on a day-to-day basis? Beth: So, I happened to be in a classroom yesterday. It was a fifth-grade classroom, and the teacher has been really working on normalizing productive struggle. And it was fabulous. I just happened to stop in, and she stopped everything to say, ‘We want to have this conversation in front of you.' And I said, ‘All right, go for it.' And the question was, ‘What does productive struggle feel like to you and why is it important?' That's what she asked her fifth-graders. And they said, ‘It feels hard at first. And uh, amazing at the end of it. Like, you can't feel amazing unless you've had productive struggle.' We're taking away that opportunity to feel so joyous about the mathematics that we're learning because we got to the other side. And some of the students said, ‘It doesn't feel so good in the beginning, but I know I have to remember what it's going to feel like if I keep going.' I was blown away. I mean, they were like little adults in there having this really thoughtful conversation. And I asked her what … she said, ‘We have to stop and have this conversation a lot. We need to acknowledge what it feels like because we're kind of conditioned when we don't feel good that somebody needs to fix it.' Mike: Yeah, I think what hits me is there's kind of multiple layers we consider as a practitioner. One layer is, do I actually believe in productive struggle? And then part two is, what does that look like, sound like? And I think what I heard from you is, part of it is asking kids to engage with you in thinking about productive struggle, that giving them the opportunity to voice it and think about it is part of normalizing it. Beth: It's also saying, ‘You might be feeling this way right now. If you're feeling like this,' like for example, teaching a task and students are working on a task trying to figure out how to solve it and, and it's starting to get a little noisy and hands start coming up, stopping the class for a second and saying, ‘If you're feeling this way, that's an OK way to feel,' right? ‘And here's some things we might be thinking about. What are some strategies'—like re-sort-of focusing them on how to get out of that instead of me fixing it—like, ‘What are some strategies you could think about? Let's talk about that and then go back to this.' So, it's the teacher acknowledging. It's allowing the students to talk about it. It's allowing everybody … it's not just making students be in productive struggle, or another piece of that is ‘just try harder.' That's not real helpful.  Like, OK, ‘I just need you to try harder because I'm making you productively struggle.' I don't know if anyone has had someone tell them that, but I used to run races and when someone said, ‘Try harder' to me, I'm like, ‘I'm trying as hard as I can.' That isn't that helpful. So, it's really about being very explicit about why it's important. Getting students to the other side of it should be the No. 1 goal. And then addressing it. ‘OK, you experienced productive struggle, now you did it. How do you feel now? Why is it worth it?' Mike: I think what you're talking about feels like things that educators can put into practice really clearly, right? So, there's the fron- end conversation maybe about normalizing. But there's the backend conversation where you come back to kids and say, ‘How do you feel once this has happened? It feels amazing.' This is why productive struggle is so important because you can't get to this amazingness unless you're actually engaged in this challenge, unless it feels hard on the front end. And helping them kind of recalibrate what the experience is going to feel like. Beth: Exactly. And another example of this is this idea of … so I had a pre-service teacher teaching a task. She got to teach it twice. She taught it in the morning. Students experienced struggle and were puffed up and running around, so engaged when they solved it. Beyond proud. ‘Can we get the principal in here? Who needs to see this, that we did this?' And then she got some feedback to reduce the level of productive struggle for the second class based on expectations about the students. And she said the engagement, everything went down. Everything went down, including the level of productive struggle went way down. And so, the excitement and joy went way down, too. And so, she did her little mini-research experiment there. Mike: So, I want to stay on this topic of what it looks like to enact these practices. And there are a couple practices in the book that really jumped out at me that I'd like to just take one at a time. So, I want to start with this idea of giving kids what you would call a ‘walk-back option.' What's a walk-back option? Beth: So, a walk-back option is this opportunity once you've had this conversation—or maybe one-on-one, or it could be class conversation—and a walk-back option is to go look at your work. Is there something else that you'd like to change about it? One of the things that we want to be thinking about in mathematics is that solutions and pathways and models and strategies are all sort of in flux. They're there, but they're not all finished all the time. And after having some conversation or time to reason, is there something that you'd like to think about changing? And really building in some of that mathematical reflection. Mike: I love that. I want to shift and talk about this next piece, too, which is ‘rough-draft thinking.' So, the language feels really powerful, but I want to get your take on, what does that mean and how might a teacher use the idea of rough-draft thinking in a classroom? Beth: So rough-draft thinking is really Mandy Jansen's work that we brought into the strengths work because we saw it as an opportunity to help lift up the strengths that students are exhibiting during rough-draft thinking. So, rough-draft thinking is this idea that most of the time ( chuckles ), our conversations in math as we're thinking through a process is rough, right? We're not sure. We might be making a conjecture here and there. We want to test an idea. So, it's rough, it's not finished and complete. And we want to be able to give students an opportunity to do that talking, that thinking and that reasoning while it is rough, because it builds reasoning, it builds opportunities for students to make those amazing connections. You know, just imagine you're thinking through something, and it clicks for you. That's what we want students to be able to do. So, that's rough-draft thinking and that's what it looks like in the math classroom. It's just lots of student talk and lots of students acknowledging that ‘I don't know if I have this right yet, but here's what I'm thinking. Or I have an idea, can I share this idea?' I watched a pre-service teacher do a number talk and a student said, ‘I don't know if this is going to work all the time, but can I share my idea?' Yes, that's rough-draft thinking. ‘Let's hear it. And wow, how brave of you and your strength and risk-taking. Uh, come over here and share it with us.' Mike: Part of what I'm attracted to is even using that language in a classroom with kids, to some degree it reduces the stakes that we traditionally associate with sharing your thinking in mathematics. And it normalizes this idea that you just described, which is, like, reasoning is in flux, and this is my reasoning at this point in time. That just feels like it really changes the game for kids. Beth: What you hear is very authentic thinking and very real thinking. And it's amazing because even very young children—young children are very at doing this. But then as you move, students start to feel like their thinking has to be polished before it's shared. And then that gives other students who may be on some other developmental trajectory in their understanding, so much more afraid to share their rough-draft thinking or their thoughts or their ideas because they think it has to be at the polished stage. It's very interesting how this sort of idea has developed that you can't share something that you think in math because it's got to be right and completed. And everything's got to be perfect. And before it gets shared, because, ‘Wait, we might confuse other people.' But students respond really beautifully to this. Mike: So, the last strategy that I want to highlight is this one of a ‘math amendment.' I love the language again. So same question, how does this work? What does it look like? Beth: OK, so how it works is that you have done some sharing in the class. So, for example, you may have already shared some solutions to a task. Students have been given a task they're sharing, they may be sharing a pair-to-pair share or a group-to-group share, something like that. It could be whole class sharing. And then you say, ‘Hmm, you've heard lots of good ideas today, lots of interesting thinking and different strategies. If you'd like to provide a math amendment, which is a change to your solution in addition, something else that you'd like to do to strengthen it, you can go ahead and do that and you can do it in that lesson right there.' Or what's really, what we're finding is really powerful, is to bring it back the next day or even a few days later, which connects us back to this idea of what you were saying, which is, ‘Is this mastered? Where am I on the developmental trajectory?' So, I'm just strengthening my understanding, and I'm also hearing … I'm understanding the point of hearing other people's ideas is to go and try them out and use them. And we're really allowing that. So, this is take, this has been amazing, the math amendments that we're seeing students do, taking someone else's idea or a strategy and then just expanding on their own work. And it's very similar to, like, a writing piece, right? Writing. You get a writing piece and you polish and you polish. You don't do this with every math task that you solve or problem that you solve, but you choose and select to do that. Mike: Totally makes sense. So, before we go, I have the question for you. You know, for me this was a new idea. And I have to confess that it has caused me to do a lot of reflection on language that I used when I was in the classroom. I can look back now and say there are some things that I think really aligned well with thinking about kids' assets. And I can also say there are points where, gosh, I wish I could wind the clock back because there are some practices that I would do differently. I suspect there's probably a lot of people where this is a new idea that we're talking about today. What are some of the resources that you'd recommend to folks who want to keep learning about strengths-based or asset-based teaching and learning? Beth: So, if they're interested, there's several … so strengths-based or asset-based is really the first step in building equity. And TODOS, they use the asset-based thinking, which is mathematics for all organization. And it's a wonderful organization that does have an equity tool that would be really helpful. Mike: Beth, it has been such a pleasure talking to you. Thank you for joining us.  Beth: Thank you so much. I appreciate it. It was a good time. Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2023 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Today's Guest is Mike Branam.   Mike is Director of Multifamily Sales at PointCentral and has nearly 20 years of experience in real estate technology, Mike has been a part of several successful prop-tech start ups serving the multifamily industry. Join Sam and Mike in today's episode. -------------------------------------------------------------- Intro [00:00:00] Mike Branum's Background and Experience [00:01:02] Evolution of Smart Home Technology [00:02:52] The benefits of smart property technology [00:09:24] Future-proofing smart property technology [00:10:19] User experience and customization of smart property technology [00:12:08] Saving on insurance with technology [00:18:52] Benefits of smart thermostats [00:19:51] Closing [00:20:39] -------------------------------------------------------------- Connect with Mike: Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikebranam/ Web: https://www.pointcentral.com/   Connect with Sam: I love helping others place money outside of traditional investments that both diversify a strategy and provide solid predictable returns.     Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HowtoscaleCRE/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samwilsonhowtoscalecre/ Email me → sam@brickeninvestmentgroup.com   SUBSCRIBE and LEAVE A RATING. Listen to How To Scale Commercial Real Estate Investing with Sam Wilson Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-to-scale-commercial-real-estate/id1539979234 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4m0NWYzSvznEIjRBFtCgEL?si=e10d8e039b99475f -------------------------------------------------------------- Want to read the full show notes of the episode? Check it out below: Speaker 1 (00:00:00) - I spent a little bit of time in Arizona. So, you know, if it's 115 degrees outside and the outgoing resident has their air conditioning, it's 62 degrees and they're not in that unit for another 90 days. The property is on the hook for, you know, pretty decent chunk of change utility wise. You extract that over a portfolio of 10,000 units. You're talking about significant costs. Yeah, smart property technology solves that, right? So when we start to integrate with property management softwares, so when a resident moves out and the thermostat automatically gets reset, the door automatically locks. Now, maintenance can better serve other aspects of the building to fix that dishwasher that broke yesterday. Right. And and increase service levels and customer or resident service satisfaction. Welcome to the how to scale commercial real estate show. Whether you are an active or passive investor, we'll teach you how to scale your real estate investing business into something big. Mike Branum is the director of multifamily sales at Point Central, and he has nearly 20 years of experience in real estate technology.   Speaker 1 (00:01:02) - He's also been a part of several successful prop tech startups serving the multifamily industry. Mike, welcome to the show. Hey, thanks for having me, Sam. Good to be on. Absolutely. Mike There are three questions I ask every guest who comes on the show in 90s or less. Can you tell me where did you start? Where are you now and how did you get there? Where did I start? I started about 20 years ago in real estate technology at the time, really working on startups and had partnered up with a couple folks that had been on the ground floor at Google and they served as mentors for me in understanding property marketing and the rental space and search technology and pioneered that into a company called Rent Pits, which grew into a company called Remotely, which from my perspective, I believe it was the first smart apartment solution to offer smart home technology to the multifamily space. So I've spent the better part of the last dozen years specifically in that space and now leading the central sales and strategy team that does smart property technology.   Speaker 1 (00:01:59) - So still coming from where I came from and to what I'm doing now and have done so for the past five years. What what is different about what you're doing now than what you've previously done? You know, the technology has come a long way. You know, when I sort of look at Smart Home and put it in a similar bucket is like the flat screen television. 15 years ago, it was like only your wealthy friends down the street had a flat screen, right? Now everyone has one, right? So the cost came down, production ramped up. And of course, you know, it's just sort of like the standard models now. Now there's different types of models, but sort of everyone has one. Smart home is very similar. It's kind of been on that path where, you know, first the technology needed to prove itself. Once it did that, the cost to to sort of enter Smart Home, whether it was your house in my house, was getting the thermostat or getting a smart lock that's really grown into smart home is defined much differently now.   Speaker 1 (00:02:52) - And in fact, I look at it as smart properties specifically for rentals, that it's not just the the end user is the benefactor of that. When I say end user, it's not just the person holding the phone controlling the thermostat. Now it's the it's the building that benefits from that. It's the it's the owner operator of the asset. It's the people who work in the building and live in the building. They all benefit from smart property technology because it's it's mitigating risk. It's making life more customized. It's it's automating certain tasks so staff can do different things, more impactful things. So it's come a long way and it's come a long way fast over the last several years. It really has. I'm thinking back, gosh, to like in the late 90s, early 2000, they started talking about the smart home, you know, and they would send these drawings, these graphics of like, you know, you see all these wires running everywhere and where we're going to take smart homes. And it was just like, okay, this is ridiculous.   Speaker 1 (00:03:46) - Like, you know, they were they were designing whole neighborhoods that were going to be smart neighborhoods. Do you recall that? I do. I do. I go back to like The Jetsons. Right? Like we're all supposed to be flying to work at this point, aren't we? Right. So I think that was like the vision of like everything is sort of automated and everything is super high tech and future proofed. And I think the reality or the evolution of the technology has been, hey, how does it make my life better, easier, more comfortable, more secure? And I think that's where that adoption is coming. I remember years ago people would say, well, if I can't get up and turn off a light switch, then this isn't, you know, I'm not that lazy. It's not turning off light switches. You know, really what it is, is making sure my door's locked when I leave for a trip. It's making sure that if if there's a flood in my space, that that water is turned off automatically.   Speaker 1 (00:04:32) - So don't come back to a $50,000 bill and clear out my basement. Right. So the technology is really just benefiting the real estate space in that way. Now, maybe we'll fly to work one of these days, but not yet. Right, Right. Yeah. I mean, hey, they're working on those vertical takeoff and landing quadcopters and all that stuff. You seen those. Those electric vtol things that. I don't know. I read a lot of flying magazines, and it's always the. It's. It's still in the future. I mean, they keep talking about it, but it's not here yet. But I think that's interesting how how that kind of has played out where you're right. It's not it's not that we're too lazy to get up and turn off a light switch. It's that we maybe want lights to come on at various times when we're out, when we're out of town or we're on vacation or things like that. But then also just the health of the building, even even just from technology.   Speaker 1 (00:05:18) - One of those thought that came to me is my pickup truck. My truck notifies me if I leave it unlocked, Right? I walk to my office and all of a sudden just, you know, get a notification on my phone like, hey, hey, you left your truck unlocked like nobody's in it. You're like, Oh, right, I'm an idiot. I can lock it from my phone, which is kind of wild how some of those things. And oftentimes I live in Memphis, which I always want my truck locked. So those are helpful things. But let's talk then, how this really ties in, though, to multifamily. I mean, a lot of this adoption, a lot of this technology, there's there's a lot of different moving pieces in this space, like aggregating that into a central platform that is meaningful both to the tenant and the landlord is a task. How have you guys done that? You know, several ways. It's a really good question. There's a couple base components to it that that had had and have impact.   Speaker 1 (00:06:10) - Every building has some form of access control solution. Every resident unit has a lock in a thermostat. So taking that and sort of leveling up to the to to the new modern world of, okay, the residents shouldn't have to have a separate access control solution versus a separate app for their smart lock for the door and then a separate app to control the thermostat. Nor should the building and the staff have to sort of figure out all these different technologies that are sort of weaving around the building, which now now what you have is it's harder for them, right? So technology, which is supposed to be easy, is would make life harder. So we've unified that into a single solution. And what that's doing is really interesting, right? So, you know, when a property turns over, you know, what maintenance typically has to do is go up and lock the door, make sure the thermostat is set to a set point that's more energy efficient. I spent a little bit of time in Arizona, so, you know, if it's 115 degrees outside and the outgoing resident has their air conditioning at 62 degrees and they're not in that unit for another 90 days, the property is on the hook for, you know, pretty decent chunk of change utility wise.   Speaker 1 (00:07:21) - So you extract that over a portfolio of 10,000 units. You're talking about significant costs. Yeah, Smart property technology solves that, right? So when we start to integrate with property management softwares, so when a resident moves out and the thermostat automatically gets reset, the door automatically locks. Now maintenance can better serve other aspects of the building to fix that dishwasher that broke yesterday. Right. And and increase service levels and customer or resident service satisfaction. So that has impact on the entire building because it increases renewal rates, improves resident satisfaction and reduces costs. And what's happening right now is we're in this sort of uncertain time economically where the last seven, eight years in multifamily has been pretty good. So rent growth has been steady and even sort of outpaced forecast. That's really not the case right now. So operators of buildings are looking for ways to, hey, let's improve customer satisfaction with our residents and increase renewals. But how do we also improve our bottom line? And it's really becoming, you know, centralization, task automation and operational efficiencies.   Speaker 1 (00:08:26) - And so technology enables all of those things. One more example, and it's probably sort of a tired one, but but Covid sort of forced a lot of different things on all of us. And one of the the early signals in multifamily was, hey, my staff may not be able to actually go to work, but we still have people that whose leases are up and they have to move somewhere. How do we show the model and self-guided tours is is really sort of kicked down the door, no pun intended, and forced a new way of showing properties upon the multifamily space that the single family space had figured out several years ago. And this was more by force. But now that everyone sort of back on site, they said, you know what, like this model kind of works, right? Like, let's let's expand the hours of operation of the model, let people go see it. You know, usually they want to see it at 7:30 a.m. before they go to work. At least the engine isn't there yet.   Speaker 1 (00:09:24) - So it's getting more eyeballs inside the building and on the property, which improves the number of leases that actually come to the building while the staff goes to work on something else. Right. So those are been sort of great enablers for this type of technology. Yeah, absolutely. And it goes back to I mean, every everybody's goal, which is the highest and best use of my time, like what is the highest and best? And it gets a question we're always asking, you know, as business owners like what what's what's the best thing right now for the business for me to be doing? Not necessarily, you know, should I be doing that? Should I be doing at no, I should be working on growth strategy and other things that are really meaningful to what we're doing. So it's kind of the same idea just when it comes to staff on hand. And that, of course then improves. The bottom line is there would have been maybe some challenges in I know you mentioned integrating with property management software would have been some challenge maybe you guys have found in getting this deployed.   Speaker 1 (00:10:19) - And then on top of that, is there any fear once you go through investing in all of this, of obsolescence in the near future? Good question. You know, we get a lot of those questions about future proofing. How do I know that this won't be obsolete tomorrow? The good news about the smart property technology is a lot of the updates are OTA updates. You know what we're not looking to to build a different lock. We're not looking to change the way thermostats actually work. At the end of the day, the thermostat is to, you know, control a set point at a certain time and a door is to lock and unlock. So from a future proofing standpoint, there might be some aesthetic changes to the way. From the stats look in locks, but the function is the same. How do you make those functions smarter, more customizable, more programmable, and to ensure that it's secure. So. So those are things that help with future proof. All the software updates are done at two in the morning when everyone's asleep.   Speaker 1 (00:11:15) - Right? So, so that's the way we get we get through the future proofing component to this. What's good is that everyone sort of recognizes, okay, I've got to get rid of my, for lack of a better term, dumb lock and dumb thermostat. It's now picking the provider. And because there's been so much movement in tech over the last several years, what we've seen is groups are looking to find providers that are future proofed and that will be around tomorrow because there's been a lot of of capital that's gone into startups that may not have had success in profitability. So now they're looking for more stability in their partners right now that that makes a lot of sense. Let's let's rewind here for one one quick second. You mentioned an OTA update. I don't know the acronym. What is that over-the-air? So it's all done over the air. Got it. Got it. Okay, cool. Learned something new here today. Let's talk then about the difference between what you what the landlord sees and maybe then what the tenants see.   Speaker 1 (00:12:08) - How easy is that? I'm going to call it digital keys Assigning. Okay. Mike, you moved into unit ten. Like, here's your access to your thermostat. Here's your access to your I mean, I'm assuming you guys are even doing door locks on the units where it's like, hey, this is, you know, you can open the door with your smartphone. I'm guessing that's that's the capabilities you're working with now. But tell me if I'm wrong. How are you guys managing that between the tenants, between the landlord software, all those integrations? Like, what does that look like from a user perspective? Yeah, a great question, Sam. So when a resident moves in because you know the technology is tied in with property management software, think, think Yardi, think RealPage and Trotta, you know, those types of sort of primary, the foundational property management software solutions when that resident moves in property staff is is very well trained to just enter that capture that resident data moving them in on the appropriate date.   Speaker 1 (00:13:01) - When that happens, they automatically receive email and or text that just says welcome to your smart home and it drops them off to the application. And once the app is downloaded in 30s, they have a smart apartment. So all of those controls are on their phone. Of course, they can still use them physically at the door, at the device should they so choose. But now they have that customization option of I think I forgot to lock the door, I'm at the airport. Let me make sure that happened or I'm in Colorado now. So we have very drastic weather changes. It's not uncommon for it to go from 85 to 25, right? So thermostat controls are really important when you're away so you don't have a catastrophic, catastrophic event. So all that can be done for the resident within 30 to 60s and it's done automatically once the property staff moves them into the property management software. So that's great. The on site staff for them. It's really interesting, right? Because, you know, depending on where where they're working, what building they're working in, there might be a lot of technology or a little technology.   Speaker 1 (00:14:01) - So sometimes there's sort of this fear component. There could be this wall that says, okay, well, what are you putting in my building here? You know, what is this going to do? And it's just going to take my job away. No, it's not. It's actually going to be a job aid for you. So, you know, I went back to that maintenance reference before. You know, maintenance used to be a very reactive role where something breaks and we go fix it. Right now, it's it's not only proactive, it's even preventative. We can provide notifications when an Hvac system starts to operate inefficiently. So it's a nice it's a nice heads up, right when maintenance starts to learn about those types of things that come to their building, we almost see their shoulders go down like, Wait a minute, so I'm not going to get like somebody calling and yelling because the thermostat broke. Like I can actually get a heads up and say, Hey, let me just take a preventative measure here.   Speaker 1 (00:14:48) - Something's not operating efficiently and this could save you a few dollars on your energy bill. Otherwise what happens? It breaks down and they run that bill down to the front office and say, hey, I'm not paying this because your thing broke. Right. So the adoption, I think, is where you might have been going with that. Like the adoption for residents and staff is phenomenal just because it's it's a low barrier technology and it's customized technology, but it's very convenient for the operator or or the staff member or the resident. Absolutely. Absolutely. I'm thinking about some commercial spaces we have, and it's intriguing just to get those notifications again, going back to my truck, that tells me I'm a truck's unlocked, I get notifications. It's like, Hey, your AC, I got one. The other day it said, Hey, your AC's, you know, it's such and such locations have been running for, you know, four hours and the temperature has risen by three degrees. And you're like, Well, that is something wrong? Like, why? Why is that happening? And so I think that's that's really, really cool just to see how how that works.   Speaker 1 (00:15:44) - Well, let me ask you this, Mike. Just from a cost benefit analysis standpoint, what can you can you give us some, you know, just high level case studies on how this works out? And then maybe on the back side of that, tell us the types of properties inside a multi. Like what the ideal candidate is. Candidate is for what you guys do. Sure. So from from a return standpoint, you know. There's a lot of different sort of pockets to this where the the the operator sees return. One is rent growth and retention. There's that element to it. Vacant unit savings, there's that benefit to it, unifying technology. So they're not paying different providers for 3 or 4 different services when it can all be bundled into one, so to speak. You know, a big one that's kind of obvious is water. You know, I haven't met a property manager yet that doesn't have sort of this nightmarish story about water. You know, it leaks from the 15th floor and then everything from the 14th on down, you know, tends to get ruined.   Speaker 1 (00:16:44) - And one that was near and dear to me that was crushing, you know, having been an old baseball card collector as a $3 million baseball card collection was destroyed in a water event in a multifamily property. And you can't get those back, right? So that becomes the I think the average water event was 50, $60,000. Well, this was this was $1 million plus, you know, a water event. And they're absolutely preventable. So, you know, when you look at the return on things like that, every property manager will say, if I can solve water, you know, then, yeah, it'll save us money. But it also really impact our resident experience because the person whose card collection was ruined isn't renewing, right? So, you know, those are the types of things that we'll see on the renewal standpoint. We've got a wonderful ROI calculator that we put in front of our prospects just to point to all the different return points that exist with this type of technology. Um, second part of that question is what types of buildings does this make the most sense in? What's kind of funny is, you know, the initial thought is, oh, this makes a lot of sense for maybe a class or luxury class only.   Speaker 1 (00:17:50) - But we've had incredible adoption on class, you know, you know, not trying to go from a B to an A, but saying, look, we're going to be the best B on the block, and that will help our rent and that'll help attract more residents. And that, you know, that capital investment for technology is significantly less than some of the cosmetic improvements that might have to come with ripping out flooring and countertops and appliances and things of that nature. You'd be even surprised. You'd be surprised, like even workforce housing that operates on really thin margins, you know, some might say, well, that's a candidate they probably wouldn't want to adopt. And they're coming to us saying, actually, we do because we operate on thinner margins. For us, 15% savings on vacant units is much more meaningful, right, than it might be for an A-class property. Um, so those are a couple examples. They're built to rent, which is emerging vertical right now is all over this. Just because the single family home environment has adopted this technology very quickly and build to rent is still a single family home.   Speaker 1 (00:18:52) - But we look at it as like a multifamily that's just not horizontal, right? Um, so there really isn't a property type that's totally off the table because there's different types of benefit for every asset class. Got it. That's really, really cool. Are there? Are there ways of saving on insurance when you employ this technology? I mean, our underwriters giving discounts because, hey, look, you know, we've got an entire point central system set up at our property. You see anything like that? You know, we're hearing about that. We don't have the relationships with the providers. And ultimately it's the operator that's paying the premiums. But we're starting to hear that, hey, I can I can save X percent if I have this system in place. We're even hearing that, hey, my local utility will actually give us a credit or a rebate on the thermostats by by purchasing the hardware because they know that that that can help on the utility, you know, in saving with the grid and sort of dialing certain set points at certain hours.   Speaker 1 (00:19:51) - So there are incentives out there on hardware. There's certainly the insurance market is emerging with this type of technology, right? No, that's really, really cool. Yeah. I'm even thinking about the thermostats in our own in our own house that I mean, it's just amazing how far this has come where they will program based upon peak usage timing in the rest of the city and say okay, well if peak usage is at 7 a.m., we're going to set yours to start at 530 and get the house cool by 630. And then, you know, we're off peak usage. So, I mean, it's just it's amazing all the different ways. And I think it'll be fun just to see how this industry continues to to evolve in what what comes out next. This has been absolutely fantastic. Mike, thank you for taking the time to come on the show today and really tell us about Central, what you guys bring to the market and how it benefits both not just the tenants, but also the landlords and property owners.   Speaker 1 (00:20:39) - There's certainly been fascinating if our listeners want to get in touch with you and learn more about you, what is the best way to do that in Central? So yeah, feel free to contact me. Mike Branham at Point Central, go to our website that can that can point us point you toward me as well. But thank you for the time and and for the platform just to have a good conversation. Sam I appreciate it. Absolutely. Thank you, Mike. And we'll make sure we include that there in the show notes Point Central. Mike, thank you again. Have a great rest of your day. My pleasure. You, too. Hey, thanks for listening to the How to scale commercial Real Estate podcast. If you can do me a favor and subscribe and leave us a review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, whatever platform it is you use to listen. If you can do that for us, that would be a fantastic help to the show. It helps us both attract new listeners as well as rank higher on those directories.   Speaker 1 (00:21:29) - So appreciate you listening. Thanks so much and hope to catch you on the next episode.  

無情工商時間～ 賴老師的課程：文法百寶箱上架，lai200 https://lihi2.com/oKcha 快速幫你複習一下這集的主題句 ＆ 單字： 下次不敢了 I won't do it/that again. 下次不會(做)了 I'm never doing that again. 補充學習 吃霸王餐 dine and dash -dash 跑走 -dine 用餐 The customer at table 3 just dined and dashed. 被抓到 got caught. 當場被抓到 catch someone red-handed / in the act 情境對話 Mike：Duncan，有人說你早上在度假村的自助餐吃霸王餐欸！ Duncan, someone said you dined and dashed at the resort buffet this morning. Duncan：那不是免費的嗎？大家都在拿自助餐的食物。 I thought it was for free? Everybody was taking food from the buffet. Mike：天下沒有白吃的午餐！你這個白癡。 There's no such thing as a free lunch. You idiot. Duncan：好吧抱歉，下次不敢了。 I know. I know. I won't do it again. 小額贊助支持本節目： https://open.firstory.me/user/ckf6dwd77euw20897td87i5wj 留言告訴我你對這一集的想法： https://open.firstory.me/user/ckf6dwd77euw20897td87i5wj/comments Powered by Firstory Hosting

Mike Brevoort, Chief Product Officer at Gitpod, joins Corey on Screaming in the Cloud to discuss all the intricacies of remote development and how Gitpod is simplifying the process. Mike explains why he feels the infinite resources cloud provides can be overlooked when discussing remote versus local development environments, and how simplifying build abstractions is a fantastic goal, but that focusing on the tools you use in a build abstraction in the meantime can be valuable. Corey and Mike also dive into the security concerns that come with remote development, and Mike reveals the upcoming plans for Gitpod's local conference environment, CDE Universe. About MikeMike has a passion for empowering people to be creative and work together more effectively. He is the Chief Product Officer at Gitpod striving to remove the friction and drudgery from software development through Cloud Developer Environments. He spent the previous four years at Slack where he created Workflow Builder and “Platform 2.0” after his company Missions was acquired by Slack in 2018. Mike lives in Denver, Colorado and enjoys cycling, hiking and being outdoors.Links Referenced: Gitpod: https://www.gitpod.io/ CDE Universe: https://cdeuniverse.com/ TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: It's easy to **BEEP** up on AWS. Especially when you're managing your cloud environment on your own!Mission Cloud un **BEEP**s your apps and servers. Whatever you need in AWS, we can do it. Head to missioncloud.com for the AWS expertise you need. Corey: Have you listened to the new season of Traceroute yet? Traceroute is a tech podcast that peels back the layers of the stack to tell the real, human stories about how the inner workings of our digital world affect our lives in ways you may have never thought of before. Listen and follow Traceroute on your favorite platform, or learn more about Traceroute at origins.dev. My thanks to them for sponsoring this ridiculous podcast. Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud, I'm Corey Quinn. I have had loud, angry, and admittedly at times uninformed opinions about so many things over the past few years, but something that predates that a lot is my impression on the idea of using remote systems for development work as opposed to doing local dev, and that extends to build and the rest. And my guest today here to argue with me about some of it—or agree; we'll find out—is Mike Brevoort, Chief Product Officer at Gitpod, which I will henceforth be mispronouncing as JIT-pod because that is the type of jerk I am. Mike, thank you for joining me.Mike: Thank you for insulting my company. I appreciate it.Corey: No, by all means, it's what we do here.Mike: [laugh].Corey: So, you clearly have opinions on the idea of remote versus local development that—I am using the word remote development; I know you folks like to use the word cloud, in place of remote, but I'm curious to figure out is, is that just the zeitgeist that has shifted? Do you have a belief that it should be in particular places, done in certain ways, et cetera? Where do your opinion on this start and stop?Mike: I think that—I mean, remote is accurate, an accurate description. I don't like to emphasize the word remote because I don't think it's important that it's remote or local. I think that the term cloud connotes different values around the elasticity of environments and the resources that are more than what you might have on your local machine versus a remote machine. It's not so much whether the one machine is local or remote as much of it is that there are infinite numbers of resources that you can develop across in the cloud. That's why we tend to prefer our cloud development environments.Corey: From my perspective, I've been spending too many years now living in basically hotels and airports. And when I was doing that, for a long time, the only computer I bring with me has been my iPad Pro. That used to be a little bit on the challenging side and these days, that's gotten capable enough where it's no longer interesting in isolation. But there's no local development environment that is worth basically anything on that. So, I've been SSHing into things and using VI as my development environment for many years.When I started off as a grumpy Unix sysadmin, there was something reassuring about the latest state of whatever it is I'm working on lives in a data center somewhere rather than on a laptop, I'm about to leave behind a coffee shop because I'm careless. So, there's a definite value and sense that I am doing something virtuous, historically. But it didn't occur to me till I started talking to people about this, just how contentious the idea was. People would love to ask all kinds of fun objections to this where it was, “Oh, well, what about when you're on a plane and need to do work?” It's, well, I spend an awful lot of time on planes and that is not a limiting factor in me writing the terrible nonsense that I will charitably called code, in my case. I just don't find that that idea holds up anywhere. The world has become so increasingly interconnected that that seems unlikely. But I do live in San Francisco, so here, every internet is generally pretty decent; not every place is. What are your thoughts?Mike: I agree. I mean, I think one thing is, I would just like not to think about it, whether I can or can't develop because I'm connected or not. And I think that we tend to be in a world where that is moreso the case. And I think a lot of times when you're not connected, you become reconnected soon, like if your connection is not reliable or if you're going in and out of connectivity issues. And when you're trying to work on a local laptop and you're connecting and disconnecting, it's not like we develop these days, and everything is just isolated on our local laptop, especially we talk about cloud a lot on this podcast and a lot of apps now go way beyond just I'm running a process on my machine and I'm connecting to data on my machine.There are local emulators you could use for some of these services, but most of them are inferior. And if you're using SQS or using any other, like, cloud-based service, you're usually, as a developer, connecting to some version of that and if you're disconnected anyway, you're not productive either. And so, I find that it's just like an irrelevant conversation in this new world. And that the way we've developed traditionally has not followed along with this view of I need to pile everything in on my laptop, to be able to develop and be productive has not, like, followed along with the trend that moved into the cloud.Corey: Right. The big problem for a long time has been, how do I make this Mac or Windows laptop look a lot like Linux EC2 instance? And there have been a bunch of challenges and incompatibility issues and the rest, and from my perspective, I like to develop in an environment that at least vaguely resembles the production environment it's going to run in, which in AWS's case, of course, comes down to expensive. Bu-dum-tss.Mike: Yeah, it's a really big challenge. It's been a challenge, right? When you've worked with coworkers that were on a Windows machine and you were on a Mac machine, and you had the one person on their Linux machine forever, and we all struggled with trying to mimic these development environments that were representative, ultimately, of what we would run in production. And if you're counting costs, we can count the cost of those cloud resources, we can count the cost of those laptops, but we also need to count the cost of the people who are using those laptops and how inefficient and how much churn they have, and how… I don't know, there was for years of my career, someone would show up every morning to the stand-up meeting and say, it's like, “Well, I wasted all afternoon yesterday trying to work out my, you know, issues with my development environment.” And it's, like, “I hope I get that sorted out later today and I hope someone can help me.”And so, I think cost is one thing. I think that there's a lot of inconsistencies that lead to a lot of inefficiencies and churn. And I think that, regardless of where you're developing, the more that you can make your environments more consistent and sound, not for you, but for your own team and have those be more representative of what you are running in production, the better.Corey: We should disambiguate here because I fear this is one of the areas where my use case tends to veer off into the trees, which is I tend to operate largely in isolation, from a development point of view. I build small, micro things that wind up doing one thing, poorly. And that is, like, what I do is a proof of concept, or to be funny, or to kick the tires on a new technology. I'll also run a bunch of random things I find off of JIF-ub—yes, that's how I pronounce GitHub. And that's great, but it also feels like I'm learning as a result, every stack, and every language, in every various version that it has, and very few of the cloud development environments that I've seen, really seems to cater to the idea that simultaneously, I want to have certain affordances in my shell environment set up the way that I want them, tab complete this particular suite of tools generically across the board, but then reset to that baseline and go in a bunch of different directions of, today, it's Python in this version and tomorrow, it's Node in this other version, and three, what is a Typescript anyway, and so on and so forth.It feels like it's either, in most cases, you either get this generic, one-size-fits-everyone in this company, for this project, approach, or it's, here's a very baseline untuned thing that does not have any of your dependencies installed. Start from scratch every time. And it's like, feels like there are two paths, and they both suck. Where are you folks at these days on that spectrum?Mike: Yeah, I think that, you know, one, if you do all of that development across all these different libraries and technology stacks and you're downloading all these repos from JIF-hub—I say it right—and you're experimenting, you tend to have a lot of just collision of things. Like if you're using Python, it's, like, really a pain to maintain isolation across projects and not have—like, your environment is, like, one big bucket of things on your laptop and it's very easy to get that into a state where things aren't working, and then you're struggling. There's no big reset on your laptop. I mean, there is but it takes—it's a full reset of everything that you have.And I think the thing that's interesting to me about cloud development environments is I could spin one of these up, I could trash it to all hell and just throw it away and get another one. And I could get another one of those at a base of which has been tuned for whatever project or technology I'm working on. So, I could take—you know, do the effort to pre-setup environments, one that is set up with all of my, like, Python tooling, and another one that's set up with all my, like, Go or Rust tooling, or our front-end development, even as a base repo for what I tend to do or might tend to experiment with. What we find is that, whether you're working alone or you're working with coworkers, that setting up a project and all the resources and the modules and the libraries and the dependencies that you have, like, someone has to do that work to wire that up together and the fact that you could just get an environment and get another one and another one, we use this analogy of, like, tissue boxes where, like, you should just be able to pull a new dev environment out of a tissue box and use it and throw it away and pull as many tissues out of the box as you want. And they should be, like, cheap and ephemeral because—and they shouldn't be long-lived because they shouldn't be able to drift.And whether you're working alone or you're working in a team, it's the same value. The fact that, like, I could pull on these out, I have it. I'm confident in it of what I got. Like for example, ideally, you would just start a dev environment, it's available instantly, and you're ready to code. You're in this project with—and maybe it's a project you've never developed on. Maybe it's an open-source project.This is where I think it really improves the sort of equitability of being able to develop, whether it's in open-source, whether it's inner-source in companies, being able to approach any project with a click of a button and get the same environment that the tech lead on the project who started it five years ago has, and then I don't need to worry about that and I get the same environment. And I think that's the value. And so, whether you're individual or you're on a team, you want to be able to experiment and thrash and do things and be able to throw it away and start over again, and not have to—like for example, maybe you're doing that on your machine and you're working on this thing and then you actually have to do some real work, and then now that you've done something that conflicts with the thing that you're working on and you're just kind of caught in this tangled mess, where it's like, you should just be able to leave that experiment there and just go work on the thing you need to work on. And why can't you have multiples of these things at any given time?Corey: Right. One of the things I loved about EC2 dev environments has been that I can just spin stuff up and okay, great, it's time for a new project. Spin up another one and turn it off when I'm done using it—which is the lie we always tell ourselves in cloud and get charged for things we forget to turn off. But then, okay, I need an Intel box one day. Done. Great, awesome. I don't have any of those lying around here anymore but clickety, clickety, and now I do.It's nice being able to have that flexibility, but it's also sometimes disconcerting when I'm trying to figure out what machine I was on when I was building things and the rest, and having unified stories around this becomes super helpful. I'm also finding that my overpowered desktop is far more cost-efficient when I need to compile something challenging, as opposed to finding a big, beefy, EC2 box for that thing as well. So, much of the time, what my remote system is doing is sitting there bored. Even when I'm developing on it, it doesn't take a lot of modern computer resources to basically handle a text editor. Unless it's Emacs, in which case, that's neither here nor there.Mike: [laugh]. I think that the thing that becomes costly, especially when using cloud development environments, is when you have to continue to run them even when you're not using them for the sake of convenience because you're not done with it, you're in the middle of doing some work and it still has to run or you forget to shut it off. If you are going to just spin up a really beefy EC2 instance for an hour to do that big compile and it costs you 78 cents. That's one thing. I mean, I guess that adds up over time and yes, if you've already bought that Mac Studio that's sitting under your desk, humming, it's going to be more cost-efficient to use that thing.But there's, like, an element of convenience here that, like, what if I haven't bought the Mac Studio, but I still need to do that big beefy compilation? And maybe it's not on a project I work on every single day; maybe it's the one that I'm just trying to help out with or just starting to contribute to. And so, I think that we need to get better about, and something that we're very focused on at JIT-pod, is—Gitpod—is—Corey: [laugh]. I'm going to get you in trouble at this rate.Mike: —[laugh]—is really to optimize that underlying runtime environment so that we can optimize the resources that you're using only when you're using it, but also provide a great user experience. Which is, for me, as someone who's responsible for the product at Gitpod, the thing I want to get to is that you never have to think about a machine. You're not thinking about this dev environment as something that lives somewhere, that you're paying for, that there's a meter spinning that if you forget it, that you're like, ah, it's going to cost me a lot of money, that I have to worry about ever losing it. And really, I just want to be able to get a new environment, have one, use it, come back to it when I need it, have it not cost me a lot of money, and be able to have five or ten of those at a time because I'm not as worried about what it's going to cost me. And I'm sure it'll cost something, but the convenience factor of being able to get one instantly and have it and not have to worry about it ultimately saves me a lot of time and aggravation and improves my ability to focus and get work done.And right now, we're still in this mode where we're still thinking about, is it on my laptop? Is it remote? Is it on this EC2 instance or that EC2 instance? Or is this thing started or stopped? And I think we need to move beyond that and be able to just think of these things as development environments that I use and need and they're there when I want to, when I need to work on them, and I don't have to tend to them like cattle.Corey: Speaking of tending large things in herds—I guess that's sort of for the most tortured analogy slash segway I've come up with recently—you folks have a conference coming up soon in San Francisco. What's the deal with that? And I'll point out, it's all on-site, locally, not in the cloud. So, hmm…Mike: Yeah, so we have a local conference environment, a local conference that we're hosting in San Francisco called CDE Universe on June 1st and 2nd, and we are assembling all the thought leaders in the industry who want to get together and talk about where not just cloud development is going, but really where development is going. And so, there's us, there's a lot of companies that have done this themselves. Like, before I joined Gitpod, I was at Slack for four years and I got to see the transition of a, sort of, remote development hosted on EC2 instances transition and how that really empowered our team of hundreds of engineers to be able to contribute and like work together better, more efficiently, to run this giant app that you can't run just alone on your laptop. And so, Slack is going to be there, they're going to be talking about their transition to cloud development. The Uber team is going to be there, there's going to be some other companies.So, Nathan who's building Zed, he was the one that originally built Adam at GitHub is now building Zed, which is a new IDE, is going to be there. And I can't mention all the speakers, but there's going to be a lot of people that are really looking at how do we drive forward development and development environments. And that experience can get a lot better. So, if you're interested in that, if you're going to be in San Francisco on June 1st and 2nd and want to talk to these people, learn from them, and help us drive this vision forward for just a better development experience, come hang out with us.Corey: I'm a big fan of collaborating with folks and figuring out what tricks and tips they've picked up along the way. And this is coming from the perspective of someone who acts as a solo developer in many cases. But it always drove me a little nuts when you see people spending weeks of their lives configuring their text editor—VIM in my case because I'm no better than these people; I am one of them—and getting it all setup and dialed in. It's, how much productivity you gaining versus how much time are you spending getting there?And then when all was said and done a few years ago, I found myself switching to VS Code for most of what I do, and—because it's great—and suddenly the world's shifting on its axis again. At some point, you want to get away from focusing on productivity on an individualized basis. Now, the rules change when you're talking about large teams where everyone needs a copy of this running locally or in their dev environment, wherever happens to be, and you're right, often the first two weeks of a new software engineering job are, you're now responsible for updating the onboarding docs because it's been ten minutes since the last time someone went through it. And oh, the versions bumped again of what we would have [unintelligible 00:16:44] brew install on a Mac and suddenly everything's broken. Yay. I don't miss those days.Mike: Yeah, the new, like, ARM-based Macs came out and then you were—now all of a sudden, all your builds are broken. We hear that a lot.Corey: Oh, what I love now is that, in many cases, I'm still in a process of, okay, I'm developing locally on an ARM-based Mac and I'm deploying it to a Graviton2-based Lambda or instance, but the CI/CD builder is going to run on Intel, so it's one of those, what is going on here? Like, there's a toolchain lag of round embracing ARM as an architecture. That's mostly been taken care of as things have evolved, but it's gotten pretty amusing at some point, just as quickly that baseline architecture has shifted for some workloads. And for some companies.Mike: Yeah, and things just seem to be getting more [laugh] and more complicated not less complicated, and so I think the more that we can—Corey: Oh, you noticed?Mike: Try to simplify build abstractions [laugh], you know, the better. But I think in those cases where, I think it's actually good for people to struggle with setting up their environment sometime, with caring about the tools that they use and their experience developing. I think there has to be some ROI with that. If it's like a chronic thing that you have to continue to try to fix and make better, it's one thing, but if you spend a whole day improving the tools that you use to make you a better developer later, I think there's a ton of value in that. I think we should care a lot about the tools we use.However, that's not something we want to do every day. I mean, ultimately, I know I don't build software for the sake of building software. I want to create something. I want to create some value, some change in the world. There's some product ultimately that I'm trying to build.And, you know, early on, I've done a lot of work in my career on, like, workflow-type builders and visual builders and I had this incorrect assumption somewhere along the way—and this came around, like, sort of the maker movement, when everybody was talking about everybody should learn how to code, and I made this assumption that everybody really wants to create; everybody wants to be a creator, and if given the opportunity, they will. And I think what I finally learned is that, actually most people don't like to create. A lot of people just want to be served; like, they just want to consume and they don't want the hassle of it. Some people do, if they have the opportunity and the skillsets, too, but it's also similar to, like, if I'm a professional developer, I need to get my work done. I'm not measured on how well my local tooling is set up; I'm sort of measured on my output and the impact that I have in the organization.I tend to think about, like, chefs. If I'm a chef and I work 60 hours in a restaurant, 70 hours in a restaurant, the last thing I want to do is come home and cook myself a meal. And most of the chefs I know actually don't have really nice kitchens at home. They, like, tend to, they want other people to cook for them. And so, I think, like, there's a place in professional setting where you just need to get the work done and you don't want to worry about all the meta things and the time that you could waste on it.And so, I feel like there's a happy medium there. I think it's good for people to care about the tools that they use the environment that they develop in, to really care for that and to curate it and make it better, but there's got to be some ROI and it's got to have value to you. You have to enjoy that. Otherwise, you know, what's the point of it in the first place?Corey: One thing that I used to think about was that if you're working in regulated industries, as I tended to a fair bit, there's something very nice about not having any of the data or IP or anything like that locally. Your laptop effectively just becomes a thin client to something that's already controlled by the existing security and compliance apparatus. That's very nice, where suddenly it's all someone steals my iPad, or I drop it into the bay, it's locked, it's encrypted. Cool, I go to the store, get myself a new one, restore a backup from iCloud, and I'm up and running again in a very short period of time as if nothing had ever changed. Whereas when I was doing a lot of local development and had bad hard drive issues in the earlier part of my career, well, there goes that month.Mike: Yeah, it's a really good point. I think that we're all walking around with these laptops with really sensitive IP on it and that those are in bars and restaurants. And maybe your drives are encrypted, but there's a lot of additional risks, including, you know, everything that is going over the network, whether I'm on a local coffee shop, and you know, the latest vulnerability that, an update I have to do on my Mac if I'm behind. And there's actually a lot of risk and having all that just sort of thrown to the wind and spread across the world and there's a lot of value in having that in a very safe place. And what we've even found that, at Gitpod now, like, the latest product we're working on is one that we called Gitpod Dedicated, which gives you the ability to run inside your own cloud perimeter. And we're doing that on AWS first, and so we can set up and manage an installation of Gitpod inside your own AWS account.And the reason that became important to us is that a lot of companies, a lot of our customers, treat their source code as their most sensitive intellectual property. And they won't allow it to leave their perimeter, like, they may run in AWS, but they have this concept of, sort of like, our perimeter and you're either inside of that and outside of it. And I think this speaks a little bit to a blog post that you wrote a few months ago about the lagging adoption of remote development environments. I think one of those aspects is, sort of, convenience and the user experience, but the other is that you can't use them very well with your stack and all the tools and resources that you need to use if they're not running, sort of, close within your perimeter. And so, you know, we're finding that companies have this need to be able to have greater control, and now with the, sort of, trends around, like, coding assistance and generative AI and it's even the perfect storm of not only am I like sending my source code from my editor out into some [LM 00:22:36], but I also have the risk of an LM that might be compromised, that's injecting code and I'm committing on my behalf that may be introducing vulnerabilities. And so, I think, like, getting that off to a secure space that is consistent and sound and can be monitored, to be kept up-to-date, I think it has the ability to, sort of, greatly increase a customer's security posture.Corey: While we're here kicking the beehive, for lack of a better term, your support for multiple editors in Gitpod the product, I assumed that most people would go with VS Code because I tend to see it everywhere, and I couldn't help but notice that neither VI nor Emacs is one of the options, the last time I checked. What are you seeing as far as popularity contests go? And that might be a dangerous question because I'm not suggesting you alienate many of the other vendors who are available, but in the world I live in, it's pretty clear where the zeitgeist of my subculture is going.Mike: Yeah, I mean, VS Code is definitely the most popular IDE. The majority of people that use Gitpod—and especially we have a, like, a pretty heavy free usage tier—uses it in the browser, just for the convenience of having that in the browser and having many environments in the browser. We tend to find more professional developers use VS Code desktop or the JetBrains suite of IDEs.Corey: Yeah, JetBrains I'm seeing a fair bit of in a bunch of different ways and I think that's actually most of what your other options are. I feel like people have either gone down the JetBrains path or they haven't and it seems like it's very, people who are into it are really into it and people who are not are just, never touch it.Mike: Yeah, and we want to provide the options for people to use the tools that they want to use and feel comfortable on. And we also want to provide a platform for the next generation of IDEs to be able to build on and support and to be able to support this concept of cloud or remote development more natively. So, like I mentioned, Nathan Sobo at Zed, I met up with him last week—I'm in Denver; he's in Boulder—and we were talking about this and he's interested in Zed working in the browser, and he's talked about this publicly. And for us, it's really interesting because, like, IDEs working in the browser is, like, a really great convenience. It's not the perfect way to work, necessarily, in all circumstances.There's some challenges with, like, all this tab sprawl and stuff, but it gives us the opportunity, if we can make Zed work really well in for Gitpod—or anybody else building an IDE—for that to work in the browser. Ultimately what we want is that if you want to use a terminal, we want to create a great experience for you for that. And so, we're working on this ability in Gitpod to be able to effectively, like, bring your own IDE, if you're building on that, and to be able to offer it and distribute on Gitpod, to be able to create a new developer tool and make it so that anybody in their Gitpod workspace can launch that as part of their workspace, part of their tool. And we want to see developer tools and IDEs flourish on top of this platform that is cloud development because we want to give people choice. Like, at Gitpod, we're not building our own IDE anymore.The team started to. They created Theia, which was one of the original cloud, sort of, web-based IDEs that now has been handed over to the Eclipse Foundation. But we moved to VS Code because we found that that's where the ecosystem were. That's where our users were, and our customers, and what they wanted to use. But we want to expand beyond that and give people the ability to choose, not only the options that are available today but the options that should be available in the future. And we think that choice is really important.Corey: When you see people kicking the tires on Gitpod for the first time, where does the bulk of their hesitancy come from? Like, what is it where—people, in my experience, don't love to embrace change. So, it's always this thing, “This thing sucks,” is sort of the default response to anything that requires them to change their philosophy on something. So okay, great. That is a thing that happens. We'll see what people say or do. But are they basing it on anything beyond just familiarity and comfort with the old way of doing things or are there certain areas that you're finding the new customers are having a hard time wrapping their head around?Mike: There's a couple of things. I think one thing is just habit. People have habits and preferences, which are really valuable because it's the way that they've learned to be successful in their careers and the way that they expect things. Sometimes people have these preferences that are fairly well ingrained that maybe are irrational or rational. And so, one thing is just people's force of habit.And then getting used to this idea that if it's not on my laptop, it means—like what you mentioned before, it's always what-ifs of, like, “What if I'm on a plane?” Or like, “What if I'm at the airport in a hurricane?” “What if I'm on a train with a spotty internet connection?” And so, there's all these sort of what-if situations. And once people get past that and they start actually using Gitpod and trying to set their projects up, the other limiting factor we have is just connectivity.And that's, like, connectivity to the other resources that you use to develop. So, whether that's, you know, package or module repositories or that some internal services or a database that might be running behind a firewall, it's like getting connectivity to those things. And that's where the dedicated deployment model that I talked about, running inside of your perimeter on our network, they have control over, kind of helps, and that's why we're trying to overcome that. Or if you're using our SaaS product, using something like Tailscale or a more modern VPN that way. But those are the two main things.It's like familiarity, this comfort for how to work, sort of, in this new world and not having this level of comfort of, like, it's running on this thing I can hold, as well as connectivity. And then there is some cost associated with people now paying for this infrastructure they didn't have to pay for before. And I think it's a, you know, it's a mistake to say that we're going to offset the cost of laptops. Like, that shouldn't be how you justify a cloud development environment. Like—Corey: Yeah, I feel like people are not requesting under-specced laptops much these days anymore.Mike: It's just like, I want to use a good laptop; I want to use a really nice laptop with good hardware and that shouldn't be the cost. The proposition shouldn't be, it's like, “Save a thousand dollars on every developer's laptop by moving this off to the cloud.” It's really the time savings. It's the focus. It's the, you know, removing all of that drift and creating these consistent environments that are more secure, and effectively, like, automating your development environment that's the same for everybody.But that's the—I think habits are the big thing. And there is, you know, I talked about a little bit that element of, like, we still have this concept of, like, I have this environment and I start it and it's there, and I pay for it while it's there and I have to clean it up or I have to make sure it stopped. I think that still exists and it creates a lot of sort of cognitive overhead of things that I have to manage that I didn't have to manage before. And I think that we have to—Gitpod needs to be better there and so does everybody else in the industry—about removing that completely. Like, there's one of the things that I really love that I learned from, like, Stewart Butterfield when I was at Slack was, he always brought up this concept called the convenience threshold.And it was just the idea that when a certain threshold of convenience is met, people's behavior suddenly changes. And as we thought about products and, like, the availability of features, that it really drove how we thought about even how to think about you know, adoption or, like, what is the threshold, what would it take? And, like, a good example of this is even, like, the way we just use credit cards now or debit cards to pay for things all the time, where we're used to carry cash. And in the beginning, when it was kind of novel that you could use a credit card to pay for things, like even pay for gas, you always had to have cash because you didn't know if it'd be accepted. And so, you still had to have cash, you still had to have it on hand, you still had to get it from the ATM, you still have to worry about, like, what if I get there and they don't accept my cards and how much money is it going to be, so I need to make sure I have enough of it.But the convenience of having this card where I don't have to carry cash is I don't have to worry about that anymore, as long as they have money in my bank account. And it wasn't until those cards were accepted more broadly that I could actually rely on having that card and not having the cash. It's similar when it comes to cloud development environments. It needs to be more convenient than my local development environment. It needs to be—it's kind of like early—I remember when laptops became more common, I was used to developing on a desktop, and people were like, nobody's ever going to develop on a laptop, it's not powerful enough, the battery runs out, I have to you know, when I close the lid, when you open the lid, it used to take, like, five minutes before, like, it would resume an unhibernate and stuff, and it was amazing where you could just close it and open it and get back to where you were.But like, that's the case where, like, laptops weren't convenient as desktops were because they were always plugged in, powered on, you can leave them and you can effectively just come back and sit down and pick up where you left off. And so, I think that this is another moment where we need to make these cloud development environments more convenient to be able to use and ultimately better. And part of that convenience is to make it so that you don't have to think about all these parts of them of whether they're running, not running, how much they cost, whether you're going to be there [unintelligible 00:31:35] or lose their data. Like, that should be the value of it that I don't have to think about any of that stuff.Corey: So, my last question for you is, when you take a look at people who have migrated to using Gitpod, specifically from the corporate perspective, what are their realizations after the fact—I mean, assuming they still take your phone calls because that's sort of feedback of a different sort—but what have they realized has worked well? What keeps them happy and coming back and taking your calls?Mike: Yeah, our customers could focus on their business instead of focusing on all the issues that they have with configuring development environments, everything that could go wrong. And so, a good example of this is a customer they have, Quizlet, Quizlet saw a 45-point increase in developer satisfaction and a 60% reduction in incidents, and the time that it takes to onboard new engineers went down to ten minutes. So, we have some customers that we talk to that come to us and say, “It takes us 20 days to onboard an engineer because of all the access they need and everything you need to set up and credentials and things, and now we could boil that down to a button click.” And that's the thing that we tend to hear from people is that, like, they just don't have to worry about this anymore and they tend to be able to focus on their business and what the developers are actually trying to do, which is build their product.And in Quizlet's example, it was really cool to see them mention in one of the recent OpenAI announcements around GPT4 and plugins is they were one of the early customers that built GPT4 plugins, or ChatGPT, and they mentioned that they were sharing a lot of Gitpod URLs around when we reached out to congratulate them. And the thing that was great about that, for us is, like, they were talking about their business and what they were developing and how they were being successful. And we'd rather see Gitpod in your development environment just sort of disappear into the background. We'd actually like to not hear from customers because it's just working so well from them. So, that's what we found is that customers are just able to get to this point where they could just focus on their business and focus on what they're trying to develop and focus on making their customers successful and not have to worry about infrastructure for development.Corey: I think that really says it all. On some level, when you have customers who are happy with what's happening and how they're approaching this, that really is the best marketing story I can think of because you can say anything you want about it, but when customers will go out and say, “Yeah, this has made our lives better; please keep doing what you're doing,” it counts for a lot.Mike: Yeah, I agree. And that's what we're trying to do. You know, we're not trying to win, sort of, a tab versus spaces debate here around local or cloud or—I actually just want to enable customers to be able to do their work of their business and develop software better. We want to try to provide a method and a platform that's extensible and customizable and gives them all the power they need to be able to just be ready to code, to get to work as soon as they can.Corey: I really want to thank you for being so generous with your time. If people want to learn more, where's the best place for them to find you, other than at your conference in San Francisco in a few weeks?Mike: [laugh]. Yeah, thank you. I really appreciate the banter back and forth. And I hope to see you there at our conference. You should come. Consider this an invite for June 1st and 2nd in San Francisco at CDE Universe.Corey: Of course. And we will put links to this in the [show notes 00:34:53]. Thank you so much for being so generous with your time. I appreciate it.Mike: Thanks, Corey. That was really fun.Corey: Mike Brevoort, Chief Product Officer at Gitpod. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, along with an angry comment detailing exactly why cloud development is not the future, but then lose your content halfway through because your hard drive crashed.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.

Rounding Up Season 1 | Episode 17 – Asset-Based Approach to Assessment Guest: Tisha Jones Mike Wallus: When you look at the results of your students work, what types of things are you attending to? Many of us were trained to look for the ways that students were not understanding concepts or ideas. But what if we flipped that practice on its head and focused on the things students did understand? Today on the podcast, we're talking with Tisha Jones, senior adviser for content development at The Math Learning Center, about building an asset-based approach to assessment.  Mike: Tisha, first of all, thanks for joining us. We're thrilled to have you with us. Tisha Jones: I'm really excited to be here. Mike: I have a sense that for a lot of people, the idea of asset-based assessment is something that we might need to unpack to offer, kind of, a basic set of operating principles or a definition. So, my first question is, how would you describe asset-based assessment? What would that mean for a practitioner? Tisha: I think the first part of it is thinking just about assessment. Assessment is a huge part of every school that is in this country. So, there are formative assessments, which are ongoing assessments that teachers are doing while students are considered “in the process of learning”—although we know that students really are never not in the process of learning. And then there are also summative assessments, when we want to see if they have demonstrated proficiency or mastery of the concepts that they've been learning throughout that unit. But when we're thinking about assessments, oftentimes the idea of assessment is that we are looking for what students don't know. And asset-based assessment means that we're taking this idea and we're flipping it, and we're saying, “Let's start by looking at what students are showing us that they do know.” And we're trying to really focus on the things that our students are showing us that they're able to do. Mike: So, that's a lot. And I think one of many of the things that's going on for me is that that's a pretty profound mind shift, I think, for a lot of folks in the field; not because they necessarily want to look at their students as a set of deficits, but because most of the training that a lot of us got actually was focused on “What are the deficits?” Tisha: Most of the training when we're talking about kids casually, or with our colleagues or administrators, we're often worried about, “Well, our kids don't know this. Our kids are struggling here.” And that really becomes the way that we see our students, right? And our kids are so much more than that, right? And our kids are coming to us with knowledge, and we can forget that when we're only focused on what they don't know. Mike: There's a great quote that you're making me think about. It's from the 14th century, and the person has said, essentially, “The language that we use becomes the world that we live in.” And I think that's a little bit of where you're going, is that deficit-focused language kind of lives in the DNA of a lot of either the training that we've had or the structures of schools. And so, flipping this is a mind shift, and I think it's really exciting that we're talking about this. I have two things on my mind. I think one is, let's talk about the assessments themselves first. So, if I want to start thinking about using my assessments in an asset-based way, if we just think about the assessments themselves, be they formative or summative, tell me about what you think an educator might do with the assessments that they're using, whether they're coming from a curriculum or whether they're some that they're designing on their own. How should I think about the assessment materials that I have, and are there ways that I should imagine shifting them? Tisha: That's a great question. I think that when you're looking at your assessments, you may or may not need to change them. They might be fine the way that they are. But the way to know is when you see the opportunities kids have to give their answers, what is that going to tell you about what they understand? So, if you have, for example, a problem that is computation, if you have a problem that has just asked the kids for an answer, or if you have a problem that's multiple choice, what are you learning about their thinking, about their understanding from what they put on the paper? Now, I'm not saying don't ever use those questions. They have their purpose. But that is really what I am asking you to do, is to think about “What is their purpose? What is the intention behind the questions on the assessment?” So, are there ways for you to open up the assessment to give kids more ways of showing what they do understand as opposed to limiting them to saying, “You must show something in this way” or “You're either right or you're wrong”? Mike: Yeah, that really hits home for me. And I think one of the operating principles that I'm hearing is, regardless of what assessment tools you're using, creating space for kids to show you how they're thinking is really a starting, foundational, kind of, centerpiece for asset-based assessment. Tisha: Absolutely. And I want to also add that I'm talking a lot about paper and pencil because we think about assessments as paper and pencil. But assessment's also not just paper and pencil. Assessment, especially formative assessment, it's your conversations that you have with kids in class. As far as I am concerned, there is no better way to know what a kid's thinking than to talk to them. Talk to your kids as much as you absolutely, possibly can. Ask them so many questions. Mike: Well, you're bringing me to the second piece about the assessments themselves. One piece is, create space, regardless of whether it's a question in a conversation or whether it's a question in a paper-pencil assessment or what have you, for them to show their thinking. The other thing that it makes me think is, part of my work as an educator is to look at the questions and say, “What are the big ideas that I'm really looking for? And what is it that I'm hoping that I can understand about children's thinking with each of these questions that I'm asking?”  Tisha: Yes. Mike: Beyond just right and wrong. Tisha: Yes, this is hard work. But this, to me, is not extra work. When you think about a gap, sometimes that can feel very disheartening. It can feel like, “I can't close it. My kids don't know this. They're never going to get it.” It almost just drains the joy of teaching out. This is the job, and this is the part that I am hoping we can all get excited about. I am excited to know what my kids understand. I feel like that gives me a better entryway to being a better teacher for them. If we can start to shift how we think about assessing our students to looking for what they know, to me, that feels very different. It feels different for your kids, and it feels different for you. It's much more fun to walk into a classroom thinking about what my kids know than what they don't. Mike: Yeah. And I think you're hinting at the next place that I wanted to go, which is, there's the assessments themselves and both how I use them and how I make space for kids to show their thinking. And then there's “How do I approach the things that kids are showing me in their assessments?” And I think that feels like another one of these mind-shift pieces where, what kept coming to mind for me is, if you and I and a colleague or two were sitting together at a table and we were teaching third grade and we had a set of student work in front of us, part of what I'm thinking about is what would a conversation sound like if we were really taking an asset-based perspective on looking at our students' work? What questions might we ask? What kind of a process might we use to, kind of, really focus on assets as opposed to focusing on deficits and gaps? Tisha: So, as we're looking at the work, I think the best place to start is, if we're talking as colleagues, “What do you see that the kids know? What are they doing well?” Whether you're talking about one kid or whether you're talking about a group of kids or your class collectively, “What are they doing well?” And for me, even just sitting here across from you saying this, that feels like a much brighter place to start. I'm like, “OK, I'm into this conversation about what my kids know,” and I would then start to say, “OK, and how can we build on what they know?” Mike: Ooh, I love that. Keep talking about that. Tisha: So, if we're looking at say, fractions, and we're kind of at the beginning, we could come in and we could say, “Oh, our kids are just not getting it. They don't know anything about fractions.” And that feels very defeating. But if you start with, “OK, well, I can see that they can partition into half, great. OK, so can we get them to fourths? Can we get them to eighths? How about thirds? All right. Can they get it on a rectangle? Can they get it on a circle? Can they get it in this context? Can they get it if it's a sharing situation?” Right? Now, we're brainstorming all of these questions of what can they do next. Mike: And those are actionable things, right? Like … Tisha: Right.  Mike: … in addition to saying, “This is what kids are doing,” thinking about “What I can build from” actually leads to action, it leads me to a path of instruction, and that does feel really different. Tisha: So, if we are here and we take the perspective that our kids don't get fractions, then that could bleed into our instruction in a different way. So, instead of now thinking about what we can do next and how we can keep building them up, we may be thinking about how do we need to water things down? How do I need to make things easier? And we want to make sure that we are not taking away rich mathematical opportunities from our students because our perspective is that they're not able, they have deficits. We want to instead think about “How do we build them up? How do we still make sure that they're getting these rich mathematical problems and opportunities in class and being able to grow them in that way?” Mike: Love that. So, one of the things that really just jumped out, and I want to come back to this because I think the language is so darn important: This idea that an asset-based perspective leads to thinking about instruction as “building upon.” That just seems like such a practical, simple thing. But boy, shifting your mindset and approaching it the way you described it, Tisha, that really does feel profoundly different than a lot of the data conversations that I've sat in over the years. Tisha: At that point, we should be stopping to think, “What do they need next?” But it's hard to make that [determination] based on saying, “Well, they don't know this.” It's much easier to think about what they need next if you're looking for what they do know. And you can say, “Oh, I can make some connections to that and move them maybe even just a little bit to a little bit further, help them take another step.” Mike: It strikes me that what I don't hear you saying is, “We can't acknowledge that there's sometimes going to be a difference between what kids understand and our ultimate goals for them.” That can still be true, but we're looking at their starting point as the starting point and the next steps, rather than just only saying, like, “The gap is this wide.” And even using the language of “gap” is challenging, right?  Tisha: Absolutely.  Mike: Because we're trying to say, like, “Our job is to build, not just to measure.” Tisha: Well, and when you think about talking about a gap, it almost feels like it's the kids' fault.  Mike: Uh-hm.  Tisha: But right now, in our conversation, we are talking about where the responsibility is.  Mike: Oh! Yeah! Tisha: And the responsibility is on me to keep thinking about “How do I help this kid grow?”  Mike: Uh-hm. Tisha: “How do I keep helping this kid grow in their math understanding?” It is not uncommon in elementary schools to group or classify kids based on their abilities. And coming from the best place, right? Like, we're all wanting to help our students. I believe that everybody wants to help their students grow.  Mike: This conversation has really got me thinking a lot, and I suspect that anyone who's listening is in the same place. I'm curious, if I'm a person who's new to this conversation, if these ideas are new, I'm wondering if you have any recommendations about where someone could go to keep learning, be it, uh, a book, a website, something along those lines that could keep me thinking about this and exploring these ideas? Tisha: A good place to start is a book called “The Impact of Identity in K–8 Mathematics: Rethinking Equity-Based Practices.” And that is an NCTM publication. Mike: I love that one. It's fantastic. In fact, I've read it myself. We'll put a link to that in the podcast notes. Tisha: That would be great. I think that it's a great resource for thinking about assessment and just equity-based practices in general. Mike: Fabulous. Tisha, it was lovely having you on. Thank you so much. Tisha: Oh, it's been so much fun. Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2023 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Rounding Up Season 1 | Episode 11 – Successful Curriculum Adoption Guest: Dana Nathanson Mike Wallus: Adopting a new curriculum is not for the faint of heart. What makes this challenging? Well, beyond the materials themselves, a curriculum adoption may represent many things: changes to longstanding practices, beliefs, and classroom culture. On today's podcast, we'll talk with Dana Nathanson, the elementary math coordinator in Leander, Texas, about how leaders can effectively design, manage and sustain a successful curriculum adoption. Welcome to the podcast, Dana. I'm thrilled to have you and be able to talk with you a little bit about the work that goes into adopting and supporting the implementation of a new curriculum.  Dana Nathanson: I'm excited to be here. Thank you for the opportunity.  Mike: Absolutely. So, in your case, we're talking about the work that you did in Leander, Texas, when you supported the adoption of Bridges in Mathematics. I'd love to start by talking about something that feels really critical when a school or a district adopts a new curriculum: the idea of buy-in. How did you think about building buy-in for teachers when you adopted Bridges in Mathematics in your district?  Dana: I think that's an interesting question, because we do hear a lot about, ‘How do you get people to buy in?' And in our district when we think about buy-in, I think about, ‘That's my idea. And so how am I going to get people on board with my idea?' And so, really, we want to kind of flip the script on that and think about ownership. And so, when we think about, ‘How do I get people to kind of own this idea with me?' Then that is really where we see true empowerment. And so, we really approach this with that kind of lens to be thinking about, ‘How do I get people to own this, um, process and own what good math instruction looks like with me?' So that when we do adopt that we are adopting something that aligns with our vision for mathematics and what we want to see students participating in and being a part of in the classroom.  Mike: That really feels different even just to hear you talk about it. Ownership kind of conveys this idea that there's a shared responsibility as opposed to buy-in, which is, can I convince you to do a thing?  Dana: Right, right. And so, to get that ownership, we were at a time in the state of Texas where we were adopting new standards. And so, it was kind of, like, the perfect timing to think about, ‘How are we going to really get a clear picture of what we want math instruction to look like?' So, we did a lot of work with our teachers up front prior to adoption on what are those standards going to look like and how are we … or what do we feel like is the best way to teach math, really, in the younger grades? And so, we did a lot of learning together, a lot of reading. We really grounded ourselves with some of the work of Cathy Seeley, who is a former NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) president. She wrote a book, called ‘Faster Isn't Smarter.' And so, we kind of looked at that as a good starting point for, ‘We want all students to have opportunities to make sense of math, do the math and use the math.'  And that kind of became our foundation. It's not just about procedural fluency, but conceptual understanding and then ultimately, transfer. And so, we grounded our work in that and tried to bring people along as far as owning that vision. And then from there, we really looked at what teachers wanted from a resource. And thinking about the use of continuous improvement tools, we used feedback loops, consent-o-grams to—all along the way—so that we could really feel like everybody was owning. They wanted a parent component. They wanted more technology. They wanted practice opportunities through, through games. And so, when we established a rubric together with teachers and administrators, then that really helped us when we came to adoption because we were looking for something that checked all of these boxes.  Mike: Yeah. The story that I make up as I hear you talk about that, is that you had a level of consensus around what you were looking for, which made it a lot easier to make a decision that you felt good about, that you felt like people could own.  Dana: Right. Exactly.  Mike: So, I think anyone listening to this podcast knows that schools and districts have limited resources. So, the thing that I'm wondering about is, what were some of the supports that you prioritized during the first year of your implementation of Bridges?  Dana: So, I'm fortunate to work in a team of, there's three of us at the district level, to support all of our campuses. We have over, well, we have 28 elementaries and we're about to open 29; and so over a thousand elementary teachers that we support. But we knew that the three of us could not do it alone. And so, we are also fortunate that we have an instructional coach at each campus. Now this instructional coach is not specific to math. They support all content areas, but we had to bring them along. We had to get them to own it, and we had to have them feeling comfortable. And then we also created a teacher-leader system where we had a lead teacher from each campus. And we really focused on the instructional coach and the lead teacher as our early adopters or our campus champions to really help us rally—rally everyone around, um, owning this vision for mathematics and also the implementation of a new resource. And what a great opportunity along with the implementation of our new standards. And so, we did pay our teacher leads a stipend for that year. And having the instructional coaches in place was critical because it's those two groups that we would be able to lead and then they would take back to their campuses. Another thing that was also critical in that first year was administrator support. And I know that we're going to talk a little bit more about that, but I just want to highlight the fact that our campus principals were really great about giving teachers time in that first year of implementation to work as a professional learning community together, to have half days to plan and support the new adoption that we had.  Mike: There's a lot that you shared there … Dana: ( chuckles )  Mike: ( chuckles ) that I'd love to dig into a little bit. I think what strikes me about what you said though, particularly at the last part first, is the way that you worked with and supported administrators in really designing a year one where teachers had space and time to actually really devote mental space to thinking about a new curriculum: how it's designed, giving space to plan. That feels like it was an intentional priority that you worked with your administrative team to create.  Dana: Yes, that was very intentional. And it was evident when we began our first Getting Started trainings that summer. And we also trained our ICS (In-Class Support) and our lead teachers first, so that they could kind of get the buzz going for summer professional learning. And I thought it was also great that we were able to have the resources available. If you attended the training, you left with your resources. And teachers were so excited to get all of the great resources that are provided with Bridges. So, that was kind of a draw for them. But then once they had their resources and you start to dig through everything, there's another level of support that is needed. And so, we actually had what we called open houses prior to school starting so that teachers could go around to different teachers' classrooms in the district to see, ‘How did you set up your Number Corner? How did you provide space or how are you structuring space in your classroom for Work Places?' And so, we had a lot of teachers [who] would go around to other teachers' classrooms at other campuses and kind of explore to see and get ideas from each other, which was really powerful. And we created the space up front for that prior to the school year so that they would have that opportunity. And I also want to say at this time, seven years ago, we had a pretty good Twitter presence during this, so that we could also have people online. And I know Twitter's kind of blown up since then, but we were on Twitter a lot, and just being able to share that way, as well.  Mike: So, I love this idea of giving teachers space and time to get their materials and get set up. And the open house idea feels really supportive. One of the things that I sometimes think about is an adoption and an implementation might be a pedagogical shift. There might be a different understanding of the mathematics. But the truth is for a lot of people, the very first thing is, ‘How am I going to find a home for all of these things? What will my classroom look like?' You're kind of attending to that really important need that people have to have met even before they're trying to grapple with the curriculum itself.  Dana: Right. And so, to give that time for them up front to kind of get settled in—with what's this going to look like and how do I make it work—I think was key. And I talked a little bit earlier about the principals being able to provide some half-day plannings for teams throughout the year. But we also offered what we would term ‘power hours' after school. And we would host these in teachers' classrooms. And so, this month we're going to talk about the Work Places because we thought it was so critical that the teachers played all the Work Places so that they would know. And that's how you kind of get their ownership of that, too, as well. And so, we would have these power hours after school, where they would come and play the Work Places, or maybe the next month we're going to do a Math Forum together. That's coming up. And then the next month we're going to go through all of the Number Corner. Now you guys have all these great videos, but this was before you had those for Number Corner. And so, we were just really trying to get teachers in each other's classrooms sharing and making it easier. And we would all make the charts together so that they would have them ready for the next month. And we would see a lot of people on Twitter posting: ‘Here I am at my son's baseball game with my binder, learning.' ( laughs ) But I mean, that's just part of the process, too, right?  Mike: Well, you've really started to address the next thing that I wanted to bring up, which is, when I think about having been an elementary teacher for 17 years, what strikes me is that in education, we sometimes give ourselves really short windows of time to do a complete ‘implementation' quote- unquote. I can't tell you how many times I've heard this year is literacy. Next year is math. Dana: Right. Mike: I think what you're starting to address, but that I wanted to ask you directly is, as an instructional leader, how have you really tried to maintain the integrity of your implementation over time? Maybe just talk a little bit about how you've thought about that process of maintaining and sustaining.  Dana: So again, we leaned heavily, and we still continue to lean heavily, on our instructional coaches at campuses. So, each nine weeks, especially in the first three years of implementation—but even now— we'll dive into what does that curriculum look like for the upcoming nine weeks? And we'll give them ideas and point out specific things that are coming up so that they know how to share or how to kind of pull these things out when they're planning with the different grade levels. And so, we would continue to meet with them, but we always start with that unit introduction.  Mike: Hmm.  Dana: And if teachers can just take the time to read this, and this was another big sell from our department for Bridges, was the built in PD (professional development). If you read those introductions, just, like, how much learning that the teachers can have. So, those first years we really wrapped ourselves around those introductions and the learning together as teams. But we also took, at the time you guys had an Implementation Guide …  Mike: We still do.  Dana: Then I will plug the Implementation Guide. Now it's expanded a lot more. But we took that and we had teachers really pick what's a strength for you on here so that other teachers could come see that modeled for them. And then, what's your area of growth for this nine weeks or for this year? Are you going to focus just on Number Corner, but what parts of Number Corner? Or you want to work on the Work Places, but you're not really implementing the sentence frames correctly. So, whatever that goal is for you, and then the instructional coach and the campus administrator would know what that is, and they're able to support you or come give you feedback on that. And that has really helped us because that gave also administrators, kind of the look-fors that they should see when they walk into classrooms. And our department is fortunate to be able to walk with administrators and our instructional coaches so that we could all kind of participate in this coaching together around what we want it to look like, and then where it's going well. And we bring teachers across campuses and classrooms to see where it's going well, and really having them focus on some goals that they want to set to improve.  Mike: So, I suspect unless Leander is a magical school district that's different from everywhere else, you don't have exactly the same staff that you did … Dana: ( chuckles ) Mike: … seven years ago when you started your process. So, you probably know where I'm going, which is … Dana: Yes. Mike: … how do you account for the fact that teachers, like everyone else, have lives? And sometimes they move on from the grade level that they're teaching or their families move somewhere else. You have new administrators and educators coming in. How do you account for, kind of, that turnover that's just natural in education?  Dana: Right. So, we have the natural turnover. But also we are one of the fastest-growing school districts in Texas. And we continue to open about one school at least, sometimes two a year. So, we know that training and learning together is so important. And so, we have sent our curriculum specialists have participated in many of the Bridges trainers of trainers, trainers of leaders, and for Getting Started. And so, we still offer a two-day for that every summer and also in the fall. And we offer that special session for our new administrators, and we even have turnover in our cabinet. So, we offer that training, and I sit down with superintendents and our area superintendents, because we all have to own, own this. And so that is just a yearly thing that we do. But then also continuing to use our campus champions. We have continued that teacher-leader program. They support our new-to-district teachers as well, and then our instructional coaches. So, it is an ongoing cycle. And I will tell you, at first we kind of say, like, ‘If you can get Number Corner, your Problems & Investigations, and your Work Places down,' then we kind of introduced then the assessment piece the next year and then the intervention piece. So, we have layered it in that way so that it's not so overwhelming for our teachers. And then it just becomes part of your practice.  Mike: Thank you so much for that, Dana. The next piece that I wanted to go to, and you've alluded to it throughout this, is the role that instructional leaders—be they administrators or instructional coaches— play … I was reading a bit from The Wallace Foundation about how critically important principals are. Anthony Mohammad talks about how administrators are the ceiling on where a building can go. Can you talk in a little bit more detail about the kind of work that you did to bring your instructional leaders, particularly your principals, into the process of owning the adoption and the implementation?  Dana: This is still a journey. And so, I want to make sure that I plug that, that even though we are seven years into this adoption, we're still on a journey. Everybody's on a journey. We're not at the end of the race when we think about best practices and instruction in mathematics. But to bring our administrators along, we are fortunate to have instructional leadership meetings every month. And so, we really focus on curriculum with them. We focus on best practices and really, we bring learning to them. And we use a lot of the resources that The Math Learning Center provides. We will learn through some of the blog posts together, reading those together. But really what we wanted upfront before adoption and through the adoption process was for our principals to really own the fact that all students, each and every student, can learn math; and making that accessible to all of our learners. And so that is a mindset. We did a lot of work around the mindset work with Jo Boaler and Carol Dweck. And so, thinking about how then, we wanted—we're not a district that just throws out the direct instruction piece either. We still value that direct instruction. But we want to see that blended with investigating and exploration for our students. And then also having that small group time where they're able to reinforce through Work Places. And so, we really wanted our principals to be firm in the components so that they would know what to see in the classroom, but also firm in the fact that we want to see visual models. What do our standards say? What are the best practices for mathematics say? And the use of manipulatives. And that our Number Corner is meant to be a routine and why we value that for practice for pre-teaching and reinforcing. And what's the value of playing the games in Work Places? So that they would understand these components and really own that they want to see these in the classroom because that's what we know is best practices in mathematics.  Mike: When you think about Bridges, in particular, as a curriculum that you've adopted, were there features of the way Bridges is structured or organized that you really felt like it was important to help people understand going into it? And what I mean by that is, in some ways, Bridges is a departure from a traditional curriculum. And I'm wondering what were the things that you identified that's like, gosh, I've just got to make sure people understand this about how it's designed to work?  Dana: Again, it's kind of the three components that I already alluded to, but really that Number Corner piece. Really thinking about Number Corner as an opportunity for the whole class. And we even kind of connect it to a read-aloud. This is an opportunity for the whole class to come together and to, either it's going to pre-teach some things or it's going to reteach some things. And so how are you making sure that those routines are in place and making sure that we have secured small group time for the Work Places to happen? And that's what we call our small group time, is Work Place time. Because we're talking about how the teacher is floating about the Work Places and observing how they're communicating and playing the game and how they are talking about the math with each other. So, I would say, the Work Places and the Number Corner are really, kind of, the areas that were a little bit harder to bring people along.  Mike: What strikes me about what you said is that you describe the function of those two pieces of the curriculum, Number Corner as a tool to have consistent, long-term opportunities to either reengage with big ideas or pre-engage with big ideas that are coming up. And then the idea that Work Places are an opportunity to practice. But they're so much richer of an opportunity to practice than the worksheets that I remember as a kid, where there were 25 naked number problems and two story problems at the bottom ( chuckles ). They function in the same way in the sense that they're the opportunity for longterm practice. Dana: Right. Mike: And the added bonuses, as you said, when the teacher's moving about the classroom, they can formatively assess and listen to what kids are saying. But they can also jump in and do some miniconferring with children in the moment. Dana: Right. Mike: To help guide them or move them or advance their thinking.  Dana: Exactly. And just thinking about that Work Place time and when teachers are thinking about, ‘Oh, I have to plan something different for this small group.' Well, bring that group together to engage in the Work Place with them so that you are right there observing and having, like you said, that conferring time or that mini-lesson over the Work Place.  Mike: Well, before we close, one of the default questions that I ask anyone who's a guest is, if someone was listening to this podcast and they were charged with leading an adoption or an implementation of a curriculum, what are some of the resources you would recommend for someone who is looking for guidance on how to do this work?  Dana: Well, now I would definitely use the blue ( laughs ) ‘Principles to Actions' NCTM book, because I think this sets the great stage for, what are those teaching practices that we want? But also it talks about the elements. One of the essential elements is specific to curriculum. I didn't mention this earlier, but we also had parents give us feedback along the way. And I think that that is also critical, as well as students. Let your students have some hands-on experiences with the resources so that they're able to even advocate and say, ‘This is how we want to learn math.' There's no denying when you see that students are feeling successful, but also when they are loving what they're doing in the math classroom.  Mike: Well, I was just going to say, everything that you talked about today, I think that the word that comes to mind in addition to ownership is investment. As I've listened to you, I keep thinking, you invested time and energy to make the things that you were looking for come to fruition …  Dana: Uh-hm.  Mike: … to continue the journey, as you said. And without investing in those really important things, the outcome might look really different at this point in time. Dana: Right.  Mike: Well, thank you so much for joining us, Dana. I've learned a lot from the conversation. It's been a pleasure talking to you.  Dana: Thanks, Mike. I appreciate it.  Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability. © 2023 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Rounding Up  Season 1 | Episode 9: Multilingual Learners  Guest: Jean Harvey, Shannon Lindstedt and Christa Beebe of TNTP (The New Teacher Project) Mike: As a young educator, I was often unsure how to support the multilingual learners in my classroom. And my well-intended attempts didn't always have the impact that I hoped they would. Today we're returning to a topic we've discussed before on the podcast: support for multilingual learners in the mathematics classroom. We'll talk about some of the myths surrounding multilingual learners and dig into specific strategies educators can use to leverage their assets and support meaningful understanding of mathematics. Today we're joined by Shannon Lindstedt, Jean Harvey and Christa Beebe from TNTP (The New Teacher Project). We're going to talk with them about a set of tools and practices they've developed to support educators who serve multilingual learners.  Mike: Welcome, Shannon, Jean and Christa. Great to have you with us today.  Jean: Thanks for having us.  Shannon: Yeah, happy to be here.  Mike: So, Jean, I'd like to start with a question for you. I'm wondering if you could talk a bit about the misconceptions that we have in the education community involving multilingual learners. What is it that we've misunderstood about multilingual learners and how to support them in a mathematics classroom?  Jean: So, one of the most prominent misconceptions is that multilingual learners—MLLs as we call them—cannot engage in grade-level math because they do not yet have the language to understand the task. In MLL Good to Great, we take teachers through a planning protocol that has them assess English-language demands in a task. They consider what mathematical academic language a student needs to know to answer a problem. We ask teachers to also analyze what language in a problem may be new to students, and then they think through what visuals and additional supports could help students to understand the language and the problem. We also think through what language students will need to use to express their understanding. This step is so important because it empowers MLLs to be part of the conversation, and they can grow their language at the same time. When teachers first implement the supports, they're always so delighted how well their MLLs were able to participate in class that day. When the language is supported and MLLs can fully engage in the task, teachers see how capable they are and how eager they are to dig into the rigorous learning.  Jean: The supports also help to dispel another common myth, which is that MLLs might lack the confidence or the ability to engage in class discussions. Sometimes teachers avoid calling on MLLs because they fear embarrassing students. However, when our teachers provide the language supports that help students to understand the task and to produce the language needed to express their understanding, they become part of the conversation. MLLs need that access to critical language, and they'll need some independent think time to craft a response. But they're fully capable of engaging in grade-level math and expressing their understanding. By offering both receptive and productive language supports, MLLs are able to unlock content and demonstrate their incredible learning. We know that actively engaging in class discussions is important for all students, but it's absolutely essential for MLLs. Mike: There was a particular piece that you mentioned. You talked about the need for individual think time. I'm wondering if you can just say a little bit more about that, particularly with respect to MLL students?  Jean: Absolutely. So, one thing that we learned early on was that it's not always instinctive to give kids the think time that they need to gather their thoughts because they're not just processing the math in a given problem, they're also assembling the language that they need to use. In many cases, they're translating from their native language into English and trying to create … figure out how they're going to express their understanding in English. So, giving them that independent think time is incredibly important for MLLs.  Mike: Well, I will say that is most certainly something that is a shift in practice for folks. That level of comfort with what feels like silence—but for the learner is actually think time. That makes a ton of sense to me. Jean, I'm wondering if you could talk in a little bit more depth about the work that you did around vocabulary. And particularly, like, I taught kindergarten and first grade for quite a long time, so this actually feels really relevant to some of the things that I remember thinking about when I had children who may not have been familiar with language, let alone not having the language we were working in be their first language. Can you just talk a little bit about what that process was like for educators as you took them through it?  Jean: We would ask teachers to first think about what's the mathematical academic language that students need to know to access this problem? And so, if it was a problem on ratios, we'd think of ‘What are the terms they might need to use to discuss this problem?' They might not be terms that are specifically listed in the problem, but it's the mathematical academic language that might come up. Then we look at the problem itself, and we wouldn't just focus on vocabulary. There might be phrases in there that are really unfamiliar. We were working with one problem that was about students running a ticket booth and what they were charging for different blocks of tickets. And just the phrase ‘running the ticket booth' was really different because running has multiple meanings. And students know what it means to run, um, you know, using their feet. But running the ticket booth was very different. And so, we supported that with some illustrations and put a sentence by it so that students could make that connection. Sometimes teachers will make some connection to native language supports as well. So, using Spanish or whatever the student's native languages is a bridge to accessing some of the new language and making sure they have that connection as well. And then finally, we'd think about what language the students are going to produce. So, what do they need to say to express their understanding and how can we support them informing the language to express that understanding?  Mike: That's fascinating. What strikes me is how often the work that you're describing stops with the mathematical vocabulary and doesn't actually do that next piece, which feels really important. Like this idea: What is it about the vocabulary that we're using that we assume people understand, but that, like, ‘running the booth,' that's ( chuckles ) as you say it, and actually think and contemplate it. That's confusing.  Jean: Yeah, it's very confusing. And once teachers realize that that's what it takes to support language, you don't have to have an advanced degree in linguistics. It doesn't have to be deeply complicated. You're just really planning for what students might need to know to understand the mathematics in that task.  Mike: What are some of the moves that educators can make when they discover this language that we take for granted as everyone understanding? Would you be willing to talk a little bit about, what are the adaptations or the steps that folks take to help unpack that for children?  Jean: Yeah, absolutely. I think once you've identified different terms within just that day's lesson versus your academic language, you're going to want to have some consistent supports in your classroom. So, a lot of teachers will create a word wall. But a word wall isn't really effective unless students are using it. So, terms, definitions, and I'd also say having an illustrated word wall can be a game changer for some of the common vocabulary you're going to see within a unit—having that up so students can continually reference it and understand what it means. When we looked at the vocabulary and the phrases within the problem, we also connected it to visuals so we can explain what it means. We can provide students a written definition, but when you're still learning a language, the visuals are so essential to actually understanding what the term means or understanding it in context.  Mike: So, one of the things I'm curious about is, what are some of the understandings, the ahas, and the practices that you saw emerging as teachers engaged in this cycle of PL (professional learning)?  Shannon: I can respond to this one. We work with teachers to implement specific instructional strategies during their math classes, such as those mathematical language routines or the five practices. So, by using the variety of language supports incorporated in the program, we have definitely seen teachers develop a more nuanced understanding of what makes an appropriate scaffold and how to differentiate support for students based on their levels of English proficiency. It's not uncommon for teachers and the program to voice concerns that the tasks that we're using or how we're asking students to participate is too hard. And we know that this is coming from a good place. Teachers want their students to feel supported and be successful. So, we talk a lot about productive struggle and the role that it plays in students' meaning making and development in math class, and how critical it is that multilingual learners also get those opportunities to grapple with deep math concepts.  Mike: I think you're hinting at my next question, too, which is: Can you talk a little bit about the impacts that you observed on student identity and their learning as a result of this work?  Christa: Yeah, I'll take this one. This is my most favorite thing to talk about, cause I think this is where we saw the biggest impact, um, in the work that we were doing. And when we think about student identities, we almost had to take a step back and think about teacher identities. Especially when we think about mathematics and the role that that plays. We know that there's been a big emphasis on mindset and, and how important it is when we're learning mathematics to have this growth mindset and recognize that mistakes are OK and good, and that's how we learn. But we also know that math classes historically haven't been set up that way, right? We focus on a right or a wrong answer. So, there's not a lot of opportunity for kids in a traditional math class setting to experience the joy of making a mistake and working through it.  Christa: The hard thing about that is, we want teachers to create that type of math class for kids, but they may not have experienced that type of math class as a learner. So, in Good to Great, we give teachers the opportunity to reflect on who they are as math learners, who they were as math learners, and what their experiences were. And it's not surprising that many of our stories were the same, right? Like, we didn't see ourselves as math people, math is not our favorite subject, you know, on and on. And when we started to reflect on, ‘Well, how does that come through in our teaching?' Some things kind of bubble to the surface. Some teachers would look at that and say, ‘Math is hard for me, so I want to make it easier for my kids.' They want to make this a more positive experience, trying to make it easier for them to, to solve the problem.  Christa: So inadvertently, they're kind of taking away that power, making that mistake, and learning through it. And so, teachers had the opportunity to pause and think about, ‘Who did I position as mathematically capable today?' Really what that means is, ‘Who did we give the opportunity to be seen as a mathematical thinker, who got to answer the questions, who got to share their thinking?' And when teachers were reflecting on that, some of them started to realize that ‘No, I may not be giving my multilingual learners the same opportunities as my native English speakers.' And once we had those discussions, we pulled in those tools that support that productive and receptive language, and we challenged teachers to call on their multilingual learners the next day. And let's see what happens. They did the supports in class, called on those kids, and what we noticed in those debriefs that came after that: The teachers were starting to share, ‘Once I gave them those tools, they ran with it.' We heard things like, ‘My kids enjoy math class, they, they want to participate. They're raising their hands.' All of this from providing the right supports, digging in deeper to some of these mindset issues that we may have ourselves as math learners. And then how do we shift that experience for students so that they can develop their mathematical identities in this?  Mike: The psychology of all of this is fascinating because you're making me think about the idea of intent versus impact, right? So, the intentions of an educator who might be making some of the choices that you're talking about are positive, right? Like they're genuinely in a spot where it's like, ‘I don't want to make a child feel embarrassed.' On the other hand, the child doesn't know that. They just know that they're not getting called on, and they're making up their own story about why that's true. And that's also true for all the other kids in the class who are noticing that as well. And I think the thing that I'm coming around to is, it really does come back to the practices. You all gave them a set of tools to allow them to feel comfortable calling on those kids because they felt they could support them in the moment, and that produced a massive shift.  Christa: Yeah, absolutely. Once, they had the tools, they were able to see what their kids had in them all along.  Mike: You know, one of the things that jumps out for me is, there are a lot of demands on teachers' time. But what you described, I can imagine this happening in a grade-level team. I can imagine it happening at a PLC, and really investing in the types of practices that you all just described feels like the payoff is pretty solid. So, I wanted to ask you all for educators or instructional leaders who are interested in learning more about the Good to Great professional learning that you all have built, designed, and implemented, where can they go to actually learn more?  Jean: Sure. Thanks for asking that. So, we recently published a free toolkit that contains many of our MLL Good to Great resources, including the planning and reflection tools that we've been talking about today, as well as videos and exemplars. So, if someone just wants to learn a little bit more, they can go to the toolkit and see what some of the tools look like. The toolkit is called ‘More Than Right Answers: Math Instruction for Multilingual Learners,' and it's available on tntp.org. So, the toolkit also includes links to contact us at TNTP with any additional questions. And anyone interested in learning more could also email me directly. It's jeanine.harvey@tntp.org.  Mike: Thank you all so much for this conversation. I've learned a lot, and it was a pleasure talking to y'all. Jean: Thank you so much for having us.  Shannon: Thanks, Mike. It was great to be here.  Mike: This podcast is brought to you by The Math Learning Center and the Maier Math Foundation, dedicated to inspiring and enabling individuals to discover and develop their mathematical confidence and ability.  © 2023 The Math Learning Center | www.mathlearningcenter.org

Mike Evans is the Founder of GrubHub, and the author of “Hangry: A Startup Journey.” Mike founded GrubHub in his spare bedroom and grew it into a multi-billion dollar food delivery business that's a household name. After leaving GrubHub, he founded Fixer.com, an on-demand handyperson service focused on social impact, and providing full-time work for well-trained tradespeople. Mike shares what he learned from raising a startup to IPO, biking across America, and writing “Hangry.” He believes it is necessary to create a business not just to make a profit, but to be powerful levers for social change.   https://bit.ly/TLP-340   Key Takeaways [2:27] Mike loves cycling and getting around places by bike, but not quickly. After the GrubHub experience, he rode his bike across the country. Later, Mike and his wife rode across Austria. They hope to ride across another country soon with their daughter. Mike tells what he likes about electric bikes. [4:41] As GrubHub grew from a few employees to 2,500 employees over 12 years, there were two things that increased his anxiety and made it challenging to live. [5:14] The first challenge was the fact that there are a lot of competing interests: shareholders, employees, diners, and restaurants and it was hard to balance them all. There's no scenario where everybody wins 100%. There are tradeoffs. It was a tightrope walk to do. Mike started seeing the company making different choices as it grew beyond him. That was challenging to see. [6:09] The second challenge was hiring. As a business leader, you either hire your friends, or the people you hire become your friends. Sometimes you have to make decisions that are not the best outcomes for your employee-friends. When you have to let people go that you like, you cannot recover those friendships. They're gone. You can't fire somebody and then go hang out with them. [6:37] It should be hard to fire someone. You can't be good at firing people and be a good leader. It should never get easier. You should care a lot about the people you work with. The competing interests, and having to fire friends took a toll on Mike over the course of a decade. [7:53] Contentment is fleeting, especially for entrepreneurs who start from a place where “something is broken in the world and I'm really annoyed by it.” Mike doesn't think contentment was ever in the cards for him. An entrepreneur has to see the world with an expectation that it could be better than it currently is, which is not a good recipe for contentment. [9:45] Mike believes it's important to have a personal definition of success that other people or factors don't define. Other people won't necessarily agree with it. Mike tells how he defined success all the way up through GrubHub's IPO. Other people told him the IPO was his success, but that wasn't Mike's definition. Your definition of success gives you a North Star for one aspect of your life, business. [11:11] You also need personal definitions of success for your relationships, family, faith community, and civic community. Then you need to do the hard step of making tradeoffs between them. Work/life balance is elusive because it's impossible to achieve. You have to make tradeoffs. The best you can do is say “I have a clear-eyed picture of what I want from a family perspective,” and make choices explicitly. [12:03] If you don't choose explicitly, things happen to you instead of you making choices. That's what causes imbalance, frustration, anger, and disappointment. Your definitions of success change during your journey. As you approach your goals, the goalposts move. It's a destination and a journey. It's not one or the other. As we do hard things, we change, and therefore our goals change. [12:54] Sometimes we fail. If you're not going to be able to accomplish a goal, continuing to have it as a goal is only an exercise in frustration. Be able to say “This isn't working; I'm going to go try doing something else.” Whether you succeed or fail, your goals change. Success is a larger concept; it's the accumulation of goals over decades. [13:54] Mike compares how he feels about goals today with what he might have felt at age 24. One of the themes in his book is Think Bigger. Don't set your goals low. When Mike launched GrubHub, he just wanted to pay off his student debt. He missed the opportunity to embed the value of “Do right by restaurants, no matter what,” in the DNA of the company. At 24, he only wanted to make money. [14:37] If Mike had struggled at age 24 with the decision about doing right by the restaurants, there might have been a better outcome over the decades. [16:17] Starting GrubHub and taking it through the IPO involved thousands of decisions of Mike letting go. On Day 1, Mike owned 100% of GrubHub with 100% of the responsibility for it. On the day Mike kicked off on his bike ride across the country, he had 0% of the responsibility. He had a few shares in GrubHub for six more months. His hack was to give up first the thing he hated most — scanning menus! [18:14] Mike's first hire, a graphic designer to scan menus, went on to create the brand which ended up in two Super Bowl ads. He started scanning menus but had an opportunity from being in a high-growth startup. He ended up having to delegate. Once you hire your first employee, you get your first investor. Lean in on that and enjoy it! [19:31] Accepting reality is a paradox for an entrepreneur. You have to have enough arrogance to say “The world is broken, it needs to be fixed, and I'm the only person who can do it,” and you have to have the humility to listen to your customers and employees about what you're doing right and wrong, and how to adjust. Arrogance and humility do not “play nice” together. Mike doesn't always get it right. [20:28] If you put a document in front of five people, they're all going to start editing it. Don't put a press release in front of anybody but the people who have the responsibility of doing the press release. One way to keep micromanagement from happening, to allow people to delegate, is don't put the work product in front of them before it's done. Don't give people editing access. [20:54] Not micromanaging starts with not being in there to edit things. Trust people to do their work. Tactical things like that help you to let go of the small decisions. [21:33] Mike's book has a humble tone, but the exclamation point at the end is, “I had a fricking IPO, folks!” Mike captures in the book the paradox of arrogance and humility needed to run a startup well. [23:18] Mike had done week-long backpacking trips and liked being out in nature. On one of those trips with his wife, he went to Grand Tetons National Park and camped. He saw people riding in on bikes and setting up tents. It was the TransAmerican Trail cross-country bike tour going through the park. Mike thought biking and carrying a pack on a rack was a way better idea than hiking with a backpack! [24:14] The bike tour sounded like a very accessible adventure. It was accessible because he did it in 90 fifty-mile bike rides, not one 4,500-mile bike ride. His first day was just 25 miles. One thing Mike learned is that it starts with the first mile. The best training for Week Two is Week One. The best training for Week One is to go slow. Don't try to eat up the miles in your first week. [24:54] Anyone physically able can ride 10 miles on a bike. You can do that and you can take lunch and you can do that again. And that can be your whole first day. You build up until you're riding 100 miles in a day. The decision for Mike was just following something he was interested in doing. He quit his job to ride his bike across the country. It was a very clear decision for his life. [26:18] Mike kept a journal of his bike ride, on MikeEvans.com. He used those notes in Hangry to write about his bike trip. The trip reinforced something for Mike: the idea that you don't do it all at once. When he looks back, yes he did a 4,500-mile bike ride. Day to day, he woke up every morning and made the decision to start pedaling a mile. [26:51] Long-haul hikers say, “Don't quit at the end of a long day. Wait till the morning, when you're fresh.” A lot of people feel like quitting when they're tired. When you wake up in the morning you see you can do another day. That was true for Mike in business, as well. He kept at it because he had a bigger mission he was trying to accomplish. [28:14] Mike's purposes for his bike trip were to reflect on what he had accomplished, how he did it, and how he felt about it, and to consider what he was going to do next. That led to the creation of Fixer, the on-demand handyperson business. The handypersons are full-time employees, trained from scratch. He wanted to create a business with social benefits built-in: great employment with a path into the trades. [29:11] Mike's first decision for the bike trip was to buy a recumbent bike because he wanted to look at the horizon instead of the ground. He already had a tent. He rented a van and drove it down to Virginia Beach. One thing that helped is that the Adventure Cycling Association publishes TransAmerica Trail bike route maps so he ordered a set of maps and joined their online community to talk about the ride. [31:51] Starting a business is ugly and hard. It's filled with self-doubt and recriminations. To succeed, you have to make tough choices and a lot of people judge you for those choices. Mike also judges GrubHub and where it went after he left from the IPO and how it became a poster child for the gig economy and not great for restaurants. That is frustrating to Mike. [32:21] It felt to Mike that it was important to tell the whole story and how businesses are huge levers for social change, whether you want them to be or not. When Mike was intentional about that at GrubHub, it was beneficial for restaurants. When that intentionality left the business, it was not as good for restaurants. [32:40] Mike's goal with Hangry is to show the idea of changing the world by creating a business. He wanted to make it accessible and he wanted to elevate the importance of being intentional about creating the change you want to see in the world through the business. It's not a thing you can do after the business is done, through charity work. You have to create the business as a lever for social change. [33:21] Hangry is mostly about trying to take what Mike learned and letting other people learn from it and live their lives, whether as an entrepreneur, a business leader, or an executive in a company and do their work in such a way that the communities in which they operate benefit from what they're doing. [34:11] The book is called Hangry, so Mike isn't happy and pleasant the whole time. He's snarky about exclusionism. Silicon Valley is great at drawing circles and saying “You can't come in.” Cyclists do it, too! There are lots of groups that draw a circle and say, “You're not allowed inside this circle.” Mike says that Silicon Valley is particularly good at excluding anybody who's not a white male. There's a better way. [34:52] Democratizing the startup culture, democratizing the process, and demystifying the hero narrative that people use sometimes, make it more accessible to people. There's an urgency to making our world a better place for our children and grandchildren that sort of raises the bar for what success looks like at a business. It can't just be making money anymore. [36:27] The catalyst for creating Fixer.com was trying to get a handyperson and having to use “the phone app” on his phone. He wondered who uses that anymore! He started looking into it. The work that tradespeople do in the economy right now is typically great. Scheduling, communication, and billing are not done well. They're inaccessible. [37:23] It's hard for people to enter the trades unless they have an uncle or father who shows them how to do things. It continues the bias against women entering the trades. Entry-level handyperson jobs are good-paying jobs. They're also stepping stones to becoming an electrician, a plumber, a roofer, or a mason. It was the same problem he saw with food. You can't order things online and it's annoying. [37:54] He wanted to make handypersons more accessible, but he found there just aren't enough tradespeople. So he figured that by training people from scratch, they would get quality and wrap it in modern packaging. You schedule online and ask for someone to be there at 11:00 a.m. and the handyperson shows up by 11:00 a.m. They're highly trained, and they clean up after the job. [38:45] Mike uses the service himself, even though he's pretty handy. [40:00] Fixer.com has hundreds of applicants for every job position that they open. They target people who are working in food service, grocery, and retail and invite them to have a career instead of a job. Fixer.com pays people while training them. It's easy to get people on board. People in the service field don't have the flexibility to set their hours and schedule, which is hard in this job climate. [40:48] The adoption of working from home as a norm is damaging to people who don't have that flexibility and it creates a two-class society. Seventy-five percent of the people at Fixer.com are tradespeople, not office workers. At some point, they will have 10,000 tradespeople as full-time employees. Mike is concerned about issues of equity and expectations around time. [42:34] Mike explains why he picked a business model that's hard and hard to copy. It is intentional and it makes his company the competition that everyone else worries about. He's building a multi-billion dollar business that will be hard to compete with. [43:51] Mike's listener challenge: “I would love it if everybody would buy the book. … If you want the summary line, it's this idea that businesses affect the communities in which they work, and being intentional about what that impact is, is really, really important.” You're going to be juggling competing priorities, but it's still useful even if you're considering a socially beneficial impact for every decision. [45:19] Closing quote: Remember, “Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work.” — Daniel Burnham   Quotable Quotes “I'm not like one of these fast people who are always racing along the Lake Path in Chicago. Seeing the country; getting places at 10 mph is great. … After the GrubHub experience, I rode my bike across the country.” — Mike “Electric bikes are great. They really create access for people who might not otherwise physically be able to do it. And so I think they sort of democratize our bike trails. I'm a big fan of electric bikes.” — Mike “It should be hard to fire people, anyway. … You can't be good at firing people and be a good leader. I think those two things are totally mutually exclusive. It should always be hard. It should never get easier. You should care a lot about the people you work with.” — Mike “The difference between an entrepreneur and a miserable grump is that the entrepreneur actually does something about it. So, I'm not sure it was ever in the cards for me to be content.” — Mike “[An entrepreneur] has to see the world with an expectation that it could be better than it currently is, which is not a good recipe for contentment.” — Mike “I think it's really important to have an internal, personal definition of success that's not defined by some external factor.” — Mike “Sometimes we fail. If you're not going to be able to accomplish a goal, continuing to have it as a goal is only an exercise in frustration and self-punishment. So being able to say, ‘This isn't working, I'm going to go try something else,' is also important.” — Mike “People often ask me ‘What's the most strategic hire that you can do first?' … Forget that! Hire somebody to do something that's the most annoying thing to you. And then you start to get the benefit of ‘I don't have to do every little thing.'” — Mike “Don't put a press release in front of anybody but the people who have the responsibility of doing the press release. One way to keep micromanagement from happening, to allow people to delegate, is don't put the work product in front of them before it's done.” — Mike “The tone of the book is humble. I tried to be self-reflective in the book, but the exclamation point at the end is, ‘I had a fricking IPO, folks!' which is not a humble thing. I'm kind of bragging.” — Mike “Anyone physically able can ride 10 miles on a bike. You can do that and then you take lunch and you can do that again. And that can be your whole first day. And then by the time you hit the Rockies, a 100-mile day is like, ‘Oh, yeah, I've been doing this for weeks!'” — Mike “There's an urgency to making our world a better place for our children and grandchildren that sort of raises the bar for what success looks like at a business. It's not just making money anymore. It can't just be that.” — Mike “Picking hard business models, that are necessarily hard, to create value for customers is a really good defense against competition. What we're doing is hard and so it's hard to copy. And that's very intentional.” — Mike “The thing that really sucks about competition is it's not in your control. But … you can choose to pick a business model where you have to have some grit and some hard work and some thoughtfulness and some talent to make it work. … And then you are the competition.” — Mike “Businesses affect the communities in which they work, and being intentional about what that impact is, is really, really important. … it's still useful even if you can't make every decision toward a socially beneficial impact if you're considering it for every decision.” — Mike   Resources Mentioned Theleadershippodcast.com Sponsored by: Darley.com Rafti Advisors. LLC Self-Reliant Leadership. LLC Mike Evans MikeEvans.com GrubHub Fixer.com Hangry: A Startup Journey, by Mike Evans Race Across America (RAAM) The Appalachian Trail The Pacific Coast Trail Grand Tetons National Park TransAmerica Trail cross-country bike tour Adventure Cycling Association Blue Ocean Strategy  

Patrick answers questions about what is the proper response when you see someone trying to steal the Eucharist, how to defend the truth of the Immaculate Conception to a non-Christian, he explains what the Byzantine Rite is and talks with a Veteran about the importance of prayer Efrank - Is it a mortal sin to not prevent someone from stealing the Eucharist? Paula - What do you think of the book “Jesus is Calling?” Mary - Can a non-Catholic Man who has had a vasectomy marry in the Catholic Church? Jacob - How do I defend the Immaculate Conception? Patrick responds to a couple of letters thanking him for sharing the news that Peppa Pig is the latest children's program that is indoctrinating our kids Ian - All the Latest Marian Apparitions are happening in non-Latin Mass churches. Ann - What is the Byzantine Rite and what is the history behind it? Mike - There is a soldier's prayer that might be helpful for soldiers coming back and trying to deal with what they did. Vicki - The Little House Series' mom was so perfect that I found it intimidating

「牛奶過期了嗎？」 英文怎麼說？ 冰箱牛奶忘記喝完，一不小心就放到過期了！ “保存期限”、“製造日期”、“還可以放多久” 英文怎麼說呢？ 這一集文化閒聊，Duncan 跟我們分享， 我們印象中美國人早上好像常常吃牛奶配穀片，實際上真的也是這樣嗎？ 快來聽這一集內容，聽聽看牛奶過期的英文怎麼說。 孩子一想到學測英文作文就一個頭兩個大嗎？ 我們邀請到台北英文補教名師張維老師， 合作「張維學測英文：108 課綱英文作文必勝攻略」線上課程， 教你的孩子怎麼寫好學測各種題型的英文作文。 課程超早鳥優惠中，馬上點進連結把握優惠喔： https://lihi1.com/4IDc7 學測英文中翻英拿到全部的分數，比你想的還容易！ 我們邀請到在台大教授中翻英課程多年的 Wesley 教授， 合作市面上唯一學測中翻英線上課程「Wesley 教授的學測英文中翻英高分技巧」， 課程現在限時優惠中，馬上點進來試看喔： https://lihi1.com/C0lw6 不知道怎麼安排學測英文單字的複習計畫？ 讓安東尼老師帶著你，按部就班背好學測必考單字！ 「學測出題情境 900 單字：只要 90 天，幫你輕鬆跨級」線上課程優惠中， 結帳前輸入優惠碼 ivy150 再省 150 元喔： https://lihi1.com/YkSqm 我們跟 MixerBox 合作，推出「這句英文怎麼說」專屬的贊助方案囉！ 有每個禮拜會寄給你一次 podcast 電子報 ＆ 幕後花絮腳本的輕鬆學習方案， 也有來跟我們一起錄音的互動方案，和用 8 折優惠購買我們的線上課程方案喔。 歡迎點進我們的贊助方案看看有沒有你喜歡的內容喔： https://pse.is/3zu4hx 快速幫你複習一下這集的主題句 ＆ 單字： 牛奶過期了嗎？ Has the milk gone bad? Is the milk expired? expire 過期 補充學習 製造日期 (food/drink) package date (other products) manufacturing date 保存期限 expiration date 什麼時候買的？ When did you buy it? 還可以放多久？ How long will it keep? （stay good) 情境對話 Duncan: Hey Mike, I'm going to the store. Do we need milk? Mike：There should be some milk in the fridge. Duncan：Oh, really? Let me check. Mike：Has the milk already expired? Duncan：No, it's good for three more days. 學英文吧網站https://ivybar.com.tw/?c=3 或追蹤 iVY BAR 學英文吧的 IG，上面圖文版 podcast 複習也很棒喔！https://pse.is/39vede 現在我們也有影音版的 Podcast 實境秀喔https://pse.is/3ahupl Powered by Firstory Hosting

Mike Isaacson: If your free speech requires an audience, might I suggest a therapist? [Theme song] Nazi SS UFOsLizards wearing human clothesHinduism's secret codesThese are nazi lies Race and IQ are in genesWarfare keeps the nation cleanWhiteness is an AIDS vaccineThese are nazi lies Hollow earth, white genocideMuslim's rampant femicideShooting suspects named Sam HydeHiter lived and no Jews died Army, navy, and the copsSecret service, special opsThey protect us, not sweatshopsThese are nazi lies Mike: Welcome once again to The Nazi Lies Podcast. I am joined by two historians today. With us is Evan Smith, lecturer at Flinders University in Adelaide, and David Renton, who taught at a number of universities in the UK and South Africa before leaving the academy to practice law, though he still finds time to research and write. Each of them has a book about today's topic: the free speech crisis. Dr. Smith's book, No Platform: A History of Anti-Fascism, Universities and the Limits of Free Speech, chronicles the No Platform policy of the National Union of Students in the UK from its foundation in 1974 to the present day. Dr. Renton's book, No Free Speech for Fascists: Exploring ‘No Platform' in History, Law and Politics, tells a much longer story of the interplay of radical leftist groups, organized fascists, and the state in shaping the UK's speech landscape and their significance in politics and law. Both are out from Routledge. I have absolutely no idea how we've managed to make the time zones work between the three of us, but welcome both of you to the podcast. Evan Smith: Thank you. David Renton: Thanks, Mike. Mike: So David, I want to start with you because your book goes all the way back to the 1640s to tell its history. So what made you start your story in the 1640s, and what did contention over speech look like before Fascism? David: Well, I wanted to start all that time back more than 300 years ago, because this is the moment when you first start to see something like the modern left and right emerge. You have in Britain, a party of order that supports the state and the king, but you also have a party which stands for more democracy and a more equal distribution of wealth. And essentially, from this point onwards in British, European, American politics, you see those same sites recreating themselves. And what happens again, and again, and again from that point onwards for hundreds of years until certainly say 50 years ago, you have essentially the people who are calling for free speech, whether that's the levellers in 1640s, Tom Paine 100 years later, J.S. Mill in the 19th Century. The left is always the people in favor of free speech. In terms of the right, if you want a kind of the first philosopher of conservatism, someone like Edmund Burke, he's not involved in the 1640s. He's a bit later, about a century and a half later. But you know, he supports conservatism. So what's his attitude towards free speech? It's really simple. He says, people who disagree with him should be jailed. There should be laws made to make it harder for them to have defenses. And more and more of them should be put in jail without even having a trial. That's the conservative position on free speech for centuries. And then what we get starting to happen in the late 20th century, something completely different which is a kind of overturning of what's been this huge, long history where it's always the left that's in favor of free speech, and it's always the right that's against it. Mike: Okay. Now, your contention is that before the appearance of Fascism, socialist radicals were solidly in favor of free speech for all. Fascism changed that, and Evan, maybe you can jump in here since this is where your book starts. What was new about Fascism that made socialists rethink their position on speech? Evan: So fascism was essentially anti-democratic and it was believed that nothing could be reasoned with because it was beyond the realms of reasonable, democratic politics. It was a violence, and the subjugation of its opponents was at the very core of fascism. And that the socialist left thought that fascism was a deeply violent movement that moved beyond the traditional realm of political discourse. So, there was no reasoning with fascists, you could only defeat them. Mike: So, let's start with David first, but I want to get both of you on this. What was the response to Fascism like before the end of World War II? David: Well, what you do is you get the left speaking out against fascism, hold demonstrations against fascism, and having to articulate a rationale of why they're against fascism. One of the things I quote in my book is a kind of famous exchange that takes place in 1937 when a poet named Nancy Cunard collected together the writers, intellectuals, and philosophers who she saw as the great inspiration to– the most important writers and so on that day. And she asked them what side they were taking on fascism. What's really interesting if you read their accounts, whether it's people like the poet W.H. Auden, novelist Gerald Bullitt, the philosopher C.E.M Joad, they all say they're against fascism, but they all put their arguments against fascism in terms of increased speech. So C.E.M Joad writes, "Fascism suppresses truth. That's why we're against fascism." Or the novelist Owen Jameson talks about fascism as a doctrine which exalts violence and uses incendiary bombs to fight ideas. So you get this thing within the left where people grasp that in order to fight off this violence and vicious enemy, they have to be opposed to it. And that means, for example, even to some extent making an exception to what's been for centuries this uniform left-wing notion: you have to protect everyone's free speech. Well people start grasping, we can't protect the fascist free speech, they're gonna use it to suppress us. So the Left makes an exception to what's been its absolute defense of free speech, but it makes this exception for the sake of protecting speech for everybody. Mike: Okay. Evan, do you want to add anything to the history of socialists and fascists before the end of World War Two? Evan: Yeah. So just kind of setting up a few things which will become important later on, and particularly because David and I are both historians of antifascism in Britain, is that there's several different ways in which antifascism emerges in the interwar period and several different tactics. One tactic is preventing fascists from marching from having a presence in public. So things like the Battle of Cable Street in 1936 is a very famous incident where the socialists and other protesters stopped the fascists from marching. There's also heckling and disrupting of fascist meetings. So this was big meetings like Olympia in June 1934, but then also smaller ones like individual fascist meetings around the country were disrupted by antifascists. There was also some that are on the left who also called for greater state intervention, usually in the form of labor councils not allowing fascists to congregate in public halls and stuff like that. So these kinds of arguments that fascism needs to be confronted, disrupted, obfuscated, starts to be developed in the 1930s. And it's where those kinds of free speech arguments emerge in the later period. Mike: Now immediately after the Second World War, fascist movements were shells of their former selves. They had almost no street presence and their organizations usually couldn't pull very many members. Still, the response to fascism when it did pop up was equally as vehement as when they organized into paramilitary formations with membership in the thousands. Something had qualitatively changed in the mind of the public regarding fascism. What did the immediate postwar response to public fascist speech look like, and what was the justification? Evan, let's start with you and then David you can add anything he misses. Evan: David probably could tell the story in a lot more detail. In the immediate post-war period in Britain, Oswald Mosley tries to revive the fascist movement under the title The Union Movement, but before that there's several kind of pro-fascist reading groups that emerge. And in response to this is kind of a disgust that fascists who had recently been imprisoned in Britain and their fellow travellers in the Nazis and the Italian Fascists and the continental fascists had been, you know, it ended in the Holocaust. There was this disgust that fascists could be organizing again in public in Britain, and that's where it mobilizes a new kind of generation of antifascists who are inspired by the 1930s to say "Never again, this won't happen on our streets." And the most important group and this is The 43 Group, which was a mixture of Jewish and communist radicals, which probably David can tell you a little bit about. David: I'd be happy to but I think before we get to 43 Group, it's kind of worth just pausing because the point Mike's left is kind of around the end of the Second World War. One thing which happens during the Second World War is of course Britain's at war with Germany. So what you start to get is Evan talked about how in the 1930s, you already have this argument like, “Should stopping fascism be something that's done by mass movements, or should it be done by the state?” In the Second World War the state has to confront that question, too, because it's got in fascism a homegrown enemy, and the British state looks at how all over Europe these states were toppled really quickly following fascist advance, and very often a pro-fascist powerful section of the ruling class had been the means by which an invading fascism then found some local ally that's enabled it to take over the state and hold the state. So the British state in 1940 actually takes a decision to intern Oswald Mosley and 800 or so of Britain's leading fascists who get jailed initially in prisons in London, then ultimately on the Isle of Man. Now, the reason why I'm going into this is because the first test of what the ordinary people in Britain think about the potential re-emergence of fascism comes even before the Second World War's ended. When Oswald Mosley is released from internment, he says he has conditioned phlebitis, he's very incapacitated, and is never going to be politically active again. And the British state buys this. And this creates–and an actual fact–the biggest single protest movement in Britain in the entire Second World War, where you get hundreds of people in certain factories going on strike against Oswald Mosley's release, and high hundreds of thousands of people signed petitions demanding that he's reinterned, and you start to get people having demonstrations saying Mosley ought to go back to jail. That kind of sets the whole context of what's going to happen after the end of the Second World War. Mosley comes out and he's terrified of public opinion; he's terrified about being seen in public. He's convinced that if you hold meetings you're going to see that cycle going on again. So for several years, the fascists barely dare hold public meetings, and they certainly don't dare hold meetings with Mosley speaking. They test the water a bit, and they have some things work for them. Evan's mentioned the 43 Group so I'll just say a couple sentences about them. The 43 Group are important in terms of what becomes later. They're not a vast number of people, but they have an absolute focus on closing down any fascist meeting. We're gonna hear later in this discussion about the phrase "No Platform" and where it comes from, but you know, in the 1940s when fascist wanted to hold meetings, the platform means literally getting together a paste table and standing on it, or standing on a tiny little ladder just to take you a couple of foot above the rest of your audience. The 43 Group specialize in a tactic which is literally knocking over those platforms. And because British fascism remained so isolated and unpopular in the aftermath of the Second World War, you know, there are 43 Group activists and organizers who look at London and say, "All right, if there going to be 12 or 13 public meetings in London this weekend, we know where they're going to be. If we can knock over every single one of those other platforms, then literally there'll be no fascists to have any chance to find an audience or put a public message in Britain." That's kind of before you get the term 'No Platform' but it's almost in essence the purest form of No Platforming. It's people being able to say, "If we get organized as a movement outside the state relying on ordinary people's opposition to fascism, we can close down every single example of fascist expression in the city and in this country." Mike: Okay. So through the 50's and 60's, there were two things happening simultaneously. On the one hand, there was the largely left wing student-led free speech movement. And on the other hand, there was a new generation of fascists who were rebuilding the fascist movement in a variety of ways. So let's start with the free speech movement. David, you deal with this more in your book. What spurred the free speech movement to happen? David: Yeah. Look in the 50s and 60s, the free speech movement is coming from the left. That's going to change, we know it's going to change like 20 or 30 years later, but up to this point we're still essentially in the same dance of forces that I outlined right at the start. That the left's in favor of free speech, the right is against it. And the right's closing down unwanted ideas and opinion. In the 50s and 60s, and I'm just going to focus on Britain and America, very often this took the form of either radicals doing some sort of peace organising–and obviously that cut against the whole basic structure of the Cold War–or it took the form of people who maybe not even necessarily radicals at all, just trying to raise understanding and consciousness about people's bodies and about sex. So for the Right, their counterattack was to label movements like for example in the early 60s on the campus of Berkeley, and then there's originally a kind of anti-war movement that very quickly just in order to have the right to organize, becomes free speech movements. And the Right then counter attacks against it saying, "Essentially, this is just a bunch of beats or kind of proto-hippies. And what they want to do is I want to get everyone interested in drugs, and they want to get everyone interested in sexuality, and they want everyone interested in all these sorts of things." So their counterattack, Reagan terms this, The Filthy Speech Movement. In the late 60s obviously in states, we have the trial of the Chicago 7, and here you have the Oz trial, which is when a group of radicals here, again that their point of view is very similar, kind of hippie-ish, anti-war milieu. But one thing is about their magazines, which again it seems very hard to imagine today but this is true, that part of the way that their their magazine sells is through essentially soft pornographic images. And there's this weird combination of soft porn together with far left politics. They'll get put on trial in the Oz trial and that's very plainly an attempt– our equivalent of the Chicago 7 to kind of close down radical speech and to get into the public mind this idea that the radicals are in favor of free speech, they're in favor of extreme left-wing politics, and they're in favor of obscenity, and all these things are somehow kind of the same thing. Now, the point I just wanted to end on is that all these big set piece trials–another one to use beforehand is the Lady Chatterley's Lover trial, the Oz trial, the Chicago 7 trial, all of these essentially end with the right losing the battle of ideas, not so much the far right but center right. And people just saying, "We pitched ourselves on the side of being against free speech, and this isn't working. If we're going to reinvent right-wing thought, make some center right-wing ideas desirable and acceptable in this new generation of people, whatever they are, then we can't keep on being the ones who are taking away people's funds, closing down ideas. We've got to let these radicals talk themselves out, and we've got to reposition ourselves as being, maybe reluctantly, but the right takes the decision off of this. The right has to be in favor of free speech too. Mike: All right. And also at this time, the far right was rebuilding. In the UK, they shifted their focus from overt antisemitism and fascism to nebulously populist anti-Black racism. The problem for them, of course, was that practically no one was fooled by this shift because it was all the same people. So, what was going on with the far right leading into the 70s? Evan, do you want to start? Evan: Yeah. So after Mosley is defeated in Britain by the 43 Group and the kind of antifascism after the war, he moves shortly to Ireland and then comes back to the UK. Interestingly, he uses universities and particularly debates with the Oxford Union, the Cambridge Union, and other kind of university societies, to find a new audience because they can't organize on the streets. So he uses–throughout the '50s and the '60s–these kind of university platforms to try and build a fascist movement. At the same time, there are people who were kind of also around in the '30s and the '40s who are moving to build a new fascist movement. It doesn't really get going into '67 when the National Front is formed from several different groups that come together, and they're really pushed into the popular consciousness because of Enoch Powell and his Rivers of Blood Speech. Enoch Powell was a Tory politician. He had been the Minister for Health in the Conservative government, and then in '68 he launches this Rivers of Blood Speech which is very much anti-immigration. This legitimizes a lot of anti-immigrationist attitudes, and part of that is that the National Front rides his coattails appealing to people who are conservatives but disaffected with the mainstream conservatism and what they saw as not being hard enough in immigration, and that they try to build off the support of the disaffected right; so, people who were supporting Enoch Powell, supporting the Monday Club which is another hard right faction in the conservatives. And in that period up until about the mid 1970s, that's the National Front's raison d'etre; it's about attracting anti-immigrationists, conservatives to build up the movement as an electoral force rather than a street force which comes later in the '70s. Mike: There was also the Apartheid movement, or the pro-Apartheid movement, that they were building on at this time as well, right? Evan: Yeah. So at this time there's apartheid in South Africa. In 1965, the Ian Smith regime in Rhodesia has a unilateral declaration of independence from Britain to maintain White minority rule. And a lot of these people who are around Powell, the Monday Club, the National Front, against decolonization more broadly, and also then support White minority rule in southern Africa. So a lot of these people end up vocalizing support for South Africa, vocalizing support for Rhodesia, and that kind of thing. And it's a mixture of anti-communism and opposition to multiracial democracy. That's another thing which they try to take on to campus in later years. Mike: So finally we get to No Platform. Now, Evan, you contend that No Platform was less than a new direction in antifascist politics than a formalization of tactics that had developed organically on the left. Can you talk a bit about that? Evan: Yeah, I'll give a quick, very brief, lead up to No Platform and to what's been happening in the late '60s. So Enoch Powell who we mentioned, he comes to try and speak on campus several times throughout the late 60s and early 70s. These are often disrupted by students that there's an argument that, "Why should Enoch Powell be allowed to come onto campus? We don't need people like that to be speaking." This happens in the late 60s. Then in '73, Hans Eysenck, who was a psychologist who was very vocal about the connection between race and IQ, he attempts to speak at the London School of Economics and his speech is disrupted by a small group of Maoists. And then also– Mike: And they physically disrupted that speech, right? That wasn't just– Evan: Yeah, they punched him and pushed him off stage and stuff like that. And a month later, Samuel Huntington who is well known now for being the Clash of Civilizations guy, he went to speak at Sussex University, and students occupied a lecture theater so he couldn't talk because they opposed his previous work with the Pentagon during the Vietnam War. This led to a moral panic beginning about the end of free speech on campus, that it's either kind of through sit-ins or through direct violence, but in the end students are intolerant. And that's happening in that five years before we get to No Platform. Mike: One thing I didn't get a good sense of from your books was what these socialist groups that were No Platforming fascists prior to the NUS policy stood for otherwise. Can we talk about the factionalization of the left in the UK in the 60s and 70s? David, maybe you can help us out on this one. David: Yeah, sure. The point to grasp, which is that the whole center of British discourse in the ‘70s was way to the left of where it is in Britain today, let alone anywhere else in the world. That from, say, ‘64 to ‘70, we had a Labour government, and around the Labour Party. We had really, really strong social movements. You know, we had something like roughly 50% of British workers were members of trade unions. We'll get on later to the Students Union, that again was a movement in which hundreds of thousands of people participated. Two particular groups that are going to be important for our discussion are the International Socialists and International Marxist Group, but maybe if I kind of go through the British left sort of by size starting from largest till we get down to them. So the largest wing we've got on the British left is Labour Party. This is a party with maybe about half a million members, but kind of 20 million affiliated members through trade unions, and it's gonna be in and out of government. Then you've got the Communist Party which is getting quite old as an organization and is obviously tied through Cold War politics to the Soviet Union. And then you get these smaller groups like the IS, the IMG. And they're Trotskyist groups so they're in the far left of labor politics as revolutionaries, but they have quite a significant social heft, much more so than the far left in Britain today because, for example, their members are involved in editing magazines like Oz. There is a moment where there's a relatively easy means for ideas to merge in the far left and then get transmitted to the Labour Party and potentially even to Labour ministers and into government. Mike: Okay, do you want to talk about the International Marxist Group and the International Socialists? Evan: Do you want me to do that or David? Mike: Yes, that'd be great. Evan: Okay. So as David mentioned, there's the Communist Party and then there's the International Socialists and the International Marxist Group. The International Marxist Group are kind of heavily based in the student movement. They're like the traditional student radicals. Tariq Ali is probably the most famous member at this stage. And they have this counter cultural attitude in a way. International Socialists are a different form of Trotskyism, and they're much more about, not so much interested in the student movement, but kind of like a rank and file trade unionism that kind of stuff, opposition to both capitalism and Soviet communism. And the IS, the IMG, and sections of the Communist Party all coalesce in the student movement, which forms the basis for pushing through a No Platform policy in the Nationalist Union of Students in 1974. Mike: Okay. So in 1974, the National Union of Students passes their No Platform policy. Now before we get into that, what is the National Union of Students? Because we don't have an analogue to that in the US. Evan, you want to tackle this one? Evan: Yeah. Basically, every university has a student union or a form of student union–some kind of student body–and the National Union of Students is the national organization, the peak body which organizes the student unions on all the various campuses around the country. Most of the student unions are affiliated to the NUS but some aren't. The NUS is a kind of democratic body and oversees student policy, but individual student unions can opt in or opt out of whether they follow NUS guidelines. And I think what needs to be understood is that the NUS was a massive organization back in those days. You know, hundreds of thousands of people via the student unions become members of the NUS. And as David was saying, the political discourse is much bigger in the '60s and '70s through bodies like this as well as things like the trade union movement. The student movement has engaged hundreds of thousands of students across Britain about these policies much more than we see anything post the 1970s. David: If I could just add a sentence or two there, that's all right. I mean, really to get a good sense of scale of this, if you look at, obviously you have the big set piece annual conventions or conferences of the National Union of Students. Actually, it doesn't even just have one a year, it has two a year. Of these two conferences, if you just think about when the delegates are being elected to them how much discussion is taking place in local universities. If you go back to some local university meetings, it's sometimes very common that you see votes of 300 students going one way, 400 another, 700 going one way in some of the larger universities. So there's an absolute ferment of discussion around these ideas. Which means that when there are set piece motions to pass, they have a democratic credibility. And they've had thousands of people debating and discussing them. It's not just like someone going on to one conference or getting something through narrowly on a show of hands. There's a feeling that these debates are the culmination of what's been a series of debates in each local university. And we've got over 100 of them in Britain. Mike: Okay, how much is the student union's presence felt on campus by the average student? Evan: That'd be massive. David: Should I do this? Because I'm a bit older than Evan and I went to university in the UK. And it's a system which is slowly being dismantled but when I was student, which is like 30 years ago, this was still largely in place. In almost every university, the exceptions are Oxford and Cambridge, but in every other university in Britain, almost all social activity takes place on a single site on campus. And that single site invariably is owned by the student's union. So your students union has a bar, has halls, it's where– They're the plumb venues on campus if you want to have speakers or if you want to have– Again, say when punk happened a couple of years later, loads and loads of the famous punk performances were taking place in the student union hall in different universities. One of the things we're going to get onto quite soon is the whole question of No Platform and what it meant to students. What I want to convey is that for loads of students having this discussion, when they're saying who should be allowed on campus or who shouldn't be allowed on campus, what's the limits? They feel they've got a say because there are a relatively small number of places where people will speak. Those places are controlled by the students' union. They're owned and run by the students' union. It's literally their buildings, their halls, they feel they've got a right to set who is allowed, who's actually chosen, and who also shouldn't be invited. Mike: Okay, cool. Thank you. Thank you for that. That's a lot more than I knew about student unions. Okay. Evan, this is the bread and butter of your book. How did No Platform come about in the NUS? Evan: So, what part of the fascist movement is doing, the far-right movement, is that it is starting to stray on campus. I talked about the major focus of the National Front is about appealing to disaffected Tories in this stage, but they are interfering in student affairs; they're disrupting student protests; they're trying to intimidate student politics. And in 1973, the National Front tried to set up students' association on several campuses in Britain And there's a concern about the fascist presence on campus. So those three left-wing groups– the IMG, the IS and the Communist Party–agree at the student union level that student unions should not allow fascists and racists to use student buildings, student services, clubs that are affiliated to the student union. They shouldn't be allowed to access these. And that's where they say about No Platform is that the student union should deny a platform to fascists and racists. And in 1974 when they put this policy to a vote and it's successful, they add, "We're going to fight them by any means necessary," because they've taken that inspiration from the antifascism of the '30s and '40s. Mike: Okay. Now opinion was clearly divided within the NUS. No Platform did not pass unanimously. So Evan, what was opinion like within the NUS regarding No Platform? Evan: Well, it passed, but there was opposition. There was opposition from the Federation of Conservative Students, but there was also opposition from other student unions who felt that No Platform was anti-free speech, so much so that in April 1974 it becomes policy, but in June 1974, they have to have another debate about whether this policy should go ahead. It wins again, but this is the same time as it happens on the same day that the police crackdown on anti-fascist demonstration in Red Lion Square in London. There's an argument that fascism is being propped up by the police and is a very real threat, so that we can't give any quarter to fascism. We need to build this No Platform policy because it is what's standing in between society and the violence of fascism. Mike: Okay. I do want to get into this issue of free speech because the US has a First Amendment which guarantees free speech, but that doesn't exist in Britain. So what basis is there for free speech in the law? I think, David, you could probably answer this best because you're a lawyer. David: [laughs] Thank you. In short, none. The basic difference between the UK and the US– Legally, we're both common law countries. But the thing that really changes in the US is this is then overlaid with the Constitution, which takes priority. So once something has been in the Constitution, that's it. It's part of your fundamental law, and the limits to it are going to be narrow. Obviously, there's a process. It's one of the things I do try and talk about in my book that the Supreme Court has to discover, has to find free speech in the American Constitution. Because again, up until the Second World War, essentially America has this in the Constitution, but it's not particularly seen as something that's important or significant or a key part of the Constitution. The whole awe and  mysticism of the First Amendment as a First Amendment is definitely something that's happened really in the last 40-50 years. Again, I don't want to go into this because it's not quite what you're getting at. But certainly, in the '20s for example, you get many of the big American decisions on free speech which shaped American law today. What everyone forgets is in every single one of them, the Supreme Court goes on to find some reason why free speech doesn't apply. So then it becomes this doctrine which is tremendously important to be ushered out and for lip service be given to, just vast chunks of people, communists, people who are in favor of encouraging abortion, contraception, whatever, they're obviously outside free speech, and you have to come up with some sophisticated justifications for that. In Britain, we don't have a constitution. We don't have laws with that primary significance. We do kind of have a weak free speech tradition, and that's kind of important for some things like there's a European Convention on Human Rights that's largely drafted by British lawyers and that tries to create in Articles 10 and 11 a general support on free speech. So they think there are things in English legal tradition, in our common law tradition, which encourage free speech.  But if we've got it as a core principle of the UK law today, we've got it because of things like that like the European Convention on Human Rights. We haven't got it because at any point in the last 30, or 50, or 70 or 100 years, British judges or politicians thought this was a really essential principle of law. We're getting it these days but largely by importing it from the United States, and that means we're importing the worst ideological version of free speech rather than what free speech ought to be, which is actually protecting the rights of most people to speak. And if you've got some exceptions, some really worked out well thought exceptions for coherent and rational reasons. That's not what we've got now in Britain, and it's not what we've really ever had. Mike: Evan, you do a good job of documenting how No Platform was applied. The experience appears to be far from uniform. Let's talk about that a little bit. Evan: Yeah, so there's like a debate happening about who No Platform should be applied to because it states– The official policy is that No Platform for racists and fascists, and there's a debate of who is a racist enough to be denied a platform. There's agreement so a group like the National Front is definitely to be No Platform. Then there's a gray area about the Monday Club. The Monday Club is a hard right faction within the conservatives. But there's a transmission of people and ideas between National Front and the Monday Club. Then there's government ministers because the British immigration system is a racist system. The Home Office is seen as a racist institution. So there's a debate of whether government politicians should be allowed to have a platform because they uphold institutional racism. We see this at different stages is that a person from the Monday Club tries to speak at Oxford and is chased out of the building. Keith Joseph, who's one of the proto-Thatcherites in the Conservative Party, comes to speak at LSE in the 1977-78 and that there is a push to say that he can't be allowed to speak because of the Conservative Party's immigration policies and so forth like that. So throughout the '70s, there is a debate of the minimalist approach with a group like the International Socialists saying that no, outright fascists are the only ones to be No Platformed. Then IMG and other groups are saying, "Actually, what about the Monday Club? What about the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children? What about Conservative Ministers? Are these people, aren't they also sharing that kind of discriminatory agenda that shouldn't be allowed a platform?" Mike: Okay, and there were some objections within the National Union of Students to some applications of No Platform, right? Evan: Yeah, well, not so much in the '70s. But once you get into the '80s, there's a big push for it. But probably the biggest issue in the '70s is that the application of No Platform to pro-Israel groups and Jewish student groups. In 1975, there's a UN resolution that Zionism is a form of racism, and that several student groups say, "Well, pro-Israel groups are Zionists. If Zionism is a form of racism and No Platform should be applied to racists or fascists, shouldn't they the pro-Israel groups then be denied a platform? Should pro-Israel groups be disaffiliated from student unions, etc.?" Several student unions do this at the local level, but there's a backlash from the NUS at the national level so much so the NUS actually suspends No Platform for about six months. It is reintroduced with an explicit piece of it saying that if No Platform is reinstituted, it can't be applied to Zionists groups, to pro-Israel groups, to Jewish societies. But a reason that they can't, the NUS can't withhold No Platform as a policy in the late 1970s is because they've been playing catch up because by this time, the Anti-Nazi League, Rock Against Racism are major mass movements of people because the National Front is seen as a major problem, and the NUS has to have some kind of anti-Fascist, anti-racist response. They can't sit on their hands because they're going dragged along by the Anti-Nazi League. Mike: One thing that you talked about in your book, David, is that simultaneous to No Platform was this movement for hate speech prohibitions. Talk about how these movements differed. David: Well, I think the best way to convey it is if we go back to the motion that was actually passed at the National Union of Students spring conference in May '74. If you don't mind, I'll just begin by reading it out. Conference recognizes the need to refuse any assistance, financial or otherwise, to openly racist or fascist organizations or societies (e.g., Monday Club, National Front, Action Party, Union Movement, National Democratic Party) and to deny them a platform. What I want to try and convey is that when you think about how you got this coalition within the National Union of Students in support of that motion, there were like two or three different ideas being signaled in that one motion. And if you then apply them, particularly what's happening as we're talking 50 years later now, if you apply them through the subsequent 50 years of activism, they do point in quite different directions. To just start up, “conference recognizes the need to refuse any assistance” dadadada. What's really been good at here, I'm sure some of the people who passed No Platform promotion just had this idea, right? What we are, we're a movement of students' unions. We're a movement of buildings which are run by students and are for students. People have said to themselves, all this motion is really committing us to do is to say that we won't give any assistance to racist or fascist organizations. So what that means in practice is in our buildings, in our halls, we won't invite them in. Now, it may be that, say, the university will invite a conservative minister or the university will allow some far-right person to have a platform in election time. But the key idea, one key idea that's going on with this, just those things won't happen in our students' unions. They're our buildings; they're our halls. To use a term that hasn't really been coined yet, but this is in people's heads, is the idea of a safe space. It's just, student unions are our safe space. We don't need to worry about who exactly these terrible people are. Whoever and whatever they are, we don't want them on our patch. That's idea number one. Idea number two is that this is really about stopping fascists. It's not about any other form of discrimination. I'll come on to idea three in a moment. With idea three, this is about fascist organizations. You can see in a sense the motion is talking to people, people coming on and saying like I might not even be particularly left wing, but I don't like fascists. Evan talked about say for example, Zionist organizations. Could a Zionist organization, which is militantly antifascist, could they vote this motion? Yes. And how they'd sell it to themselves is this is only about fascism. So you can see this in the phrase, this is about refusing systems to “openly racist or fascist organizations,” and then look at the organizations which are listed: the National Front, well yeah, they're fascists; the Union Movement, yeah, they're fascists; the National Democratic Party, they're another little fascist splinter group.And then the only one there that isn't necessarily exactly fascist is the Monday Club who are a bunch of Tories who've been in the press constantly in the last two years when this motion is written for their alliance with National Front holding demonstrations and meetings together. So some people, this is just about protecting their space. Some people, this is about excluding fascists and no one else. But then look again at the motion, you'll see another word in there. “Conference recognizes the need to refuse any assistance to openly racist or fascist organizations.” So right from the start, there's a debate, what does this word racist mean in the motion? Now, one way you could read the motion is like this. From today, we can all see that groups like the National Front are fascists. Their leaders can spend most of the rest of the decade appearing constantly in literature produced by anti-fascist groups, identifying them as fascist, naming them as fascist, then we have to have a mass movement against fascism and nazism. But the point is in 1974, that hadn't happened yet. In most people's heads, groups like the National Front was still, the best way to describe them that no one could disagree to at least say they were openly racist. That was how they described themselves. So you could ban the National Front without needing to have a theological discussion about whether they fitted exactly within your definition of fascism. But the point I really want to convey is that the motion succeeds because it blurs the difference between saying anything can be banned because it's fascist specifically or anything can be banned because it's racist or fascist. This isn't immediately apparent in 1974, but what becomes pretty apparent over time is for example as Evan's documented already, even before 1974, there have been non-fascists, there have been conservatives going around student unions speaking in pretty racist terms. All right, so can they be banned? If the answer is this goes to racists or fascists, then definitely they can be banned. But now wait a second. Is there anyone else in British politics who's racist? Well, at this point, both main political parties are standing for election on platforms of excluding people from Britain effectively on the basis of the color of their skin. All right, so you can ban all the main political parties in Britain. All right, well, how about the newspapers? Well, every single newspaper in Britain, even the pro-Labour ones, is running front page articles supporting the British government. All right, so you could ban all newspapers in Britain. Well, how about the television channel? Well, we've only got three, but the best-selling comedies on all of them are comedies which make fun of people because they're foreigners and because they're Black. You can list them all. There's dozens of these horrible programs, which for most people in Britain now are unwatchable. But they're all of national culture in Britain in the early '70s. Alright, so you say, all right, so students we could ban every television channel in Britain, every newspaper in Britain, and every political party in Britain, except maybe one or two on the far left. It's like, wait a second people, I've only been doing racism. Well, let's take seriously the notion, if we're against all forms of racism, how can we be against racism without also being against sexism? Without being against homophobia? So the thing about No Platform is there's really only two ways you can read it in the end, and certainly once you apply it outside the 1970s today. Number one, you can say this is a relatively tightly drawn motion, which is trying to pin the blame on fascists as something which is growing tremendously fast in early 1970s and trying to keep them out. Maybe it'd be good to keep other people out too, but it's not trying to keep everyone out. Or you've got, what we're confronting today which is essentially this is an attempt to prevent students from suffering the misery, the hatred, the fury of hate speech. This is an attempt to keep all hate speech off campus, but with no definition or limit on hate speech. Acceptance of hate speech 50 years later might be much more widely understood than it is in early '70s. So you've got warring in this one motion two completely different notions of who it's right politically to refuse platforms to. That's going to get tested out in real life, but it's not been resolved by the 1974 motion, which in a sense looks both ways. Either the people want to keep the ban narrow or the people want to keep it broad, either of them can look at that motion and say yeah, this is the motion which gives the basis to what we're trying to do. Mike: Okay. I do want to get back to the notion of the maximalist versus the precisionist view of No Platform. But first before that, I want to talk about the Anti-Nazi League and Rock Against Racism to just get more of a broader context than just the students in Britain in terms of antifascism. David, do you want to talk about that? David: Okay. Well, I guess because another of my books is about Rock Against Racism and the Anti-Nazi League, so I'll try and do this really short. I'll make two points. First is that these movements which currently ended in the 1970s are really very large. They're probably one of the two largest street movements in post-war British history. The only other one that's candidate for that is the anti-war movement, whether that's in the '80s or the early 2000s. But they're on that same scale as amongst the largest mass movements in British history. In terms of Rock Against Racism, the Anti-Nazi League, the total number of people involved in them is massive; it's around half a million to a million people. They're single most famous events, two huge three carnivals in London in 1977, which each have hundreds of thousands of people attending them and bring together the most exciting bands. They are the likes of The Clash, etc, etc. It's a movement which involves people graffitiing against Nazis, painting out far-right graffiti. It's a movement which is expressed in streets in terms of set piece confrontations, clashes with far-right, Lewisham in ‘76, Southall in ‘79. These are just huge movements which involve a whole generation of people very much associated with the emergence of punk music and when for a period in time in Britain are against that kind of visceral street racism, which National Front represents. I should say that they have slightly different attitudes, each of them towards the issue of free speech, but there's a massive interchange of personnel. They're very large. The same organizations involved in each, and they include an older version of the same activist who you've seen in student union politics in '74 as were they you could say they graduate into involvement in the mass movements like Rock Against Racism and the Anti-Nazi League. Now, I want to say specifically about the Anti-Nazi League and free speech. The Anti-Nazi League takes from student politics this idea of No Platform and tries to base a whole mass movement around it. The idea is very simply, the National Front should not be allowed a platform to speak, to organize, to win converts anywhere. Probably with the Anti-Nazi League, the most important expressions of this is two things. Firstly, when the National Front tries to hold election meetings, which they do particularly in the run up to '79 election, and those are picketed, people demonstrated outside of them  A lot of them are the weekend in schools. One at Southall is in a town hall. These just lead to repeated clashes between the Anti-Nazi League and the National Front. The other thing which the Anti-Nazi League takes seriously is trying to organize workers into closing off opportunities for the National Front spread their propaganda. For example, their attempts to get postal workers to refuse to deliver election materials to the National Front. Or again, there's something which it's only possible to imagine in the '70s; you couldn't imagine it today. The National Front is entitled to election broadcasts because it's standing parliament. Then the technical workers at the main TV stations go on strike and refuse to let these broadcasts go out. So in all these ways, there's this idea around the Anti-Nazi League of No Platform. But No Platform is No Platform for fascists. It's the National Front should not get a chance to spread its election message. It's not yet that kind of broader notion of, in essence, anything which is hate speech is unacceptable. In a sense, it can't be. Because when you're talking about students' unions and their original No Platform motion and so forth, at the core of it is they're trying to control their own campuses. There's a notion of students' power. The Anti-Nazi League, it may be huge mass movement and may have hundreds of thousands people involved in it, but no one in Anti-Nazi League thinks that this organization represents such a large majority that they could literally control the content of every single TV station, the content of every single newspaper. You can try and drive the National Front out, but if people in that movement had said right, we actually want to literally carve out every expression of racism and every expression of sexism from society, that would have been a yet bigger task by another enormous degrees of scale. Mike: Okay, I do want to talk a little bit more about Rock Against Racism just particularly how it was founded, what led to its founding. I think it gives a good sense of where Britain was at, politically. David: Right. Rock Against Racism was founded in 1976. The two main events which are going on in the heads of the organizers when they launched it, number one, David Bowie's weird fascist turn, his interview with Playboy magazine in which he talks about Hitler being the first rock and roll superstar, the moment where he was photographed returning from tours in America and comes to Victoria Station and appears to give a Nazi salute. The reason why with Bowie it matters is because he's a hero. Bowie seems to represent the emergence of a new kind of masculinity, new kind of attitude with sexuality. If someone like that is so damaged that he's going around saying Hitler is the greatest, that's really terrifying to Bowie fans and for a wider set of people. The other person who leads directly to the launch of Rock Against Racism is Eric Clapton. He interrupts a gig in Birmingham in summer '76 to just start giving this big drunken rant about how some foreigner pinched his missus' bum and how Enoch Powell is the greatest ever. The reason why people find Eric Clapton so contemptible and why this leads to such a mass movement is weirdly it's the opposite of Bowie that no one amongst the young cool kids regards Clapton as a hero. But being this number one star and he's clearly spent his career stealing off Black music and now he's going to support that horror of Enoch Powell as well, it just all seems so absolutely ridiculous and outrageous that people launch an open letter to the press and that gets thousands of people involved. But since you've asked me about Rock Against Racism, I do want to say Rock Against Racism does have a weirdly and certainly different attitude towards free speech to the Anti-Nazi League. And this isn't necessarily something that was apparent at the time. It's only kind of apparent now when you look back at it. But one of the really interesting things about Rock Against Racism is that because it was a movement of young people who were trying to reclaim music and make cultural form that could overturn British politics and change the world, is that they didn't turn around and say, "We just want to cut off all the racists and treat them as bad and shoot them out into space," kind of as what the Anti-Nazi League's trying to do to fascists. Rock Against Racism grasped that if you're going to try and change this cultural milieu which is music, you actually had to have a bit of a discussion and debate and an argument with the racists, but they tried to have it on their own terms. So concretely, what people would do is Rock Against Racism courted one particular band called Sham 69, who were one of the most popular young skinhead bands, but also had a bunch of neo-nazis amongst their roadies and things like that. They actually put on gigs Sham 69, put them on student union halls, surrounded them with Black acts. Knew that these people were going to bring skinheads into the things, had them performing under Rock Against Racism banner, and almost forced the band to get into the state of practical warfare with their own fans to try and say to them, "We don't want you to be nazis anymore. We want you to stop this." That dynamic, it was incredibly brave, was incredibly bold. It was really destructive for some of the individuals involved like Jimmy Pursey, the lead singer of Sham 69. Effectively saying to them, "Right, we want you to put on a gig every week where you're going to get bottled by your own fans, and you're going to end up like punching them, just to get them to stop being racist." But we can't see any other way of shifting this milieu of young people who we see as our potential allies. There were lots of sort of local things like that with Rock Against Racism. It wasn't about creating a safe space in which bad ideas couldn't come in; it was about going onto the enemy's ideological trend and going, "Right, on this trend, we can have an argument. We can win this argument." So it is really quite an interesting cultural attempt to change the politics of the street. Mike: Okay, now you two have very different ideas of what No Platform is in its essence. Evan, you believe that No Platform was shifting in scope from its inception and it is properly directed at any institutional platform afforded to vociferous bigots. While David you believe that No Platform is only properly applied against fascists, and going beyond that is a dangerous form of mission creep. Now, I absolutely hate debates. [laughter] I think the format does more to close off discussion than to draw out information on the topic at hand. So, what I don't want to happen is have you two arguing with each other about your positions on No Platform (and maybe me, because I have yet a third position). David: Okay Mike, honestly, we've known each other for years. We've always been– Mike: Yeah, yeah, yeah. David: –your listeners will pick up, there's loads we agree on, too. So I'm sure we can deal without that rubbish debate. [Evan laughs] Mike: All right. So what I'd like to do is ground this discussion as much as possible in history rather than abstract moral principles. So in that interest, can each of you talk a bit about the individuals and groups that have taken the position on No Platform that you have, and how they've defended their positions? David let's start with you. What groups were there insisting that No Platform was necessary but its necessity was limited to overt fascists? David: Well, I think in practice, that was the approach of Rock Against Racism. They took a very different attitude towards people who were tough ideological fascists, to the people who were around them who were definitely racist, but who were capable of being argued out of that. I mean, I've given the example of the policy of trying to have a debate with Sham 69 or use them as a mechanism to change their audience. What I want to convey is in every Rock Against Racism group around the country, they were often attempts to something very similar. People talk about Birmingham and Leeds, whether it be sort of local Rock Against Racism groups, they might put on– might get a big band from some other city once a month, but three weeks out of four, all they're doing is they're putting on a local some kind of music night, and they might get a hundred people there. But they'd go out of the way to invite people who they saw as wavering supporters of The National Front. But the point is this wasn't like– We all know how bad faith debates work. It's something like it's two big ego speakers who disagree with each other, giving them half an hour each to debate and know their audience is already persuaded that one of them's an asshole, one of them's great. This isn't what they were trying to do. They were trying to win over one by one wavering racists by putting them in an environment where they were surrounded by anti-racists. So it was about trying to create a climate where you could shift some people who had hateful ideas in their head, but were also capable of being pulled away from them. They didn't do set piece debates with fascists because they knew that the set piece debates with fascists, the fascists weren't going to listen to what they were going to say anyway. But what they did do is they did try to shift people in their local area to try and create a different atmosphere in their local area. And they had that attitude towards individual wavering racists, but they never had that attitude towards the fascist leaders. The fascist leaders as far as they're concerned, very, very simple, we got to close up the platform to them. We got to deprive them of a chance. Another example, Rock Against Racism, how it kind of made those sorts of distinctions. I always think with Rock Against Racism you know, they had a go at Clapton. They weren't at all surprised when he refused to apologize. But with Bowie, there was always a sense, "We want to create space for Bowie. We want to get Bowie back because Bowie's winnable." That's one of the things about that movement, is that the absolute uncrossable line was fascism. But if people could be pulled back away from that and away from the ideas associated with that, then they wanted to create the space to make that happen. Mike: Okay, and Evan, what groups took the Maximalist approach to No Platform and what was their reasoning? Evan: Yeah. So I think the discussion happens once the National Front goes away as the kind of the major threat. So the 1979 election, the National Front does dismally, and we can partially attribute that to the Anti-Nazi League and Rock Against Racism, kind of this popular antifascist movement. But there's also that Margaret Thatcher comes to power, and there's an argument that's made by historians is that she has pulled away the racist vote away from the National Front back to the conservatives. It's really kind of a realignment of leftwing politics under Thatcher because it's a much more confrontational conservative government, but there's also kind of these other issues which are kind of the new social movements and what we would now term as identity politics, they're forming in the sixties and seventies and are really big issues in the 1980s. So kind of like feminism, gay rights, andthat,  there's an argument among some of the students that if we have a No Platform for racism and fascism, why don't we have a No Platform for sexism? Why don't we have a No Platform for homophobia? And there are certain student unions who try to do this. So LSE in 1981, they endorse a No Platform for sexist as part of a wider fight against sexism, sexual harassment, sexual violence on campus is that misogynist speakers shouldn't be allowed to have a presence on campus. Several student unions kind of have this also for against homophobia, and as a part of this really divisive issue in the mid 1980s, the conservative government is quite homophobic. Section 28 clause 28 is coming in in the late eighties. It's a whole kind of homophobia of AIDS. There's instances where students object to local Tory politicians who were kind of outwardly, explicitly homophobic, that they should be not allowed to speak on stage. Then also bubbling along in the background is kind of the supporters of apartheid, so South African diplomats or kind of other people who support the South African regime including Conservative politicians, is that several times throughout the 1980s, they are invited to speak on campus, and there's kind of a massive backlash against this. Sometimes the No Platform policy is invoked. Sometimes it's just simple disruption or kind of pickets or vigils against them. But once fascism is kind of not the main issue, and all these different kind of politics is going on in the eighties, is that there's argument that No Platform for fascism and racism was important, but fascism and racism is only one form of hate speech; it's only one form of discrimination; it's only one form of kind of bodily violence; and we should take them all into consideration. Mike: Okay. Now there's been a fair bit of backlash against No Platform in kind of any of its forms from various sectors, so let's talk a bit about that. Let's start with the fascist themselves. So their response kind of changed somewhat over time in response to No Platform. David, you talk about this. David: Yeah. In the early ‘70s in Britain or I suppose in the late ‘70s too, what's extraordinary is how little use fascist make out of saying, "We are being attacked, free speech applies. We've got to have the right to be heard." I made the point earlier that Britain doesn't have a strong legal culture of free speech. We do have some culture of free speech. And again, it's not that the fascists never use these terms at all, they use them, but they use them very half-heartedly. Their dominant approach is to say, "We are being attacked by the left. The left don't understand we have better fighters than them. If they attack us on the streets, we'll fight back. In the end, we'll be the ones who win in a kind of battle of machismo, street fighting power." Now A, that doesn't happen because actually they lose some set piece confrontations, mostly at Lewisham in 1977. But it's interesting that they don't do the kind of thing which you'd expect the far right to do today, which is to say, like the British far right does today, they constantly say, "We're under attack. Free speech demands that we be heard. We're the only people who take free speech seriously." There's a continuous process in the British far right these days of endlessly going on social media every time anyone even disagrees with them a little bit, they immediately have their faces taped up and present themselves as the victim of this terrible conspiracy when in the mid-'70s when there really were people trying to put the far right out of business, that isn't what the far right did. I think, in essence, a whole bunch of things have to change. You have to get kind of a hardening of the free speech discourse in the United States; you have to have things like the attack on political correctness; the move by the American center-right from being kind of equivocal on free speech to being extremely pro-free speech; and you need to get the importation into Britain of essentially the same kind of free speech discourse as you have in States. Once we get all of that, the British far right eventually twigs that it's a far more effective way of presenting themselves and winning supporters by posing as the world's biggest defenders of free speech.  But in the ‘70s, they haven't learned that lesson yet, and their response is much more leaden and ineffective. In essence, they say, "No Platform's terrible because it's bullying us." But what they never have the gumption to say is, "Actually, we are the far right. We are a bunch of people putting bold and dangerous and exciting ideas, and if we are silenced, then all bold and dangerous and difficult ideas will be silenced too." That's something which a different generation of writers will get to and will give them all sorts of successes. But in the ‘70s, they haven't found it yet. Mike: Okay. Now fascists also had some uneasy allies as far as No Platform is concerned among Tories and libertarians. So let's talk about the Tories first, what was their opposition to No Platform about? Evan, you talk about this quite a bit in your book. Evan: Yeah. So the conservative opposition to No Platform is essentially saying that it's a stock standard thing that the left call everyone fascist. So they apply it to broadly and is that in the ‘80s, there's a bunch of conservative politicians to try to go onto campus, try to speak, and there's massive protests. They say that, "Look, this is part of an intolerant left, that they can't see the distinction between fascism and a Conservative MP. They don't want to allow anyone to have free speech beyond that kind of small narrow left wing bubble." In 1986, there is an attempt, after a kind of a wave of protest in '85, '86, there is an attempt by the government to implement some kind of protection for free speech on campus. This becomes part of the Education Act of 1986, that the university has certain obligations to ensure, where practical, free speech applies and no speech is denied. But then it's got all kind of it can't violate the Racial Discrimination Act, the Public Order Act, all those kind of things. Also, quite crucially for today, that 1986 act didn't explicitly apply to student unions. So student unions argued for the last 30 years that they are exempt from any legislation and that they were legally allowed to pursue their No Platform policy.

Podcast: Emerson Automation ExpertsEpisode: Growing Cybersecurity Threats and Mitigation Approaches PodcastPub date: 2022-06-15Cybersecurity was a big topic at the 2022 ARC Industry Forum in Orlando, Florida. While there, I had the opportunity to sit down and catch up with Emerson's Director of Cybersecurity, Mike Lester. We discussed many of the issues and growing threats companies face, as they try to maintain strong cybersecurity postures. Unfortunately, there is no silver bullet to becoming cyber-secure and maintaining strong defenses. Mike offers guidance on ways to develop a strong culture and address these challenges over time. Visit the Cybersecurity section on Emerson.com and subscribe to our continuing series of Emerson Automation Experts podcasts. Transcript Jim: Hi, everyone. This is Jim Cahill with another “Emerson Automation Experts” podcast. Today, I’m here at the 2022 ARC Forum in Orlando, and joined by Emerson’s director of cybersecurity, Mike Lester, to discuss some of the latest happenings in cybersecurity. Welcome, Mike. Mike: Thanks, Jim. Jim: Well, let’s get everyone grounded with a little bit of your background, and path to your current role here at Emerson. Mike: Sure, Jim. So, I’ll start way back in the Air Force, I was an aircraft mechanic back from 1985. so I did that for 12 years and then moved into communications, which was networking, data center operations, cybersecurity, you name it, and we did it from a technology perspective. And then after doing that for 10 years, I moved into Emerson as the operations manager for IT in the Rosemount twin cities factories, and helped, you know, maintain the factories, and networks, and systems there. Then moving into information security role for the then Process group. And then in 2017, moving into the current role for product security in the technology arm of the organization today, where I get to interact with customers, and all the business units around cybersecurity strategy, as well as technologies and governance. Jim: Well, that sounds like a really strong background, and I know cybersecurity is one of the key topic areas here at the conference this week. So why does cybersecurity remain such a large concern in the critical infrastructure space? Mike: Jim, there’s some obvious reasons and responses here, like, ever-increasing threats and successful attacks against critical infrastructure targets. Cybersecurity remains a large concern because there’s been a clear shift from gang-related cyberattacks seeking financial gain, to cyber as a fifth element of war with all nature of attacks between different threat actors, nation-states to nation-state saboteurs, to nation-state to private industry and in critical infrastructure sectors. A good example of this dynamic is Russia launching cyberattacks against Ukraine, days before the kinetic attacks began. Followed by that, was a global community of independent volunteer hackers that attacked and provided intelligence to the world about where oligarchs were docking their yachts, and much more direct, defensive, and offensive. Essentially crowdsourcing cyber warfare without anybody asking them to do it. Likewise, there’d been malicious threat actors like Anonymous, since most people are familiar with them, who chose sides in the cyber warfare effort. The threats are real, and we need to begin putting them into context in order to analyze risk with trained professionals in this space as opposed to some historically dismissive behavior or thinking that it can never happen. Jim: Yeah. It sounds like the degree of difficulty for companies to deal with it has gone way up, so there’s more that needs to be done. So I guess, given the strategic importance of critical infrastructure like manufacturing, what are the key areas of concern? Mike: Safety is always at the top of the list for concerns, but I would also couple this with the additional consequences of operational disruptions, leading to loss of revenue, supply chain disruption, all the way through to potential extreme or extended social and national capability disruptions, from lack of resiliency in cybersecurity and operations. Look, we depend on a Jenga stack of people, processes, and technology to live our daily lives with electronic everything. This includes our homes, our work, grocery stores, fuel, our national security, our entire way of life is really dependent on the continued and successful operation of critical infrastructure. And if I extend that Jenga analogy, you know, if you take the wrong block out, the entire structure can fail. And we’ve seen this, some blocks have been taken out or partial collapses in many places. But when we look at the cases like Venezuela and Haiti, where power outages lasted for extended periods of time, there were significant disruptions across the spectrum of what we would consider normal society and livelihood capabilities. We need to be cognizant of the possible, and engineer capabilities in critical infrastructure to match the risk. This may seem a bit doom and gloom but, you know, in reality, they are possible in civilization. We need to manage the risk appropriately in a way that equals a holistic capability. We need to work collaboratively and recognize the role that we have. Jim: I think that Jenga analogy is a real good one and gives people a picture of the challenges that we face in that. So what are some of the root causes of these points of concern? Mike: You know, it might be a little unexpected, but, you know, and I’m not gonna go point to a particular control or get dived down into the real technical details, recognizing that in reality, we have imperfect systems, and devices operated by imperfect processes, and often undertrained, imperfect people, we must look across the spectrum to determine how we can prioritize efforts in the right place. I believe this confusion or varying opinions to achieve better levels of cybersecurity, coupled with an extreme shortage in appropriate talent in the workforce, have led the industry to focus on a silver bullet approach primarily with technology solutions, and a market that fuels this approach. And we are misaligned through focus on discrete objectives, rather than industry, regional, national, company-strategic objectives that achieve outcome-based risk management, as opposed to compliance-oriented risk management that’s failed us for decades. A good example of this is antivirus or anti-malware, everybody’s familiar with that, being a mandatory compliance requirement for audits. When in reality, when it finds malware, it’s already in your environment, and likely active. Anti-malware is known as a reactive tool in the cybersecurity professional space, and what we should be focusing on is preventing that malware from getting into our environments in a proactive manner. Jim: Well, I guess we all wish there was a silver bullet to handle it, but much like other things, safety, there is no single thing that just makes everything perfect for you. So what can be done to mitigate these cybersecurity risks and threats? Mike: There’s a spectrum of thing, but it really equals work. Lots of work, with appropriate investment strategies, and dedicated budgeting. Threats can really only be addressed by more cyber-resilient and capable products, systems, services, supply chains, and operations. This requires cybersecurity skill and expertise across all business functional areas, similar to finance, or legal. Everyone in the company has a fiduciary expectation and responsibilities that they must meet. They don’t need to be a finance major, or certified public accountant, or a CFO. More directly, I always like to start with an assessment for your operations to determine gaps and create a plan to remediate those in a prioritized manner. We need to expand this thought process to all aspects of our business and across all functions if we’re gonna get beyond compliance to higher levels of maturity and capability. It’s not gonna be easy, and it’ll likely stretch, or break most paradigms of how to approach holistic cybersecurity that can achieve cyber and operational resiliency to the levels needed in our industries, and for future opportunities in automation and control. Jim: Well, yeah. It does sound like when you’re trying to tackle a very difficult problem, starting with the assessment and really prioritizing the things that need to be done, so it just doesn’t feel overwhelming. It seems like that’s a very logical approach to attack this very difficult problem. So what are your top recommendations to manufacturers and producers to strengthen their cyber defenses? Mike: Often we’re gonna be looking for…customers may be looking for, or other business folks may be looking for a list, “Here’s my checklist of things to do.” But really what it comes down to is, work with industry experts and cybersecurity partners, get an outside perspective, or a gap analysis. Cybersecurity in general from a people, process, and technology perspective, has very fast-paced rate of change across a full landscape. So it’s likely what was known about your operations last year, or when it was implemented, they’re stale data points. You know, looking to…or working with partners to build cybersecurity and operation resiliency in business investments, processes, implementations, etc., you know, with a prioritized business risk-based approach, is a really good start. Often, conversations around achieving cybersecurity devolve into technology and leverage, versus how to accomplish the right proactive or active defense against threats from the nation-state actors I spoke about earlier on, you know, an active cyber warfare landscape. I’m not saying this really to, you know, instill fear, uncertainty, or doubt, or what we commonly hear as FUD, but to really speak truth about what we face as an industry and as a society. Technology changes to improve cybersecurity capabilities will always be slow to implement and embed into systems and devices that control safety, operations, and the critical infrastructure segments. We’ve gotta understand the spectrum of cybersecurity architecture’s capabilities and operations that can enable resilient operations and fast recovery from what seems to be an inevitable incident that impacts manufacturers and producers. Jim: Well, I think that’s some good guidance of how to think about it and approach it. So where can our listeners go to learn more about ways to build their cybersecurity posture and culture? Mike: There’s a lot of good resources. I like to point folks, if they wanna be vendor-agnostic or they don’t…maybe they’re looking at vendors and asking whether we’re gonna sell them the silver bullet approach, you know, we can use resources like the national government’s U.S. Department of Homeland Security in the U.S., the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), or the UK’s National Cybersecurity Centre, and others, you know. Most recently, Emerson’s partner Dragos, launched a program called OT-CERT. That provides free resources for companies who may not have the expertise available to help them understand the complex space of cybersecurity, and how to mature their programs, or even initialize their programs. Emerson also has a portfolio of cybersecurity capabilities like assessments, products, and services that focus on enabling secure customer operations. The bottom line is we really like to work with our customers and achieve their cybersecurity, and ultimately their business objectives. Jim: Well, that’s a great summary of places to go for more information, and I’ll add a link to the cybersecurity section on emerson.com for more on the tools and solutions to help our listeners in their cybersecurity efforts. Well, Mike, I wanna thank you for joining us today. I hope our listeners got as much out of this as I did. Mike: Thanks, Jim. Appreciate you having me.The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Emerson Team, which is the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Listen Notes, Inc.

Mark Ledlow and Mike H. return in this week's episode of The Fearless Mindset podcast, to further discuss the untold truth about the situation in Ukraine. Mike is a U.S. military veteran who is currently doing voluntary work in Ukraine doing rescue missions for Ukrainian locals who need help amidst the ongoing Russian attacks. HIGHLIGHTSMike's living situationMike finding new purpose in volunteeringMike on continuing his voluntary workWhat keeps Mike fearlessFaith taking Mike to the right directionQUOTESMike: "The biggest concerns is human trafficking. You got all these refugees that are coming across the border, and there are people out there that will take advantage of this stuff.”Mike: "There's a lot of stuff that's being pushed out in the media that I haven't really heard. There's no telling what the Russians have been doing.”Mike: "To see people that are willing to die, I mean literally know they're gonna die but are willing to fight and defend their country until their death is just an experience.”Mike: "I left the military in 2012, and for a long time, I was really lost and didn't really know what my next step in life was and just kind of felt like I was spinning my wheels and ended up joining an organization, and just volunteering and once again found a sense of purpose.”Mike: "I've been through a lot in my life and been through war and been through cancer, and I'm here. And I definitely serve a much larger purpose.”To help Michael H. in his mission to save lives in Ukraine check out the link below:GoFundMe - https://gofund.me/aa73eae6To hear more episodes of The Fearless Mindset podcast, you can go to https://the-fearless-mindset.simplecast.com/ or listen to major podcasting platforms such as Apple, Google, Spotify, etc. You can also subscribe to the Fearless Mindset YouTube Channel to watch episodes on video.

This time Megan will be covering Season 7 Episode 4 titled “Compelled”. It originally aired September 3, 2016. Amy recapped Season 2 Episode 17 called “Possessed” which originally aired May 3, 2013. **This one involves some content that we want to warn you about head of time: Child death (history), Children being attacked by spirits, talk of suicidal thoughts. But again, if you watch the show, you're prepared. ** These both take place in Michigan! And that's NOT the only parallel.·        In both stories the male client is named Mike·        There's a bad entity in the basement·        Possession in involved·        Questionable mothers-in-law Then here's another thing we thought was odd. In Amy's episode the entity Sadie, was born October 16th, and died (year's later) on October 18th. The client mentions that the date of birth is just a few days before hers. Sadie's date of death is just before Megan's birthday.If that's not weird enough…in the episode Amy covered last week, the entity was also born October 16 and died October 18th.[insert Twilight Zone theme song]But first we gab for a good bit of time before we even start talking about The Dead Files. So if you don't enjoy patter and/or US as people, just skip ahead to about 15:00 for when we start talking about the show. But be warned, we still go off on tangents even when we are, in theory, on track. Think of it as our charm.Pour yourself a glass of Feet Wine, (or cream wine, your choice) and join us while we talk about tea bags, La Grippe and we'll also dissect a couple of episodes of The Dead Files, and be warned against Gas Station Hard Boiled Eggs.The Activity Continues is a podcast where a couple of dorks (Amy & Megan) chat about the TV show, The Dead Files and other creepy shit. Each week we each choose an episode to dissect and chat about.So grab your hankies, hop in the Cadillac, and join us when… The Activity Continues.Stuff we talked about in this episode:Our promo partner podcast this month is the “Haunted UK”.Adam's Pest Control Commercial https://youtu.be/YHHOUrrK5UcCalendar: https://amzn.to/3qIutG2Candle https://amzn.to/3DglUrb This was recorded on March 24, 2022 and released April 1, 2022.If you'd prefer to watch the video versions of our episodes, please seeYouTube: https://bit.ly/TAC_videosSpotify: https://spoti.fi/3iLoAqG If you're looking for all our links and other info go here: https://bit.ly/TACabout SponsorThree Spirit Drinks. They create plant-based non-alcoholicelixirs.  https://us.threespiritdrinks.com/theactivitycontinuesand use the promo code THEACTIVITYCONTINUES for 15% off yourentire order. Thank you for listening, take care of yourselves. We'll see you next week! CreditsHosted by: Amy and MeganProduced by Amy at Collected Sounds Media, LLC.Theme song. “Ghost Story” and segment music by Cannelle https://melissaoliveri.com/   Support us on Ko-Fi: https://ko-fi.com/theactivitycontinuesBecome a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/theactivitycontinuesA Paranormal PodcastSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/collected-sounds2/donations

HIGHLIGHTSOperation Hold FastGrowth of Mike's operationActivities in the operationQUOTESMike: "We decided to come together and put our own funds together to kind of help support her family. And that kind of turned into a little bit of a larger operation with helping out with their community.”Mike: "There's a lot of big organizations that are doing stuff right now. Area recovery groups, save our allies, a lot of them, you know, they got some really good stuff going on.”To help Michael in his mission to save lives in Ukraine check out the link below:GoFundMe - https://gofund.me/aa73eae6To hear more episodes of The Fearless Mindset podcast, you can go to https://the-fearless-mindset.simplecast.com/ or listen to major podcasting platforms such as Apple, Google, Spotify, etc. You can also subscribe to the Fearless Mindset YouTube Channel to watch episodes on video.

HIGHLIGHTSGoing viral with McDonald's and living your personal brandCreate strong content by becoming part of the community firstPeople want to know who they're buying fromPassion beats talent any dayQUOTESMike: "Are you all familiar with Rick and Morty? Are you familiar with the Szechuan sauce that came out at McDonald's for Rick and Morty? I am the guy who brought it back and made the Internet explode."Mike: "Listening to your audience is of utmost importance because they will tell you if you're doing good or bad. They will tell you if you're playing too much or not enough. They'll tell you if you sucked that day or if you were awesome."Mike: "Nobody's going to believe you if you just pay for it. You're going to get impressions, you will get zero engagement. So a lot of people will see your awesome ad but if people don't believe in the ad, it's not going to move them."Mike: "There's an entire internet universe that is not real. Well, if you open a restaurant in there and it becomes so popular, you can use that brand to make a real life restaurant and leverage. So now, metaverse is you're in digital and you're in real life."Connect with Mike in the following links:Twitter: https://twitter.com/Mike_HaraczLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeharacz/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/ChefMikeDoesStuffInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/mike_haracz/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@chefmikeharaczFollow Club Colors and reach out to John in the links below: Website: https://www.clubcolors.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/%E2%98%98%EF%B8%8Fjohn-morris%E2%98%98%EF%B8%8F-96148716/

Mike hosts his own podcast called Boardroom Sessions, interviewing Southern California's best and brightest technology leaders and executives. He also heads up the telecom carrier division at Sidepath, a SoCal-based technology integrator. Mike breaks the traditional corporate mold with his approach to business and life.L: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hbmikemiller/Alex - https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-gafford-09b2b87/P: https://boardroomsessions.com/Highlights02:55 Even small acts of sharing can create big impact08:24 How to survive working from home 11:14 Redefining work ethic and productivity by finding your balance 12:55 Organizing your tasks is key to effective time management15:18 Using vision boards to set goals and intentions16:14 Prioritizing the Body, Mind, and Spirit23:17 Create your "dream team" and ask, "What would they do?"29:15 Set measurable and attainable goals 31:25 Do something for someone random, but don't tell anyone about it 32:54 Redefining Hustle: Ambition, Motivation, and Grind37:40 Defining your top 3 attributes and making them work for you 41:15 Finding the real value that you can offer43:41 Ask yourself these 3 questions after every successful project51:41 Lean in to your ambitionQuotes04:33 Alex: “As you go about your busy week, what are some little things that you really love to do that you can easily share with others? Even if it's something really small, it could have a huge huge impact on someone else.” 10:02 Mike: “Do some things for yourself in the middle of the day. We now have a different work pattern: take advantage of it.” 11:59 Mike: “There used to be a work-life balance — like I have to work and then I have to have a life. I don't believe in that anymore. I think it's a work-life blend." 30:58 Mike: “I believe in an 'I'm here to help' mentality. That's the overarching value I bring to the table.”36:54 Alex: “When I think of hustle or work ethic, I think of hard hard work. And you see some people that are very busy all the time and just work. They seem to be working very hard, but maybe there's no intention or focus.” 43:38 Mike: "After a successful project, always, we ask questions. First, I come back and say, 'Hey. why did you trust in me to help you' Two. 'What did we do well here?' Three, 'What could we have done better?'”51:53 Mike: "In my life, only when I'm working and growing am I completely happy."

In this episode, we pay homage to the fantastic genre of alien invasion movies. Movies like Independence Day, Skyline, War of the Worlds, etc. Aliens arrive, and though their intentions are unclear at first, we quickly learn that they are not here to be peaceful and make friends. It's up to a military leader and her scientist ex to figure out how to stop the invasion and save the world. This episode has love, drama, and port-a-potties (yes, port-a-potties)! Links Independence Day movie on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Day_(1996_film) War of the Worlds on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Worlds_(2005_film) Skyline  on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(2010_film) Time Codes Segment 1 - Discussion the Genre Tropes: 03:30 Segment 2 - Creating the Movie Outline: 09:47 Segment 3 - Picking the Improv Comedy Games: 16:36 Start of show: 24:55 Improv Game - Movie Trailer: 25:17 Improv Game - Best of Times Worst of Times: 26:53 Improv Game - One Word at a Time Typewriter: 34:30 Improv Game - Blind Line: 46:15 Improv Game - Cutting Room: 56:23 End of show, into announcements: 1:07:17 More Information About the Show, Mike, and Avish Subscribe to the podcast:  Our Website: www.AvishAndMike.com Our Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/143183833647812 Avish's site: www.AvishParashar.com  Mike's site: www.MikeWorthMusic.com/   Transcription of the “Discussing the Genre Tropes” Segment (Unedited and Un-Cleaned up) Avish: What do you think when you think of a big budget alien invasion movie. Mike: Oh boy well so to start with um there's always the ominous foreshadowing right so it's always like. Mike: You know they find some alien tech like buried in like in guardians all over the world or look there's an establishing shot, so they let you know, right from the get go that something bad's going on. Mike: that's because the establishing act one usually act one is all about the impending dread of the arrival of the Aliens in a mysterious fashion and the US in various countries trying to establish contact with it it's almost always like that right. Avish: yeah they figured out that they're not sure, a lot of time is. Avish: Are they friendly are they dangerous in the first act it's a lot of. Avish: there's like usually there's like a military character or group that knows the Aliens are there knows the Aliens are coming, but then there's like the general populace, that is, like just discovering the aliens and not sure what's going on with them. Mike: Right right right and. Mike: You know act one usually ends with the first blast of aggression that's that's the crossing of the threshold right where it's. Avish: Like a big I mean independent they certainly. Avish: Had big aggression, but a lot. Mike: yeah. Mike: And then they did you know what they did, which was really cool and this is, if we can try and boy, this is a bridge too far, maybe, but we should try it. Mike: Independence Day nail it because they had three crossing of the threshold at the same time, so the chopper was destroyed. Mike: At the same time that the scientists will, at that time there was a doomsday timer at the same time that all the ships start opening up their lights on top of New York City.    Mike: So it was like every every every feeler from our planet, that was out was getting was getting.    Avish: Like a lot of shifts we're hitting a lot of fans all.    Mike: The shifts in the fans yeah.    Avish: that's right, then we get into the um there's a lot of scrambling like there's a total overwhelm right like the Aliens are always just.    Mike: completely outside yeah absolutely dominant right then act two is the regroup and usually the counter attack and the best part is well I.    Avish: Think, part two, is like the over like act one is where we're learning we're not sure Act two is where the Aliens just dominate.    Avish: X three I feel is when you get kind of we're getting more proactive we're going to fight back, but it usually is relatively ineffective.    Mike: mate right.    Avish: You know okay we're going to drop the nuke and Independence Day, and that does nothing.    Mike: yep or in or in Independence Day, though the knockoff them like virtus scored they may mount a couple of offenses in the early, just like wipe them out like just because they're just.    Mike: underground and stuff like that now they're usually has to be a macguffin that changes the tide something involving human ingenuity and usually involving like the little rogue science team to kind of figure something out right.    Avish: Well it's always yeah it's it's the the other civilian version like there was, like the civilian in the military yeah the civilian figure something out Independence Day, with the virus in war of the worlds, it was a real virus.    Mike: yeah but we're the world's this is kind of funny like it's one of the few movies, where the humans had nothing to do with just defeated the.    Avish: retrospective terrible storytelling.    Mike: yeah yeah so it's a great. Avish: ultimate deus ex machina it's like.    Avish: Oh yeah yeah yeah you're.    Avish: gonna wipe you out, but the common cold cold.    Mike: Because he's angel these aliens all this advanced technology that hungered for our world didn't research, the common virus and bacteria.    Avish: Like insides where they didn't research, the planet was covered in water.    Mike: yeah so 1% water yes.    Avish: We, for our story we'd like a more proactive, but it could also be the author trope that comes up a lot, which I don't know we're gonna do is the hive mind alien queen trope where it's like.    Avish: yeah discovered to fight back you know we don't need to destroy the entire alien race which is dominant we.    Avish: got killed.    Mike: queen yeah the board the board idea that you know.    Avish: The Board mind or yeah a lot of.    Avish: Like rain of fire which is dragons not aliens but it's like hey we killed.    Avish: The Queen dragon and all the dragons die, so I.    Mike: Actually, never saw that it looks good and cool.    Avish: I saw it in the theater I don't remember very much about it, which should tell you something.    Avish: it's yeah my recollection is I wouldn't call it a good movie, but it may have been a fun movie.    Mike: you've already reminded me that there will be, because any trope there will be a Matthew mcconaughey character in our in our.    Avish: character.    Mike: yeah and he's gonna be in our show.    Mike: Because now. Avish: Oh there's almost always um. Some.    Avish: relationship in peril you know there's like the estranged. Avish: husband and wife back to each other or the father trying to save the sound of the mother trying to say or in shark NATO, where it was the guy from beverly hills.    Mike: No, I know from American pie, I engineering and Terry fantastic some kind of like.    Avish: To the main characters will be connected.    Avish: Yes, some kind of romance or love.    Mike: There is usually a general slash military leader who is initially at odds with the heroes and heroin, but then has kind of a come to Jesus thing and at three and four.    Avish: yeah they're not like evil they're just.    Avish: opinionated damien's yeah.    Avish: yeah yeah and that's our five minutes, I think the final thing i'll throw in there is.    Avish: Most of these don't have a real villain like the entire alien race is like the villain does not like a head alien.    Avish: Even if it's a queen it's not like.    Avish: Being a character.    Mike: and much of the conflict actually allies, with a disaster movie it's like they're trying to escape a building as it's getting nuked by laser bolts or.    Mike: You know the the Aliens blow up a dam and obviously it's a way it's a cheap way for people to get like a little disaster movie in there it's like Oh, they start a forest fire and you have to flee and now you have to be you have to fight, you have to defeat.    Avish: Yes, I like a lot of times yeah when they are blowing stuff up the Aliens are the disaster like Independence Day, the first half of that movie is like pure just disaster movie. Mike: Exactly so that's yeah that's your thing we got to think of it's like there's a healthy component to disaster before that it's not like Star Wars or star trek where it's like SCI fi space flights and stuff.    Avish: All right.    Mike: we're good place we're in a good spot. Transcription of the “Creating the Outline” Segment (Unedited and Un-Cleaned up)    Avish: For this movie it's going to be rough in a high level and because we're going to be using improv games to play this we may end up veering from the outline in minor ways, or even a major ways, but this is kind of our starting point.    Mike: yeah we reserve the right to change anything and everything exactly.    Avish: But this is what we're going to kind of roughly stick to you, so our five minute timer starts now alright so for this one you're thinking prologue well, so we always start your first time listening, where we start with a prologue or a movie trailer.    Avish: We want a prologue of the Aliens arriving and all that or do you want just the movie trailer.    Avish: of you.    Mike: can see it either way man, you make the call today.    Mike: I like them both.    Avish: The movie trailer, for we last couple times we don't a prologue so let's do a trailer.    Mike: yeah yeah yeah.    Avish: alright.    Avish: So now for outline what happens in act one.    Avish: Of the Aliens need to arrive and people need to find out the military and the civilian need to find out.    Mike: Right military finds out first.    Mike: And they have to find out, first because they need to start mobilizing their stuff to be ahead of the civilian population.    Mike: yeah realizing response alright a. Avish: Civilian a the civilians to find out, we also need to establish the relationship for the civilian right like.    Mike: yeah and and let's keep it simple let's let's go with the.    Mike: main hero.    Mike: Love interest.    Avish: I mean, if you want it, and this can come out of the improv you want to keep it simple also one thing there's like the coincidence right so it's like. Avish: It could be the military person and the civilian main character are like husband wife or access or boyfriend girlfriend or you know, instead of having an extra character which sometimes when we're doing improv can get a little confusing.    Mike: Man all right, our accents are only so good. Mike: We only have I only have so many American deal with you know that, should we can do that a main character mean here leverages military commander, we have to establish.    Mike: Now now do we want the main hero to have agency in terms of like there's a reason he wants to defeat the Aliens or is he just caught up in it and just happens to be heroic.    Avish: Well, I think the military one wants to defeat the aliens and the civilian one just kind of gets caught up maybe because they're connected to the military person or there.    Mike: huh yeah.    Avish: It just happened to be.    Mike: I haven't read yet tell me this is like look look getting too granular but, like the Aliens had some tech they're using the setup the assault and the main hero gets a hold of the tech or translates the tech or somehow is able to use it against the aliens. Avish: yeah I think that's good that's kind of like how Jeff goldblum figured out the countdown codependent thing.    Avish: yeah all right, and then at the end of by the end of act one the Aliens will have attacked like.    Mike: yeah and then there's this just mass destruction that.    Avish: yeah maybe attempt contact.    Avish: And then attack yep.    Mike: And it bleeds out the attacks bleed over into active, because at the end of Act two is going to be a bunch of disaster scenes you know what I mean like you know that i'm trying to get through.    Avish: And that's it's gonna be a lot of like yeah vignettes of disaster scrambling attacks.    Mike: yeah.    Mike: Military getting pummeled.    Mike: Civilians fleeing right.    Avish: And at this point if they haven't connected in Act two, I think, is when our main characters we'll all meet up like if we've got a military and civilian and maybe a third one they'll all kind of connected this point.    Mike: All parties unify and a location yeah.    Mike: See, I would, I would say I don't always like oh man, I wonder what they didn't like escape from La or whatever it is battlefield la but and watch those movies were like apparently horrible like battleship was horrible.    Avish: battles a battle Los Angeles was.    Avish: Okay, it was mildly entertaining.    Avish: So I think at the end of Act two is when kind of everyone gets together.    Mike: yeah and then, and then the yeah and then at three is usually the prep retaliatory strike.    Avish: yeah and real quick if you're listening and you're familiar with story and act structure of most use a three act structure we use a four were basically divide out to into.    Avish: Act two and three, because actually longer now, we have had the first half of us the reactive, the second half is proactive so.    Mike: Right games, you want to talk about the end of the big act to block so.    Avish: Act three right.    Mike: good guys do retaliatory strike yeah.    Avish: They formulate a plan and retaliate work.    Mike: Usually the strike is ineffective to mildly effective, you know we'll give them the BAT you know it did it doesn't But then what usually happens is.    Mike: Civilian main characters.    Mike: discover macguffin right. Avish: yeah or though I think I will have like the end of act three like that's kind of how it they kind of figured out so.    Mike: yeah I.    Avish: figured out at the end, I think, in addition to the.    Avish: I think this is where you get the big disagreement, you know you're saying how the middle of like the there's usually a more veteran military leader, I think this is where the disagreement kind of comes to a head.    Mike: yeah we're the leader. Avish: In effect, tool and then they kind of have to turn to the civilian solution. Mike: mm hmm exactly and then act for is usually mounting the the assault yeah.    Avish: And i'll plan and usually there's a heightened sense of danger, like the the Aliens figure out where the good guys are hiding or they have captured you know the someone important to the the main characters.    Mike: yep and and yeah and the heightened sense of danger, this is the last chance, where I know we're a little over but it's all right, usually a split narrative usually there's like. Mike: When you're looking at the military side of it used to be epic battle and usually there's a smaller commando team is doing something else. Mike: You know, to mean like again yeah. Avish: This is very independent and if we're going, I mean may get too confusing for our forum, but if we had a third, to be like the third will be like. Avish: The by standards civilians like trying to stay safe there's like counter attack small desperate strike force and then everyone else just trying to survive.    Mike: Right exactly. Avish: And Randy quaid flying a plane. Mike: Wait wait with the new version one with a. Avish: A biplane and like a crop missing. Mike: So, by the way, because you guys are listening, and this is how funny love this stuff that apparently that scene was in the original test screening of Independence Day Randy quaid character. Avish: or SCI fi on like YouTube the original. Mike: Like and apparently the audience just. Mike: They were like yeah X that. Avish: Terrible. Avish: I don't know and he, like. Avish: It missile like strapped in the backseat of his plane. Mike: yeah yeah like. Mike: Worst armory gunnery sergeant ever like you just let's go walk off with the sidewinder.    Mike: Alright, so so. Mike: Cheap.

Freeze, creep! This week, we're checking out the 1995 and 2012 attempts to bring Judge Dredd to American movie audiences. Spoiler alert: It didn't work out like the studios hoped.  ----more---- [00:00:00] Mike: That's a little too thirsty, I think. Welcome to Tencent takes the podcast where we violate Mega City One's judicial codes, one issue at a time. Coming at you live from the hot box of my closet; I have not showered in 24-hours, and I smell fantastic. I'm Mike Thompson and I am joined by my co-host, the princess of pain, Jessika Frazer. Jessika: Yaar! I'm also - Mike: How are you smelling? Jessika: God, I'm in a hotbox of pain at the very least, I had to go to work like physically into the office today. So I actually, you know, had to be decent enough to be around people that are masked, so the deodorant had to at least be applied, but. Mike: No hard pass. I work out of my bedroom now, you're lucky if you get pants. Jessika: Well, that's nice. [00:01:00] Mike: Would you like to explain why we are here? Jessika: You know, we're here because we love comics. Mike, Mike: True. Jessika: We love comics. We want to talk about all the comics. We want to do deep dives about our favorite comics and their heroes, and where they came from. And wild little stories that we find out about them and bringing in nefarious characters like Eric Estrada. He's not a nefarious. Mike: He's a little nefarious. He was involved in a really weird kind of scammy land sale thing. He did also endorse Trump on Twitter. Remember that where he was like - Jessika: Oh God. He is nefarious. Gosh, darn I, why do I always want to give Eric Estrada so much credit? I'm like way too nice to the guy. I don't even know him. I do follow him on Twitter now, but. Mike: No. He literally told Donald Trump on Twitter that he should run for president because he tells it like it is. So thanks, Eric. Thanks. Appreciate that. Jessika: No. That was a bad idea. Like, for [00:02:00] the record, I don't know if anyone else knows that. Everyone else knows that, every other country knows that. Mike: They do now. Jessika: Oh man, we're going to get into some hot topics today, too. This is already a good start. Mike: Yeah. So before I interrupted you, is there anything else that we'd like to cover or talk about or look at? Jessika: Oh, their video games, all the related media movies. Everything, everything comics related, we want to talk about it. Mike: Fair. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: Well, today we are going to hop on our Law Masters and cruise the Cursed Earth as we check out both the cinematic adaptations of Judge Dredd. But, before we do that, before we dive into this episode, we'd like to acknowledge a small milestone because this is our 10th episode and we've received over 500 downloads. So, you know, that may not sound like anything major compared to a lot of podcasts out there, but we're incredibly proud of what we've been able to achieve and how far we've gotten so far. And if you're listening to us, we're super [00:03:00] grateful that you've just given us your time. We really appreciate it. So to celebrate, we're going to do a giveaway. If you go to our page on Apple Podcast and leave a rating, and then email us a screenshot of said rating and a review, but that's only if you're inclined, really, we just care about the rating. We'll enter you to win a $25 gift card from NewKadia. NewKadia actually offers international shipping too. So, even listeners outside of the continental us are eligible. Jessika: That's super exciting! Mike: Yeah. Jessika: So Yeah. Rate us, review us. We appreciate you all. Mike: Even you. Yeah. So I'm talking to you right through your car stereo right now. Jessika: We're there with you driving along. Hey, watch the road. Mike: All right. We're at the point of the episode where we like to start off with one cool thing that we've read or watched lately, do you want to start off? Jessika: Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. So I needed a little bit of a palate cleanser after watching the [00:04:00] 2012 dread film so much gore. So I ended up watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2, which I hadn't seen before, and it was super fun. Loved the music as always characters had a really good chance to further develop. Okay. But I have to say, dude, I like still Stalloned myself. I did not know he was in that movie. And then he just shows up and I was like, what the fuck? Cause I literally had just watched them both in a row. And so I literally had just seen Stallone like the movie before that. And then he shows up again and I was like, good lord. Mike: Well, and you know that his crew is like the original Guardians of the Galaxy from the comic books. Jessika: I do. Yeah.I do. Now. I know I looked that up afterwards and I was like, oh, okay. All right. Mike: Yeah. And it was like Michael Rosenbalm, who did the voice of Superman and was Lex Luther in Smallville and the Michelle Yeoh and Ving Rhames. I was totally here for that cameo. That was great. [00:05:00] Jessika: Yeah. It was, once I looked that up, I was like, oh, that makes more sense. Cause I wasn't aware of that. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: it was super fun, but then I Stalloned myself again because I today a guest hosting of trivia for North Bay Trivia in Santa Rosa, at Shady Oak Barrel. And they have like a little arcade game. That's Stallone on the front. And I can't remember, I sent it to you, I think, cause I frickin' Stalloned myself again, secondary Stallone. Mike: I feel like you did. And I can't remember what it was. Jessika: I'd have to look it up, but I'm too lazy to look through my phone. So we'll just leave it. Anyone knows I don't, I don't care anymore. Mike: Fair. Jessika: So, back to the Guardians of the Galaxy after that Stallone detour, I really, really liked the evolution of Gomorrah, Nebula's relationship. Mike: I love that. I thought it was fantastic. Like I thought honestly, Almost all the characters had really nice [00:06:00] development, except really, I mean, I don't know. I feel like Peter didn't actually develop that much as an actual character. Jessika: No, he was just taken on some Shamaylan twists and turns. Mike: Yeah. But yeah, the whole bit where, Yondu is yelling at Rocket about, you say that I don't know you, but like you're me. And it was oh, oh. Jessika: Gosh. I definitely cried during that movie. I'm not going to lie, but I'm a crier. Mike: There's a lot of feels. There's a lot of feels in that movie. Jessika: Yeah. Oh, it was so good. So overall two thumbs up. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: What about you? What have you been reading? Watching? Mike: Yeah. So, Sarah and I started watching Loki because that just began airing last week, and ahead of that I wound up reading a couple of old issues of Thor, specifically Thor 371 and 372, which are the issues that actually introduced the Time Variance Authority. And the funny thing is that these issues also introduced a character who [00:07:00] may look a little familiar to you, especially as we've been prepping a bit for this particular episode. So check out the cover and tell me if he reminds you of anyone Jessika: Okay. That looks like a, that's so funny. That looks like Captain America, but it also looks like one of those those Doctor Who, like, what are those things called? Mike: The Daleks. So if you take a closer look at that guy that is so his character, his name is Justice Peace. And if you look at the shape of his helmet and he's actually on a sky cycle. Jessika: Oh shit. Mike: But, yeah, it's a pastiche of Judge Dredd. Jessika: He does look like Judge Dredd. You know what threw me was the bright colors, because Judge Dredd has darker tones. So I kinda got drawn more to that kind of vibe, but you're right. He's got the helmet across his face. You can see one of his eyes and the other one looks like it's probably bionic. And it's kind of like a samurai helmet, it looks like. It's, I think it's supposed to be shaped like more of a samurai style. If I'm not mistaken. Mike: Kind [00:08:00] of which - Jessika: It's big. Mike: Like actually the, Jessika: I don't. Mike: The old school Judge Dredd helmets, actually, like some of them have actually taken on that look too. Like they've kind of played with the shapes, but anyway, I thought it was just kind of a funny, a funny, a full circle moment. Jessika: He's got some arm bandoliers too. Mike: Yeah, man. Those were big in the eighties. Jessika: I guess. So, dang dude, I'm loving this. Mike: Yeah. It's a lot of fun. We are going to be talking about Judge Dredd in general. We're not going to do a deep dive on the comics, but we're going to talk a bit about the background. And so before we actually do that, I felt like we should take a minute and talk about how of us have grown up with pretty close connections to law enforcement. Do you want to go first? Jessika: No. Sure, sure, sure, sure. So my dad was a police officer for, I think, close to 30 years. And for a lot of it he worked in public safety, which is really like policing and [00:09:00] firefighting and they rotate duties. So you have to know both, you go through both academies. It's supposed to be that you're a little bit more well-rounded and involved, and I don't know, it was. At the time the community was a lot smaller and it probably made more sense, but it's getting bigger. And, I don't know how much sense it makes, but I'm also not an expert. And I haven't lived there for a while, so I don't know what the politics there are these days surrounding that as much as I used to. As far as police officers go, I do know a few really decent people who are police officers and, you know, growing up, I had mostly good experiences. However, that hasn't been the case for everyone. And my privilege of being raised white and a child of a law enforcement officer has absolutely shielded me from so many of the issues and policing that plagues our country. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: And I have to say like, unironically, my dad was a decent cop. He's still alive. But when he was still in law enforcement, he was a decent cop and [00:10:00] he definitely let his ethics guide him, and he left positions based on his moral compass. And I'm really proud of him for leaving organizations that were more on the corrupt side or that weren't doing things that he thought they should be doing and abiding by their own rules. However, he's also the one who taught me about profiling, which is a conversation I remember having with him around 9 or 10 years old, maybe earlier than that. And that's just such a racist tactic that has never really sat right with me. And that I adamantly oppose now that I'm older and I have a better understanding of how we as a society, villainize people of color just for existing. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: So without getting too far into what is a really, really massive conversation and discussion, the judicial system in this country is absolutely broken, and we statistically arrest convict and give longer incarceration timeframes to people of color. Mike: Yeah. I mean, there's, [00:11:00] that's just a fact. Jessika: It's a fact. There, there are numbers, you can look it up, you know, it's yeah. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: So, I know, on that fun note, whatever, I'm such a downer. Mike: That's okay. I should have known better than to start us off on this, you know, really positive note for the episode. Jessika: I already got fired up. I'm already going to have to edit out my mumbling. Mike: That's all right. You know, it's funny because I have to wonder if my uncle actually knew your dad because my uncle was in the same area and works in public safety as well. So, he always did the firefighting and police work as well. My uncle is the guy that I grew up idolizing when I was a kid. He was the cool uncle to me. He taught me the basics of photography. And I worked as a freelance photographer for awhile. He was a forensic specialist dealing with fingerprinting. So you and I [00:12:00] grew up in the 90's in the Bay Area. So Polly Klaas is a name that any, anyone who was here during that time knows, and she was a girl who was kidnapped out of her home, basically just taken while she was having a sleep over with some friends out of her home in Petaluma. And the FBI apparently came in and did a Palm print, but they use some fluorescent powder that the local PD couldn't read, but my uncle had the training and I guess the equipment, I don't quite know all the details, but so he worked the Polly Klaas case. He and my aunt are both retired police and they were both so incredibly cool to me when I was growing up. And I've since had to reckon with the fact that, you know, not all cops are good, and I'd hope that they were great. I hope that they were the bar that other cops were measured against, but who can say it, this. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: So we, we both have connections to law enforcement, and I think it's safe [00:13:00] to say that we're approaching Judge Dredd from a perspective that is influenced both by our backgrounds, as well as the current environment that's going on because we're recording this in June of 2021 when things are still real bad in a lot of ways. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: So now that we've got that highlight out of the way. I'm curious, what was your awareness of Judge Dredd prior to this. Jessika: You know, besides name recognition, I didn't know much about the plot line, other than some vague notion that it was futuristic or post-apocalyptic. So, I came into this super fresh, and I'm super excited to learn more now. Mike: Yeah. So, I definitely have a lot more familiarity with the character. I read some of his stuff in the 90's and 2000's. I would just kind of randomly find things and I thought he was pretty cool. When I was in roller derby, my roller derby name actually wound up being Judge Dreadful. [00:14:00] And so I've since then bought a number of collections. I've read most of the big storylines that they did from the 70's up until the mid-90's. And then I also read one of the more recent American series as well. I've seen all the movies. Dred is still one of my favorite movies of all time, even though we'll talk about that later on, it's got its own issues through today's lens. I guess the best way I can describe myself is: I'm more than a casual fan, but I'm not a diehard fan. Part of it is just because there's so much lore at this point. So, I have an unfair advantage in terms of familiarity, I guess. Sorry. Jessika: No, that's okay. That's why you're hosting this episode. Not me. Mike: Yeah. So, we're going to do some basic background. Dredd was originally created in 1977 for this newly launched comics anthology called 2000 AD. There was this guy, he was an editor named Pat Mills and he brought on a writer that he'd worked with named John Wagner to create new content for this magazine. [00:15:00] And, basically comics, anthology magazines, they were printed on like newspaper stock. They were magazine format. And what it was very kind of, you know, old school pulp magazine, like where it was serial stories usually, or a little one-offs. So it'd be four to five pages, usually of content per story. And then a lot of times they would end on a cliffhanger so that, you know, the readers would come back the next week. And that's generally how British comics have worked. At least that's my understanding of it. That's how a lot of them are. And actually when they were trying to do US style sized comics, supposedly they didn't do as well because they would get covered up basically and overshadowed by the sheer size of these magazines, which were much bigger and flashier. So Wagner came into 2000 AD. He'd had a lot of success writing this Dirty Harry kind of character called One-Eyed Jack for another anthology series called Valiant, and both he and Mills realized that 2000 AD needed [00:16:00] a quote unquote, a hardcore cop character as part of the magazine's content. So, Wagner has since then described, dread as a psycho cop with no feelings. And then he worked with this artist named Carlos Escuera to create the character and then Escuera wound up designing a character who reflected that kind of hardcore, no feelings ideal. He actually died a couple of years ago and the Guardian ran a really, it was really nice ,tribute talking about his accomplishments and his style, but there's this really great quote, which I think you should actually read out. And it gives us a lot of background in a nutshell of Dredd and who he is. Jessika: Escuera started his career drawing war comics in Barcelona before moving to the UK and working for the anthology 2000 AD and others, He brought the iconography of fascist Spain to Dredd's extremely weird and [00:17:00] vivid design and combined it with his experiences of living in Croydon through the 70's and 80's, the punk movement on his doorstep and TV images of policemen, charging striking miners. The Eagle motif and helmet were drawn from fascism, the permanently drawn truncheon from police on the picket line. The zips chains and knee pads from punk. I was living in Franco, Spain, he told an interviewer last year, but also I was living in Mrs. Thatcher's England. Mike: I think that kinda tells us all we need to know about what they're going for with the vibe of Judge Dredd. Jessika: Yeah. No, that, that definitely showed. I was thinking that about the Eagle. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: When they were showing the big building and it was super, everything was just cement and. Mike: Yeah. It's got that brutalist kind of architecture. Yeah. Jessika: Yes. Mike: Yeah. So Dred exists in this world. That's left standing after World War III, and [00:18:00] most of the planet's just been devastated. America is largely uninhabitable, say for a couple of what are called Mega Cities, which are these autonomous city states that housed hundreds of millions of people. At one point in the comics, I think it's up to 800 million and they've had different events where they've kind of knocked it down repeatedly, Jessika: Yikes. Mike: And at one point it got as low as like 120 million or so I think that was kind of after I stopped reading though. But anyway, mega city one was originally going to be a future version of New York City. But that was quickly retconned to that specific part, being some sort of capital area for this urban sprawl that covers most of the Eastern seaboard. And from the get-go, Dredd stories were kind of this extreme form of satire. It was presenting the society where democracy basically failed, and the office of the president of the United States has been retired, and society now runs under this, to be honest, terrifying gaze of the Judges. How would you sum up the [00:19:00] Judges based on what we saw in the movies? Jessika: As a whole, they were pretty robotic and unfeeling. They were doling out the letter of the law as it happened and per their protocol, and their justice is swift and immediate, which is really terrifying. Like you said to imagine. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: And what's even scarier is that all crimes were treated the same. You are either sent to a prison called an isopod, or killed right then and there. There was, there were no middle grounds between those points. It was like, you're hauled off then, you serve a sentence, or you're just killed. Mike: Yeah. I mean, that's really not that different from the comics. Jessika: And then, as far as their appearance, as with most uniforms, they dress the same with helmets and body armor and they are just armed to the gills and they look just as scary as they act. Mike: Yeah. And, I think a safe way to describe the system of Mega City [00:20:00] one is to call it authoritarian, but it's just a little bit different than what we normally associate with that term. Jessika: Yeah. I wonder if there's some sort of like a law-tarian like judiciatarion. I don't know, somebody is going to @ me and tell me how stupid I am, but that's fine. I already know. Mike: I like, I like, I liked judicialtarion. I think that's, uh, if that's not a word we should make it one. Jessika: Here we are, TM TM. Mike: Yeah, we're just going to sit back and let the royalties roll in after this. Yeah, but in spite of all this, there's this very weird, dry, British humor that kind of makes the whole narrative a little more palatable. So like one of the early stories is focusing on how robots were doing most of society's work and that's resulted in rampant, unemployment and boredom, so citizens of the mega blocks start engaging in what they call block wars, where neighboring blocks basically just start opening fire on each other because they want something to do. There's another story where the Dark Judges, who [00:21:00] are, they're effectively movie monster versions of the Judges as we know them crossover into Dredd's reality. And then they start slaughtering people, indiscriminately, because all crime is committed by the living. And, thus the sentence for life is death. Jessika: Yikes. Mike: Or, there's also the idea that recycled food is, what they call it, is how they eat these days. But recycled food is actually made from people you know, it's Soylent Green Jessika: Oh, How Soylent Green. Yeah. Mike: Yeah. The Dredd comics always have this kind of underlying tone of absurdity. It's that slight bit of levity that makes this really brutal comic actually pretty enjoyable because it becomes ridiculous. It's a comic of extremes. Over time, the comics gone on to deal with things like Dredd having to resolve how the system that he represents is actually problematic, and it needs some kind of reform. The ramifications of how the push to move back to democracy fails and, [00:22:00] you know, actually fleshing him out as a character who occasionally has feelings, not all the time, but just sometimes. He goes from being kind of a lawful neutral character to a lawful kind of good alignment, like sort of good, kind of, some of the time. There's only so long that you can have a character be a robot for justice, if nothing else before, you know, people are going to sour on them. Jessika: You mean a veritable killing machine? Mike: Yeah. The other thing is that the core Dredd stories haven't really been reset. They're still going from 2000 AD, so at this point we have nearly 50 years of stories that are all canon. And the other thing is that they keep on aging Dredd in realtime. So, at this point he's absurdly old and they hand wave it away by he spends time in the Rejuva-pods or whatever they are. But as a result, he's the same guy who has seen everything that has gone on in the comics. [00:23:00] And as a result, he's matured and changed a bit. And it's kinda neat. So in the UK Dredd's a pretty big deal, but his presence in America isn't quite the same. Like UK comic magazines back then were very different from comics here in the states. So, when they decided to bring them over here across the pond, 2000 AD wound up working with this guy named Nick Landau, who a couple of years earlier had created tightened books to publish comic collections of Judge Dredd in the UK, and then was publishing more collections of other things. Landau had just created Eagle Comics to collect and publish Dredd stories and other 2000 AD stuff. Uh, here in the States in 1983, the Eagle series lasted for about three-ish-is years, and then it moved on to another publisher. And this is pretty much how Dredd existed in the states in the 80's and 90's; a publisher would pick up the rights, and then try to make them click with American readers, and then the [00:24:00] series would get canceled, and then someone else would pick them up and try to do it again. And arguably his most quote unquote mainstream moment was when DC comics published an 18 issue series from 94 to 96. I've only gotten through a couple of these issues and they don't quite bite like the originals. They feel more like an action sci-fi series. Some weird kind of sarcastic humor, but it doesn't quite translate the same way. It feels like a knockoff product, to be honest. I mean, honestly the best American adaptation I've seen is from the 2012 series that IDW did. And that condensed several of the iconic Dredd storylines from the original British run. So they were a little bit more palatable for American audiences, but basically American awareness of the characters generally stayed that level of, oh yeah, that sounds kind of familiar. And then he's never really been a household name, which was what the 1995 movie was trying to change. [00:25:00] Jessika: Yeah, well, it didn't change it for me, but I was also, you know, I was also nine in 1995. So. Mike: *Sigh* I was 14. Jessika: You're only a few years older - you say that like you're 90 now, by the way, every one for the record, Mike is 90. Mike: I am. Jessika: Since he's making a huge deal out of it. Mike: I'm waiting on my Rascal. Scooter Just gonna, just gonna drive through downtown Petaluma with my dogs in my side car. We're all gonna be wearing goggles and flight helmets. And you'll see me go by and just gol “RASCAL!” Jessika: My dude, you can do that now. Mike: Sarah has told me I can't do that yet. We've had this discussion. Jessika: Oh, that's too bad. Mike: Now that we've got the background out of the way, why don't we actually talk about what we're here to talk about? Which is the 1995 Judge Dredd movie. [00:26:00] Jessika: Here we are. Mike: Yeah. Do you remember those TV schedules that used to be in the back of the newspaper, they would show you like A) what was on the air that night and B) provide one sentence summaries of what the movies were? Do you remember those? Jessika: I do because I loved reading those. Mike: I know I did too. How would you summarize Stallone's Judge Dredd, if you were writing it up in that format? Jessika: Oh, need a throat clear for that. In a world where chaos reigns, one man stands between justice and lawlessness. But what happens when the Judge becomes the judged? Find out this Wednesday at 6:00 PM Pacific standard time, 9:00 PM Eastern on Spike TV. I just assume Spike TV would play that. Mike: Spike TV would be all over this. Are you kidding? Jessika: Yeah, no, exactly. That was the first television channel that I thought of that was like, yeah, they would [00:27:00] absolutely have this on like they'd have a Dredd marathon. Mike: God, what an absolute time capsule of a TV channel - is, Spike TV isn't around still, is it? I don't know. Jessika: I have no idea. I was my, my 90's brain just woke up and was like, this is what you say. Mike: God. I remember that was such a mid to late aughts TV channel. It was basically toxic masculinity, the TV channel. Jessika: Yeah. It was, it was either super masculine movies like this, or it was just a game show about people falling all over each other and just laughing at people. Mike: Oh yeah. Was it Most Extreme Challenge? Jessika: Most Extreme Elimination Challenge Yep. As I sit here and I know exactly what it, cause I didn't watch a million episodes of that. Mike: No I'm, that was the only reason that I would turn that fucking channel on. Jessika: Yeah. It's true. My brother and I would roll. Mike: No, so, okay. I just looked it up and we don't need to [00:28:00] actually record the sorry, uh, Paramount Network, formerly Spike, which is still used for the Dutch in Australian feed as an American, but you know, whatever, fuck Jessika: The Australians don't even listen to us. I'm leaving all of this in, and the Australians don't listen to us, yet. Oh God. They're going to listen to us now. And they're going to be like, oy yes we do. I can't, I'm not even going to try, not even to try to do some like, incredibly offensive Australian accent. Mike: No, no, don't do it. Jessika: No, no, I know about it. Mike: Okay. Let's go for an actual movie summary now. Jessika: Sure set in a, oh, sorry. Regular voice, Jessika. Set in a dystopian future complete with a densely populated metropolis and flying cars, order is dictated and carried out by people called Judges, whose job is to convict, judge, and punish those moving outside of the law. The punishments [00:29:00] are severe, being jailed or even killed for their transgressions. Stallone, who plays Judge Joseph dread is seemingly one of the most feared and respected judges until he is framed by a maniacal and presumed to be dead ex-judge Rico. Dredd has to prove his innocence in order to continue providing his particular brand of justice. Oh, and how can I forget about Rob Schneider? Whose main role in this film was to say Dredd's named really loudly. So they would get caught when they were trying to be covert. I mean, at least that's how it felt. Mike: Yeah, whenever I talk about this movie, I always sit there and reference how Robert Schneider is the worst choice to provide, you know, it's not even comic relief. It's like air quotes, comic relief. Schneider was really big at that time. Like, he had just come out of SNL and I never found them really to be all that funny. But, this was like at the [00:30:00] start of his whole 90's. I don't know. What would you call that movement? Jessika: God, it was like the stupid humor movement. Mike: Yeah, it was that Adam Sandler. Jessika: I talk like I'm a baby. Adam Sandler. I can deal with, to a certain extent. There are some movies, I'm just like, whatever, but I've liked him in some things even, but I feel like Will Ferrell is a result of Adam Sandler. I feel like Adam Sandler, birthed will Ferrell and I'm not happy about it. I do not like Will Farrell Mike: Man, I. Jessika: @ me Will Ferrell. I do not like you. Mike: Just watch, he's going to like angrily tweet and then we're going to get a bunch of, you know, I guess, angry gen X-ers I'll all up in our DMS. Jessika: OPress? Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that bad press wasn't just good press also, because it is. Mike: Yeah. And I mean, this was before Schneider was given starring [00:31:00] roles in movies like Deuce Bigalow, which I have yet to see a Rob Schneider movie that I don't find absolutely abhorrent for a number of reasons. Yeah. Jessika: Especially in retrospect. Mike: Yeah. I mean, he's not offensive in this movie, he's just not very funny and kind of useless, even though he's supposed to be the plucky comic sidekick, which, I mean, this was part of that era of buddy action cop movies, except just in a different setting. Jessika: Yeah. I don't know. It was just very grating. The humor Mike: Yeah. , Jessika: And forced. Mike: Yeah. So, your summary is spot on. There's also detours into the Cursed Earth where Dredd is wrongfully convicted. And then, this is something where they diverged from the comic lore, but they're traveling to the penal colony in Aspen, when actually the penal colonies are all off-world. So it's, you basically get sent there for hard labor, off-planet and it's not exactly described what, and then he has to come back from the Cursed Earth, after dealing with the [00:32:00] cannibalistic Angel Gang. And then there's the reveal that he's a clone, which at this point in time is not really a big deal. Like, everybody knows it in the lore and yeah, we get a climactic battle at the statue of Liberty. Also, Joan Chen shows up for no real reason other than to be a woman for Diane Lane to fight. Jessika: Yeah, exactly. Mike: But yeah, it's not a great movie. Jessika: No, no. Mike: But there are parts of it that I still really enjoy. Sarah and I wound up watching it together and all of the practical, special effects that they did are still so good and they look so good. And, and honestly the action scenes are pretty decent for, you know, a mid 90's movie, even where there's that bit with the flying motorcycles, where they're being chased and they knock off one of the Judges chasing them that bit, where he's falling into the bottomless abyss of Mega City looked [00:33:00] really good and I couldn't help, but think of Ninja Turtles 3, where on the other hand, the bad guy getting knocked off into the ocean looks like garbage. Jessika: Yeah, no, that, I was really impressed by that. Especially considering the timeframe it was in. Mike: Yeah. So this movie really tried to smash together a lot of those classic Dredd moments from the comic book. And it was trying to basically create something new while giving fans a lot of nods that they would appreciate. The funny thing is that it was really focusing on the story of Rico Dredd after he comes back from serving his prison time, but in the comic, he only shows up for a one-shot serial story. If I remember right where he comes back from serving prison time in a colony on Saturn's moon of Titan. So if I remember this, right, he's just this kind of one-off character who shows up pretty early in the Dredd stories. Like, I, [00:34:00] I don't think the Dredd stories had even been published for a year by that point. It's like the 30th issue or so, and then he's shot down by Dredd in a duel and the whole, the logic behind it is that he tries to get the drop on Dredd, but his reactions are slower because he's been operating in lower gravity for a while. Jessika: Interesting, but he's still supposed to be a clone, right? Mike: Yeah, he's he, it's originally noted that he's Dredd's brother. And then there's the whole club thing that, that shows up later on and all that, but he also looks way different from Armand Assante in the movie, I'm sending you an image, you can take a quick look and see what Rico Dredd looks like after his prison time in the comic. Jessika: Oh, you would not get those two confused. Mike: Yeah. It's um. Jessika: This guy's got this, guy's like a metal face. Now he's got a nice little head band with probably a laser coming out the top. And then he's got like, no nose any longer. He's just got metal over his nose. There's metal stuff going into his mouth. And like [00:35:00] half of his face just doesn't have skin anymore. And you can tell one of his eyes is blind. It's pretty wild. His hair is all crazy. He's not having a good hair day. It's a look. Mike: It's a look. Yeah. So the whole idea is that when you get shipped off to these colonies, you are basically surgically modified to survive in the environment. Jessika: Oh. Mike: Yeah. So, definitely not what we got in the movie. Jessika: No. You had a guy that actually looked a lot like Stallone. They did a pretty good job of that, if they were going for lookalikes. Mike: Yeah. They were both very fit dudes who had those very strong chin lines. And then they also gave them cosmetic contact lenses so that they would actually have blue eyes, which is why. Jessika: That's what I thought. Mike: When you look at Stallone, you're like, mm, pretty sure God didn't make those eyes. That color. Jessika: Yeah. It's not so bad from certain angles, but other ones you're like, wow, Snowpiercer what's up. Mike: Yeah, it looks [00:36:00] very weird when you're, especially when you're watching it in high-def these days, it looks unnatural. I'm not sure how it would look on a TV or in a movie theater in 1995. I'm a little curious because I didn't get to see it. I was too young to go see an R-rated movie back then, womp womp. But yeah, so likewise, the character of Hershey, who is Diane Lane's character, she first appeared in a 1980 story called the Judge Child, which is this it's this cool thing where it starts off as a road trip across the Cursed Earth, and the Angel Gang who we see in the movie shows up, and then it becomes this weird space opera as Dredd winds up chasing after the Angel Gang and the kidnapped Judge Child across multiple star systems, which again, talking about the weird absurdity of Judge Dredd. So, it's weird to see her in this movie because I always associate Diane Lane with Under the Tuscan Sun. I mean, I've never even seen that movie, but that's just always what I [00:37:00] think of when I see her. Jessika: Oh, same. I definitely see her in an Italian villa and I have not seen that either. Mike: Yeah. Although she did play Superman's mom in the DCEU. Jessika: Oh yeah. Mike: So there was that, her finest role, you know, when she gets sad about Superman with Lois Lane, and then it turns out to be a Martian green dude. Jessika: We're going to have so many movie stars, not happy with us. Mike: I know. Jessika: They'll just be crying in all of their money. It's fine. Mike: Oh, no two lame nerds on the internet were mean to me. I just, uh. Jessika: My nightmare. Mike: They made vaguely negative remarks about me. All right. Jessika: Oh, let me use this 50 to dry my tears. Mike: Anyway. Yeah, so [00:38:00] Diane Lane shows up in Judge Dredd, and she's like way more of a damsel in distress and then weirdly a romantic interest for Dredd than anything else. And that was really bizarre to see, because with the hindsight of the comics, that character in Dredd A) Hershey is like a bad-ass cop. She is a hardcore street Judge. But she and Dredd actually have often had kind of an antagonistic relationship based on differing perspectives about how the justice system should operate. Jessika: Oh, interesting. Mike: Yeah. And eventually, she goes on to be the Chief Judge. Jessika: Oh, good for her. Mike: Yeah, you know, she busted through that glass ceiling. Jessika: Man. It just took, you know, going through a third world war, ladies, this is what we have to look forward to. Just wait for the flying motorcycles. We'll be there. Mike: Well, you know, you don't have to cook because we're just recycling people at that point. So, you know, frees up a lot of time. [00:39:00] Jessika: Oh, perfect. Mike: You don't have to, don't have to stand in the kitchen and make all of us men folk roasts all day. Jessika: Oh, perfect. Well, dang. What will I do? Mike: Okay. overthrow the patriarchy, I guess. Jessika: Let's do it. Mike: Yeah. And then additionally, you know, Dredd himself was pretty different from what we had in the comics. The movie violated this key component of the character by spending a lot of time focused on Dredd out of uniform, which means that we got to see his face. And it's such a known thing that this is not something that Dredd does, but it's actually one of the first points in Dreads, Wikipedia article, if you would be so kind. Jessika: Sure. Dredd's entire face is never shown in the strip. This began and is an unofficial guideline, but soon became a rule. As John Wagner explained, it sums up the facelessness of justice. [00:40:00] Justice has no soul, so it isn't necessary for readers to see Dredd's face. And I don't want you to. Mike: Which I mean, I think that's actually a really cool defining aspect of the character. Jessika: And it's always scarier if you can't see what you're fighting. Mike: Yeah. Agreed. Jessika: I mean, that's basic horror film rule, you know, it's always scarier if you can't see what's chasing you. Mike: Yeah. I kind of equate it to the recent Alien movie that they did. Alien Isolation, where they explained the origin for the alien species. And I was sitting there and going, there is nothing that you could tell me that would be worse than what I come up with in my mind when you've got a really nebulous origin. Jessika: Exactly. Mike: And then I watched the movie and I was like, that's dumb. I'm going back to my original design. I like that better. Jessika: Yeah. It's like Signs was really scary until they brought that stupid alien life being in. And then I was like, well, there it goes. Mike: Yeah. [00:41:00] Curse you, Shamaylan! Judge Dredd is one of those movies where when you watch it, it feels like the people that were involved with making it really had a lot of fun, and were really passionate about what they were doing. Like I've got the making-of book, and you can actually see the set that they built basically on a patch of farmland that became the street for Mega City One. And it's crazy. It wound up having hundreds of neon signs after they built it. It looked like a living, breathing street from this strange city in the future. It was really cool. And likewise, there's that ABC warrior robot that we get to see a couple of times who looks absolutely incredible. And the costume designs are really cool. They don't quite work because you know, it's spandex, but it's very faithful to the comic. And, even the final scenes in the Statue of Liberty where you're in the lab and you've got all those clones being grown, I don't quite understand why the clones are [00:42:00] mostly grown, but we can still see their intestines, but they look really cool. Jessika: I agree. Yeah. Mike: That said, the movie had a lot of production problems. And in fact, it actually had to get re-cut and submitted to the NPAA five times in order to get just an R rating down from an NC 17. Jessika: Dang. Mike: And by the way, we need to talk about the fact that this movie is rated R and if you watch it, it does not feel like an R rated movie. It feels like maybe a PG 13 movie at this point, maybe. Jessika: Maybe, I mean, and that would just be for the violence, Mike: I mean, yeah, but, compared to what gets rated PG 13 these days? Jessika: Yes. Mike: I think if I remember right, one of the Aliens vs Predator movies, maybe both of them are rated PG 13 and they're way more violent and gory. Jessika: Really? Wow. Mike: I mean, I could be completely wrong. Jessika: Who rates these movies? I mean, not a real question. We don't need to get into that, but that's wild to me. Mike: We'll go on a very tiny side tangent, but. Highly recommend you watch the movie. This [00:43:00] film is not yet rated, which talks about the NPAA and the ratings board and how weird and secretive it is. And just a how dumb and arbitrary their system is. Jessika: I might watch that tonight. Mike: It's great. I highly recommend it. So there was an interview with Steven D'Souza, who was the guy who actually wrote the script for Judge Dredd. e was talking to Den of Geek, he shed some light on how the movies, problematic production wound up leading to this mess that we wound up receiving, if you would be so kind. Jessika: Why sure. Judge Dredd was actually supposed to be a PG 13 movie, the production company at the time, Synergy, they were having some financial troubles, so they didn't have any UK executives on location in England. And in their absence, the director, Danny Cannon, wanting to make it true to the comic book, was making everything more and more and [00:44:00] more violent. So when the movie was delivered to be cut, it was rated X and it was rated X four times. They say you can't appeal after four, four is all you get. Somehow the producer, Ed Pressman, managed one more time to get it rated R which actually wasn't a victory because this was supposed to be PG 13. They had made a deal with Burger King, oop. I think, and a toy company. And you can't advertise toys for an R-rated movie and no hamburger plays, wants toys for an R-rated movie. So they hamburger people and the toy people turned around and sued Disney, the distributor whoop. Mike: Hmm. Oops. Jessika: Well, Disney then said, we'll take this out of the director's hide because he signed a piece of paper saying he would deliver a PG 13, but Synergy who was releasing it through Disney at that point had never done [00:45:00] anything, but an R-rated movie, nobody in the entire company had ever had the experience of putting that piece of paper in front of a director. So they had to pay him. They couldn't withhold his salary for violating a legal promise they never asked him to make. Mike: I kind of love that. Jessika: Blunders. Mike: Yeah. That interview also notes that the scene where the reporter gets killed by Rico and he's framing Dredd. It was way more violent and gory, and it looked like something out of Robocop. And then additionally, there was the bit where Rico tells his robot to tear off the arms and legs of the council of five Judge that he's been working with. And he says, rip off his arms and legs and then save his head for last. And so it was originally supposed to be a scene where basically it cuts away to Rico walking away or something like that or shadows or something, and then you just hear the screams and that's it. But [00:46:00] apparently they made a full animatronic robot that had the arms and legs actually getting ripped off and like spewing blood. Jessika: Yikes, no. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: Guys. Mike: Yeah. So this was clearly one of those things desires were not clearly communicated. So Stallone gave an interview to Uncut Magazine in 2008. And he talked about a bunch of the things that, that went wrong with that movie, including this weird story about Danny Cannon, where he said, I knew we were in for a long shoot when for no explainable reason, Danny Cannon, who's rather diminutive, jumped down from his director's chair and yelled to everyone within earshot. Fear me, everyone should fear me. Then jumped back up to his chair as if nothing happened. The British crew was taking bets on his life expectancy. Jessika: Yikes. Yeah, the guy's going to give himself a coronary. Holy moly. Mike: It reminds [00:47:00] me a little bit of the stories that were coming out of the Suicide Squad set. Jessika: Oh. Yeah, I'm hearing more and more stories of just things that actors are being put through on set, and it's just, I don't care who you are, you shouldn't have to deal with this bullshit while you're working. Mike: I don't envy them. Jessika: Yeah, I don't either. I mean, there has to be ways that doesn't hurt people to entertain us. Mike: Yeah. Back onto this topic of Judge Dredd itself, it was this movie that costs $95 million and that's in 1995. So adjusting for inflation, that's roughly $190 million in 2021 dollars. Jessika: Whew. Mike: For reference there's a bunch of MCU flicks that when adjusting for that inflation costs less than Judge Dredd did. The R rating in turn, and kind of the lackluster end product, resulted in $113 million at the box office worldwide. And that was a lot less than Stallone, and really everyone else, was hoping for, [00:48:00] they were legit hoping that this was going to be just a blowout success story, and they could make a franchise out of it. So we've already talked about how they were trying to make this into something that they can market to kids. And we still got some products that show that was the plan. There were a couple of associated products, like a junior novelization, and a comic adaptation of the movie from DC comics itself. And then a video game that's actually, it's not bad. It's like a side scroller and the movie story ends about, I think, halfway through. And then you go on to a bunch of different worlds and end up fighting those Dark Judges that I was talking about earlier, which is kinda cool. Yeah. It's fine. But anyway, none of these tie-in products really seemed to land. How did you feel about this film overall? I'm curious. Jessika: Is it bad to say a came across as a little cheesy? Mike: No, not at all. [00:49:00] Jessika: Like a nice wholly Swiss cheese. There were some mega plot holes that were very apparent. That kind of took me out of the experience saying that a lot this episode, but way to go guys. And it made me really overthink aspects of the storyline. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: Like the whole, how did you not know where were clones? Did you not accidentally ever pick up the other person's gone and we're like, why can't I use this? If you have the DNA testing, it just, it didn't make a lot of sense. And how can you sequence two different guns if you only have one sequence of DNA? I don't get that either. Mike: Yeah. Part of that is just because it was 1995. DNA was still like a really hot topic for plots. It was new science. It was really exciting. I mean. Jessika: That's fair. Mike: We were in the throws of the OJ Simpson trial, and so DNA evidence was a really big thing there, but yeah. Jessika: Hot button item. You're right, I think, buzzword. Mike: And so that kind of goes into the whole [00:50:00] idea of clones as well, but that's an established plot line of Dredd itself. But I mean, like I remember, there's a bit where they focus on the flying Law Master motorcycle and they say, well, if you can ever get it to work, it will be yours. And they bust out and then there's several other flying Law Masters chasing after them. Jessika: Well, when they're talking about those motorcycles, I think they're trying to liken them to really bad quality, government issue, like these things are a piece of shit, but you can probably get em into the air, and have the worst model sitting there for the newbies to fuck around with. But I don't know, that's that was my takeaway from it just because I also remember, not that the cars are bad necessarily, the police cars, but it's like, they're stripped down to nothing, they're just like a car. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: None of the fancy shit. Mike: Yeah. Those, those good old Crown Vics. Jessika: Oh Yeah. And I think that part of it for me was the serious scenes, like the courtroom scene, especially mix in Rob Schneider in any of [00:51:00] those situations. And it was just a little much. Mike: Yeah, absolutely. Stallone played it really straight and really intense and it doesn't quite work. It feels almost like a high school drama production where you're watching those kids onstage, they're acting too hard. They've turned their acting dials up to 11 and you're like, okay buddy, we needed it like a seven. Jessika: I'm just imagining a man, like a child on stage, shaking. His arm is shaky. He's got a skull in his head and he was just screaming out lines from Hamlet. You're like, ooh, buddy, calm down. Mike: Yeah. Yurick can't hear you Hamlet. He's already dead. I think it's okay. Jessika: Womp womp. Mike: Yeah. My take on it, aside from the fact that it's a little bit too faithful and too earnest is that this reminds me of that situation where you take a bunch of different ingredients that you think are going to taste amazing and you've slapped them together into a sandwich. And then you realize the combination doesn't work, but yet you end up eating it anyway. [00:52:00] Jessika: Been there. Mike: Like, we talked about the sets, the makeup, the costumes, even the special effects, those are all great, but the script and then Stallone's performance really kind of do it a disservice, and even Sly has acknowledged that the movie missed the mark. So that earlier interview that I mentioned with Uncut Magazine, he had a really great point where he talks about how it didn't work. Jessika: I loved that property when I read it, because it took a genre that I love what you could term the action morality film, and made it a bit more sophisticated. It had political overtones. It showed how, if we don't curb the way we run our judicial system, the police may end up running our lives. It dealt with archaic governments. It dealt with cloning and all kinds of things that could happen in the future. It was also bigger than any film I've done in its physical stature and the way it was designed, all the people were dwarfed by the system and the architecture. It shows how insignificant [00:53:00] human beings could be in the future. There's a lot of action in the movie and some great acting, too. It just wasn't balls to the wall. But I do look back on Judge Dredd as a real missed opportunity. It seemed that lots of fans had a problem with Dredd removing his helmet because he never does in the comic books. But for me, it is more about wasting such great potential there was in that idea, just think of all the opportunities there were to do interesting stuff with the Cursed Earth scenes. It didn't live up to what it could have been. It probably should have been much more comic, really humorous and fun. What I learned out of that experience was that we shouldn't have tried to make it Hamlet. It's more Hamlet and eggs. That's so funny that I brought up Hamlet! I didn't read ahead. Mike: I was laughing about that actually. Yeah. And I mean, he's not wrong. I think he played it too straight and too serious. And they also tried to make it an action buddy comedy [00:54:00] movie, which it just, it doesn't quite work. Like the, the tone with Dredd is you have to walk a really fine line. They didn't stick to it this time. Yeah. I feel like it was trying to be extremely faithful to the source material, which always walked this very fine line tonally, and then it blew past it to create something that's just it's way too earnest. And over the top, it kind of reminded me of Jupiter Ascending. If you remember that movie. Jessika: I do. Mike: Yeah. It's this movie that has crazy high production values, a pretty great cast actually, and a really big story. And then it all combines into something that's honestly kind of underwhelming. Jessika: And forgettable, cause I kind of forget what that whole plot line of that movie is. And I think I've seen it twice cause I was like, I don't think I've seen this before. And I sat through the whole thing again. It's one of those movies. Mike: I just remember a lot of shirtless Channing Tatum and. Jessika: Oh, yeah, he wasn't at sea. I don't even know. Mike: Yeah. Do you have any more thoughts before we move on to [00:55:00] the 2012 remake kind of, it's not really a remake. It's just the 2012 movie. Jessika: No let's Rob Schneider, our way out of this. Mike: I'm not sure I liked that verb. Jessika: I was using it as: do something really stupid to get out of a situation. And I think I did it just by saying that. Mike: All right. How would you describe this movie? Give it, give another quick summary. Jessika: Mega City One. The future. There are still flying cars, but less of them. In a packed city rife with violence, Judge Joseph Dredd is assessing a new potential recruit to the force. This recruit isn't like the others. However, she is psychic; a mutant! In answering their first call, they inadvertently get themselves involved in a large scale drug operation and have to kill or be killed in order to survive. This film has no sympathy for innocent bystanders, who are killed by the dozens each [00:56:00] scene. And the Judges are swift to kill any who might oppose them. They finally escape using their wits and these psychic's ability, all while taking down a drug ring. Ta-da, all in a day's work. Mike: Dread came out right around the same time, I think a little bit after, as this movie out of, I think Thailand called The Raid. Which it's about a police force. That's basically working their way up through a skyscraper. And it's another really intense action movie. It's got really kick-ass action scenes. It's really good. And the sad thing is it's just that and Dredd have a similar plot based on that, but it's also very different. So there were a lot of unfair comparisons to that at the time. Jessika: I see. Mike: How do you feel this movie compares with the Stallone one? Jessika: It was definitely more serious and more bloody, for sure. It really leaned into the death and carnage aspect [00:57:00] becoming more and more creative and destructive as the film progressed. Like was it strictly necessary to aim towards and blow up an entire floor of a densely inhabited building? I dunno. It was kind of hard to watch some times, it was pretty graphic. I did like that it took on a more serious tone though. And I think the reason that it's so hard to watch for me is more for the social implications. Like, when the film made it clear that vagrancy could carry a similar sentence to other more serious crimes. Mike: Right? Jessika: Which was really wild. Mike: Yeah, it's interesting because I feel like it did a lot more subtle world-building with moments like that, or when they're describing the Mega Block that they're investigating and it's noted that there's only a 3% employment rate. It's weird because it's such a violent movie and don't get me wrong, I think the action scenes are just incredible. They look great. But at the same time, it's a more [00:58:00] subtle movie in a lot of ways than the Stallone one was. Jessika: Yeah. Definitely it's scarier. Like the idea of it is more, it seems more real and in your face, and for me, it definitely put a spotlight on how scary policing can be to targeted groups. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: And this might be an extreme example, but how extreme is it really? Mike: Yeah. And it's interesting because you and I talked about this before, this is a movie that is very, it's very binary with its morals. Like there's only the good guys and the bad guys. This isn't this, isn't one of those movies where you sit there and you watch it and are really given a lot of moral things to consider. There's not a lot of philosophy here, but it doesn't sit there and say that Dredd and the Judges themselves are in the right. It's basically showing that there is a force who is basically the gang that is running the apartment block that they are in, which is headed up by a fucking terrifying Lena Headey and A), [00:59:00] they really uglied her up. Which, I was actually really impressed. I didn't recognize her because this came out right after game of Thrones had just had its first season. I think maybe its second season had hit, but I mean what a stark contrast between her in the mama role and then Cersei Lannister. Jessika: Stark. I like what you did there. Mike: Hey, was totally intentional. Or that was totally, that was totally intentional. I totally did that on purpose. Jessika: Okay. Mike: Like I said, there is no wiggle room. They sit there and they basically say no, this woman is a monster, and she does need to be taken down. You know, to the movies credit, the judges, don't really mow down innocent bystanders, it's all the thing of, no, they're going up against bad guys who have guns and are trying to kill them. But at the same time, it does also acknowledge how they aren't completely in the right either. Like there's a scene where they take shelter in an apartment. And Olivia Thirlby's character reads the mind of this woman who they're basically holding up to give them shelter for a few minutes. [01:00:00] And she realizes that, oh, this woman's baby daddy is one of the gang members that they just killed a few minutes ago. Jessika: She herself had killed that guy. Mike: Yeah. And I appreciated that. There are those moments where it takes a more mature look at, maybe everything that's going on isn't great. And then there's that moment at the end where Anderson sits there and talks about how, when she lets the hacker character go, because she realizes that he is just as much of a victim as a lot of the other people in the block are, even though he's been aiding Ma Ma. Jessika: Yeah. And then I like how Dread tries to call her on it. She's like, I've made the judgment. He's a victim. Mike: Yeah. And I thought that was great. Also, that actor is the guy who played General Hux in the Star Wars movies that we got recently. Jessika: I thought I recognized him and I could not place him, and I was too lazy to go on IMDB. Mike: But yeah, thought it was a much more, it's weird to call that movie subtle, but I felt like there were a lot of nice little subtle moments in it. [01:01:00] And I really liked how A) Ma Ma was a genuinely frightening villain, especially because you never see her flying off the handle or being over the top or anything like that. She delivers everything with this really kind of scary, calm, in which we see in the first few minutes, when she tells her officer to skin, some guys who were selling drugs on her territory without her permission. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: And then the order is given after they've been skinned, to be given hits of slow-mo, which is the drug throughout the movie that slows down perceptions of time. So they were thrown off the top story of this apartment block. And basically they have this long, awful, painful plummet into the courtyard below. Jessika: God, that's gotta be so terrifying. Mike: And that really set the tone for who we were dealing with, which I thought was incredibly effective. Jessika: I thought they did such a nice job on the cinematography on that, by the way, when they did those scenes with the slow-mo and they [01:02:00] had it kind of shimmery and they put you in the mindset of the person having used the slow-mo, and I thought that was such a good technique. Mike: So yeah, and the whole thing was that they released this movie in 3D. So, you can tell that those scenes were filmed specifically for 3D cinematography. Jessika: That makes so much sense. Mike: I actually saw this movie opening night in the theaters and A) I remember tweeting about it and saying that movie was way too good for the theater to be that empty on a Friday night. But I remember that was the first, and really that's the only time, I've ever enjoyed a movie in 3D because I felt the 3d actually added something as opposed to just being a cheap gimmick to ring an extra couple of bucks out of my wallet. Jessika: That's usually how I feel about it. Mike: Yeah. But I liked how Olivia Thirlby's character Judge Anderson was actually way less of a damsel in distress than Diane Lane's character Judge Hersey. And then on top of that, a lot of the [01:03:00] superhero movies rely on that whole female heroes have to fight female villains trope that it always feels like they don't get to participate in the end boss battle. And I thought it was really cool how Anderson wound up using her powers to A) escape, her captors, B) actually rescue Dredd, and then C) really be a giant aid to him throughout the movie. She felt like a viable, real character as opposed to just kind of, window trim. Jessika: Yeah. Agreed. I was nodding vigorously when you were talking about that, because I am an absolute agreement. I was a little worried when she first got captured, cause I was like, oh, here we go, so fucking typical. But then when she was actually using her powers and she was getting out of the situation herself, it was like, okay, fine. You got this. You're fine. Mike: Yeah. On top of that, the intro to the movie we get is so tight and efficient. And aside from the intro where we get a chase scene, where we see slow-mo and effect, we see how brutal Dredd is himself. We also get [01:04:00] the intro to Anderson, where she's demonstrating her powers by basically reading the mind of Dredd from behind a two way mirror. And there's that great line about like, oh, well, you know, there's another Judge with you. He's male. I sense control and anger and then something, something more something. And then the judge cuts her off just like, that's enough, that's fine. And I'm like, cool. So we've got a really good summary of who Dredd himself is. Okay. We get it now. This is all we need. Jessika: Yeah. It was a really good narrative tool. I did like that. Mike: Yeah. And then, in the comics, Anderson actually won is a pretty big ally of dread himself. And she's also never romantic interest, but she winds up being key to defeat those monster movie versions of the Judges. And actually, it's been a little while since I read this, but if I remember right when she first confronts Judge Death, who is the leader of the Dark Judges, she winds up, trapping him inside her own mind because he's this psychic entity. And so I was really happy that they took a strong character and [01:05:00] kept her really strong. Jessika: It's good to hear that she also had a really strong role within the comics. Mike: And then the other thing is that I kind of liked how they had Dredd himself be a little bit more subtle. Like, Hey, we never haven't take off his helmet, which I thought was great. And I thought Karl urban, I mean, how did you feel about Karl Urban as Dredd compared to him? Jessika: I thought he was great. And I think I, it would've made less sense if he had taken off his helmet just as far as the character goes. And honestly, I think in this situation, there wasn't much room for him as a character to have his helmet off because they were pretty in a battle mode. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: The whole movie, truly, except for the introductory first few minutes. Mike: Yeah. And I liked the bit where, so Anderson loses her helmet pretty early on and Dredd actually calls her out on it. And he says, you're not wearing your helmet. And she goes, oh, well, the helmet interferes with my psychic abilities and you just go solo bullet and then that's it. That's Jessika: Yup. Mike: I thought that was great. Jessika: Yup. He'll give her the advice he will give, but he's not going to [01:06:00] tell her to do it, which I thought was good. Mike: Yeah. I'm curious. We're going to get to this in a minute about like how it is through the 2021 line. But did you enjoy the movie? Jessika: I think for me, because I'm such an empath, it was a little bit too much innocent blood death. Mike: Okay. Jessika: Even just like, they didn't need to kill the vagrant, it, that was a very like, oh, the gates closed. And the Vagrant just happened to be sitting there and he got squashed and they both kind of looked at it like, well, guess we don't have to deal with that. And I was like, well, fucking hell guys, come on. Mike: Yeah. And I mean, at the same time, from my perspective, and I understand where you were coming from with this, but from my perspective, it was kind of the embodiment of that weird absurdist, gallows humor that is often prese

Season 2, Episode 24 - Brenda's WDW Recap! Brenda's WDW Recap! Hey everyone, I'm Mike, she's Sophie, and that's Brenda, and we're On the Road with Mickey! This is Season 2, Episode 24 for June 14, 2021, and our feature topic today is Brenda's WDW Recap! Today we are hearing all about Brenda's trip, along with comparisons between how things were for her last trip as opposed to this trip! So, if you have a trip planned, this may be full of great information for you! Grab a drink, relax, and join us as we talk about all the things that we came up with! Here's our rundown of what we talked about: Cheddar from the Big CheeseSophie: ‘Ohana at Disney's Polynesian Village Resort is re-opening July 9; booking available June 10!Brenda: ‘Ohana reopening is good -- changing the menu like they did...not so much.Mike: There was an accident on the Skyliner on June 8th -- no injuries and all is good now from what I'm reading.Connect with us! Here's how: Facebook: https://facebook.ontheroadwithmickey.comFacebook Group: https://facebookgroup.ontheroadwithmickey.comYouTube: On the Road with Mickey (Don't forget to subscribe, like the videos, and comment!)Instagram: On the Road with MickeyEmail: info@ontheroadwithmickey.comPhone Voicemail: 919-799-8390Feature Topic: Brenda's WDW Recap!Listener Questions:Jennifer asks: “Are the parks doing the service where you purchase items and they are able to send to your resort without you having to carry the items around yet?”Diana asks: “Are the lines longer with increased capacity- like back to normal long?”This Day in Disney History for June 14Three major attractions open at Disneyland.Also, on June 9: Happy Birthday Donald Duck! Donald makes his debut on this day in 1934 in the Disney Silly Symphony short “The Wise Little Hen”Disney Who's Who Character: Maleficent from Sleeping BeautyWalt Disney Quote“You'll be a poorer person all your life if you don't know some of the great stories and great poems.” ~ Walt DisneyComing Next Week: A Look at Disney LegendsSponsorshipOn the Road with Mickey is sponsored by Pixie Vacations by Mike Ellis and Tech Solutions NC.

Mike Isaacson: Da j00z! [Theme song] Nazi SS UFOsLizards wearing human clothesHinduism's secret codesThese are nazi lies Race and IQ are in genesWarfare keeps the nation cleanWhiteness is an AIDS vaccineThese are nazi lies Hollow earth, white genocideMuslim's rampant femicideShooting suspects named Sam HydeHiter lived and no Jews died Army, navy, and the copsSecret service, special opsThey protect us, not sweatshopsThese are nazi lies Mike: At the core of nazi lies is antisemitism. Since the Second World War it has disguised itself in many guises–Rothschilds, Soros, Bildebergs, lizard people. At its core is an all-powerful entity controlling the masses and aiming to destroy the nation through the corruption of culture and politics, which remains at the heart of fascist conspiracy theory. One of the ur-texts of Jew hatred in the 21st century is David Duke's book “Jewish Supremacism,” which makes the claim that not only do Jews control the world, but that our religion teaches us to do so. Today, we're joined by Ben Siegel who has his master's in Religion, the Hebrew Bible, and Ancient Near Eastern Studies from the Claremont School of Theology. (Wow, that's a mouthful.) Welcome to The Nazi Lies Podcast, Ben. Ben Siegel: Thanks for having me Mike. I'm grateful for the opportunity to trash a Jew hater's biblical scholarship. Mike: [laughs] Very good. Okay, so before we get into Duke's book, let's talk a bit about how Judaism works, because it's very unlike Christianity. Can you give us a rundown of how Jewish law and Jewish morality works? Ben: Sure. I'll do my best. Now the Jewish legal system, known in Hebrew as halakha, is a comprehensive framework that informs the behaviors of religious, and also frequently secular, Jews. It takes as its starting point the written text, the Torah, the biblical books of Genesis through Deuteronomy, from which it derives 613 mitzvot, meaning laws or commandments, as authoritative God-given instruction on how to live an observant Jewish life. So from those texts, considered the written Torah, what's called the oral Torah is derived. This comprises successive centuries worth of interpretation of the written Torah by rabbis. The earliest of these is the Mishnah, which was compiled early in the second century of the common era, and the Gemara, rabbinical commentary on the Mishnah that was put together between the second and fifth centuries CE. These commentaries were collected to produce the Talmud. Now one in the Galilee region of Israel between 300 and 350 CE, known as the Jerusalem Talmud, and the second far more extensive Talmud compiled in Babylon in about 450 to 500 CE. This is the Babylonian Talmud. This is the one that people tend to cite most. It's really these long, extensive discourses weighing legal arguments on virtually every topic that was relevant to Jews during these periods, from personal and communal religious devotion to economic regulations to laws concerning marriage, dietary restrictions, relations with non-Jews; you name it. Now the Talmud is upheld to this day by most Jewish communities across the world as the basis for living an appropriate Jewish life in accordance with halakha and in accordance with God's will and vision for the world. Halakha informs Jewish ethics to a great deal as much as it undergirds legal and political concerns–a concern for ethical treatment of one's community and one's neighbors, stemming from the collective memory of slavery in Egypt, an ethics of solidarity, really, righteousness, compassion, and justice, in effect. Mike: Okay, so Duke takes aim at our self-description as the chosen people. This is commonly misinterpreted. What does it mean when the Jews say we are the chosen people? Ben: As the old saying goes, “How odd of God to choose the Jews.” So there's this notion that God selected the Israelites for a particular theological mission, to live according to His laws, and to be a light unto nations, inspiring other people through their example. But there's also this idea that the Jews chose God. That Abraham and his descendents embraced monotheism through a special and unique relationship with the deity. Chosenness in this sense isn't indicative of inherent ethnic or racial superiority, as Duke argues. I'd feel safe saying he's projecting his own white supremacist views onto the Jews here. Mike: You don't say. Ben: [laughs] Yeah, I do.  Mike: Okay, so another thing that David Duke derides is our holidays. Specifically, he describes Purim and Pesach as a celebration of the slaughter of gentiles, which I find absolutely laughable. Do you want to clear that one up? Ben: This would absolutely be hilarious if it weren't so malicious. Pesach celebrates the liberation of the Israelite people from slavery and oppression in Egypt. Recalling the ten plagues during the seder does recognize the suffering inflicted upon the Egyptians to make this happen. But this isn't a joyful moment. It's typically somber. The recitation of each plague is followed by dripping a drop of wine from our cups onto our plates to signify how we ourselves are diminished by the Egyptians' suffering. There's also a similarly warped misinterpretation of Purim going on here, where we celebrate the prevention of genocide against us. So in the Purim story, Haman had ordered the Jews put to death. The Megillah Esther makes it clear that the 70,000+ Persians killed at the end of the book are those sent by Haman to slaughter the Jews. And the Jews were only able to defend themselves because king Ahasuerus gives them permission to pick up swords. And to be frank, Mike, defense against genocide seems to a pretty legitimate cause for merrymaking.  Mike: Yeah, no, for sure. It's a really fun holiday if you've ever celebrated it, you know. It's a lot of dress up… I've heard it described as basically a combination of Halloween and New Years all wrapped into one. It's really fun.  Ben: Sure, if you like to drink and scream, Purim is the holiday for you. Mike: There you go. [laughs] Okay, so now let's get into the nitty gritty. So, David Duke cites a whole bunch of scriptures to make the Jews out to be haters of all things goyishe, or non-Jewish, with scriptural references that appear to justify unscrupulous behavior towards them. First of all, before we get into that, what does the word “goy” mean? Ben: Well it would be prudent to acknowledge that the term “goy” changes meaning slightly over time. In the biblical text, it means nation or people, not nation in the modern sense of Westphalian nation-states, but more as a homogenous ethnic identity. The Israelites were recognized as a goy here. Most notably, Exodus 19 where God promises Abraham that he will make his people “goy gadol,” a great people, Exodus 19:6. As we enter into the rabbinic period, where the Jews in the diaspora are negotiating Jewish identity as a minority population, goy predominantly takes on the meaning of non-Jew as a distinguishing marker. This interpretation of “goy” has persisted to this day, and is perhaps the most commonly recognized usage of the term. I have seen discussions among antisemites who misinterpret it as meaning “cattle,” based on connotations in Talmudic texts. But these texts offer a strict binary worldview where “Jew” is seen as akin to human, whereas non-Jews are aligned with animals. I think it's important to make the distinction that this framework is a legal one not necessarily a political one. Post exilic diaspora Jews did not have the kind of social power needed to foster political programs that affected the disenfranchisement of other groups typically associated with rhetorics of dehumanization.  Mike: Okay, so kind of on that point, Duke points to a number of decontextualized passages from Jewish scripture which describe gentiles in various negative ways: barbarians, animals, animal-fuckers. And I've got a few passages here which I've provided to you in advance. So there's Gemara Kiddushin 68a, Yebamoth (and correct me on any of these pronunciations) Yebamoth 98a, Baba Mezia 114a-b, Abodah Zarah 22a-b, and Baba Mezia 108b. Can you give us a little exegesis? Ben: I'd be happy to, but first I want to talk about how Duke sourced these texts. There's been some commentary on him plagiarizing Kevin McDonald who is an evolutionary psychologist working out of Cal State University-Long Beach. He uses the same arguments and the citations. But it also appears that Duke took many of the translations of these texts from a book by Elizabeth Dilling, who was a far-right political activist in the 1930s, noted antisemite, who went to Nazi Germany and spoke very highly of what she saw there. So with these translations that he's using, I think it's important that we take it with an enormous grain of salt, first of all. Mike: Right. Ben: But also the thing I've noticed most about non-Jews who rage against the Talmud is that they haven't read the damn thing. And frankly, I haven't read all of it either. It's an enormous body of text. And in that body of text there are, you know, rabbis disagreeing with each other. So one view may be held, and the exact opposite view is going to be upheld a line down. Just worth noting for when we're looking at these texts that are obviously cherry-picked. Mike: Right. Ben: The first one you mentioned, Kiddushin 68a, it's from a tractate that deals with rules pertaining to marriage and engagement laws. Now what Duke says about this is the Talmud denotes gentiles as animals. So here it's forbidding the betrothal of an Israelite to a Canaanite maidservant. One thing, there's no Canaanites in third century Persia at this time, so this is purely a hypothetical situation. But it's really this legal justification for not marrying non-Jews because of the potential for them to influence a Jew's worship in a negative way, so that they won't follow halakha. And there's definitely a discussion here of identifying them as like an animal, but it's not a similar dehumanization that we see in typical nazi rhetoric of like “Jews are cockroaches” or “Jews are vermin.” It's like, here is this category of thing that is not us, and we cannot mix with that. Does that make sense? Mike Yeah, I guess. Does the issue of her being a maidservant matter in a subordinate position to the person?  Ben: Some rabbis argue yes; some rabbis argue no. But really it's more that who she is, based on this identity, is making the betrothal ineffective. It's not considered valid. Mike: Okay, so like– Ben: Yeah. Mike: Go ahead. Ben: No, go right ahead. Mike: Okay, yeah continuing right along, let's go to Yebamoth 98a? Ben: Yeah, Yebamoth deals with rules of yibbum. This is what's commonly known as levarite marriage, where the brother of a man who died without children is permitted and encouraged to marry the widow. What Duke has this translated as is that all gentile children are animals. It doesn't say anything of the sort here. It's saying that the children of gentiles don't have a father. They don't have a patrilege. Like the offspring of a male gentile is considered no more related to him than the offspring of donkeys or horses. It's just a way of saying that the rabbis don't care who the kid's dad is. It's like, they couldn't be bothered. Mike: I see. Ben: They're not interested in the patrilege of non-Jews. They're really more concerned with Jewish family ties. Mike: Okay, so moving along, there's two passages from Baba Metzia, one is 114a-b and one is 108b. Ben: Mmhmm. Baba Metzia discusses civil matters. That is property, law of usury, other issues such as lost property and damages done to it. So the issue here is again, categorizing– Duke takes issue with the categorizing of goyim as non-human. And again, it comes down to the same thing. It's less that they are not recognized as human, and more that it is an issue of ritual purity because they don't adhere to the same religious standards. Therefore, they necessarily can't contaminate certain Jewish sacred spaces. Mike: That's probably– Ben: And– Mike: Go ahead. Ben: Yeah, sorry go ahead. Mike: I was gonna say, it's probably also worth noting that like many Jews, I would venture even to say most Jews, probably don't follow a lot of these laws. [laughs] Ben: Yeah, many of them aren't even aware of them. You know, you can spend your entire life studying these texts and maybe come across it once. You know, there are thousands of these tractates. Mike: And last in this category was Abodah Zarah 22a-b. Ben: Mmhmm. [laughs] This one's funny. Duke says gentiles prefer sex with cows. What the text is actually saying is that the animal of a Jew is more appealing to gentiles than their own wives. [laughs] So, I don't know if this intentionally, you know, throwing some shade gentiles and their own marriage relations, but it seems more in keeping with a concern that's held by the Talmudic sages of how do you ensure that an animal that you are sacrificing is ritually pure. That means it has no blemishes; it is handicapped in any way; but very importantly, that it has not had any sexual relations with anybody. So Abodah Zarah, literally meaning “foreign worship” or “strange service,” it deals with how to live with people who don't adhere to the same religious convictions. And the concern of beastiality is kind of a big, overarching theme in this text to the point that there are many discussions of concern about whether or not you can purchase a sacrificial animal from a goy. Some rabbis say no; some say yes. Interestingly enough, there is one narrative in the text, where a goy named Dama– The rabbis go to him, and purchase a red heifer which is like a really big omen in the bible. It's like huge. That's like primo sacrifice. And he is upheld as a righteous goy and as someone who would never shtup his cow. So what's really interesting here is that you've got these two different voices in the text that are both preserved as authoritative. One, there is the concern that the goy will engage in beastiality. The other is this one goy Dama who is upheld as an example of righteousness in regards to being able to buy, you know, a sacrificial animal for him. Of course, Duke isn't going to look at this text because it doesn't serve his overall purpose as vilifying the Jewish people as anti-goy. Mike: And before we continue, I want to inform our listeners that shtup is a Yiddish word for “having sex with.” Ben: Yeah, literally it means “push,” but yeah, it means sex. Mike: Alright so, Duke also makes the claim that there are different laws that Jews follow when it comes to dealing with the goyim. So he specifically points to Gittin 57a, Abadoh Zarah 67b, Sanhendrin 52b, Sanhedrin 105a-b and 106a-b. Can you explain what's going on in those passages? Ben: Sure, so my understanding of his gripe with Gittin 57a is what is the punishment for Jesus in the next world, saying that he will be boiled in excrement. He's going to be punished in boiling poop, and that anyone who mocks the word of the sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement. This was his sin, as he mocked the words of the sages. And the Gemara comments come and see the difference between these sinners of Israel and the prophets of the nations of the world as Balaam, who was a prophet, wished Israel harm whereas Jesus the Nazarene, who was a Jewish sinner, sought their wellbeing. So there is this, kind of– There's some antagonism towards Jesus in the text because of its function as– Jesus's function and Christianity's function as a counter-claim to the inheritance of Abraham and of Isaac and Jacob. So there's some theological competition going on here. Mike: And what about Abodah Zarah 67b? Ben: Mmhmm. “The halakha from the case of gentiles that require purging. Vessels that gentiles used for cooking that the Torah requires that one purge through fire and ritually purify before they may be used by Jews.” You know, he seems to be indicating that– Duke seems to be indicating that the text is saying that goyim are dirty. But this isn't an argument for, like, hygienic cleaning. The ancient Israelites and Talmudic sages didn't have a germ theory of disease. What they're talking about is purifying these vessels for religious purposes, specifically. They have to be rededicated for their sacred use because they may have come in contact with forbidden food, with non-kosher food. Mike: Right, so this is about the laws of kashrut, right? Ben: Yeah, precisely. And again this is Abodah Zarah which is all about how do we do our religion properly with all of these other influences around us. Mike: Right, okay so Sanhendrin 52b. Ben: Yeah, this is another Jesus one. So Duke says that the person being punished in this text is Jesus, and he sees this as an anti-Jesus text. But the text doesn't mention Jesus whatsoever. It's a general rule for capital punishment by strangulation which is outlined in Leviticus. So this is one of your big nazi lies. He doesn't mention– They don't mention Jesus here. Mike: Is this one of the ones where he mentions Balaam or something? Ben: I believe so. Mike: Okay, can you talk about who Balaam is, because Duke misidentifies him as Jesus. Ben: Yeah he does that a lot. So in the book of Numbers, Balaam is a prophetic figure, identified in the text as a false prophet, who goes to send a curse against the Israelite people, and he is himself cursed for it and put to death. So he's kind of like this figure of those who would seek the destruction the Jewish people. He's a big bad. Mike: Right, and since he's in the book of Numbers which is the Torah, right? Ben: Yeah. Mike: Yeah, I mean, that would mean that this is, like, well before Jesus's time, right? Ben: Absolutely. Mike: Like there's no way this would have been Jesus. Ben: For sure. Granted, there are certain Christian interpreters of the text who see Hebrew bible references to Jesus throughout. Mike: Right. Ben: So they kind of see Jesus as foreshadowed in so much. Mike: Alright so, moving on, Sanhendrin 105a-b? Ben: So this one's interesting because it says that Balaam was a diviner by using his penis. [both laugh] And he's one who engaged in beastiality with his donkey. So what Duke takes to be a condemnation of Jesus, because he's misidentified Jesus with Balaam, is really kind of like textbook Talmudic condemnation of a big bad goy. Now here's a guy who sought the destruction of the Jewish people. In the book of Numbers he's got this talking donkey who prevents him– who tries to stop him from going forward with his mission. And we know that he was bad because, according to the Talmud, he had sex with his donkey. There's this major preoccupation with bestiality in the Talmud, and it is weird as hell. But it's there, and we've got to deal with it. [laughs] Mike: Okay, and Sanhendrin 106a-b. Ben: Again, this one's not about Jesus, but rather about Balaam who has been misidentified with Jesus. I think this is– this kind of misidentification is just indicative of Duke not doing his homework. My understanding is that he took these from Dilling, and he never fact-checked to see if, you know, this is what the text says or this is what the text identifies. You know, this is bad scholarship on his part which is probably to be expected from this guy who defrauded his own his own white supremacist organization and has a fake degree. Mike: Right, and he even says in the book that he's not doing anything original, that it's just collected from other sources. Ben: Right. Mike: Well, since we're on the subject of Jesus, we may as well go with the rest of the passages that I have here. So Sanhendrin 90a. I'm kind of skipping around here. Ben: Yeah this one's all about prohibition against idol worship. And you said this one is Jesus-related? Mike: That's what he said, yeah. About Christianity and Jesus, yeah. Ben: I don't find much to do with Jesus in this text. Jesus isn't mentioned in this one. It's primarily about idol worship and people who prophesize with regards to it. Maybe he's trying to say that, like, the preoccupation with idol worship is a condemnation of Christianity, but I'm just not seeing where he's getting Jesus out of this. Mike: Okay then, on that same subject Shabbat 116a. Ben: Yeah, holy books in Babylonian temples. Now is this the one where he says a goy can't read the text? Mike: It might be, yeah. Or a Christian can't read the text. Ben: Yeah, oh no, this is a really particular one. Again this one is just– There's a lot of rhetorical violence against those who do the religion improperly or don't treat the sacred texts as they should. You know, these are practices and artifacts that are very important to the Jewish people, so they hold them in very high regard. Mike: So I guess moving along, Duke refers to a number of passages in the Bible that he takes to mean that Jews are preoccupied with racial integrity. (Projection much?) He points specifically to Sanhendrin 59a, Deuteronomy 7:2-6, Ezra 9:1-2 and 9:12, Leviticus 20:24, and Nehemiah 13:3. So what do these passages say and what do they actually mean? Ben: With Sanhedrin 59a, which Sanhedrin primarily deals with criminal law, it says that “A gentile who engages in Torah study is liable to receive the death penalty. As it is stated: ‘Moses commanded us a law, an inheritance of the congregation of Jacob.'” This is from Deuteronomy 33:4. “Indicating that it is an inheritance for us, and not for them.” So there is one sage, a rabbi Yokhanon who is arguing that goyim who study Torah, you know, they're liable to be put to death. You know, they expose themselves to capital punishment. He's arguing this because they view the Torah with such high esteem; it is their most sacred text. They want to preserve it. Now this text is followed a line or two down by a counterargument. It says, “You have therefore learned that even a gentile who engages Torah study is considered like a high priest.” So you've got one argument saying that a goy who studies Torah is liable to be put to death, and another that says that they have an incredible status, that studying Torah gives them very high regard. But this again is one of those instances where Duke does not consider that might undermine his central thesis that Jews are bad, are always bad, and will always be bad. Mike: Okay, so what about the Deuteronomy passages? Ben: Deuteronomy is fascinating. We could do a whole discussion of that book in and of itself because it is–Deuteronomy in Greek means “second law”–but it is kind of a later law code that is arguably the result of a very kind of reactionary sect of Israelite theology that does not see coexistence with people who don't worship YHWH as possible. And rhetorically, what they are saying is when the Israelites get to the promised land, they are to commit genocide against the peoples of the land. Don't intermarry with them because that could lead to apostasy, that could lead to illicit worship. You know, their daughters will lead you to serve other gods. The sense here is that Israel is a holy people, God has chosen them to be special unto him, and if they allow this foreign influence to affect them, that will be undermined. Mike: Okay, and what about the Ezra text? Ezra 9:1-2 and 9:12. Ben: Yeah, there's some scholarship to indicate that Ezra and Nehemiah represent one scholarly tradition. So after the Babylonian empire was defeated by the Persian empire, the Persians allowed the community of Israelites that had been taken into exile, the golah community, to return to the land, to rebuild the temple, and to reestablish rule. So one of the concerns of the returning community is this very specific idea that the reason they were exiled in the first place is because God is punishing them for worshipping other gods. And that sense also undergirds the theology of the book of Deuteronomy. So their solution is that, to prevent that from ever happening again, they have to divorce from the non-Israelite wives that they had married that might lead them into temptation. Now this is the view of the returning community, not the community that had stayed in the land of Israel during that time. So these would have been the intelligentsia, the priestly class, the aristocracy, skilled laborers, so it's not a normative view, but it kind of becomes normative because it becomes the dominant voice of the text, if that makes any sense. But they are saying that for the sake not just of religious purity but also to establish power for themselves, you know, the returning community has a claim to power in the land, not just because they have, you know, they have a connection to it where they are before the exile, but they are supported by the Persian imperial power. They're making this new claim of identity and religiosity to assert that power. Mike: Okay and what about Leviticus 20:24? Ben: “You shall inherit their land” (“Them” being the Canaanites.) “that I will give unto you to possess it, a land that flows with milk and honey. I am the Lord your God that separated you from other people.” So this is God telling the Israelites that they will be given the promised land because God has chosen them, has separated them. The word “kodesh,” to be holy, also means separate. So it's really a theological category, not an ethnic one. You know, the Israelites are separate from these people and are given the land because of their adherence to the covenant at Sinai, not because they are of a particular ethnic or racial background. Mike: Okay, so we talked a little bit about kind of the somewhat genocidal tendencies I guess. And so David Duke talks about massacres perpetrated by Jews in the bible. He points to Deuteronomy 20:10-18, Isaiah 34:2-3. and Joshua 6:21 and 10:28-41. And when I mentioned Joshua to you, you kind of rolled your eyes at it. Ben: Yeah. Mike: So I guess let's start with Joshua then. Ben: Yeah, I do. Good. Joshua's a fascinating text. Scholars pretty much agree that it has no, or little to no, basis in historical fact. You know, one of these is that, these texts Joshua 6:21, is the destruction of the city of Jericho which according to archeological records happened several hundred years prior to when this narrative is supposed to have taken place. But what's being discussed here in 21 is the devotion of the city to the Lord, the destruction of every living thing in it. So, you know, this is absolutely a genocidal text. It's a purification of the land by the sword and by flame. So typically in war in the ancient near east, you could take slaves, you could take cattle as war booty. But what is being done here is the destruction of all of that, saying that everything belongs to God, and as such it must be destroyed and sacrificed unto him. But it's also seen as a kind of justice because here are these, for lack of a better word, pagans who stand in the way of the Israelite mission, and who may also tempt the Israelites to turn away from the path of God. So it's absolutely this violent, theologically motivated holy war, genocidal slaughter, maintained in the text. And I do think it's important to wrestle with these notions. You know, whether or not it actually happened, it's still– It's there, and it informs a great deal of thinking. It informed the colonization of the New World, whereby settlers from Europe saw themselves as Israelites and the indigenous people here as Canaanites. Robert Allen Warrior is an indigenous scholar who's done a lot of work on this. But then, the Joshua narrative also informed many of the early Zionists, and they saw themselves as, as Rachel Haverlock called the Joshua generation. Like, Ben Gurion assembled a number of different people to do bible studies on the book of Joshua. It is a text of settler colonialism and can be used to justify that kind of political programme. Mike: Okay so back to Deutero– Ben: If that's what you're trying to do, Joshua is a good place to pull from. Mike: Okay so back to Deuteronomy, 20:10-18. What's being said in there? Ben: “When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open its gates, all the people shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage in battle, lay siege to the city.” And the ban, or kherem, is in effect there. So destroy, destroy, destroy, and leave nothing because everything is for God. It's the same scenario– In this instance, the people in the land are given the opportunity to surrender, otherwise they are subject to the sword. It's very similar to the kind of warfare described in other texts from the ancient near east, whether they're Assyrian or Babylonian. So it's not uncommon to see this kind of siege warfare described, and it's not necessarily unique to the Israelite people. Mike: Right, I mean, yeah, I mean that was one of the things that happened to the Israelite people, at least in engaging the Romans, right? Ben: Yeah, precisely. Mike: Okay, what about Isaiah 34:2-3? Ben: This one's interesting because it's not actually a narrative of slaughter. It's a prophetic oracle delivered against the people of Edom, the Edomites, for betraying the Israelites to the Babylonians and assisting in their imperial endeavors. It's saying that, you know, you will be destroyed. You know, the corpses of your people will lay in the street. So it's not an actual thing that happened. It's part of a type of prophetic literature called oracles against the nations where the prophet of a particular book will condemn a specific people on God's behalf. Keep in mind that the prophets aren't really seen as their own agents. They're the agents of God; they speak God's word. So God through Isaiah is saying, here's what's going to happen to you because of your betrayal. Mike:  Okay, so this next part is probably going to need a trigger warning or something. So there's some really strange passages that he cites about rape and virginity that I honestly haven't looked at because by the time I got to these passages I was just tired of him being wrong every time I checked the passages he cited. So he cites Kethuboth 11b, Sanhedrin 55b and 69a-b, Yebamoth 57b, 58a, and 60b. So let's start with Kethuboth. Ben: Right, yeah, so here he's– The issue is Bath Sheeba, when she gave birth to Solomon, whether or not she was six years old, or whether or not she was an earlier age. It's not saying that six-year-olds are appropriate– or that six is an appropriate age for sexual relations with a girl. It's arguing at what age a child can conceive. Like when is conception possible? And it's saying that because Bath Sheeba gave birth to Solomon when she was six, it's somewhere around that time. Yeah, this whole discourse is really gnarly.  Mike: Okay, so what about Sanhendrin 55b? Ben: So here it's about a girl who is three years and one day whose father has arranged for her to be married, and betrothal is through intercourse. It's concerning the legal status of the intercourse with her, if it's like full-fledged sex. Really here the text is examining forbidden sexual acts that cause ritual impurity and calamity. And prior to this specific quotation is a broader context of unwitting beastiality, like beastiality that you didn't know you did. It's not justifying sex with minors; it says that the act renders the man ritually impure and liable to be put to death. Lucky for the child, I guess lucky, is that they're exempt from execution because they're a minor. Small condolence I guess. Mike: Okay so it's basically saying the opposite of what David Duke said. Ben: Yeah. Mike: Okay, what about 69a-b? Ben: I mean, this is probably a discussion of the legal ramifications of this act. Mike: Yeah this is actually, this says exactly what you were talking about earlier. So “A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabitated with her, she becomes his.” Blah blah blah. Ben: Yeah, because it's Yebamoth– It's Yebamoth, right? Mike: No this is Sanhendrin. Ben: Oh Sanhendrin. So this is, yeah, criminal law. So this is the liability of criminal punishment, but also these rabbis debated everything. What is the likelihood that a three-year-old is going to be married to someone who then dies and then has to be– Again they have the option to be married to their brother so that the dead brother's lineage doesn't end. They're really negotiating, like, every possible eventuality that might happen just in case. You know, all of these are hypothetical situations. And, you know, they're gross. Some of them are just really fucked up. Mike: [laughs] Yeah Jews like to talk about a lot of weird hypotheticals. Alright so now onto the Yebamoth one. So 57b. Ben: Yeah, Yebamoth 57b. This one I've got, “A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired by marriage in coition.” So yeah, the sex act is technically allowed. It's not condoning it. But because three-year-old girls cannot become pregnant, it's still technically forbidden because it's a waste of seed in non-procreative sex. So it's saying that she can't conceive via sexual intercourse, so it's really forbidden because sex in this worldview is not for pleasure; it's purely for procreation. So if you are wasting sperm engaging in this sex act, it's a bad thing. Not going to lie, this one's fucked up. Mike: Yeah, what about 58a? Ben: Um, doesn't say anything about minors. Mike: Really? Ben: Just, yeah, I didn't see anything about minors in this one. Mike: What about rape? Ben: Most likely. Let me just take a closer look. Mike: Or virginity or something? Ben: Yeah, do you have a quote on this one? Mike: Not sure. I mean, I don't have quotes on any of these because again I stopped looking at them. Ben: Yeah, and a lot of it is just like– It's kind of he said, she said. I don't know. I don't take David Duke's reading of these in good faith, and I don't think we can. Mike: This is a weird passage. There's something about “Through betrothal alone a woman is not entitled to eat.” This is so strange. Ben: I mean I would lie if I said that I understood the majority of Talmudic literature. Mike: Right. Ben: You know, people can spend seven years reading this entire work all the way through. The law of tamurah. Mike: Yeah, and, I mean, even– David Duke doesn't even necessarily quote these passages. He just references them. And I guess, like you said, he probably pulls them from other sources without reading them. Ben: Yeah, I– With this, I can't even tell, like, what he's arguing. Like, what is the– What issue is he taking here? Mike: Yeah, I would suggest that our listeners read this passage and try to figure out what the fuck David Duke has a problem with. Ben: Yeah exactly. Yeah [sarcastically] read David Duke's book. You'll have fun. Mike: Yeah, no don't read David Duke's book, but you can read the Talmud, that's pretty good. Ben: Spend seven years reading the whole thing. You can do it, a daf a day. Mike: Alright, do you have any notes on Yebamoth 60b? Ben: So this is where the Gemara cites another ruling related to who is considered a virgin. And it's not condoning sex with a three-year-old. It says that in the event of that happening, she remains a virgin because her hymen grows back. Like if it's through a sex act with an adult man or if her hymen is ruptured by wood. You know, she's still considered a virgin because it grows back. I don't know if that's medically true. Mike: Yeah, I was– Ben: Sounds like bullshit, but the issue here is virginity as it relates to being able to determine paternity in the long run. Mike: Okay, alright, so Judaism has changed a lot since these texts were written. So what can we say about the ethos of Judaism now as it relates to these texts? Ben: Right, obviously most Jews aren't concerned with the majority of the issues we've addressed here today. You know, they don't spend a lot of time thinking about beastiality, thank goodness. But I think if there is a single Jewish ethos, it's an affirmation of being the people of Israel, literally meaning “to wrestle with God,” Yis-ra-el. Engagement in argument over Torah are so central to our people's identity that even secular atheist Jews still contend with these issues. So as many different types of Jews as there are and how many different ways they approach the text, there still profoundly, proudly participating in a longstanding tradition that's engaging with and arguing with the tradition. I think that's the modern Jewish ethos, and it's much the same as the ancient but adapted to the current context: How do we live a good life?  Mike: Word, well Ben Siegel, thank you so much for coming on The Nazi Lies Podcast and taking the time to do the tedious work of debunking David fucking Duke. [both laugh] You can catch Ben on Twitter and Facebook at Anarcho-Judaism. Ben: Mike it has been an absolute pleasure. Thank you for having me. [Theme song]

Picking up where we last left off, it's time to learn about Marvel's second attempt at comics for Christian audiences. Highlights include comic adaptations of "classic" Christian stories and the creation of an evangelical superhero, but the results were decidedly less impressive than the "Saint Series" from the early 80s.  ----more---- Episode 8 Transcription [00:00:00] Jessika: Good, I can see, perfect. No sneaking up on me, Jesus.  Mike: Welcome to Ten Cent Takes, the podcast where we partake in comics' forbidden fruit, one issue at a time. My name is Mike Thompson and I'm joined by my cohost, the muffin of mayhem herself, Jessika Frazer. Jessika: Hello.  Mike: How's it going? Jessika: Oh, pretty good. Even better, now that you're calling me a muffin. I love it. Mike: I mean, it was either that or the scone of scorn and I liked muffin of mayhem better. Jessika: Oh, either way. I mean, it's very close. I do have a cupcake on my shoulder as you know. Mike: Yes.  [00:01:00] Well, as always, the purpose of this podcast is to perform deep dives on comic books in ways that are both fun and informative. We want to look at their coolest, weirdest and silliest moments, as well as examine how they're woven into the larger fabric of pop culture and history. Today, we're picking up where we left off with our last episode and concluding our look at Marvel's short-lived run of Christian comics. Are you ready? Jessika: Yeehaw.  Mike: Well, I'm going to give you a quick break before we actually get into that. What is one cool thing that you have read or watched since we last recorded? Jessika: I started reading the Princeless series by Jeremy Whitley.  Mike: Nice. Jessika: Yeah. The art for the first book was by M Goodwin, but there are other artists involved, including Emily Martin, who is local to our area, which is super neat. Mike: Yeah. I met her at Luma [00:02:00] Con a couple of years ago.  Jessika: Oh, that's rad as heck. Nice, nice.  So, the story follows a princess, Adrienne, who from a young age, is not at all on board with the conventional helpless role she's expected to take as a princess, and is not happy about being locked in a tower alone. So she decides that she doesn't need to continue this path that has been chosen for her and escapes to help others. She's also a person of color and her hair care routines and style reflect that, which is wonderful. And I'm only one issue into the first book, but I'm so excited to see what destiny Adrienne writes for herself.  Mike: I think I read the first volume a couple of years ago and I really enjoyed it. It was a really fresh feeling story. Jessika: That's how I felt about it, it was very refreshing.  Well, what about [00:03:00] you? Whatcha been reading?  Mike: So, one of the series that I have on my pull list at Brian's comics up in Petaluma is We Only Find Them When They're Dead from Boom. It's about six issues. And now it's this really cool sci-fi fantasy sort of series by Al Ewing who has really gotten big while he's been writing the Immortal Hulk, which I also highly recommend because that takes the incredible Hulk storyline and turns it into pretty much a horror story. Jessika: Oh, cool.  Mike: It's really neat. And it's really unnerving and, he's been writing it for over 30 issues now, I think, but it's really solid. And the whole idea is that the Hulk is effectively an immortal being and he can't die. But how that comes into play is genuinely terrifying at times. But Al Ewing did this new series called We Only Find Them When They're Dead. The series is just incredible. And it's set in this weird dystopian future where [00:04:00] the bodies of these giant space gods, for lack of a better term appear out of nowhere. And then humanity is so stretched thin for resources that, that what they've started doing is they have these spaceships that will harvest the bodies for parts. And nobody knows where these gods come from until the crew of one of these harvesting ships decides to solve the mystery. It's this really tight kind of small scale story so far, but it's set against this really insane, massive cosmic backdrop. And it's also very queer, so, I think you would probably enjoy it more so than usual. Jessika: Very nice. Very nice.  Mike: All right. Let's turn back to Marvel's Christian Comics. Would you be so kind as to give us a quick recap of where we left off after the last episode? Jessika: Sure. Last week we went [00:05:00] through the first years of the Marvel Catholic comics, how it got its start printing religious material, cue the power of asking that we keep discussing on this show, and who was involved in making these particular Comics. Our focal comics were the Saint series, comprised of the stories of St. Francis in Francis Brother of the Universe, Pope John Paul. I can't not do it that way.  Mike: It's so good. Jessika: Pope John Paul II, and Mother Teresa. Oh man. Do we want to take a quick second and talk about the recent news? It was so timely about Mother Teresa. You wanna? You want to talk a little bit about that, Mike?   I just had to talk about it. It was so freaking timely.  Mike: Oh, absolutely.  I think this happened a day or two after we recorded the article.  So over the past couple of days there's been a number of stories that have come out, basically highlighting that [00:06:00] Mother Teresa was running a cult and I think the headline that I sent you was, “Are there still people who didn't know Mother Teresa was running an alleged cult?” And.  Jessika: Cue.  Mike: I think.  Jessika: Cue me raising my hand.  Mike: Yeah, I think this was a day or two after, after you and I had recorded and it just felt ridiculously timely. It was really funny. Jessika: Oh, serendipitous.  Mike: No,  she was not a good person by the increasingly numerous accounts that I've been seeing.  She was quote unquote good by a very narrow definition that unfortunately it was kind of like what the media presented her as back then in the eighties. And since then, I mean, if she was operating today, there's no way that she would have received the Nobel Peace Prize. But. Jessika: Oh, no, absolutely not.  Mike: But you know, we're talking, she received that 40 years [00:07:00] ago, so. Jessika: Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Oh gosh. Well, back to what we were talking about last week. After the St. series, after all of that wrapped up, Marvel seemed to decide to walk away from religious content after these winning Comics, we did however, land on a bit of a cliffhanger because Mike, you teased that they took another swing at religious comics in 1992.  Mike: That is correct. So, to set the stage, the late eighties and early nineties were a massive boom for the comic book market.  There was this huge speculation bubble that was going on, and as a result, Marvel and DC and other imprints were just seeing an unprecedented amount of success.  On average, a lot of major books were seeing over a million issues in circulation, which, even today, they don't see.  I think in 1991, X-Men number one, the new series that was [00:08:00] drawn by Jim Lee and written by Chris Claremont had something like 12 million issues move for the.  Jessika: Oh. Mike: For - yeah. It's bonkers. And then shortly thereafter, the rug basically got pulled out from under Marvel's feet. So the early nineties really went from being awesome to really rough in almost no time flat. And that was because the company's top artists were freelancers and they weren't happy with Marvel's compensation plan. So they left and they founded Image Comics back in early '92. And that was essentially the top artists from really well-performing comics, like X-Men, Spiderman, Guardians of the Galaxy, and X-Force just to name a few, became Marvel's competition overnight.  And DC was having some major commercial successes at the same time with events like the death of Superman, and Batman Knightfall, which is when he got his back broken. [00:09:00] So Marvel was suddenly scrambling to keep their share of the market in that light Christian book, publisher, Thomas Nelson, reaching out to former commercial partnership must have seemed like a, uh, well, for lack of a better term, a godsend. And up until that point, Evangelical Christian audiences were a largely untapped demographic outside of their specialty markets.  Now that said, I haven't been able to find any old press releases from when this deal was announced. It honestly seems like both. Marvel and Thomas Nelson, would just like to have everyone forget about this whole venture since neither company mentions the partnerships on their sites. I can't even find them on archive or anything like that.  Jessika: Oh, wow. Mike: That said - Yeah. It's, it's like buried pretty deep, but that said, I did find an article from Christianity Today, of all places, that fills in some of the details. So, it's kind of a long-winded meandering puff [00:10:00] piece, but there are a couple of relevant details. Would you do me a favor and read the first bit explaining why this deal came to be? Jessika: Sure. Some Thomas Nelson staff, whose young children were drawn to comics noticed there was little available from a Christian viewpoint. Realizing they did not have the resources in house, the publisher struck a deal with Marvel comics to produce a series of comics under Nelson's editorial direction. Using Marvel artists and writers that resulting comics would be marketed in Christian markets by Thomas Nelson and in comic bookstores by Marvel.  Mike: Yeah, so, honestly, it sounds more like Thomas Nelson hired Marvel rather than the two were in a legit partnership.  Thomas Nelson was even setting the price point for the books, which wasn't cheap. For reference the average Marvel comic cost $1.25 in 1993.  The least expensive [00:11:00] Nelson comic, for its single issue Life Christ books, that we'll talk about a little bit, and each of those was going for $2.99, a pop. So that's almost $6 in today's money. Illuminator, which we're really going to talk about for a bit, was going for $4.99 a book, which means Thomas Nelson was expecting kids to shell out the equivalent of $10 bucks per issue for a comic with like zero name recognition. Jessika: Right.  Mike: Yeah, and that's actually called out in the same article. Like Christianity today couldn't even give them a complete puff piece, they actually called out how maybe Thomas Nelson was a little bit high on their own fumes. If you'd be so kind to read that section as well. Jessika: The primary difficulty in selling the Illuminator to the secular comic book market is not the subject matter, but the price. As a book publisher, Thomas Nelson wants the comics to look as high quality and [00:12:00] book-like as possible. They have more pages than standard comics, carrying no advertising, and are printed using higher quality paper and ink than standard comics. Thomas Nelson likes to call them illustrated novels, a variation of the comic industry term graphic novel. Because of this, the 48-page Illuminator sells for $4.99. As one comic store owner put it, “that's a pretty stiff price for a comic with no well-known characters, artists or writers”. Yikes.  Mike: When you can't even get to pull its punches for an article like this, that kinda says a lot. I feel, yeah, so I don't know what kind of marketing was done, but I haven't been able to find any ads for the Nelson comics in any of my Marvel issues from 1992 to 94, nor have I been able to track down [00:13:00] anything on the web. I mean, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, but it certainly seems like the partnership got rolling and then nobody really wanted to draw the attention to the end results. Which, based on what we've seen of  the end result of the product, uh, maybe, maybe that's kind of understandable. Jessika: Big sigh.  Mike: Yeah, that said, I do have the Illuminator comics in my collection and they are definitely higher quality in terms of production. Like, you know, the colors still pop they're definitely thicker. But, if I had seen this in the comic store, I would have blown right past it when I was kid.  Jessika: Yeah.  Mike: So speaking of Illuminator, do you want to give us an elevator pitch for that comic? Jessika: Oh my, well, if you insist. I mean, other than calling it a hot mess? Mike: Other than calling it a hot mess. Jessika: Okay. So this high school-aged [00:14:00] kid named Andy Prentiss goes to summer camp, is bullied a lot, and gets tricked into going into the forest in the middle of the night where he is abducted? Mike: It's pretty vague. Jessika: By a beam of light? Yeah.  Mike: It's super vague. Like, they don't ever actually, we'll get into that. Okay.  Jessika: It's very strange. And he, he somehow becomes the light? And has powers for no explicable reason? I know there are a lot of question marks behind my, my sentences, because that's how it feels. He gets semi-brainwashed by a local reverend and convinced that his powers are from God himself.  Mike: Was he actually a reverend was, I thought that dude was just like a… Jessika: I don't know.  Or maybe he was just a janitor. I don't know what he was. Mike: It's never really explained. Like. Jessika: I'm giving him a lot of credit.  Mike: Yeah.  Sorry. I derailed it. Jessika: That's okay. Well, he [00:15:00] convinced him that his power, whoever this dude was who worked at this church. He was always sweeping, he was probably a janitor you're right.  Convince him that his powers are from God himself and that he is acting because God directed him to. But like slippery slope my dude. Thus, the Illuminator was created after that all of the villains are supposed to represent really obvious, evil being demon-like creatures, trying, and being mostly successful at tempting the public into acting sinfully.  There isn't a great explanation as to why any of this happened, like we said, or is being aimed at Prentiss himself, who didn't seem to be very religious in the first place when this thing started? Mike: No, he was just kind of like an earnest, sort of naive teenager. Jessika: Yeah. But I'll tell you what there is, there is a healthy amount of [00:16:00] slut-shaming.  So that's certainly exciting for me because, you know, I hate that bullshit. So.  Mike: Yeah. It's definitely uncomfortable to read.  Also, I wanna note that his superhero design for the Illuminator persona feels like a rip off of Long Shot, who was this popular character in the eighties who palled around with the X-Men for awhile. Like, here's what he looked like. Take a look, tell me what you think. Jessika: Oh, he even has the little star. Okay. This does look really similar to the other comic we read. He's wearing like a black kind of jumpsuit, but it could, it really could be a motorcycle jacket and pants. He's got boots on. He has a little bullet necklace or a bullet sash? Mike: I believe the term is a bandolier. Jessika: A bandolier, thank you. He has a bandolier, I'm cutting all of that bullshit out. He has a bandolier [00:17:00] and he's throwing, like, I don't know, a little, are those knives? Mike: Knives.  Jessika: Oh, okay. Mike: He, like that's Long Shot's thing, is that his power is he's super lucky. He has slightly enhanced strength and hollow bones, which makes him a better acrobat.  Jessika: Got it. Mike: And then his weapon of choice is he throws knives that basically he just can hit anything with. Jessika: The problem is they kind of look like sharp popsicles.  Mike: Kind of yeah.  Jessika: So.  Mike: But yeah, I mean like Long Shot is one of my favorite characters.  Jessika: Nice. Mike: And I was reading this book again and I was just going, oh my God, they added a helmet and then kind of removed the bandolier and added some extra padding and called it a day. He's even got the mullet.  It's just a different color.  Andy's a dirty blonde and. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: And Long Shot is platinum.  Jessika: It's like three shades off, real close.  Mike: So you gave a pretty solid summary of the comic itself. I gotta say [00:18:00] the comic series felt very unfocused.  It doesn't feel like it really conveys much of a Christian message.   Andy's powers are so vaguely delivered, as you called out, and there's no real specific link to Jesus or Christianity at that point.  He only becomes the Christian super hero when he retreats into a church to escape, apparently a demonic opponent? Bu, the only reason that we know that he's demonic is because he doesn't want to go in the church.  And then he gets a pep talk from this one-armed wise man who lives there, apparently. I feel like he still approached things in a very standard superhero way: punch first ask questions later.  Did you notice that there was no trying to solve problems in a way that would result in anything other than a fist fight with powers? Jessika: Oh, no, it was just like, oh, there's a problem, I need to go beat someone up. That was absolutely the vibe.  Mike: Yeah, I was genuinely surprised by that. I would have expected a little [00:19:00] more Jesus-inspired approaches such as turning the other cheek, or lifting people up who are suffering, things like that. But no, it was just a superhero fights with people or things that were designated as evil from an evangelical point of view. And I mean, we should talk about that. Like, each of the comics comes across a super victim-blamey.  Like, there's that party where Nightfire, the first demonic entity, shows up and starts draining victims, and it shows they're all drinking or doing drugs or being slutty. Jessika: Yeah. They're at a party and there are girls on guys' laps and apparently, that's not good. Mike: Apparently, but then they all become Nightfire's sort of undead army. So it's that implication that sinful behavior leads to damnation later on. Um. Jessika: Okay.  Mike: And then [00:20:00] in the second issue, the story paints college campuses out as godless places, full of temptation and being devoid of morality. So, they're susceptible to this mad scientist, who's splicing together weird animal human hybrids, which, I mean, that felt like something that was written by someone who has never actually been on a college campus. Jessika: Yes.   Mike: And then the third issue was absolutely trying to link Satanism and Wiccan beliefs.  I'm not crazy, right? Like that actually, that's how it felt. Like, Satanism and crystals, that  they're just hand in hand. Jessika:  Yeah, it was super gross. Mike: Yeah, it was really bad.  I mean, the book only had three issues or illustrated novels or whatever they want to call it before it was canceled. So, I personally think that the probable lack of marketing that we discussed really hurt it, but it also seems like there were some production problems that caused it to be [00:21:00] delayed because the third volume has a cover date of August, 1993, but it turns out it didn't actually hit the shelves until February of 1994. I could not find sales figures for the months that the first two volumes came out, but the third issue doesn't even crack the top 100 issues being sold in the market when it actually hit the shelves. You brought up the slut-shamey aspect to it. And in the end of the third issue, it really felt uncomfortable where Andy was, these days it would be incel kind of logic, where he's really mad that the girl he saved didn't go to him. Jessika: That is so how it felt. I was just like pointing at you viciously right now, like, really aggressively. Mike: Yeah. When you were doing that, I was like, what did I do wrong? Jessika: Ya know that's exactly how it felt. It felt like he's like, well, I saved her and I'm the better guy. So she should just be with me.  Mike: Yeah. And then. Jessika: He just expected it. It was gross.  Mike: And then they kind of have a teaching moment where they're like, well, you know, that's not always how it works, [00:22:00] blah, blah, blah. And then she shows up to be another disciple of Christ or whatever, and blah. Jessika: Yeah. She's like, I broke up with that other guy.  Mike: Oh yeah. That. Jessika: She's wearing a knee length skirt and like. Mike: Yeah. And before that she'd been wearing kind of form-fitting jeans and tank tops and. Well, the other guy, I can't even remember his name, but he was at the party. That's the only time we saw him. And he was basically trying to make it okay that everyone was drinking. So, you know. Jessika: Yeah. And then he was in the mall scene and he was like, trying to convince her like something stupid, something else stupid.  Mike: Yeah. That was after they got returned to their bodies. That's right. I, I actually thought that she was the mom of one of the other characters originally because she had such a mom haircut and it was like, oh, it's kind of the sexy mom. And then oops. It was, the ages of those characters was very [00:23:00] ill-defined. Jessika: Agreed.  Mike: And then, like I said, like this was clearly written by someone who had not experienced really anything of the real world, it felt. Nightfire is a drug dealer who just hangs out outside of high schools and tries to randomly sell drugs to kids? Like, my dude. Do you not understand how drug dealing works? Jessika: That's not how that works. Yeah. Your kids don't have enough money for drug dealers to be interested in them.  And they're definitely not giving your kids free drugs. Like I know I say that a lot, but it's because I believe it a lot. They're not just going to get rid of their revenue. Mike:  It was the same thing with that college campus, with the mad scientist professor who was, he was in a wheelchair for no really defined reason, he just was. And then apparently he's just creating an army of [00:24:00] man-animal hybrids. Which, again, I was sitting there and I'm like, man, I took biology classes in college and they were never this cool, like, are you creating an army of mutant supermen at your college? Yeah, sign me up. I'll pay that tuition. I'll take out a loan. Jessika: Well, and it was happening in this way that wasn't really logical, to where they were kind of meshing into this larger, like alligator with massive arms and walks around like a human, but then I don't know. It was strange. He was making them come apart with his, God-light. Like they could become two separate things. Again, it wasn't like he was chopping things up and sticking them back together or making a new creature. I don't really understand how this was supposed to be happening, from a scientific aspect.  Mike: His powers were really, ill-defined like he, he could fly and he could shoot light. And then I guess, theoretically add super strength, but. Yeah, that whole, like God-light separating the things out, but then it turned out it killed them because they'd been bonded too long to get, I don't know, whatever [00:25:00] it was, it was fucking dumb. Yeah. So that was the thing was Trisha goes to a crystal store where it's apparently a front for a demon cult. And again, I'm like, I don't know, man,  if I went to a crystal store and they told me that I could traffic with demons, I'd be much more likely to buy one of their ridiculously expensive geodes. Because I've been taken on a date to a crystal shop, because I was sick and my date wanted to buy me a healing crystal and I was. Oh, God, Jessika: That's, that is very sweet.  Mike: I did not respond well to this.  Jessika: I'm sure you did not.  Mike: Which. I'm sure does not surprise you, but. Jessika: No. Mike: I'm just saying if he'd instead offered to induct me into a cult where they hung out with demons, I might've actually gone out for a second date with him. Hmm. [00:26:00]  Do you have any more thoughts on Illuminator before we move on to our next entry? Jessika: I mean, I didn't care for this comic. Other than the first one that was establishing his origin story, it felt like the same story in each of the three issues. It was some demon character sucking the life out of people that were making bad choices. It was literally the same story each time, not even well masked. Mike: Yeah, exactly. Jessika: And, it was hard to follow and it was hard to figure out the incredibly vague, read not there, ties to Christianity that this character and his actions and powers were supposed to have, like we were talking about. It felt like a stretch at best.  Mike: Yeah. They were just trying to shoehorn it in at the end where he would go talk to, the guy's name was George, I think, where he would go and talk to his mentor at the church.  It felt like a very kind of vague, well, if you look at it this way, this could be your lesson from Jesus. [00:27:00] Jessika: Yeah, exactly.  And you were bringing up another point that I also didn't like, they were just making fun of other religions, for example, naming someone Chakra, and mocking other spiritual practices with crystals, it was really disrespectful and in poor taste.  Mike: Which, I mean, I can't say I'm really surprised given how evangelical culture typically goes these days.  Jessika:  Christianity, isn't the only religion and I'm tired of mainstream society being okay with Jesus-washing everything, and then being offended when any other religion is given any space.  It's deplorable.  Mike: Yeah. And then also, these stories just felt very lazy and dumb. The big one that I keep on thinking about is, again, that second issue where he's at a college campus and there's the mad scientist and it's revealed the mad scientist kidnapped a football player, like the star football player from the university's team, and then [00:28:00] turned him into, I think, the alligator hybrid that we were talking about.  Jessika: Yeah.  Mike: I was sitting there going my dude. You're mad that they pulled your funding. What do you think they're going to do to you when you remove their giant cash cow of college football from the campus? Jessika: Yeah, exactly. And like, do you not know the cardinal rule of  picking people who don't have people looking for them? Mike: Right? Jessika: But, like, I'm not planning on doing anything bad and even I know that. Yeah. So, yeah. And other than just the audacity that Andy has making assumptions that he and Trisha are gonna get together based on the fact that he saves her from what he perceives as a bad situation.  Mike: He's a nice guy. He is that proverbial nice guy trope. Jessika: Hint to everyone out there: Don't you ever slide into my DMS and say you're a nice guy, because you will be [00:29:00] blocked so quickly.  Mike: On that note, what do you say? We move on to the next books in our discussion.  Jessika: Let's mosey.  Mike: So, I mentioned the Life of Christ comics that were single issues. These are the two issues that were put out to retail; the Christmas and Easter stories. They were both written by Louise Simonson and illustrated by Mary Wilshire, as well as Eisner award winner Coleen Doran, she apparently helped with the Easter issue. Simonson is a major name in comics alongside her husband, Walt. She co-created the character, Cable, from the X-Men; she helped launch the long running series, Superman, the Man of Steel; and she was one of the major stakeholders in the death of Superman storyline. And she also helped out, if I remember right, I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that she was a major [00:30:00] part of Walt Simonson's really acclaimed run on Thor, to the point where both of them appear in cameos in the original Thor movie. Like I think, I  think they're both featured at the end when they're celebrating at the hall of heroes, or whatever it is. But  it was a nice little nod because they created a lot of stuff like Thor: Frog of Thunder, and, Beta Ray bill, if I remember right.    Likewise, Mary Wilshire did a ton of stuff for Marvel in the eighties and nineties. She was best known for her work on Red Sonja and Firestar. And then Colleen Doran, goddamn, she's this incredible illustrator who's worked on a ton of properties. I always associate her with Neil Gaiman's Sandman. So.  Jessika: I just started reading that.  Mike: Yeah, like all three of these women are Legit Big Deals, like capital letters at the start of each of those words.  And that's why it's so weird to see their names in these issues. I can't believe how bland and [00:31:00] boring everything about them felt. Like, is that mean? Am I going out of line?  Jessika: No. No. I'm surprised to hear about the acclaim that these illustrators have, because it felt very elementary. Am I supposed to have received this as a coloring book?  Mike: Yeah, it's really flat, like, okay. So for comparison, here is a painting that Colleen Duran did for Sandman. Check it out.  Jessika:  Oh, wow. This is cool.  Mike: Right? Jessika: Wow. Okay. There's a lot going on. So I'll just describe this really quick.  There's a ton going on. So at the very top, there's a Swan couple swans, a swan and a, some sort of a harp, maybe a harpsichord thing. And you've got some planets and moons and a dude gargling some blood, it looks like. Mike: I [00:32:00] think that's supposed to be Orpheus. Cause he, if I remember right, he was Dream's son and then Orpheus is eventually ripped apart by the Bach the Bachinal. I dunno, whatever there. Jessika:  And then there is a legit goth lady who has this amazing, I'm not too far into it, obviously, as you can tell.  Mike: Right. So  that is death. That is Dreams sister. I mean,  Jessika: That's great.  Mike: Yeah. If, if you're not too familiar with it, I don't want to spoil all the elements for this, but this painting features a ton of major characters from throughout the Sandman series, which she provided a lot of illustration for. And it's a beautiful piece of work. Jessika: It's a feast for the eyes, honestly. I mean, there's so many different elements, I mean, part of it looks like it's supposed to look like stained glass and other parts of it, don't look that same way. It's very interesting.  Mike:  Yeah. So it's very [00:33:00] much not what we got. Likewise, I want you to look at some of Mary Wiltshire's art, here. Jessika: Oh, wow. See, that's fun.  Mike: Right? Jessika: Red Sonia. See, I want to read some Red Sonia.  Mike: Yeah. The 80's series is fun. I think Marvel might have the rights back, because it's part of the Conan properties. Oh no, wait, I think Dynamite has Red Sonia. I don't know. You can probably find some books on Hoopla if nothing else. Jessika: This is great. I mean, the color vibe is great. There's all this shading, which there really wasn't in that other one at all. Mike: Yeah, I noticed that, too. It was just flat color, other than they used some crosshatching within the illustration, but  that was kind of all they did, except for Jesus's hair. That was such a, like, it was a choice, I guess, they just, the only thing that had any sort of shading was, like, Jesus's hair looked like it was a tie dye masterpiece, so, [00:34:00] oh, wow.  Mike: Both of these books feel very, for lack of a better term, very paint by numbers. Jessika: Yes, very much. So.  Mike: I mean, we've all heard these stories before, too. There wasn't really anything new. The most exciting artwork for both of these books was on the cover. And, the one weird thing that really stood out to me, was that the Easter book felt kind of anti-Semitic, I don't know if I was just reading a little too much into that. Jessika: No, you you're. I've I read that too. Yes. Mike: I feel like  there was an abnormal focus on making Pontius Pilate into not being the bad guy. And instead of keeping the blame on the Jewish elders, it felt very weird and very gross.  Jessika: It did. Mike: And it's, I know that is an argument that is somewhat popular with certain extreme right-wing sectors of evangelical Christianity, too, is that the Jews killed Jesus, [00:35:00] which, I don't know how to respond to that. Like it, it just, just. Jessika: It felt very much like they were saying, yes, we know the Romans did it, but it's your fault, Jews. And it's like, what? No, no, no, no. Mike: Yeah. It was very uncomfortable to read. Jessika: Absolutely. Yeah. I agree. A hundred percent.  The other thing that bothered me from the birth issue was the angels. Like, I've read what angels are supposed to look like. If it's not some beautiful human woman with wings floating down gracefully from the clouds. It is a terrifying multi-eyed creature that shows up in some really jarring way. The whole situation seemed way too peaceful for what I've read from the actual Bible. Like, I have read the Bible in its entirety.  I was bored at [00:36:00] 13,  don't ask, but yeah. So, but that's not the vibe. Like, people are always really terrified when angels come down and there is a reason.  Mike: Yeah. And that's something that I remember is that when I was growing up, you know, I was presented with the very, kind of Renaissance style angels. And so I never understood when I was reading as a kid or having the stories read to me, why are people scared of the angels? Because you know, they're just glowing people with wings. And then later on it was, oh, oh, they're fucking monsters. They are, they are straight out of HP Lovecraft. Okay. I get it now. Jessika: Yeah. Because technically the humans are supposed to be the ones that are like, what? In God's image. There's nothing about angels being so. Mike: Nope. We're the, we're the mud people.   Jessika: Yes. Mike: Well, moving on from that, aside from those aforementioned single issues, Nelson Comics published, [00:37:00] what was dubbed the Christian Classic Series, which are comic adaptations of kind of big name Christian literature.  I was able to track down digital copies of the Pilgrim's Progress and In His Steps; What Would Jesus Do? Let's talk about that one first. I had actually heard of iIn His Steps before this, because it took that titular phrase and it kind of brought it into the popular culture. It was originally written in the late 19th century. It's basically about a reverend who is moved to challenge his congregation to use the question when making life decisions. It's a dry book and the comic was super dry as well. It just, it felt like a lot of expository dialogue set in late 19th century settings with a bunch of very prim and proper white people who, for the most part feel pretty monied and pretty privileged.   Jessika: Yeah. Mike: There's occasionally some sort of [00:38:00] over-the-top situations where our Christian heroes are facing persecution, but it's like, it's made up persecution. It's that idea where Christians are like, we're the victims, people don't like us. And I think maybe because you're assholes, I don't know how to respond to that otherwise. Jessika: Yeah. Maybe it's not about your religion. Maybe it's just you. Mike: Yeah. If everyone's telling you you're an asshole, maybe it's not anything else, maybe it's just you. I agree. But yeah, it's just, it's a boring slog and it took me way longer than it should've to get through this. Jessika: They were awful. I'm not gonna lie. I read them, but I skimmed them because I couldn't sit there and like, let that infest my brain.  Mike: No. There's also a sequel novel that they didn't adapt.  Jessika: No. Mike: But basically, I think if I remember right, the sequel novel has Jesus actually showing up, like, it's like the second coming of Jesus. If I remember right. I  Jessika: Man, they already got so close to that in this one, because they had that one [00:39:00] dude show up who is a scraggly stranger.  And then the reverend has a dream that Jesus is actually lying in the bed and he's like, oh my God, it was Jesus all along.  Mike: Yeah. Oh God, that was. Jessika: So heavy handed. Smacked me across the face with that message. Jeez.  Mike: Oh, and what is it? The tramp has a daughter who the reverend and his wife take in to raise as their own. Jessika: Oh yeah.  Mike: On what planet…? Jessika: Because apparently. Mike: Ugh. Jessika: No, it's awful. No, we all know that Christians don't care about the children once they're born. Mike: We, there are so many signs around my town, at least in our area because we live right near a Catholic church where it's the pregnancy crisis centers. And I keep on, resisting the urge to go spray, paint them or something, they're so gross. Jessika: Oh, we have the ones up that have a picture of a baby that say my eyes are formed after blah, [00:40:00] blah, blah days or whatever.  Mike: Gross. Jessika: Yeah, I know they're awful. And every once in a while they do get spray painted.  Mike: Good. Jessika: Obviously I have nothing to do with that, but I walk past and I go, okay. Yep. Yep. Yeah.  Mike: Side tangent, completely unrelated to comics, but there was a Reddit post within the last year, I think, from some guy who was really upset about how his girlfriend would go and deface, the local pro-life billboards that would go up near their house. She would add things like citation needed for some of the claims, or just cross them out, or whatever. And he was saying, would I be justified in breaking up with her? Because I feel like, she's putting herself at legal risk doing all this. And literally every response was yo dude, you should break up with her and then give her my number because she sounds fucking rad. Jessika: Seriously. Oh my gosh. That's great. Mike: Anyway. Jessika: Hero of heroes.  Mike: Yeah, the hero we need. [00:41:00] So, turning to the Pilgrim's Progress. This is a Christian allegory novel from the 1600's that's extremely surreal. I'd actually never heard of this book before now, and I had to do some basic research just to see how close they mirrored the plot. And I'm really bummed that actually, the comic is a pretty faithful adaptation of the source material. Which means there is a giant prose novel that is just this dumb and insane, but without at least the somewhat arresting visuals that we got. Jessika: It's basically Pinocchio.  Mike: Yeah, I mean, it's not far off, except there's a second act where the dude's sinful family follows him, which. Jessika: Oh my God. They just kind of get abducted into the nether though. They don't do anything.  [00:42:00] He's the one that does everything and then they're suddenly just there.  Mike:  Before we get into this discussion. It's about a protagonist named Christian, on his pilgrimage across this metaphorical landscape, where he confronts temptation and he learns, I don't know, moral lessons, I guess. I wasn't entirely certain about a lot of those, but whatever.  And then after he makes it to heaven, his wife and kids follow him, because he couldn't convince them to come with him originally. This was written in the late 1600's, originally it is updated and adapted to what's supposed to be modern day, New York. And there's a lot of like really thinly veiled criticism being leveled at environmentalists for some reason, which I did not understand.  Jessika: It was really strange. I don't know where that came from. I read that, too.  Mike: Yeah. And then in the novel, after he makes it to heaven, confronting all these challenges, [00:43:00] his wife and his kids follow him. And then they have a sort of angelic guardian, who helps protect them along the way, who she shows up in the comic book, it's whatever, the kids, and this was actually kind of a weird diversion from the novel in the novel. The kids become adults throughout the journey, cause it's a long journey and they get married and they have families of their own. And so at the very end, they don't go with the wife, but they stay behind. And, basically they're living Christian lifestyles. And in the comic book for some reason, and it's not really explained well, they're left behind with their aunt who was also on the journey with them.  And then the mom was just like, okay, bye. I'm going to go off to heaven now with your dad. Jessika: Yeah, he just like sticky handed her up there or something, like you earn the right to  snatch your wife from earth. Maybe that was the rapture. Mike: Yeah, maybe. Well, and then at the very end, his friend, who was like, oh no,  [00:44:00] you know, we're, we're doing our part. We're recycling and taking care of the planet. He's denied access to heaven by St. Peter for some reason, that's not really explained. Jessika: Which was so strange. Like, yeah, please, don't recycle friends. What, what a strange takeaway from this whole thing. Mike: It just, it feels kind of like this religious acid trip with occasional detours into misogyny and racism. Correct me if I'm wrong. Jessika: Not at all. Very, very same page as you.  Mike: The one piece of praise that I can offer these books is that they definitely have the best art of the Nelson comics line. Jessika: It was decent. Yeah.   So I found for both of these comics, both In His Steps and the Pilgrim's Progress, unsurprisingly, they keep replaying the same messages that have been consistent with these comics: be faithful against these huge temptations that are supposed to bombard you every day.  I would expect there to be women and men of loose morals [00:45:00] falling at my feet to tempt me constantly is all I'm saying, like, let's make it happen. Disappointment.  Mike: I'm, I always see these things talking about like women have loose morals or, or ill-repute,  I clearly was not hanging out in the right neighborhoods. Jessika: That's what I'm saying.  Mike: Yeah. Bums me out, man. Jessika: There's always some messages about staying on the path of God, which is always very vague and sometimes literally a path, which come on. And Beelzebub constantly shows up, because the only real villains are the devil and your inability to resist temptation, apparently. Once again, though, didn't see any queer people, which is fine because the Bible really doesn't say anything about them anyway. And I guess God didn't really start hating us in mainstream media until later on then. Huh?  Mike: Man, I don't know. I mean, [00:46:00] like, there's that whole thing about Sodom and Gomorrah, and how we're all sodomized or whatever, but I don't know when, when it became really okay for Christian people to hate on the gays. Jessika: Yeah. I don't know. They need to step back. Oh, did I say that out loud? Mike: Yeah.  Jessika: They're right behind me, aren't they?  Mike: Not yet, at least. Jessika: And also, why is it such a theme that these main characters, low key become cult leaders every single time  Mike: Right? Jessika: It's like, yikes, Catholicism, have some awareness about what a cult-vibe you give off, just like, generally. All in all, the religion is so forced in there that the plot lines of these stories rarely made any sense. It felt like the comics were a game of tug of war, trying unsuccessfully to write a cohesive storyline while still shoehorning in religion, which ultimately caused the comics to feel frenzied and disorganized.  Mike: Yeah. On top of that, these are just [00:47:00] so dry. They're so dry. I get the Thomas Nelson was trying to adapt, quote unquote, major works of Christian literature. But, I can't think of anyone who really reads these books, let alone kids. I'm not really familiar with the whole Christian allegory genre of fiction, but there's gotta be better stuff out there than these books. I know the Thomas Nelson for this line, they also had CS Lewis' Screwtape Letters turned into a comic, I couldn't find it to read, but I'm kind of wondering why they didn't try adapting some of his other work, like the Lion, the Witch, the Wardrobe, you know, Aslan is very much a Jesus' allegory and - Jessika: Yeah.  Mike: It just, it doesn't make a lot of sense not to do something with more name recognition. I mean, hell, Thomas Nelson has an entire collection of fictional books in their catalog. I just scoped out their website today, and I don't understand why they didn't do a comic adaptation of something from there. But, [00:48:00] don't know, I guess that probably would have required extra effort involving research and the author's permission. And it seems - Jessika: Oh no. Mike: Like no, I mean, that, honestly, that seems like more work than the publisher really was interested in committing to this whole endeavor. Jessika: Fair.  Mike: You know, and unsurprisingly, the Nelson comics imprint wasn't long for this world. And it was abandoned by 1994, reportedly due to low sales. Between the quality and the apparent lack of marketing and also the high price points, I can't say I'm surprised. I did find it really funny when I was looking at their website, they have  some limited edition of Dracula on their website and Shakespeare, and I'm like, those things are not Catholic friendly, or evangelical friendly.  Are these edited, are these just like, did he just decide to do like limited edition reprints? I don't know.  Jessika: That's interesting.  Mike:  Weirdly though, Thomas Nelson's recently gotten [00:49:00] back into comic books with Bible Force, which was a comic or a graphic novel that went on sale this year. Here, take a look at this cover, just check it out and tell me and me what you think. Jessika: Yeah, let's see. Oh, oh, wow.  Mike: Right? Jessika: Okay. So, who's supposed to be the dude in the middle? Mike: I don't know. I don't  Jessika: Okay. So there's like some dude, there's some dude in the middle, he's got a sword, and it's thrusting out towards the viewer. There's. What is it? Joseph and his Technicolor coat, I'm assuming that's what that was. Um,  Mike: That's what it looks like. Jessika: Uh, it's what it looks like. It's a color, her coat there's there's Noah's Ark. There's definitely Jesus with arms outstretched. Although, of course, white Jesus, because why be historically accurate? All of these people are Caucasian. I might add in this entire comic, all of these people were Caucasian, except for a very few in the Jesus [00:50:00] episodes. And those were just  people from far away, quote unquote, everyone else was very, very light-skinned. Mike: Also, if you're going to give us white Jesus, can you at least give a shirtless white Jesus? I want to see some washboard abs. Jessika: That's what I'm saying.  Mike: Right? Jessika: That's what I'm saying. So yes, this is just, it's very exciting. Says, Bible Force, the First Heroes Bible. I think that's Probably. Mary as well on the front. It's a woman also Caucasian, and she's got a head scarf of some sort on, it's pink, which they absolutely had magenta back in Bible days. I am sure, absolutely feasible. I'm there. Believe it.  Isaac Mizrahi's in there like designing, designing Mary's outfit. Oh honey, you're going to look great in this.  Mike: He is all about the [00:51:00] timeless looks, isn't he? Jessika: Yes.  Mike:  So, I mean, that's the Nelson comics. Short-lived imprint. Do you have any final thoughts? Jessika: Well, can't say I'm surprised that these didn't continue on. I can't imagine that they were really keeping kids' attention, or giving them any type of cohesive and thoughtful messages.  Mike: No. I mean, probably not. I don't think many comic retailers were carrying them either because this was right at the height of my teenage collecting years, and I don't remember seeing any of this stuff in any of the shops that I frequented. Jessika: Yeah, it was pretty much like here: look at the colors. Oh, and have some antisemitism, enjoy.  Mike: And some casual misogyny. It's fine. Jessika: Yes. Yes, exactly.  Mike:  If you could sum up the titles from this imprint [00:52:00] in one word, what would you use? Jessika: Confused.  Mike: I was going to go soulless, but that's also good. Jessika: Oh, yours is better.  Mike: Now is the time of the show where we discuss our Brain Wrinkles, which is the one thing comics or comics-adjacent that has been just stuck in our head for the last couple of days that we just want to talk about. I guess we should talk about the recent Highlander casting news. Would you like to take that away? Jessika: Oh, oh certainly. Certainly. Oh my goodness. So, during our Highlander episode, Mike, you mentioned that there has been a Highlander reboot in the works since 2008 Mike: Yep. Jessika: And we were speculating on who would be good to cast. Well, there is a reboot in the works, but we were both incorrect about casting, and sorry about that, Chris Pine and Channing Tatum, because either of you [00:53:00] would have been most fabulous in this role, but it landed and it turned out to be Henry Cavill who will be our new next Highlander. And I'm sure he'll have a new name because that's kind of how we trend with the Highlander series, which is good.  Mike: Yeah, they haven't announced the actual role that he's playing yet, but it's assumed that he's going to be the MacLeod who's the main character. Jessika: I would think so. Wouldn't it be interesting if he was like the Kurgan or something that would be really funny.  Mike: Yeah. I think I mentioned this, supposedly Bautista is going to be the Kurgan, but that he'd signed on, I think back in 2015. So it's been six years since then? Jessika: Well, I have to say though, I'm not all that upset about this turn of events. What about you, Mike?  Mike: No, not at all. I just tore through the Witcher series on Netflix last week, over the course of a couple of days while I was working, I had it on in the background. And it was really nice to see Cavill in a role that wasn't [00:54:00] Superman, which is, you know, I use the term, unfortunately, he is just so associated with that role right now. And, honestly, I like him as Superman, I just wish they gave him better scripts and movies to work with.  Jessika: Yeah. And it's hard to feel typecast as well. You don't, you know, you don't want to be Daniel Radcliffe, you know, playing Harry Potter for 20 years and then not being able to do anything else, although he's done very well. So I, can't say that. Mike: I was going to say I actually really -  Jessika: You know, not a good example, I suppose.  Mike: I love the choices that the Daniel Radcliffe has made since Harry Potter, Jessika: Yeah, me too. Mike: He has chosen so many insane roles. It's great.  Jessika: Yeah. Mike: Um, yeah, no, like, you know, honestly, Cavill. First of all, I just, I really like Henry Cavill, like, he's given the interviews where he's talked about how playing Superman makes him want to be a better person, because he is portraying this character who is a role model for so many, especially the little kids. And that just [00:55:00] makes me really fond of the dude.  Jessika: That's so sweet.  Mike: He seems like another Chris Evans, and I'm, fine with that. That said, he is fucking grumpy in the Witcher, and it's really fun. He basically just has this very surly charisma throughout the entire show. And he's still jacked, but he's not as yoked as he is for the Superman rules. Like he doesn't look like a bodybuilder, he just looks like an incredibly fit dude, and I'm fine with that.  Also, he does action scenes really well. The guy who's handling the reboot is Chad Stahelski, who did the John Wick movies. Dude knows his way around an action scene. And if you ever want to see an example of Henry Cavill in good action scenes, watch the Witcher or the Mission Impossible movie that he was in, where he literally does that thing where he reloads his arms and then puts up his Dukes. I can watch that scene on repeat for hours. It's great. Jessika: Nice. I'll have to watch that. I haven't seen the Witcher [00:56:00] yet.  Mike: Yeah. It's fun. We'll talk about that later on, but it's good. I really liked it even coming into it without having any real familiarity with the games or the books that it's based on. Also, I got to say that Highlander heart group that we were in, some of those people were grumpy at the casting. Jessika: Yes. Some people were very grumpy. It was, it was a mixed bag. Some people were very excited and some people were very, very, very grumpy.  Mike: And even - Jessika: Okay.  Mike: To their credit, even the people who were unhappy, weren't toxic, like in some other groups we've seen. Jessika: Oh, correct. Yes. That was very refreshing, cause, you know. Mike: Yeah. the backstory to your listeners is that we have been a part of other Facebook groups that are just heinously toxic nerd culture groups. And we swipe left pretty quick when we're in there. Jessika: Yeah, I don't want to feel like I can't like things or I don't want somebody telling me the amount of a fan. I am the type of fan I am.  Mike: Exactly.  Jessika: Gatekeeping is awful. Don't do it.  Mike: Yeah, don't be a jerk, [00:57:00] I have to say the news that has been coming out about the reboot for Highlander sounds pretty promising. So fingers crossed that it doesn't suck but, we'll see. Jessika: Yeah.  Mike: I believe that's it for this episode, so we'll be back in two weeks, and until then, we'll see y'all in the stacks. Thanks for listening to Ten Cent Takes. Accessibility is important to us; text transcriptions of each of our published episodes can be found on our website.  This episode was hosted by Jessika Frazer and Mike Thompson, written by Mike Thompson and edited by Jessika Frazer. Our intro theme was written and performed by Jared Emerson-Johnson of Bay Area Sound. Our credits and transition music is Pursuit of Life by Evan MacDonald and it was purchased with a standard license from PremiumBeat. Our banner graphics were designed by Sarah Frank, who goes by cut_thistles on Instagram. Jessika: If you'd [00:58:00] like to get in touch with us, ask us questions or tell us about how we got something wrong, please head over to tencenttakes.com or shoot an email to tencenttakes@gmail.com. You can also find us on Twitter, the official podcast account is @tencenttakes. Jessika is @jessikawitha, and Jessika is spelled with a K, and Mike is @vansau V A N S A U.   Mike: Stay safe out there. Jessika: And support your local comic shop. 

Show notes:Links:Mike MondragonCRDTShip of TheseusExceptional CreaturesShiba Inu Full Transcript:Ben:I'm just gonna dive on in there. I'm so eager. I'm so excited. It's actually weird because Starr is the one that typically starts us off. Josh:Yeah. I thought we were just going to start with our just general banter, and then not introduce the guest until 30 minutes later.Ben:By the way.Josh:It is also our tradition.Ben:Yeah. Well we're getting better at this thing.Josh:Where we say, "Oh, by the way, if Starr doesn't sound like Starr..."Ben:Right, yes. Today Starr doesn't sound like Starr because today's star is Mike Mondragon instead. Welcome Mike.Josh:Hey Mike.Mike:Hey.Ben:Mike is a long time friend of the show, and friend of the founders. Actually, Mike, how long have we known each other? It's been at least 10, maybe 15 years?Mike:Probably 2007 Seattle RB.Ben:Okay.Josh:Yeah. I was going to say you two have known each other much longer than I've even known Ben.Ben:Yeah.Josh:So you go back.Ben:Way back.Mike:Yep.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Yeah.Josh:Because I think Ben and I met in 2009.Ben:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Josh:Or something.Mike:Okay.Ben:Yeah, Mike and I have been hanging out for a long time.Mike:Yeah.Ben:We've known each other through many, many different jobs, and contracts, and so on. It's been awesome.Josh:Yeah, Mike, I feel like I've heard your name since... Yeah, for the last, at least, 10 years just working with Ben. You've always been in the background. And we've realized this is the first time we've actually met face to face, which is crazy. But it's great to... Yeah.Mike:Yeah.Josh:... have a face to put with the little... What is it, a cat avatar? Is a cat in your avatar? You've had that avatar for a really long time I feel like.Mike:Yeah, that's Wallace.Josh:Okay.Mike:So I'm Mond on GitHub and Twitter, and that cat avatar is our tuxedo cat, Wallace. And he is geriatric now. Hopefully he'll live another year. And if you remember in that era of Ruby, all of the Japanese Rubyists had cat icons. And so that was... I don't know. That's why Wallace is my icon.Josh:Yeah. Nice.Ben:So, so do Wallace and Goripav know each other?Mike:No, no, they don't. They're like best friends, right? They had to have met at Seattle RB.Ben:Yeah. Internet friends.Mike:Internet friends, yeah.Ben:Yeah. So, Mike is old school Ruby, way back, way back, yeah. But the other funny thing about the old Rubyists, all those Japanese Rubyists, I remember from RubyConf Denver... Was that 2007? Somewhere around there. I remember going to that and there were mats and a bunch of friends were sitting up at the front, and they all had these miniature laptops. I've never seen laptops so small. I don't know what they were, nine inch screens or something crazy.Mike:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Ben:I was like, "How do you even type on that thing?" But it's a thing. So I guess... I don't know. I haven't been to Japan.Mike:There are laptops that you could only get in Japan and they flash them with some sort of Linux probably.Ben:Yeah. Yeah.Mike:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Josh:Okay. I wonder how long it took them to compile C on there.Mike:Yeah. So, about the orbit with the founders. So, I think I'd put it in my notes that I... And I consider myself a sliver of a Honeybadger in that I did have a conversation with Ben about joining the company. And then in 2017, I did do a little contracting with you guys, which is ironic in that... So we're probably going to talk about cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin. So the Bitcoin protocol is, essentially, on a four-year timer. And in 2017 was the last time that we were building up to, I guess, an explosive end to that cycle. And I had just been working at Salesforce at Desk.com, And I left because of Bitcoin. And then this year, four years later, I, again, just left Salesforce, but I just left from Heroku. And I didn't leave so much because of Bitcoin, I just got a better opportunity, and I'm a principal engineer at Okta, and I'm in the developer experience working on SDKs, primarily, the Golang SDK.Mike:So I think one of the things that they were happy about was that I had experience carrying the pager, and knowing what that's like, and they wanted to have an experienced engineer that would have empathy for the engineers to main the SDK. So I'm really excited to be here, because I'm not going to be carrying the pager, and it is the fun programming. What I imagine, listening to the founders, about the kind of fun programming that you guys get to do, working with different languages and whatnot. So, obviously right now, I'm starting out with Golang. We don't have a Ruby SDK, because OmniAuth provider is the thing that most people use. But, there's also PHP, and some Java, so I'm just looking forward to being able to do a bunch of different languages.Josh:Yeah. That's awesome. Yeah. We don't know anything about SDK teams, Honeybadger. But yeah, it sounds like we have very similar jobs at the moment. So that's cool. We'll have to trade tips at some point. Yeah.Ben:Yeah, I'm excited that you're there, because I'm definitely going to hit you up on the SAML stuff, because SAML's a pain in the tuchus yeah, I'm sure you'll have some insights from your time there.Mike:Well, that was how I was even open-minded to talking to Okta, was the recruiter had contacted me and I think actually it was the recruiter... I don't know the structure of how this works, but a lot of companies have a prospecting recruiter. And I think that a veteran oriented prospecting recruiter contacted me. And so being a veteran, I'll usually entertain those cold calls. And so then when I was at Desk, I wrote... So Desk was a big Rails monolith. I wrote a microservice to break some of the SSO off of the monolith itself. And in writing the API documentation that was on desk.com, I actually used Okta as one of the examples as a SSO identity provider using SAML. So yeah, I have had a little bit of experience from the outside of Okta with SAML. And so maybe I'll have more experience here to answer your questions.Ben:Yeah. We'll have to have you back and we can just do a whole hour on that. It's a fun world.Josh:After we do an hour on SDKs.Ben:Yeah, and your code that you wrote for us still lives on in Honeybadger.Josh:Yeah. Was it the webpack? That was some of the work, right?Ben:Some of it, yeah.Mike:Yep.Josh:Yeah.Ben:And some GitHub integration work.Josh:And the integrations, yeah.Mike:Yeah, well if I remember correctly with the GitHub integration, I did do some GitHub integration, and it tickled your enthusiasm, Ben, and then I think you went in and like refactored that a little bit.Ben:Well, if you have a monolith like Redo that's been around for as long as ours has, things don't... It's like, what was that Theseus' ship, it's goes around the world but you replace things as it goes, and it's never the same app, right?Mike:Yeah, that's the thing, we had discussed this in the prelude around just software engineering in general and how hard it is to maintain a monolith, especially as a company grows and as developers come rolling into a project, you get all of these... Over time you get engineers with different goals, different techniques, different styles of touching your code base, to the point that it becomes very hard to maintain a project. And I think, I don't know if we're going to talk about Heroku at all, but I think that Heroku suffers from a little bit of that, where there's very few original Heroku that are involved in the runtime at least. And I just came from being on the runtime in the control plane. And, definitely, the code base there is... There's maybe one or two people that are still around that have touched that code base from the beginning.Ben:Yeah, let's dive into that, because that's fascinating to me. I know that there's been chatter on Twitter recently that people feel that Heroku is stagnated. That they haven't really brought a lot of innovative stuff to market recently. I remember, actually a funny story, I'm going to tell it myself. I can't remember what year this was, it were way... I don't know, I don't know, early 2000s. I was sitting as part of a focus group, and I can't reveal a lot of information because secrecy and stuff. But anyway, I was part of this focus group and I was asked as part of this group, what as a developer working on Ruby applications and Rails applications, what I thought about this new thing called Heroku. And had it explained to me, "Oh, you just get push", and "Blah, blah, blah", and I poo-pooed the idea. I was like, "Nah, I'm not interested", because I already know how to deploy stuff. I've got Mongrel, I got a DVS.Josh:Say Mongrel.Ben:I know how to use SEP, why do I need this? Like Math, never going to catch on. And so don't follow me for investing advice.Mike:Yeah, totally.Josh:I got my Linodes.Mike:Yeah. Or even back then, I wrote all of my own chef, so I got my own recipes I can-Ben:Right, exactly.Mike:... bare metal at will.Ben:Exactly. So, what do you think, you've been at Heroku, you've seen this process of people having to maintain this code base over a long period of time. What are some tips for people who might be a little earlier on the process? Looking down the road, what do you suggest people think about for having a more maintainable application?Mike:That's interesting. I really think that there is not one size fits all, and actually some of the things that are specific to Heroku, and actually to desk.com when I was there previously, that some of the issues actually stem from Salesforce culture and the way that Salesforce manages its businesses. And so, I guess the thing that I've always liked about Rails, specifically, is that the conventions that are used in Rails, you can drop an experienced Rails developer pretty much into any Rails app and they're going to know the basic conventions. And that saves you so much time to ramping up and bringing your experience into a project. Whereas when you get into bespoke software, then you run into well what were the architectural design patterns 10 years ago compared to now? How much drift has there been in libraries and the language, depending.Mike:And so that is... I don't... That's a very hard question to nail down in a specific way. I would just say in spit balling this, conventions are very important, I would say. So as long as you have a conventions using a framework, then I think that you'll get to go a long ways. However, if you start to use a framework, then you get the everything is a nail and I'm going to use my hammer framework on that. Which is its own thing that I've seen in Ruby, where if you start a project with Rails, I don't think everybody realizes this, but you are essentially going to be doing a type of software development that is in the mindset of Basecamp, right? And if you have an app that is not quite like Basecamp, and then you start to try to extending Rails to do something different, then you're going to start running into issues. And I think that... It makes me sad when I hear people talk poorly about Rails, because oftentimes people are just pushing it into a direction that it's not built to do. Whether they're, like in the old days, like monkey-patching libraries, or whatnot.Ben:Yeah, I think we saw that with the rise of Elixir and Phoenix, right? José just got frustrated with wanting to do some real time stuff. And that really wasn't the wheelhouse for Rails, right? And so he went and built Elixir and Phoenix, and built on top of that. And that became a better hammer for that particular nail than Rails, right? So now if you come into a new project and you're like, "Well, I'm going to do a lot of highly concurrent stuff", well, okay, maybe Rails isn't the best solution. Maybe you should go look at Elixir and Phoenix instead.Mike:Yeah. Yeah. So, with Heroku, I just want to say that it was so awesome to work at Heroku, and the day that I got a job offer to work there, it was like... I still, if I'm having a bad day, I still think about that, and the... I've never used hard drugs, but I would think that somebody that was cocaine high, that's probably what I was feeling when I got the offer from Heroku. I started using Heroku in 2009, and it has a story within our community, it's highly respected. And so I just want to say that I still think very highly of Heroku, and if I was to be doing just a throwaway project, and I just want to write some code and do git push main, or git push Heroku main, then I would definitely do that.Mike:And we were... And I'm not very experienced with the other kinds of competitors right now. I think, like you pointed him out, is it Vercel and Render?Ben:Render. Mm-hmm (affirmative).Mike:Yeah. So I can't really speak to them. I can really just speak to Heroku and some of the very specific things that go on there. I think one of the issues that Heroku suffers from is not the technology itself, but just the Salesforce environment. Because at Salesforce, everything eventually has to be blue, right? And so, Heroku, I don't think they ever could really figure out the right thing to do with Heroku. As well as, the other thing about enterprise software is that if I'm selling Salesforce service cloud or whatever, I'm selling, essentially, I'm selling seats of software licenses. And there's no big margin in selling Compute, because if I'm buying Compute, I expect to be using that.Mike:And so, as a salesperson, I'm not incented to sell Heroku that much because there's just not margins for me in the incentive structure that they have at sales within Salesforce. So I think that's the biggest thing that Heroku has going against it, is that it's living in a Salesforce environment. And as, I guess, a owner of Salesforce being that I have Salesforce stock, I would hope that they would maximize their profits and actually sell Heroku. Who knows, maybe a bunch of developers get together and actually buy the brand and spin that off. That would be the best thing, because I think that Salesforce would probably realize a lot more value out of Heroku just by doing that, even if there's some sort of profit sharing, and then not have to deal with all the other things.Ben:Yeah, that's really interesting. Yeah. The thing about billing, and then selling per user, versus the compute- That's definitely a different world. It's a totally different mindset. And I think Josh that we have now been given a directive step. We should acquire Heroku as part of Honeybadger.Josh:I was going to say, maybe we can acquire it with all of our Doge profits in five or 10 years from now.Mike:Well, yeah. Somebody spin a Heroku coin, a ERC20 token on Ethereum and get everybody to dump their Ethereum into this token.Josh:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Mike:Get that pot of money together. And then that is the Heroku Foundation. Yeah, exactly.Josh:Okay, yeah.Mike:The Heroku Foundation that buys the Heroku brand. I know that we're laughing about it, but actually this is what is possible today. And, I was telling Ben... Well, let me just say a couple of things about the FounderQuest and how it relates to me, is I've been listening to FounderQuest from the first episode, and I'm an only child, and I like to listen to podcasts. So I'll be on my afternoon walk, and I'll be hearing you guys talk, and I'm having this conversation along with you guys listening to the podcasts.Mike:And so, I think, in January, you guys were talking about, or maybe Ben was talking about, $30,000 Bitcoin, and you guys just had your yucks and laughs about it. And it actually made me think critically about this, because I've been involved with Bitcoin since about 2012, and it's like, "Do I have a tinfoil hat on?" Or what do I think? And so, I'm not joking about this, listening to you guys actually has helped me concretely come up with how I feel about this. And first off, I think, I'm bullish on technology. And this is the first epiphany that I had, is all of us have had a career close to Linux, close to Ruby, building backend services, close to virtualization and orchestration. Fortunately, that's been my interest, and fortunately that's been where our industry has gone. And so, when Bitcoin came out, as technologists, all you ever hear, if you don't know anything about Bitcoin, you just hear currency. And you're thinking internet money, you're not thinking about this as a technologist.Mike:And so that was the thing. I wish that Bitcoin had been talked about as a platform, or a framework.Josh:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Mike:And not even called it coin. Because that confuses the issue-Josh:The whole coin thing, just... Yeah.Mike:Yeah, totally. And mining the metaphors-Josh:That alone.Mike:... just totally throws everything off. Because we are talking, we're laughing about it, but this is really possible today. We could come up with a Foundation to buy Heroku with a cryptocurrency, and it would... Yeah. So that's one thing that Ben helped me realize in my thinking around Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. And I think I'm just bullish on technology. And so to me, again, across our career, there's been so much change. And why would we look at Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies any differently than any other kind of technology? Even a hundred dollar bill with all the holograms on it, that is a kind of financial technology. And so we're just talking about a digital technology, we're not talking about coins I guess.Josh:That's the appeal, a lot of the Altcoins, right? They give everyone a way to invest in those companies, whereas before you would have to... Whatever, be an accredited investor or something to be able to get involved. Is that part of the appeal? I'm probably showing what I know about crypto, which is very little, but I'm excited to... Yeah, maybe you can...Mike:Yeah. Yeah, so I feel like these projects are... I'm not a VC, and I'm not an insider, but from what I can see from afar, in Silicon Valley there's a close group of people that have access to all of these ideas. And there's Angel clubs, and VC clubs, and whatnot, that are funding these startups. And to me, I feel like these crypto projects are the same kind of thing, except for they're just available to the public. And so, I think if I was speaking to another technologist that was interested in cryptocurrencies, is you probably need to get your hands on some of the technology in order to get experience with it.Mike:And so if that means you figure out how to maybe mine some coin on your laptop, or whatever, or you actually pay for it, you should at least have some in your possession, and at least learn about the custodial part of it. Also, there's different software libraries now to actually do programming against it, and platforms, I believe. So that'd be another way to at least tickle your curiosity, is by actually touching the technology and not thinking about the value. So yeah.Ben:Yeah. That, to me, that's one of the most interesting things about the whole coin thing. My younger son is really interested in the crypto space, in the coin and in the other parts of a distributed ledger, and what does that mean, and how does that work? And before I heard about NFTs, he was talking about NFTs. And so it's really interesting to me to see this coming from him. Just yesterday, we had a conversation about CRDTs, right? Because we're talking about how do you merge transactions that are happening in distributed fashion? Right? I was like, "Oh yeah", and it's so weird to have my teenage sons' world colliding with my world in this way.Josh:Yeah.Ben:But it's a lot of fun. And I've got to say, Mike, I got to give you back some credit, talking about the whole coin thing. As you've heard, we're pretty coin skeptical here at Honeybadger, the Founders, but you made a comment in our pre-show conversation. And maybe you didn't make this explicitly, but maybe it's just a way that I heard it. But I think... Well what I heard was, and maybe you actually said this, was basically think about this like an index fund, right? You put dollar cost to averaging, right? You put some money into coin, you put a little bit, it's not going to be your whole portfolio, right? But you don't treat it like a gamble, and you just treat it like an investment, like you would other things that may appreciate in value. And of course you may not.Ben:And so, as a result, I decided, "Okay, I can do that. I can put a little bit of my portfolio into coins". So just this week, and this is the funny part, just this week-Josh:I'm just finding this out now, by the way.Ben:Yeah, yeah. Josh is like... I told my wife about this last night and she was like, "What's Josh going to say?" "Like, I don't know". So anyway, just this week I put a little bit of money into Bitcoin and Ethereum. And that was... When did Elon do his thing about Bitcoin? Was that Thursday morning?Josh:Oh yeah.Ben:I bought, two hours before Elon did his thing, and Bitcoin lost 15% of its value.Mike:That's awesome.Ben:I'm like, "It's okay. It's okay, I'm just putting-Josh:Yeah, you don't sell, it doesn't matter.Mike:What was your emotion? What was your emotion?Ben:Yeah, totally. Yeah. In fact, my first buy, I used Coinbase. And Coinbase was like, "Oh, do you want to do this periodically?" I'm like, "Yes, I do. Every month". Boom.Mike:Oh.Ben:I went ahead and set that up like so, yeah.Mike:Oh, I did not know you could do that.Ben:I'm in it to win it, man.Mike:You should get a hardware wallet. That's the next thing, is you need to learn how to handle your own custody, so-Josh:Right, yeah. You got to... Yeah.Mike:Not leave it on the exchange. Interesting.Josh:Get those hard drives.Mike:Yeah.Josh:Yeah. Ben's a veteran indexer though. So you can handle some dips. Some volatility.Ben:Yeah. Yeah.Josh:I actually, I did make some money off of Bitcoin back in the day, and probably if I would've just held onto it, I would've made a lot more, of course.Mike:Same.Josh:So I accidentally... Back, I don't know when this was, it was maybe five years ago or something, when Bitcoin was going through one of its first early hype cycles, and I was like, "I'll check it". I was learning about it, of course. And so I went and bought some and I think I ran a blockchain Elixir app that someone made, to see how the transactions work and stuff. Read some books on Bitcoin. But I bought some Bitcoin, I can't remember how much, but just left it. I think this was after Coinbase had launched, I'm pretty sure I bought it through Coinbase. But yeah, I just left it, and then that was when it was in the first huge push of Bitcoin where it went up to 20,000 or something. And I remembered that I had it, and I went and looked and oh yeah, I made five grand or something. I put hardly anything into it initially. So I forget what I actually bought with that money. I just sold it and it's like cool, free money.Mike:So you just sold it this year? Or you sold it...Josh:No, I sold it back-Mike:In 17?Josh:I think I sold it at 20... Yeah, this would have been at 17 that I actually sold it, probably.Mike:Did you report it on your taxes, your capital gains?Josh:I did, yes. Yeah, I did.Ben:That's the benefit of having an accountant, because your accountant reminds you, "You know what? You did have some Bitcoin transactions, you should probably look at those".Josh:Can I say on here that I actually put some of it through a Bitcoin tumbler though, just to see how those work?Mike:Yeah, I mean...Josh:And that was a very small amount of money, but I didn't actually report that on my taxes. Because I think I actually forgot where it was or something.Ben:You'll have to explain what a Bitcoin tumbler is.Josh:So a Bitcoin tumbler... Well, I'll try, and then maybe Mike might explain it better, but a Bitcoin tumbler is basically how you anonymize your Bitcoin transaction. If you have some Bitcoin and you want to buy some drugs on the dark web or something, you go and you send your Bitcoin to this tumbler, and then it distributes it to a bunch of random Bitcoin addresses that it gives you. And then you have those addresses, and they're anonymized, because they've been sent through a bunch of peoples' wallets, or something like that.Mike:Yep. That's basically it.Ben:So it's basically money laundering.Josh:Yeah, it's laundering.Mike:Yeah. But if your privacy... I mean, okay-Josh:Yeah, no, I get it. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Because part of the appeal of Bitcoin is some people are just like, "Oh yeah, good money, credit card transactions are so... The governments are recording them and stuff, the NSA probably has a database of them". So Bitcoin is anonymous, but it's not. It's not anonymous. And yeah. So that's why people do this, right?Mike:Yeah. Well that, to me, that's if you want to... So the value of Bitcoin, if you want to get bullish on the value of Bitcoin, the traditional outlook is yeah, the silk road was going on and there's all this illegal stuff going on. Therefore it must be bad. But actually, to me, that's the thing, you know it's good if there's illicit stuff going on, because what's the number one currency that's used right now for illicit transactions? It's dirty US dollar bills. And if you're a drug dealer in central South America, you are collecting, dollar bills United States. You're paying some sort of transport probably at 10, 15% cost to get those dollars back to wherever you're going to hold them. And so, if you're using Bitcoin, you're probably not going to pay that fee. So, to me, it's like okay, that actually proves, at least in my mind, that there is value. That it's being used, right?Josh:Yeah. And you also, you don't want to see... Some people are fanatics about cash going away, even just because as more people move to digital transactions, whether it's just through, whatever, traditional networks, or through crypto. People are using less and less cash. And I feel like, whatever... Like Richard Stallman, he pays for everything in cash though, because he thinks that cash is going to go away someday. And that's a problem for privacy, because you do want a way to pay for things in private in some cases.Mike:Yep. I agree.Josh:Yeah.Ben:My only real beef with Bitcoin, well, aside from the whole requiring power plants just to do a transaction, is that there is Badger coin. This company that is named Honeybadger, it's all about Bitcoin. And they have these ATM's in Canada, and we constantly get support requests from people.Mike:Oh really?Josh:Is this the reason that we've been so down on cryptocurrencies in the past?Ben:I think so.Josh:Because ever since the beginning, since people started making coins, Badger coin came out and then it's been our primary exposure to be honest.Ben:It has been, yeah.Josh:Throughout the past... I don't know how many years it's been. Has it been six-Ben:Yeah, six-Josh:... to eight years?Ben:Yeah, something like that. It's been nuts.Josh:I'd say.Mike:You should send them an invoice, and they actually-Ben:Yeah, so what happens is they had these kiosks where you can buy Bitcoin, right? You put your real money in, and you get your fake money out, right? And the name on the top of the kiosk is Honeybadger. So, someone puts in some money, real money, and they don't get their fake money, then all of a sudden they're upset, right?Mike:Yeah.Ben:And so they... For whatever reason, it doesn't go through, right, I don't know how this works, I've never bought Bitcoin at a kiosk. But so, they're like, "Okay, Honeybadger". And so they Google Honeybadger, and the first result for Honeybadger is us. And so they're like, "Oh, here's a phone number I can call". And they call us. And they're like, "Where's my Bitcoin?" That's like, "Uh, I really can't help you with that".Josh:They do.Ben:"You stole my Bitcoin". It's like, "No, that's not us".Josh:Something just occurred to me. I wonder how many of them are just confused over the fact that Bitcoin transactions can take a while to arrive now, right? It's not always instantaneous, where it used to be a lot faster, but now I know that it can take a while to clear. So I wonder how many of those people are emailing us in the span... Maybe that's why they eventually always go away and we don't hear from them again. Maybe it's not that they're getting help, but it's just that their Bitcoins are arriving. Yeah. I have a feeling that there's some sort of... I'm guessing these are mostly regular normies using, and interacting with this very highly technical product and experience, and even if you're walking up to a kiosk, but there's still a highly technical aspect of it that, like you said Mike, people are thinking coin, they're thinking... The way this maps to their brain is it's like dollar bills. So they're looking at it like an ATM. Yep.Mike:Yeah. When it comes to cryptocurrency and the technology, I don't want to have to think about custody, or any of that other kinds of stuff. It'll be successful when it just is happening, I'm not thinking about it. They're already... In some... I don't know all of the different mobile devices, but I do carry out an iPhone. And so, the wallet on iPhone is pretty seamless now, right? And so I'm not thinking about how that technology is working. I had to associate an Amex with it originally, right? But once I've done that, then all I do is click my button to pay. And there you go. And so I do think that the cryptocurrency technology has a long way to go towards that, because if normal people, the non nerds, have to think about it, then it's not going to be useful. Because in the end-Josh:Yeah.Mike:... humans use tools, right? And so, whatever the tool is, they're going to use it especially if it's easy and it makes their life easier.Ben:So what I really want to know, Mike, is what are your feelings about Dogecoin? Are you bullish on Doge?Mike:Well, I'll answer that, but I wanted to come back to the bit about the NFT, and just talking about the possibilities with technology. And I think that you guys could profit from this.Ben:I like where it's going.Mike:You'll have to do some more research. But I think what you could do... See, I love the origin story of Honeybadger. And maybe not everybody knows about the Honeybadger meme from what is... When was this, two thousand...Ben:2012? 2011?Mike:Yeah, okay. So not everybody... Yeah, bot everybody knows about the meme. I guess, just go Google-Ben:I can link it in the show notes.Josh:It's long dead. This meme is long dead.Mike:Is it? Well it's still awesome. I still love it.Josh:It is.Mike:So, there's so many facets of this that I love. The first one is that... Can I name names on competitors-Ben:Of course.Mike:... in the origins? Okay. So the first one was is that Airbrake, an exception reporting service, was doing a poor job with their customer service. And you guys were like, "We're working on this project, we need exception reporting. It's not working". It's like, "Well, can we just take their library, and build our own backend?" Right? And to me, that is beautiful. And in thinking about this episode, in Heroku, the same opportunity lies for an aspiring developer out there where you could just take the Heroku CLI and point it at your own false backend until you figure out all of the API calls that happen. And I don't know, you have that backed by Kubernetes, or whatever orchestration framework is...Mike:There is the possibility that you could do the same Honeybadger story with Airbrake SDK, as there is with the Heroku CLI. So that's the first thing I love about the Honeybadger story, and the fact the name goes along with the fact that Airbrake had poor customer support, and you guys just were like, "F it, we're going to build our own exception reporting service". Now, in the modern context with NFTs is... I have old man experience with the NFTs in that GIFs, or GIFs, and JPEGs, this is BS that people are gouging for profit. However, the technology of the NFT... This is the thing that I think is beautiful, is that... And I'm not sure which of the NFTs does this, but there is the possibility that you could be the originator of a digital object, and then you sell that digital object. And then as that digital object is traded, then you, as the, I guess, the original creator, you can get a percentage of the sales for the lifetime of that digital asset.Ben:Yeah.Mike:And, I'm not sure which of the NFTs allows that, but that is one of the things, that's one of the value propositions in NFT. So what I was thinking is if you guys did an NFT on the shaw of the original Honeybadger Ruby SDK check-in, that this could be the thing that you guys have an experiment with, is you have real skin in the game, you're playing with the technology and see if that works. And, let me know if you do that, because I might try to buy it. So, we'll see.Josh:Well, we've already got a buyer, why wouldn't we?Mike:Yeah, so..Ben:Indeed, yeah.Josh:See I was thinking maybe you could own various errors or something in Honeybadger.Mike:Yeah, I mean... Whatever digital signature you want to... Whatever you want to sign, and then assign value to.Josh:Yeah, we could NFT our Exceptional Creatures.Mike:Yeah.Josh:Have you seen that, Mike? Have you seen that project?Mike:Yep, yep.Josh:Okay.Mike:I'm well aware of that. Yep.Ben:Yeah. I'm thinking what about open source maintainers, right? Let's say you have this project and someone really wants a particular feature, right? Or they're really happy about a particular feature that you've already done, right? You can sell them that shaw, that commit, that put it into name, right?Mike:Yeah, totally.Ben:You are the proud owner of this feature. Thank you.Mike:Yeah, totally. Yeah, I was hoping that I would come with some ideas. I hope someday in the future that I run into somebody and it's like, "Oh, we heard that podcasts were where ideas were free ideas that were worth a lot of money were thrown about. And I did this project, and now I'm retired. Thank you, Mike". Honeybadgers.Josh:Wait, so Ben are you saying that, so as a committer, so say I commit something to Rails, submit a PR, so then I own that PR once it's merged and it would be like I could sell that then to someone? Is that along the lines of what you're saying?Ben:No, I'm thinking the owner of the project. So, if you commit something to Rails, and you're really excited about it, and you for some reason want to have a trophy of that commit-Josh:Right.Ben:... on a plaque on the wall, right? Then the Rails core group could sell you that token.Josh:Okay. Gotcha.Ben:That trophy, that certificate, like, "Yep. This is your thing. Commissioned by..." It's like naming a star, right?Josh:Yeah.Ben:You buy the rights to a star, and it's fake stuff, right? We're naming stars. But that's the same idea.Josh:Yeah. So you could use that same idea to incentivize open-source contribution. So if you make the PR to Rails and it gets merged, you get this NFT for the PR merge, which you could then actually profit for if it was... Say it was, I don't know, turbo links or something, whatever. Years later, when it's a huge thing and everyone in Rails is using it, maybe Mike's going to come along and be like, "Hey, I'll buy... I want to own the PR for turbo links".Ben:Right.Josh:Yeah. And of course then, you, as the owner, would also profit from any sale between parties later on too. You'd get that little percentage.Mike:Yeah. Well, so when somebody comes up with committer coin, just remember me, I want to airdrop of some committer coin.Josh:We have a name. We've got a name for it. Commit coin.Ben:I've got a new weekend project ahead of me.Mike:Yeah.Josh:Cool. Well, that helps me understand NFTs.Ben:Yeah, I really like the idea of being able to sell ownership rights to a digital asset. That I think a good idea. I don't know that the current implementation that we see on the news is a great implementation of that idea. Buying the rights for a copy of a JPEG, it feels kind of sketchy to me. But maybe there's some sort of, I don't know, PDF document that has some sort of value for some reason. And you can give that, sell that to someone. And to me, it's not so much about the profit, or the transaction, it's the ownership. You can say I am the owner of this thing. Yeah, there can be copies all over the place, but I'm the person that has the ownership, quote unquote, of this thing.Josh:Yeah, yeah. But then you've got to define value Ben. What is value? Okay, so, what makes a PDF more valuable than a JPEG?Mike:Yeah. Yeah. Bring this back to Dogecoin, and value propositions, and whatnot. What is valuable? When you're talking about the value of a JPEG, this reminded me of a conversation I was having with my son. He's 10 years old and he wanted some money to buy, I don't know what it was, and old man voice came out of me and it's like, "That's BS. I don't think that's valuable". And he looked at me and he was like, "It's valuable to me". And it's like, "Oh, you just put a dagger in my heart. I'm killing your dream". And one person's value may not be another person's value. So, on the Dogecoin, that's interesting. Dogecoin is very interesting to me, because I feel like I'm in a quantum state with a Dogecoin where it is a joke, but at the same time it apparently it has value.Mike:And I don't know where I stand on that threshold. I know how to trade Dogecoin. And I know the behavior of Dogecoin, and the behaviors, from a trading standpoint, has changed substantially in the last six months. Before it was a pump and dump kind of thing. Well, actually, you know what? When Dogecoin was first created, its purpose was highlighted by the community. People in podcast land don't realize this, but I'm wearing a 2017 Dogecoin shirt from when the Dogecoin community sponsored the number 98 NASCAR. And the thing of the community was like, "Oh, we have all this money, and we're just being altruistic and we're giving it away". And so they were exercising their belief with this currency, right?Mike:And from then, till now, there was a bit of a cycle to Dogecoin where you could, if you acquired Dogecoin for say under a hundred Satoshis, this is the Dogecoin BTC pair, that was actually a good buy. Just wait for the next pump when somebody does something, and Dogecoin goes over 200, or 300 Satoshis, and then you dump it. And that's basically what I did on this in the last six months. I had a small bag of Dogecoin waiting for the next pump and dump. And I actually did that, but it kept on getting pumped, and then it would stabilize. And then now we're at the point where apparently Elon Musk and Mark Cuban are saying that there's value to it.Mike:And to me, I actually put a lot of credence to that, because these are two public persons that they cannot... If they're pumping things in the public domain, then they have risk, right? And so you can't be those two people, and be pumping, and not run the risk of the FTC of the United States government coming in and saying, "Hey, why were you doing this?" So there's the, I guess for me, a small bit of a guarantee that maybe there is something to Dogecoin.Josh:Yeah. See, the way I think, when you first started you were saying it is a joke, but you're in this dual state, and my initial or immediate thought was it is a joke, but this is the internet, and the internet loves to make silly things real.Mike:Yeah, yeah.Josh:Especially these days.Ben:Yeah. It's pretty funny for all those people that made a bunch of money on GameStop, right? Yeah.Mike:Yeah. Well that's the thing, is in Dogecoin, Doge is, of itself, from a meme from the same time period as Honeybadger, right? The Iba Shinu doggie, right? So, the other thing I don't understand, or the thing that I understand but I don't know how to quantify it for myself, is that, to me... So there's no pre-mine on Dogecoin. There's no one person that owns a lot of Dogecoin from the beginning. Whereas if we're talking about Ethereum, Vitalik Buterin, the founder, or one of the founders of Ethereum, they pre-mined Ethereum, and there's a ton of Ethereum that's owned by the founders. Whereas you compare that to, say, Litecoin, Charlie Lee cloned Bitcoin and created Litecoin. He sold all of his Litecoin. I believed in him when he said he's sold it all. He's a software engineer, just like us. He was Director of Engineering at Coinbase.Mike:He doesn't seem like he's wearing tinfoil hat out there, doing conspiracies. So when he says that he sold his coin in 2017, all of his Litecoin, I totally believe that. Yet today, he is the chairperson of the Litecoin foundation. And so, to me... I actually do have, I placed some value in the benevolence of Litecoin and Dogecoin, because there's not any one person that actually controls it. I guess Charlie Lee, he probably has a stronger voice than most. But he doesn't control the levers.Josh:Not financially.Mike:Yeah.Josh:Yeah.Mike:Yeah. And so then with Dogecoin... So Dogecoin, it'll be awesome if it gets above a dollar, but the structure of Dogecoin will be such as they cannot maintain that.Josh:Right.Mike:Because it's an inflation-Josh:There's no cap, right?Mike:Right.Josh:Yeah.Mike:It's inflation. And so, I don't know the number, I think it's a million Dogecoin are minted every day. So, 10 years from now, if Dogecoin is worth a dollar still, then that means Bitcoin will be worth a lot more than that. So I guess that'd be awesome if Dogecoin stays a dollar. However, the point I'm trying to make is actually there is value in having an inflationary currency, especially if we're talking about living in the structure of our current financial... The way that our current financial markets work, where there is an inflation.Mike:And so if I want to be transacting with a digital currency, I don't want to have to be, say, like having an Argentina kind of moment where my one Dogecoin is worth $5 American today, and then maybe only $3 American a week from now. So to me, I think there is value in Dogecoin in that it's inflationary, and that it will not be as susceptible to speculation bubbles as other currencies. And so, I don't know if that answers your questions on the value of Dogecoin, but those are a couple of reasons why I think that Dogecoin is valuable. Now, am I going to be holding a big bag of Dogecoin in 2022? Probably not. Just to be honest.Ben:We're all about honesty at Honeybadger. I love the episodes where we have to have a disclaimer, this is not financial advice. Please consult competent professionals before investing, et cetera, et cetera. Mike, it has been a delight to have you with us. We appreciate your counterbalance to our coin pessimism that we have amongst the Honeybadger fan base.Josh:Yeah, I think we needed this.Ben:Yeah.Josh:We really needed this.Ben:We really did.Josh:So thank you.Ben:It's been good.Mike:Yeah. Oh, I got one more idea out there. Hopefully, somebody can run with this, is I've been trying to get motivated to do some experimentation with the Bitcoin lightning network. We didn't really talk about these a layer two solutions for scaling, but I think that there is a lot of potential in coming up with an interesting project that lays within the Litecoin* network, it has its value in and of itself, but there's a secondary value of being a note on the Litecoin* network where if there's transactions going through your node, let's say, I don't know how you'd instrument this, but let's say that Honeybadger actually was... That you guys were taking your payments across your own lightning node, then all of the transactions that are going across the lightning network, you're getting a small fee, right? So I think that there's the possibility of a micropayments kind of play there, like for instance, paying by the exception. I mean, literally-*Editor's note from Mike - "in my excitement talking about the Lighting Network I slipped and said Litecoin a couple of times between Lightning Network. Lightning Network is a layer 2 protocol that is primarily intended for scaling Bitcoin and that was what I meant. However, Lightning can be implemented to run on top of Litecoin and Ethereum."Josh:That has come up that has come up in the past, I think at one point.Mike:You can't do micro payments on a credit card.Josh:Yeah.Mike:Right? But you can do micropayments on lightening network. And I'm not selling you guys on this, but I'm saying that there's going to be some nerd out there that it's like, "Oh my God micropayments are here, I can do micropayments on lighting network". And then they're going to do well on that product, but then they're also going to do well on the commission that they're earning on payments going through their node.Josh:This could be used for usage base software as a service billing model.Ben:Totally. And then you get the skim off the top, just like a good affiliate does.Mike:Yes.Ben:I love it.Mike:Yes.Ben:I love it. All right. All right, Mike, we're going to have to do some scheming together. Well, any final words, any parting words besides go by all the Dogecoin that you can?Mike:Yeah. Don't put all your money into the cryptocurrencies. Yeah.Josh:Seems like good advice.Ben:Be smart

During this episode, Dr. Janet Patterson, Chief of Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology Service at the VA Northern California Health Care System, talks with Dr. Michael Biel about theories of motivation and their application and value in aphasia rehabilitation.  Guest Bio: Michael Biel is an Associate Professor in the Communication Disorders and Sciences department of California State University, Northridge and senior speech-language pathologist at UCLA Medical Center.  From 1993 to 2012, Michael was a full-time speech-language pathologist working in the Los Angeles and Pittsburgh VA healthcare systems.  Michael is board certified in neurologic communication disorders from the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences and specializes in working with persons with aphasia. In today’s episode you will hear about: Self-Determination Theory, and Flow, and Aphasia rehabilitation Psychological nutrients of competency, autonomy, and relatedness, including a short list of actions one can take to satisfy these nutrients Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and therapeutic engagement as a process. Interview Transcript Dr. Janet Patterson:  Welcome to Aphasia Access Conversations. Today, I am delighted to be speaking with my dear friend, research partner, and pioneer in the study of engagement, motivation and aphasia. Dr. Michael Biel. Dr. Biel earned his master's degree in Communicative Disorders from California State University Northridge, and clinical doctorate degree in medical speech language pathology from the University of Pittsburgh. Mike dedicates much of his clinical practice and research efforts to understanding the science of motivation, and how to translate well established theories in the psychology literature to clinical practice and research in aphasia rehabilitation. He also has an interest in the role of the arts and humanities in adult neurorehabilitation, and with his wife, Francie Schwarz, started a book club for persons with aphasia. You can hear about that book club in Aphasia Access Podversation # 12, where Francie describes the aphasia book club within the Los Angeles Public Library System.  Before joining the faculty at CSUN, Dr. Biel worked as a speech-language pathologist for the VA Healthcare System, and the UCLA Medical Center. Mike is Board Certified in Neurologic Communication Disorders from the Academy of Neurologic Communication Disorders and Sciences or ANCDS.  Welcome, Mike. I am pleased to have a conversation with you today, and to turn the tables on you so to speak, as you are typically a podcast interviewer with ANCDS. Today you are our aphasia expert on motivation and engagement. Thank you for talking with me today about aphasia, rehabilitation, motivation, and engaging patients, family and clinicians in the treatment enterprise. Dr. Michael Biel: Great, thank you so much for having me. Janet: Mike, I would like to start our conversation by asking you about motivation, and how we might think about it as a concept in rehabilitation. People scatter their conversations with the word motivation, attributing all sorts of their actions and reactions to motivation or the lack thereof. Knowing that this is a vast topic, can you help our listeners develop a frame of reference for thinking about how motivation fits into aphasia rehabilitation? Mike: Well, Janet, you're right. Motivation is a broad term. I think one author said that motivation is the why behind all human behavior. Some years ago, a paper was published, exploring the definition of motivation, and I think the author catalogued something like 200 different definitions. In its simplest form, I think we could say that motivation is the energy that causes us to do something, to act. Typically, whether motivation is effective, the many theories of motivation, are regarding its strength. The stronger the motivation, the more someone's going to pursue their goals and, and persist. Another way to think about motivation, one that I've kind of subscribed to comes from Self-determination Theory, and they focus more on the quality of motivation. They acknowledge that the strength is important, but they argue that more than the strength the quality is important and in its simplest terms, they define motivation as being either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is motivation where we're moved to act, because the activity itself is enjoyable, interesting, or satisfying. When people play video games that would probably be an example of intrinsic motivation. I use the example of going dancing, right, we dance because we'd like to dance not because we're expecting some kind of outcome after we're done. And so, if we are expecting an outcome, or if we have a goal in mind, then that would be considered extrinsic motivation. When I teach my students about motivation, they are in some ways, very tied to this notion that intrinsic motivation is good, an extrinsic motivation is bad. Extrinsic motivation is not necessarily bad. Much of adult life is characterized by us having to do things that we don't always enjoy. But if we're working towards a valued goal, and we're doing something because we desire to achieve that goal, then we're in a positive state of motivation, I guess you could say. Self-determination Theory divides extrinsic motivation into controlled and autonomous forms. In controlled forms of motivation, we’re acting out of some pressure to act. That can be due to some external threat, such as the client in acute rehab, who's told that if they don't participate, more, there'll be discharged, or even the pressure to secure a reward. And in this case, the care and the positive regard of a health care provider. Even we can put pressure on ourselves, wherein we have this “should” voice in our head. In Self-Determination Theory, this is thought of as some recommendation, or belief or value or goal that's been internalized, but to a shallow degree. In a better way of saying it, the authentic self is not really integrated and identified with this goal, and so it simply remains kind of a “should” voice in our head. Janet: That's fascinating, all the ways to think about motivation, several different perspectives. As I was listening to you, I was thinking about all of them, or at least, most, I think, have in common, that you're motivated to engage in something behavior, whether it's intrinsically motivated, or extrinsically motivated. But let me ask you a little bit about motivation from the perspective of engagement in the rehab process, because you mentioned that as an example of using motivation to keep people engaged in that process. I looked at the definition of engagement and found these two examples. One is, the fact of being involved with something. And another that adds a psychosocial component specifically says emotional involvement or commitment, which is exactly what I think you were talking about in differentiating the kinds of motivation.  I also found this interesting description of how engagement feels when riding a horse. Now, I am not a horse person. However, this description resonates with me, and I wonder if it does with you as well. I think it has application in how we think about aphasia rehabilitation. Paraphrasing from the site, Happy-HorseTraining.com, and I bet you never thought that aphasia and happy horse training would be in the same sentence, but there they are. “There are different degrees of engagement, and it can come and go when we are writing in itself. It is a particular gymnastic state when the horse brings into action, a specific set of postural muscles, which fundamentally alter the dynamic of how he carries himself. It is only in this state that the horse is able to carry the rider in balance, and without the damaging effects that otherwise a rider inevitably has on the horse. This is why any educated rider who cares about their horse’s well-being will make engagement a priority when they ride. Apart from the fact that an unbalanced horse is never a pleasure to ride, nor is it safe. The engagement of the horse gives you the following sensations: you feel the power from the hind legs feeding underneath your seat, instead of pushing out behind, and you feel lifted up by the horse’s back underneath the saddle, instead of dropped into a hollow. Above all, engagement is an incredibly good feeling for both the horse and the rider, because we instinctively enjoy the feeling of balance and power. Instead of always focusing on what you are doing when you ride, start to become aware of the moments when it simply feels good. This is the most reliable way of finding the direction towards a correct engagement.” Several phrases in this description such as being engaged is a good feeling for both patient and clinicians (those are my words, replacing horse and rider) they resonate with me because I think we instinctively enjoy the feeling of balance and power. What do you think, Mike? Mike: I completely agree, I think we all have a sense of what that feels like. Some people might call it flow. And in fact, there's a theory of flow and in that theory, they say, essentially, that we get into a flow state, when there is a particular balance between our skills and ability, and the degree of challenge that we're facing such that if the challenge is too great for our skills, then flow is lost. If there isn't enough challenge to capture our attention, then we're not going to have the kind of absorption that we might have in that flow state. I certainly think most of us have had that experience working with a client where, particularly after we get to know them for a while, and we've developed some skill at facilitating their communication abilities, or some aspect of a treatment that we're working on and things are starting to flow. I know that when I was at the VA in Pittsburgh, working in their Intensive Aphasia Treatment Program, one of the things I noticed was that, we worked with people for a whole month, and after about a week or two, I felt as if I was really dialed in. I was like an instrument that was being tuned, so that I could really exquisitely cue my client and facilitate their production. When we think about engagement, people have written about engagement as an experience that is co-constructed, it is a process. People have also talked about it as a state, and flow state would be an example. In going back to Self-Determination Theory, intrinsic motivation would probably be very closely related to this idea of a flow state in the sense that when we're intrinsically motivated, we're drawn to do something because we get some satisfaction out of the very act of doing it. In Self-Determination Theory, the ingredients that contribute to intrinsic motivation are that our sense of competency is being satisfied, we're feeling effective. In fact, one of the details of that competency satisfaction is that there's an optimal challenge, that we're meeting, a challenge that is not too hard, not too easy. The other ingredient that's being addressed is we're it we're doing it truly out of our own choice freely, without a sense of pressure, because we genuinely want to. Janet: That makes a lot of sense to me as you talk about engagement and motivation, and how we can apply it in the aphasia rehabilitation sessions that we do in in our program planning. I wonder if you had any other additional thoughts you might want to share at the moment about how we can think theoretically, the theories of motivation and how we can apply those to our aphasia rehabilitation practice? Mike: Sure, you know, when I started off as a therapist, and I was thinking about ways to motivate my clients and to increase their engagement, I think I often thought about the stimulus. I thought about making the activity more interesting to them. I thought about incorporating their hobbies, or something like that. And I think that practices is fairly common. But again, it tends to be focused on the interesting aspects of the stimuli. I think when we look at theories of motivation, we realize that there are deeper needs, that people have needs that are going to provide more of this motivational energy and provide a kind of energy that sustains itself for longer. I think when we focus on some of these more superficial aspects, quite honestly, of therapy, they just don't have the staying power. And at least in Self-Determination Theory, there's a concept of basic psychological needs. In this theory, they've identified three, (1) the need to feel autonomous, to feel that what we're doing is truly of our own choice that we desire to do it, (2) the need to feel competent at doing those things that we want to do, and (3) the need to feel connected to other people, what's called the need for relatedness, to feel that there are people who care about us, there are people we care about, and that this care is unconditional. I think if therapy and rehabilitation is constructed in a way where these needs are satisfied, then we're going to have a lot more fuel for engagement, and particularly when we hit the different challenges that people have to cope with.  Now, the listener may be wondering, well, exactly how did these needs influence motivation, and, to be honest, I probably don't have time to go into that in much detail, but essentially, it contributes to motivation in two ways. Number one is, at least according to Self-Determination Theory, these needs are innate. We tend to be drawn towards activities, goals and contacts, where these needs are being satisfied. These needs fuel a process called internalization, which is the human tendency to kick in the recommendations that belief, the values, the practices of important people around us, and to identify with them and to make them our own beliefs and practices and what not.  I think in rehabilitation, we do a fair amount of teaching in one way or another and recommending and espousing certain beliefs and values that we think will serve people in positive ways. In the dynamics of a relationship and satisfying these needs, there is a kind of a security and a trust, and a nurturance that our clients feel and that increases the likelihood that they do take on what we have to offer and make it their own and, develop some ownership over it. Of course, that really is going to form the foundation of a more persistent engagement. Janet: Mike, in the past year during the pandemic, and its requirement for social isolation, which perhaps may continue for several months into the future, increased mental health challenges, such as depression, have appeared in the general population, and likely also in persons with aphasia. How do you think that fostering engagement in aphasia rehabilitation and in communication interaction can help persons with aphasia cope and indeed thrive during these challenging times? Mike: Yeah, that's a that's a really interesting question. Staying on this notion of a psychological need. Self-Determination Theory is not the only psychological theory that proposes that humans have psychological needs. What these theories tend to have in common, these needs-based theories, is that it's the satisfaction of these needs that is necessary for us to be psychologically healthy. In fact, in Self-Determination Theory, these needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness are sometimes referred to as psychological nutrients, communicating the idea that just like physical, dietary nutrition, that these elements really do need to be addressed for us to be optimally healthy. I think that as therapists, of course, we have our limits. In my sessions with clients and the dynamics of our interaction, I do the best I can to address and satisfy these needs. That would also include the kind of goals, collaborative goal setting that we might do, and, and I will frankly discuss these needs with clients and family members, too, and people seem to get it. Other examples are, let's take the need for relatedness, which is not just satisfied between individuals, a client-clinician relationship, or a romantic relationship, or a parent child relationship, but it's also satisfied when people have a sense of belongingness to community. I think, right now, I've noticed that a couple of the aphasia groups that I belong to and facilitate seem to be playing a really important role in helping people feel connected to a community. Hopefully that is having a prophylactic effect in terms of helping people stay psychologically well. Janet: Which again makes sense. But as you are interacting with people, both patients with aphasia and their caregivers, what are some of the indicators you see, that suggest a client is engaged in rehabilitation, or not engaged? How do you measure engagement or feel confident in identifying when a patient is engaged with you in the rehab process? Mike: There are some measurements of engagement out there. Off the top of my head I don't know how valid they are. There are most definitely a number of measurements of motivation and Self-Determination Theory related measures of intrinsic motivation, of autonomous versus controlled forms of motivation, and need satisfaction. I don't administer those tests myself in my clinical practice, although I sometimes pull one aside to guide the kind of conversation that I might have with a client so that I can kind of get a sense for whether they're really struggling with this need for autonomy. In other words, they're not feeling as if they're having much choice over their life, that they have a sense of doing what is important to them, or steering the conversation towards getting a sense of how competent they feel, doing the things that are important to them, how connected they are to friends and family, etc. In general, I guess I rely more on my interactions with people and my observations. I think in terms of kind of markers of engagement, I think it does look different at different stages of rehabilitation. Early after a stroke, for example, or early in a clinical relationship, our clients often don't understand enough about their disorder, about the process of rehabilitation, to be real engaged the collaborators. At that point engagement is more focused on them being engaged in wanting to learn about aphasia, and the options for rehabilitation and whatnot. In so in the beginning, I'm spending more effort supporting people developing some competencies that will help them become more true collaborators, so that later on engagement is manifest much more in the sense of them participating in decision making and sharing their opinions on different treatment approaches, for example, then sharing their observations of what's going on with them and their progress towards their goals. So, I guess, overall, my experience has been when things are going well, that people start off most definitely curious and engaged in that way. Over time, they develop more ownership over the process and become, if not collaborators, maybe even more than that, for lack of a better word, become their own therapist. Then, of course, there are, I guess you could say, the more traditional observation observations of engagement, adherence to treatment schedules, home practice schedules, following up on recommendations, things of that nature. As a kind of an example, I think of the way one can use a theory of motivation to maybe start to think about some of the patterns of behavior that we see. I'll sometimes see clients who are using an app on their iPad and so I can monitor their practice how often they're practicing, when they're practicing. I might see that they kind of don't practice much until the day before their scheduled session with me. And to me, that's really one example of someone being in a more controlled form of motivation, wherein the reason for them to be motivated is perhaps the desire to maintain my approval of them. When our motives are external to us they don't really exert much influence until they're in proximity. And so, as we get closer to the scheduled appointment, all of a sudden, this external motivator starts to kick in, and they'll do some practice. I might look at that and realize that there's something missing in terms of addressing goals, etc. so that people are more truly, the genuinely autonomously motivated, in which case, the pattern would be more like, not just that people are more persistent on their own, but at times, they're even asking for more. Janet: That is a good place to leave it because you've been helping me visualize this picture of engagement as a process. Everything's so new in the beginning of a person's journey through aphasia. And as the clinician, you are helping them become more comfortable with that and take more of an active role, if you will, owning the aphasia and what to do about it. Let me ask from your experience and research, what advice or techniques or suggestions can you give to our listeners that they can take and incorporate into their clinical practice? I know you've described a little bit about how you use your observations, but are there some specific pieces of information you can impart to our listeners? Mike: Sure. I think engagement starts with me. If I am truly engaged, then that tends to facilitate the engagement of my clients. If we think about when someone listens to us, let's say and listens to our story, in a manner in which they genuinely seem to be trying to understand our perspective, that tends to cause us to be a little bit more interested in in it ourselves. I think engagement is contagious. You will read in in qualitative studies, rehab patients particularly in the acute phase, talk about this need to kind of draw on the positive energy of their clinicians to carry them through this difficult time. Now, there are some specific practices that have been described that are focused on satisfying these basic psychological needs, which are kind of the ingredients of motivation, and therefore, engagement. Maybe it would be helpful for me to just go through the list of them, or the short list, so people can kind of get a flavor for what this might look like.  The need for a satisfying people's autonomy is often achieved through first doing what is called perspective taking, listening to people, their concerns, their stories, with the particular intention to try and see the world through their eyes. That kind of listening interest is an acknowledgement of a person's autonomy, and therefore, its autonomy satisfying. Providing choice has been studied quite a bit in terms of satisfying the need for autonomy. I think most of us are familiar with that, because it plays a role in shared decision-making and client-centered goal setting, providing rationales for any of the recommendations we make, rationales that are meaningful, from the client’s perspective, that allow people to genuinely self-endorse them and to kind of take ownership of them. That's believed to be autonomy supportive. Finally, establishing an environment that is not pressuring. In other words, that we don't set up contingencies either explicitly or implicitly. What I mean by that, specifically, is that people don't feel that they need to be a certain way, or behave in a certain way, in order to secure our approval, and our energy, and also to some degree, that means paying attention to the language that we use. Those people who are familiar with motivational interviewing will know that, in motivational interviewing, you pay quite close attention to the language your client is using, the language you're using. For example, you may make an extra effort to stay away from controlling language such as “you should”, “you must”, “you need to”, etc. As far as satisfying the need for competency, that starts by providing the kind of structure that makes people feel secure, that makes them feel supported in making progress. It’s not chaotic, therapy is not a chaotic experience, it's somewhat predictable. I mentioned previously optimal challenge, such as finding tasks, goals that are optimally challenging. The nature of the feedback that we give can support people's needs to feel competent, in other words, that our feedback is more informational than evaluative. It's informational in the sense that, once we give it people have a sense of how to do better next time. It's useful a feedback. And then of course, monitoring progress is an important component of satisfying people's needs to feel competency within rehabilitation and measuring progress in a way that is meaningful to clients. As far as the need for relatedness. In general, it means that we do not send any overt or covert signals that our positive regard for our clients is in any way dependent on what they say or do. Let them know that our care for them is unconditional, and that our motivation is autonomous. In other words, that they are not an object to us. What I mean by that is, they are not a means to an end for us they are not a productivity requirement, they are not a means of generating income, they are not a means of stroking our egos, that we genuinely empathize with them and want to help. And they that is their experience of us. Janet: It does sound to me like you've spent a lot of time thinking about motivation and engagement, and also applying it in your everyday work with patients and their family members. Would you describe for us one of the successful experiences you've had and engaging patients and family members in your rehab process? Mike: Sure. I can honestly say that all of my clients now and in recent memory, or I think, successes. One of the things, as I mentioned before, that I've been experimenting with more is working with caregivers and talking about these basic psychological needs and how we, the people around the person with aphasia, can sometimes out of good intention, thwart those needs, and how they can do some simple things, to help people feel autonomous, to help them feel competent, to help them feel connected to others. I've gotten a lot of good feedback from starting to do that. Another thing I've been experimenting with are very, very short term goals. In goal setting theory, which is referenced now and then in rehab literature, proximal goals, very short term goals are thought to be more motivating than long term goals. My PT colleagues are fortunate in the sense that the kinds of goals their clients are working towards her so much more concrete and tangible. A person could not transfer from their bed to their wheelchair independently. Now, they can. It's easy to observe. Communication improvements are more abstract. To some degree, I think my patients suffer from struggling more to have a tangible, concrete sense that they're making improvements towards their goal. And so I've been working with super short term goals. In other words, goals, like,” Okay, what would you like to achieve by next week.” What's been really interesting about that process is that when we think about a goal in that short of a term, it tends to focus the mind in ways that longer term goals, one month, two months, three months, just don't. It seems to cause people to really reflect carefully on their strengths, what they can do. Then there’s this heightened sense of expectation that people have, because they're going to experience meeting a goal in a very short timeframe. Now, of course if we can link these one week goals up towards some longer term valued goal, all the better. But that's been a very interesting process, and really helpful not just for my clients, but for me as a as a clinician, too. Janet: I can imagine it has. It must, again, thinking back to the definitions we talked about earlier on engagement, make you feel good, help you and your client feel good that you're in balance with each other. You're working together, little steps, baby steps to achieve some larger goal in future time. Mike: Yeah, I think setting goals and thinking about goals is, is difficult for all of us. And by really shortening the distance. It makes it easier to conceptualize, Janet: I can imagine. Well Mike, as we bring this conversation to a close, and quite frankly, I would rather not. I'd rather go on talking to you for hours and hours because I know that you've spent a good deal of time studying this topic, and practicing this topic, and can talk for days with us about motivation and engagement and its value and importance in our rehabilitation activities. But we are limited on time, so as we bring this conversation to a close, are there any last comments on engagement or motivation? Or in particular Self-Determination Theory, that you would like to share with us?  Mike: Yeah, I think there may be two things. First is that we don't motivate people. We support people's motivation. We support people in ways that contributes to their need for motivation to show up. I want to make that statement because I know that earlier in my career, I spent a lot of time trying to persuade people to believe certain things, to do certain things, and whatnot. In a related way, you know, for me, motivation was a thorn in my side, because I often felt that my clients were not as engaged in a persistent way as they needed to be to kind of reap the benefits that treatment had to offer. That wasn't just my perspective, they felt the same way, and they often didn't know why. It was some time before it dawned on me that there was this factor - motivation - that I put a lot of emphasis on, but I essentially knew nothing about it, I followed my intuition. Learning some theories of motivation, not just Self-Determination Theory, although I think that's my favorite one, I think it's the best fit for the people that I see in my practice, but I draw from other theories, too, this has really transformed my practice and made me more comfortable in my skin, as well as I think more effective. I'd suggest that people who are interested in this topic to start to read about it. One thing about motivation is that the factors that influence motivation tend to be universal, so that we can read about motivation in the context of education or even the workplace, and I think with some confidence, translate that into our own practice. So even though their research is really not there, in speech pathology land, there is a lot of useful research that we can draw upon. Janet: Thank you, that's a good recommendation. I hope that our listeners will take that recommendation, and I hope they will to learn from a project, Mike, that I know you and I with some other people are working on to really examine how people in speech language pathology are reporting motivation when they report their clinical work. We look forward to disseminating that information in a future venue. I want to thank you so much for your time today, Mike, and for chatting with me about motivation and engagement in aphasia rehabilitation.    This is Janet Patterson speaking from the VA in Northern California, and along with Aphasia Access, I would like to thank my guest, Mike Biel for sharing his knowledge, wisdom and experience in studying and practicing principles of motivation, and engagement in aphasia rehabilitation. You can find references and links in the Show Notes from today's podcast interview with Dr. Michael Biel, at Aphasia Access under the Resource Tab on the Homepage. On behalf of Aphasia Access, we thank you for listening to this episode of The Aphasia Access Conversation Podcast project. For more information on Aphasia Access, and to access our growing library of materials, please go to www.aphasiaaccess.org. If you have an idea for a future podcast topic, please email us at info@aphasiaaccess.org  Thank you again for your ongoing support of Aphasia Access. Resources   @mebiel  https://twitter.com/Mebiel  Self-Determination Theory http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/  VA Pittsburgh Program for Intensive Residential Aphasia Treatment & Education (PIRATE) https://www.va.gov/pittsburgh-health-care/programs/pirate/

There can be only one, but Highlander's had a surprising number of media adaptations and spin-offs over the years. We take a look at all of them and even get some behind-the-scenes gossip about the infamous comic book tie-in: Highlander 3030. ----more---- Episode Transcript   Episode 05 [00:00:00] Mike: It's fine. It's fine. I'm not bitter. Mike: Welcome to Tencent Takes, the podcast where we make comics trivia rain like dollar bills on Magic Mike night. My name is Mike Thompson and I am joined by my cohost, the mistress of mayhem herself, Jessika Frazer. Jessika: Muahahaha! It is I hello, Mike. Mike: Hello. If you're new to the podcast, we like to look at comic books in ways that are both fun and informative. We want to check out their coolest, weirdest and silliest moments, as well as examine how they've been woven into the larger fabric of pop culture and history. Today, we are traveling through time and talking about the 35 year legacy of one of the strongest cult franchises around, Highlander. But [00:01:00] before we do that, Jessika, what is one cool thing that you've watched or read lately? Jessika: My brother has some copies of classic Peanuts Comics, and it's so much fun. It's good, wholesome, fun. And Snoopy- related media always makes me nostalgic. And Mike you've mentioned before that we're in California in the San Francisco Bay area, but fun fact, I live right near Santa Rosa, which is the home of the Peanuts creator Charles Schultz when he was alive. So there's a museum there and an ice skating rink. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: Which is super awesome And Snoopy on ice was huge when I was a kid. And that is definitely the place I also learned to ice skate. By the way, they throw a mean birthday party, just saying, not right this second. Not this second. [00:02:00] We should do it is what I'm saying. Mike: We should do it for ourselves. Jessika: No, that's what I'm saying. Oh, I don't have children. Mike: But we do. Jessika: Yes, they can come with us, like they're invited. Mike: I mean, are they? Jessika: Look at you hesitating. Mike: We took the kids to the Peanuts museum right before the lockdowns happened. that really Jessika: That's really lovely that's nice got to do that. Mike: There’s a lot of cool stuff to do. It's really interactive. It's also just a really fascinating experience because there's so much about the Peanuts during their, what 50 year run give or take. It may not have been that long. It may have been 30 or 40, but it was a long time, and I really dug it, like there was a lot of cool stuff, so yeah . And also the cool thing about Santa Rosa is they've also got all those Snoopy statues all over town too. Jessika: They do. Yeah. All the [00:03:00] Peanuts characters actually. Cause they, the Charlie Browns and the Lucy's now and the Woodstocks. Yeah they're all over the place. But that used to be something fun we could do as a scavenger hunt, and actually that's something you guys could still do even with the lockdown. Cause most of them are outside is just find that list of where all the Snoopy's or whatever character is and go find them all. Cause we did that at one point, like as an adult, obviously. Well, what about you, Mike? Mike: The complete opposite of something wholesome. Jessika: Perfect. Mike: We didn't actually have the kids for a few days. They were with their dad and we couldn't find anything new to watch. So, we wound up bingeing the entire series of Harley Quinn on HBO Max. Jessika: Oh, you’re ahead of me then. Damn you. Mike: This is my third time going through the series. We've just gotten to the point where we turned it on when we want to watch something that's kind of soothing in a way, even though it is not a soothing TV show. But I still am [00:04:00] having these full on belly laughs where I'm breathless at the end and it's just, it's so smart and funny and absolutely filthy with the violence. And then there are these moments of sweetness or genuine reflection, and it's just so damn refreshing. I was never much of a Harley fan, but this show and then the Birds of Prey movie really made me fall in love with that character. Also side note, Michael Ironside who played General Katana and Highlander II. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: He shows up in Harley Quinn doing the voice of Darkseid, which is a character he's been voicing since the nineties when he first started doing it for the Superman animated series. Jessika: Oh, damn. Mike: So, just a little bit of symmetry there. Mike: All right. So before we begin, I have to say that this episode wound up being a rabbit hole full of other rabbit holes that I kept going down. So, I want to give a little credit where it's due for a ton of my research. I really wound up leaning on two books: John Mosby's Fearful Symmetry [00:05:00]; and A Kind of Magic: The Making of Highlander by Jonathan Melville. Likewise, there's a YouTube series called Highlander heart hosted by Grant Kempster and Joe Dilworthand, and an associated Facebook community with the same name that were just invaluable for my crash course. And finally, I want to give special, thanks to Clinton Rawls, who runs Comics Royale, and Matt Kelly for taking the time to chat with me because they didn't have to, and they provided me with some really useful information for this episode. Jessika: Yeah, I'm super excited about what lies in store. What's really funny is I've actually, I feel like a kid before it test. Mike: Right? Jessika: like I'm a little nervous because I've been cramming so hard for this Mike: We both have. Jessika: No, you, especially you, especially like you should be much more nervous than me, Mike. No, I’m just kidding, please don't take that on. Oh, but yeah, no I'm super excited and really ready to talk about all of this stuff and learn more because I've just been consuming the media and the [00:06:00] comic books. But, you’re going to give me some back knowledge that's gonna blow my brain and I'm excited. Mike: Oh, well, I'll try to live up to that high expectation. Let's assume that you didn't know what the topic of this episode was. And if someone asked you what cult property from the 1980s. Spawned five movies, two TV series, a Saturday morning cartoon, an anime film, several video games, multiple tabletop games, audio plays, roughly a dozen novels, and four okay, technically six different comic books. What would your first answer be? Jessika: Oh, goodness. What's funny is probably not Highlander. I'd probably I would say like Batman, honestly, Mike: Yeah I would've gone with something along the lines of G.I. Joe. Jessika: Oh, yeah. Mike: Or some weird Saturday morning cartoon, something like that. I never would have guessed Highlander. I never would have assumed that. but it's just, it's really surprising to see how [00:07:00] much has been generated out of this initial movie. Were you fan of the movies or the show before we started bingeing everything for this episode? Jessika: So I was actually a fan of the show via my dad who had it on hadn't watched the films before, because I was born in 1986 fun fact. Mike: Right. Jessika: I was born when this thing was sent into the world. We both were at the same time, apparently. I didn't have that exact experience of growing up watching it, but he definitely had the TV show on in the nineties Mike: Okay. Jessika: So that was what I was familiar with and I loved it and I would run around chopping things; I'd be at work, I was actually like when I got older I'd be like, there can only be one, and I’d like have to like swipe at someone. Mike: It’s such an iconic line. Jessika: iIt is! it transcends. Absolutely. Mike: Yeah. I was pretty young when the movie came out and the show was how I became aware of it. And then when the show was airing, I was in high school. And then I became [00:08:00] aware that there was a movie that had inspired it. And so I was able to rent that when I was old enough to be trusted, to go rent movies on my own by my parents. Back when we couldn’t stream everything. Jessika: Oh my gosh. Mike: And there were rewind fees, Jessika: Oh, my gosh. Be kind rewind. Mike: Speaking of things from the eighties: it’s funny we'll talk about it later on, but the show really brought in, I think a lot of people that otherwise wouldn't have been fans. Before we start talking about the comic books, I really want to take a few minutes to talk about all the media and content that spun out of Highlander because it's a lot. And it was honestly in a couple of cases, really surprising. I didn't know about half of this stuff before I began researching for the episode, and then. Like I said, it was just constant rabbit holes that kept on leading me down more and more research paths. And it was really fun. But I want to talk about all this now. Jessika: Perfect. This is exactly what we're here for, and I think that people want to hear it too. [00:09:00] Mike: I hope so. Okay. So why don't you summarize Highlander? If you had to give an elevator pitch, Jessika: The film follows the past and present of Connor MacLeod, an immortal who is just one of many vying to be the sole victor in an age old battle, where in the end, there can only be one. Like very simply a lot more to it, but like how much of an elevator pitch. Mike: I think that's pretty simple. It's about an immortal who basically keeps on fighting his way through history and there's these really wonderful catch phrases that get us hooked. The movies got actually a really interesting origin story of its own. It was written by this guy named Gregory Widen when he was in his early twenties. That was when he wrote the initial screenplay. But he had already had a really interesting life up until then. He was one of the youngest paramedics in Laguna Beach at that point in [00:10:00] time. And then he went on to become a firefighter while he was still a teenager. By 1981, he'd also worked as a DJ and a broadcast engineer. And then he signed up for a screenwriting course at UCLA and he wrote this feature length script called Shadow Clan. And it would go through a number of changes before it became Highlander. But the core theme of an immortal warrior named Connor MacLeod wandering across the centuries is there. He wound up getting introduced to producers Bill Panzer, and Peter Davis who decided to option the film. And then they hired the screenwriters, Larry Ferguson and Peter Bellwood to rework the script into what we eventually had wind up in theaters. And once the movie was green-lit, they brought in Russell Mulcahey to direct it. And I vaguely knew that Mulcahey had been doing music videos before this, for the most part, he had one other cult movie ahead of time. It was a horror movie, I think, called Razorback. But I didn't realize which music videos he'd been making until I started doing all [00:11:00] this research. So I'm going to give you a small sampling and you're going to tell me if you've heard of these. Jessika: Okay. Sure sure sure. Mike: Okay. The Vapors “Turning Japanese”. Jessika: Uh, yeah. Mike: Yeah, okay. The Buggles “Video Killed the Radio Star”. Jessika: Wow. Yes. Mike: Duran Duran Duran’s “Rio”. Jessika: Wow. Mike: And Elton John's “I'm Still Standing”. Jessika: Yeahwow. That's actually a variety of characters. Mike: Right? But also those all really iconic music videos. Like not only songs, but music, videos cause those were all in the very early days. And the dude's entire portfolio is just iconic. If you think about the music videos that really defined the genre Jessika: Yeah, sometimes you just got it, I guess. Huh? Mike: He has a lot of those music video elements. A lot of times in the movie, it feels like a music video, like when Brenda's being chased down the hall by the Kurgan and it's got all that dramatic lighting, or that opening shot where they're in the [00:12:00] wrestling match and you see the camera flying through everything. Jessika: Yes! Mike: That was wild. That was really unusual to see camera work like that back then. The movie was distributed by 20th century Fox. And I think at this point, We'd be more surprised of 20th century Fox did a good job of marketing weird and cool, because they really botched it. They wound up forcing cuts to the movie that created really weird plot holes because they didn't feel that audiences needed it or what would understand it, and they wanted to make it simpler, but it really made things more confusing. European audiences on the other hand, really embraced the film because they got a much better version. So case in point, I'm going to show you the two main posters for it. This is the American poster for the movie. Jessika: Mmhmm. Oh, wow, he’s scary. Wow wow wow, okay. Before I even say any of the words, what you first see is Connor [00:13:00] MacLeod, but it's this awful grainy picture of him. He looks like there's something wrong with his face, which he shouldn't necessarily. And he looks like he's about to murder someone. He's like glaring off into the distance. And at the top it says, Oh, it's in black and white, by the way. at the top it says, He fought his first battle on the Scottish Highlands in 1536, he will fight his greatest battle on the streets of New York city in 1986. His name is Connor MacLeod. He is immortal Highlander! Credits at the bottom, rated R, absolutely rated R. Mike: Also, I feel like featuring original songs by Queen does not get the billing that it should. Jessika: I agree. I jammed my way through that film and this just the whole series, [00:14:00] actually the whole franchise I jammed my way through. Mike: Yeah. And if you listen to the kind of Magic album that is basically the unofficial soundtrack to the movie, and it's so good I don't know how they got those perpetual rights to Princes of the Universe, did. Every time I hear that song, I get a little thrill up my spine. All right. So here's the poster though for the European release. Jessika: All right. So, Ooh, this is totally different. This is Whoa. This is way more exciting. Okay. First of all, it's full Color, my friends, right in the middle in red it says Highlander right under it “There can only be one” in yellow. Oh it's amazing. There's a little sticker at the bottom that says featuring original songs by queen. Look it, trying to sell it, I love it. And then there's Connor MacLeod in the center of the screen [00:15:00] dramatically head back eyes closed screaming his sword thrusts forward and behind him is the Kurgan, oh my gosh so good. It's so - Oh, and a backdrop of New York city. All in lights. It's beautiful. Mike: Yeah. It’s one of those things where basically, that documentary that we watched seduced by Argentina, they talk about that where they're just like 20th century Fox fucked us. Jessika: And I didn't realize how much until, because I did watch that as well. And I'm like how bad could it be? But I that's pretty bad. It's a pretty big difference. It's like watching, that'd be like going, expecting to see like psycho or something. Mike: Honestly, I keep on thinking of Firefly and Fox and how they just totally botched the marketing for that show and then the release, and issues with Joss Wheden aside. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: It’s one of those [00:16:00] things where again, it's a really beloved cult property with a really devoted fan base, even, 5 years after it was released, shit, almost 20. Jessika: And I do love Firefly, again, Whedon aside. Mike: I do too. Jessika: And it makes me a little sad think about it because it had so much potential. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: Oh, it's so rough. It's rough to see. Mike: Yeah. What were your overall thoughts on the movie now that you've seen it because you hadn't seen it before this, correct? Jessika: No. I had only seen the TV show and probably rightfully so, because that was much less violent. I mean, much less graphically violent. They were still beheading motherfucker every episode, but, versus the film, which is like blood and like half a head and wow, there, it goes the head. But I actually really liked the movie. It was adventurous, it was thrilling and told a fairly cohesive and interesting storyline which unfortunately had an ending. But it still took us on an emotional journey. [00:17:00] Mike: Yeah, and I feel the same way. Jessika:: And how all the camp that I love from the 1980s and the special effects are just chefs, kiss love it. Mike: There is something so wonderful about the special effects from the 1980s, because they're so earnest all the time. And at the same time they look so cheesy by comparison now. Jessika: But you can tell they were trying so hard. It's almost like a little kid who's just learning to finger paint and they walk up and they're like, I did this thing. It's so good. You're like, it is really good. It's really good for where you're at. Mike: Yeah, exactly. Highlander is very much a quintessential eighties film to me, and there's both that nostalgia factor, but also it's a pretty tight little film. It doesn't really try to do anything too grandiose or too world-building because I don't think they expected to really make the sequels that they wound up doing. Which speaking of which we should discuss the sequels. [00:18:00] Mike: Like, I feel like you can’t discussion without talking about the sequels. And honestly the first time I ever heard of Highlander as a brand really was when I was visiting family in Texas And we were watching a Siskel & Ebert episode where they were thrashing Highlander II. Jessika: Dude, Siskel and Ebert I'm sure hated this. This does not surprise me in the least. Mike: I don't remember much about it, I just remember being like, oh Sean Connery's in a movie, well that's cool. Because my parents had raised me on all of the Sean Connery James Bond movies. Jessika: Yeah casting, come on. Why? Why? They had a French dude playing a Scottish guy and a Scottish guy playing a Spanish Egyptian guy. It's. Mike: I believe label was a Hispaniola Egyptian. They kinda darkened up Sean Connery a little bit too. I'm not sure. Jessika: It felt that way. I was just hoping he had just been under the tanning beds, but no, I think you're right. [00:19:00] Mike: Highlander II was definitely the most infamous of the sequels. And I mean a huge part of that is because it had such a batshit production and there’d been so many different versions of it. It was so bad that Russell Mulcahey reportedly walked out of the film premiere after only 15 minutes. There's this great documentary that you and I both watched on YouTube, it's split up into a bunch parts, but it was a documentary they made for the special edition of Highlander II. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: It was the third release of the movie that they put out because the first one was basically the bonding company for the films. Investors took over the production and assembly of the movie due to the fact that Argentina, where they were filming. And they had gone to Argentina because a, it was gorgeous, but B because it was supposedly going to be a third of the cost Jessika: Yeah. Mike: To make a movie there than it would elsewhere. Argentina’s economy collapsed and went through hyperinflation. And as a result, everything just went haywire. But they went back years later and they not only recut the [00:20:00] movie, but they refilled or added in certain scenes I think four or five years later. And then on top of that, they did the special edition a few years after that, where they redid the special effects. And I don't know it's kind of funny because it's not a bad movie now. It's not terrible. I feel it's an enjoyable film in its own way. But it's also funny where you watch that documentary and they're talking about the stuff that they're so proud of. Russell Mulcahey was talking about how proud he was of that love scene. I'm using this in quotes, love scene between Virginia Madsen and and Christopher Lambert where they just decided to do it up against the wall of an alley? Jessika: That’s always an interesting choice to me. Like you really cannot wait. Mike: Yeah. And then he was like, I thought that was a really hot scene. And I got to sit there and I'm like, I don't, I can't view this through the lens of, a 20 something guy in the 1990s. I don't know what my interpretation of it would have been then, [00:21:00] but watching it now watching it for the first time when I was in my twenties and the, in the early aughts, I just was like, this is weird and sorta dumb. And also they don't really have a lot of chemistry, but okay. Jessika: Yeah, it just kind of happens. They're just like, Oh, here you are. Mike: Yeah Right I don't know. At the same time it was cool to see they did all those really practical, special effects where they actually had them whipping around on the wires on like the weird flying skateboards and stuff. I thought that was cool. Jessika: I thought that was neat too. And how he was like, yeah, I actually got on top of the elevator and he was excited. Now he got on top of the elevator. Mike: And then they basically just dropped it down, like that's wild. So how about Highlander three? Jessika: Ahhh… Mike: Yeah, that’s kinda where I am Jessika: It’s very forgettable in my book. Mike: I feel like you could wipe it from the timeline and no one would care. Really, it felt like a retread of the first movie, but with the shittier villain in a way less interesting love story. honestly, it was a bummer because Mario [00:22:00] Van Peebles, the guy who plays that the illusionist I can't even remember his name. It was that forgettable. Jessika: Yeah, no, I can't either. Mike: Mario van Peebles is a really good actor and he's done a lot of really cool stuff. And it just, it felt like he was the NutraSweet version of the Kurgan Jessika: I like that. Yes. Yes. Mike: All of the mustache twirling, none of the substance. Jessika: It leaves a little bit of a weird taste in your mouth. Mike: Right. Splenda Kurgan! Moving on Highlander, Endgame. Jessika: What I do like about this film is that in both the TV series, as well as the film, there is the actual crossover. Connor shows up in Duncan's world and Duncan shows up in Connor's world and there is that continuity, which is good. And I do appreciate that because, before I got into this, I assumed that the character was interchangeable and we were just seeing different actors James [00:23:00] Bond situation. And when I went back and realized like, Oh no, he's his own character, they're blah, you know. Mike: I dunno I saw this in theaters I love the show and I appreciated that it felt like an attempt to merge the movies in the series and of the movies, I feel like this actually has the strongest action scenes. There's that bit where Adrian Paul faces off against Donnie Yen. And I was like, that's gotta be really cool to be able to sit there and show your kids much later in life: hey, I got to do a martial arts scene with Donnie Yen and he didn't kill me in the movie. that's pretty dope. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: Again, it felt underwhelming. It just wasn't all that interesting. And also I spent years being mad at that movie because the trailer brought me into the theater expecting something way different than what we were going to get Jessika: Okay. And I don't know that I saw the trailer. Mike: It has, it has a bunch of scenes with Magic where Connor and Duncan jumped through a portal [00:24:00]. Jessika: What? Mike: And a sword gets thrown at Jacob Kell and he catches it midair. And then he does something else where he's holding a sphere where you see Connor's face screaming and then it shatters. Jessika: What’s with all this weird, extra scene stuff in these trailers. I don't understand. Mike: Yeah, it turns out that this hasn't, this has never really been officially confirmed, but reading between the lines yeah, it’s been confirmed. They basically filmed extra scenes just to make it more appealing for people. So they would show up to the theaters. Like they filmed scenes, effectively they filmed scenes just for the trailer the director when he was asked about it in Fearful Symmetry. He basically said, yeah, I know there was some stuff that they filmed for marketing afterwards, and I wasn't involved with that. And then I think it was Peter Davis that was asked about this for the book. And he basically said, Oh, this is a really standard practice. People, or accompanies [00:25:00] film stuff for for marketing purposes all the time. And that's where he left it. Jessika: Oh, okay. to know. Mike: I was really grumpy about that, but that said I've softened a little since then. Do we even want to talk about the Source? Cause I feel like that's something that we shouldn't talk about in polite company. Jessika: No pass. Mike: Okay. Jessika: It happened? Mike: It happened, it was a thing that happened that was going to be a trilogy. They were planning to make that into a trilogy of movies. Jessika: Ohh rough times. Mike: Oh it's real bad. I don't think you were able to watch this, but Highlander, the search for vengeance. It's the anime. Jessika: No, I couldn't find it. Mike: Yeah. It's not available for streaming and it really it's really a bummer because it's actually pretty good. I'm not quite sure how to qualify it because it's not a live action movie and it doesn't star Duncan or Connor, but it's a full length anime. It's a full length movie in its own right. It focuses on Colin MacLeod who he’s [00:26:00] an immortal, who's technically part of the MacLeod clan. He's born as a Roman Britain and then he's adopted into the MacLeod clan after he fights alongside them later on. They keep on doing this. They keep on going back to dystopian SciFutures, which I kinda like, Jessika: I love, bless their little hearts. Mike: Yeah. A lot of the story actually takes place in this post-apocalyptic 22nd century, New York. And I haven't seen this in about a decade because it's not available on streaming. I don't have the DVD anymore. I really should pick it up before it goes out of print. But the movie fucking slaps. It was directed by Yoshiaki Kawajiri, he was really big in the nineties. He did Ninja Scroll and Vampire Hunter D Bloodlust. He's known for really cool looking movies that are also really violent at the same time. Like you look at his characters and you're like, Oh yeah, no, they all look interchangeable because they're also similar one movie to another, Jessika: Oh, I see. Mike: But they're really cool. And the movie was written by David Abramowitz, who was the head writer [00:27:00] for the TV show. So it felt like a pretty legit Highlander story. Honestly, if we had to talk about this and ask which of these movies or the sequels were our favorites, I would probably say the Search for Vengeance. Because I loved it so much, but since that wasn't a theatrical release, we'll exclude that and you didn't get to watch it. Of the sequels, which did you enjoy most? Jessika: Mike, why don’t you go first. Mike: Okay. I'm a little torn, I guess I enjoyed Endgame mainly because it feels like part of he in quotes, real Highlander story, I guess it's the least terrible of the sequels. And it brought in my favorite characters. The final version of Highlander II, is I don't know. I don't hate it. It honestly feels like a cool dystopian cyberpunk story with some bizarre Highlander lore shoehorned in, but at the same time, it's not the worst thing I've ever watched. How about you? Jessika: Funny [00:28:00] enough, I was going to say Highlander II, but maybe just a bit more so if it were its own standalone movie and not try to be a part of the Highlander franchise. The idea of the shield is super interesting and I think they could have elaborated more on the lead-up and the resolution of that issue rather than having to also make it about the Immortals in their forever game. Mike: Yeah, I agree. How do you feel about moving onto the TV series? Jessika: Oh, I am pro. Mike: Okay. I personally feel like this is the property that sucks all the air out of the room when you're talking about Highlander. Jessika: Oh no. Mike: Yeah, I mentioned that this is how I really got introduced to the brand. I started watching it in high school, around season three, which was when it was really starting to get good. The first two seasons I feel were kind of when they were ironing out all the rough spots. But I wound up watching it through the end. So if you're listening to this podcast and you have never seen the [00:29:00] show Highlander, the series ran for six seasons, which is a good length of time for any TV show. And it followed the adventures of Duncan, who was another member of the MacLeod clan. He was a distant cousin of Connor. And the show bounced between Seacouver, which is a fictionalized version of Vancouver in Paris. And it basically retcon things so that the original movie didn't end with The Quickening, but that the battle between the Kurgan and Connor was it's implied, it was the start of The Gathering. That's my interpretation of it. Jessika: That was what I got too. Mike: Yeah. And Christopher Lambert, he shows up in the pilot to help set things up and get them moving. But I think that's the only time we ever really seen him on the show. Jessika: Correct. He's really just an intro. He's in that first episode only. Mike: You have rewatched it as a have I . We haven't watched the entire series all the way through, but we've watched a lot of episodes. Jessika: Correct. Mike: How do you feel [00:30:00] it measures up today? compared to that nostalgic view that we had before, Jessika: I had a lot of fun watching it, actually. definitely super cheesy. I don't love all of the characters I watched a lot of the first season, then I bounced around I think I did the top, like 25 on a list that you sent me. But Duncan’s just so codependent sometimes with his characters and it's like the one time the Tessa goes on a hike by herself, she gets kidnapped by an, a mortal and it’s like, oh my God, she can't even go on a fucking hike, are you joking me? And the one time he goes to the store by himself, he gets kidnapped and it's like, oh, come the fuck on you guys. Mike: Yeah, I feel like it generally holds up pretty well. It's a little uneven, but when it hits , it really hits. And it's a lot of fun. And considering that it was a relatively low budget show on basic cable in the early to mid-nineties, there's a lot of stuff that has aged way worse. [00:31:00] Jessika:: Absolutely. It exceeded my expectations on the rewatch, for sure. Mike: Yeah, and I have to say that one really cool thing about Highlander is it's got a really large female fan base. And I suspect that the show is really responsible for that. Jessika: I would agree. There's a few reasons. Mike: Are six of those reasons. Duncan's abs? Jessika: Like 10 of those reasons are all the times he gets surprised in a bathtub. I know I messaged you while I was watching them, because I was like Duncan got surprised in a bathtub again. Mike: I don't remember which episode it was, but there's one where he is surprised while he's in a bathrobe and he's got, it's not even tighty whities, it’s like a bikini brief, and watching that, I was just sitting there going, thank you for this gift. Thank you. Thank you for this visual treat that you have given us in the middle of my very boring work day. Jessika: It’s [00:32:00] also that there are such a wide variety of female characters. I would say, Iit’s not just the other female person he seeing or whatever, the love interest, there are other female Immortals and they a lot more frequently than they do in the films. I can't recall if they have any female immortals in the films. Mike: They do in Endgame. Jessika: Okay. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I thought there was, there were some in there, but that’s tailing into, I mean yeah. Mike: Yeah. And the Source had them too, but meh. Jessika: Oh yeah. Mike: I will say that the show was pretty good about writing pretty strong female characters, I felt. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: And we'll talk about Amanda in a little bit, but I have to say that I really liked how she was written and how Elizabeth Grayson played her through the original series and then her own afterwards. I dunno. I, what do you think is the sexiest thing about Duncan MacLeod? I'm curious. Jessika: He seems [00:33:00] really like trustworthy, but like and sexy trustworthy. It's like, he'd be the dude. I called if some guys were fucking with me. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: I kept on thinking about how there's this Tumblr post that's been going around the internet, regularly, and it's this discussion about which Disney men women find the sexiest guys always thinks it's Gaston. Jessika: Oh lord, why? Mike: It’s that male power fantasy thing where they're just like, oh no, like he's like really charming. And he's really muscly. And the counterargument from women is usually A no Gaston sucks and B we all like Roger from 101 Dalmatians. Jessika: Oh yeah. Roger. Mike: Which, Roger is very much my personal role model. The dude's a talented musician, he loves animals and he's got that great, a snark where he literally is trolling the villain when she comes to his house with a motherfucking trombone from upstairs [00:34:00]. And I think Duncan's a little like that. Like he's cultured and he's worldly and he's got this wicked sense of humor. And he's also the type of dude who has no problem reciting poetry in public or making his partner breakfast in bed. Jessika: Yeah, absolutely. Mike: So it just it was something that came to mind while I was rewatching all this stuff. Jessika: Yeah. just as like a wholesome guy. Mike: Right? Jessika: He always has good intentions. So that's actually what it feels like. He's always coming at things with good intentions. Mike: Yeah, and he's not perfect, but he's always trying to do the right thing, which I really appreciate. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: What was your favorite episode? Jessika: I went back and forth. I really like the Homeland episode, and like I said, I've really only watched a good chunk of most of season what I would say, and then so kind of bounced around, but season four, episode one. It was really sweet to see [00:35:00] Duncan take the obligatory trip back to his Homeland to pay respects. And it also had a good lesson in not judging a book by its cover as the main character assumes that Duncan is just an ancestry tourist, which was super interesting. She was super hating on it but I was like this is interesting instead of visiting what once was literally his home during formative years. So it was just such a wild thing to see her be like, what are you doing near those graves? And he can't really be like, they were my parents because you cannot even read them. They are so old. Mike: The funny thing is I didn't rewatch that episode during our refresher, but I remember watching that episode when I was about 15 or so. Because it's stuck out to me. Jessika: It’s really good. And of course, Duncan, he always has a good intention. The whole reason he went back was because he figured out that somebody had been [00:36:00] pilfering graves Mike: Yeah. Jessika: And he had to return what was in this grave. Mike: I know he's making the rest of us look bad. So mine is, it's unusual suspects. It's from season six, which I feel is actually pretty weak season overall. And it's this really silly one-off episode, starring Roger Daltry of the Who fame. He plays Hugh Fitzcairn, which is a character that he shows up in plays a couple of times throughout the series. And at this point in time in the story, he was dead, but it's a flashback to the 19 teens or 1920s. 1920s, because it ends with the stock market crash, but it's a take on the British country, house murder, mystery genre, and it's really fun. And it was just this really refreshing moment of levity after what I felt our run of really heavy, and in my opinion, not very good episodes. The end of season five and the beginning of season [00:37:00] six are all about Duncan confronting this demon named Aramon and it's weird and it's not very good. And I really don't enjoy it. This is all my opinion. I'm sure that I'm insulting some Highlander fan who absolutely loves this, but it's a fun episode in its own. And then it's a good moment after one that I didn't really enjoy. And so it's got that extra refreshing bonus. I just, I want to note, it's really funny to me how intertwined Highlander has always been with rock and roll and music in general, because they had Mulcahey who do it, doing all these music videos and stuff. And then they kept on having musicians show up as guest stars. I think it was there's a character named Xavier St. Cloud, I think who was played by one of the guys from, again, I think, Fine Young Cannibals? Jessika: Yeah, I think I actually watched that episode. Mike: I think he was using nerve gas to kill people. Jessika: Yes I did watch that episode. That was a wild one. Yeah. Mike: Yeah, and I think he shows up later on too. [00:38:00] I can't remember but anyway, I really appreciate that they gave Roger Daltry of all people, this character, and he just really had fun with it and they kept bringing him back. Jessika: Yeah. He was a good character every episode he was in my other favorites was the one where they had Mary Shelley and he was in that one too. I believe. Mike: I think so. Yeah. No, it was, the series was really fun, and I liked that we can sit there and pull all these episodes just from memory that we really liked. Jessika: Absolutely. Mike: So season six , they were trying to find a new actress who could carry her own Highlander show. And so they tested out a bunch of different actresses in season six and gave them either really strong guest appearances, or they were basically the main character for episodes. But they wound up not going with any of them. They went with Elizabeth Grayson and gave her the Raven where she reprised her roles Amanda. Did you watch any of that? Did you get a chance to? Jessika: I watched the [00:39:00] first and the last episode of season one, I can only find the first season. Is there only one? Mike: There’s only one season, it didn’t get picked up again. Jessika: Oh then there you go. Then I could have only, I know I was scratching my head. Worried about where else do I find this? Mike: Well, and it ends on a cliff-hanger. Jessika: Yeah, exactly. That's where I was like, let's go. Mike: It ends with Nick becoming immortal. Jessika: Oh, see, I didn't quite finish it. Cause I was hurriedly setting it up in the background. Mike: Yeah it was fine. I thought Elizabeth Grayson is really charming in that role, but at the same time, there wasn't a lot of chemistry initially between Amanda and Nick, I felt at the very beginning. Jessika: I agree, not in the first episode. Mike: By the end of the season, it was there, and I think they were also, as is the case with most shows first seasons, they were trying really hard to figure out what they wanted to do. And so originally it was a cop show with an immortal, which there are certainly worse pitches that I've heard. Jessika: Yeah. No, I agree. Mike: But yeah. sad that it didn't get to go further [00:40:00] Jessika: I'm tempted to go back and watch all of these things. I may have to do a pallet cleanse of something different. I may have to go back to my Marvel watching. Mike: On top of this, there was a Saturday morning cartoon called Highlander, the series or Highlander, the animated series, and it was set in the future. It's in a weird alternate timeline. It stars another MacLeod. It's fine It's a Saturday morning cartoon. I didn't even care enough to really go back and watch it because being that great. They did some interesting stuff. Like they brought Ramirez back if I remember, right. And then they also had a thing where instead of beheading other Immortals, the main character had an ability where he could be voluntarily given their power. Jessika: Oh. Mike: So he had all of their knowledge and power. And again, it’s again in a dystopian future where another immortal has taken over the world. Jessika: Wow. They just love their dystopian future. Mike: They really do. But yeah, it's fine. I think it's streaming on Amazon prime. I was just so focused on everything else that I didn't get a chance to go and [00:41:00] rewatch it. Jessika: Huh, good to know. Mike: We're going to go over all the other various pieces of media real quick. and then we've got one side tangent and then we're going to go through comic books, but. Jessika: I'm so excited. Mike: Books, Highlander wound up having a pretty substantial literary footprint. The original movie had the official novelization. There wasn't really anything after that until the show came out and then the show had 10 novels and an anthology and an official behind the scenes kind of book called the Watchers Guide and it's full of essays and interviews and photos. And since then, there've been a couple of non-fiction books, like Fearful Symmetry, which is about everything Highlander related. And it's almost like a textbook, but it's pretty good. And then there's also A Kind of Magic, which is more focused on making of the original movie. And those are both actually really good. I liked them a lot. They were really easy to read. [00:42:00] There were audio plays, which I keep on forgetting audio plays are a thing at this point, but it's by this company called Big Finish in the UK. They do tie-in audio dramas for television properties. Most famously they do Dr Who. They wound up doing two seasons of audio plays. The first had Adrian Paul reprise his role as Duncan and they take place after the series ended. And then also after the events of Endgame, you can't really find them anymore. Because they just, the license expired so they aren't selling them as far as I'm aware. Jessika: That's super interesting though. Dang. Mike: Yeah. And then the second season focuses on the four horsemen Immortals, remember Jessika: Okay. Mike: Do you remember them? Jessika: I sure do. Mike: Because we were talking about this a little bit, but it was all about Methos and the other guys that he hung out with when he was effectively, a comic book villain who would've if he’d had a mustache to twirl, he would have done it. Jessika: So quickly. Yes. Mike: I thought that was really interesting. There were a couple of people in the Highlander Heart [00:43:00] group who talked about it and they seem to really like them. I can't comment, but it was really neat. Games, this is the one that's really interesting. Highlander actually has been turned into a number of games over the years. There's a couple of tabletop games we're going to breeze through. So there was two different card games in a board game. One of the card games was released back in the nineties, it was a collectible card game. And this was right when Magic: The Gathering was really hot and everybody was trying to get in on that action. And then recently there's a new one called Highlander: The Duel. And it's a deck-building game where you play as Connor or the Kurgan going up against each other. And just a couple of years ago, there was a board game that got kick-started, it was in 2018 and it's this fast paced game for two to six players. The reviews across the web were pretty positive. And again, it's one of those things where it's Immortals battling for that mysterious prize. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: But it's cool. Jessika: Nice. Mike: I’m actually pretty surprised [00:44:00] we never got like a tabletop RPG because they are not precious about applying the license for Highlander to stuff. I'm amazed that nobody went to them and said, Hey, we can make this cool historical RPG where we sorta start having players wake up and then they have flashbacks or whatever. And Jessika: Yeah Oh that would have been cool Yeah Mike: Right? But yeah we never got anything like that which I was really I actually that was the one thing I expected and was surprised to see that we never got. Okay. So we're going to go into mini tangent with video games even though they aren't technically related to comics. The first game for Highlander was a 1986 tie-in release for home computers. It was a really simple fighting title. It wasn't well received. It was apparently pretty bad. So after that the animated series had a tie in called Highlander: Last of the MacLeods. It was released on the Atari Jaguar CD console. If you remember that. Do you remember the Atari Jaguar? Jessika: Oh my god, no. I don't. [00:45:00] Mike: It kinda got lost in the shuffle in the early to mid nineties of all the different consoles that were coming out. But you can find footage of this on YouTube and it's one of those early 3d games. And so it got a lot of praise for his exploration elements and animated video sequences, but it also got a lot of criticism for its controls in combat. After that there was actually going to be an MMO called Highlander, The Gathering. And it was in development by a French studio called Kalisto entertainment, which was honestly weird because Kalisto's catalog up until now were mostly middling single-player games. They'd gotten famous for a series called Nightmare Creatures, but they also did a Fifth Element racing game on PS2 that I had and was actually pretty fun. Anyway, Kalisto went bankrupt before the MMO could come out. Jessika: Oh! Mike: And none of the folks who, yeah, that's video games. Jessika: Fair enough. Mike: So they went bankrupt. The MMO hadn't come out yet. And the folks who wound up with the rights afterwards just decided to kill the project. There's [00:46:00] one other game. That's become the source of a lot of speculation. And it's only known as Highlander: The Game it basically came about because Davis Panzer productions that's, the guys who own the rights to Highlander, and SCI, which was this holding company that owned a bunch of video game groups. They decided to ink a deal, to make a Highlander game. They announced that they basically had done a partnership back in like 2004, 2005. And at the time SCI owned Eidos who was the publisher that gave us Tomb Raider. So they were a pretty big name. The game itself was formally announced by Eidos in 2008 and the development was being handled by another French developer called Widescreen Games. It was going to be an action role-playing game. It would star a new Immortal named Owen MacLeod. The story was going to be written again by David Abramowitz and that added some [00:47:00] serious legitimacy to the project for fans. Actually, why don’t you read the summary. Jessika: Would love to my pleasure. Summary: Owen is captured and enslaved by Romans who force him to compete as a gladiator. During this time, Owen dies only to come back to life. Methos, the oldest living immortal approaches Owen to be his mentor. He teaches Owen about the game and how he and other Immortals can only be slain by beheading. As with other immortal MacLeods Owen is pursued throughout his life by a nemesis. This enemy proves to be extremely powerful. One that Owen is unable to defeat Owen learns of a magical stone, fragments of which are scattered all over the world. Throughout the game, Owen embarks upon a quest to recover these fragments and restore the stone in an attempt to gain the power to overcome his foe. [00:48:00] So dramatic. I love it. Mike: What's Highlander without any drama? But that sounds rad right? Jessika: Oh, it sounds amazing. Mike: The game was announced with a trailer in 2008 that really only showed some of the environments from different eras and then it ended with an image of Owen, but it looked promising. And then there wasn't much else after a couple of years of pretty much nothing but radio silence, Eidos wound up canceling the game and that's where a lot of the speculation has started. There's not a lot of information on Highlander: The Game. I keep waiting for one of those gaming history YouTubers to get ahold of an old dev kit and then do a video with a build, but that hasn't happened yet. So really it's all kind of speculation and wishful thinking about what could have been. And it also seems like some of the details are getting muddied as time goes on. Like Fearful Symmetry talks about the game of it but they [00:49:00] have the segment. And again I want you to read this. Jessika: Sure sure. The gam was so far along in its development stages that segments including backdrops and some of the gameplay options were presented at a Highlander Worldwide event in Los Angeles 2006 and got a very positive reaction. The beautifully rendered backdrops were almost movie quality and included the likes of Pompei, a dark forest in the Highlands, New York, and Japan as gameplay locations and introduced us to another MacLeod, Owen, the same surname but a much earlier vintage. Mike: Yeah, so, I think Mosby is a little overly enthusiastic about all of this, and this is because I think Mosby doesn't have much familiarity with how game development works. It sounds like they had concept art on display and were discussing gameplay [00:50:00] rather than showcasing a build of the game. Concept art and design discussions are things that happen very early in game development. But if you're an outsider, looking in this stuff could easily be interpreted as things being much further along than they were. Jessika: Ah. Mike: Yeah. Now that said, I did work in video games for almost a decade, and a few of my coworkers were actually involved with Highlander the game. Jessika: What? Mike: Every one of them over the years has told me the cancellation was a mercy killing. And again, this is from multiple sources, so I'm not going to name or identify because, I don't want to make things awkward for them. But basically the game was garbage . It's not really surprising to hear cause widescreen never really made a good game, the best reception that any of their titles got was just kinda mixed. But earlier this week, I actually called one of my friends. Who'd been [00:51:00] attached to the project because I wanted to get more information about this game before we recorded. Jessika: We need to get you a new shovel, you dug so deep for this. Mike: With both hands. But, they confirmed what I've been hearing from other people the gameplay itself wasn't just bad. It was boring. The biggest problem was it didn't know what kind of a game it wanted to be. Basically, it was trying to do everything all at once. There were a bunch of traversal elements, which didn't really make a lot of sense. Like why would you climb a Manhattan skyscraper when you're a roided out dude with a sword? Couldn't you just take the elevator? Or I don't know the stairs? There was going to be a bunch of Magic elements in the gameplay, which, isn't really, that's not really a thing in Highlander. There's that fantasy element because we're talking about Immortals who can't die unless you cut off their heads, but generally Magic isn't a part of the accepted Canon. And then the combat, what they were aiming to do something like [00:52:00] God of war, which was really big at the time. But, it wasn't great. My friend also pointed out that Owen looked like a bodybuilder, but his fashion sense was from that industrial metal scene of the late nineties, which neither of those things really fits with the Highlander aesthetic because Adrian Paul was arguably the most in shape of the Highlander actors. But even that was, he was a dude who was like, yeah, I could achieve that if I was really good about my diet and then just worked out aggressively but not like Hugh Jackman does for his Wolverine roles. Jessika: Yeah, yeah. Mike: So I'm going to send you a screenshot of what Owen looked like in the key art the initial title it does. Jessika: What? It looks like Criss Angel. Mike: Right. And they're trying to recreate that iconic pose of The Quickening from the first movie that Connor does at the very end where he's getting raised up and, by the rails of Lightning, or the wires [00:53:00] of lightning. Jessika: Yeah, I get what they were trying to do. Mike: Yeah,I wanna know, what the fuck is up with those weird straps with rings that are going down his legs. Jessika: I don't really know, I was trying to figure that out myself. So just so that everyone can really get the picture that we're getting here and you'll, you might understand why it's taken me so long to describe it. I had to take it all in first. Mike: Yeah, it’s a ride. Jessika: It’s all very monochromatic. And the background is of course, a cut of the statue of Liberty, the backdrop of parts of New York that I'm sure aren't even next to each other, which is always funny. And then what is this? Is this the new guy, or is this supposed to be Duncan? Mike: Yeah, this is the new guy, Jessika: It’s Owen. Mike: Yeah. It's Owen. And then Connor and Duncan were supposed to appear, supposedly. I know Peter Wingfield was recording his lines for Methos. Jessika: Well, if they haven't killed off Methos that makes sense. And I don't know in the series if they have, and maybe Duncan makes [00:54:00] sense if he hasn't died yet, but. Mike: Yeah they can't kill off Methos, Methos was my first gay crush. Jessika: Yeah. He's. Slightly problematic in a couple episodes, but he's a great character overall. But he's very Chriss Angel, he's wearing like a trench coat and that has to be some sort of a lace undershirt or something. Mike: lAnd he’s got like a weird really, like baggy leather pants. Jessika: Yes. Which cannot be comfortable. It's doing this weird pooching thing in the front. Mike: Yeah, and then I think I saw another screenshot where it looks like he's wearing skater shoes tennis shoes as well. Jessika: Oh, Vans Off the Wall, man. Mike: Just once I want to see a MacLeod in the movies with a good fashion sense. Jessika: Yeah, I mentioned that I wanted to cosplay as Duncan, which overall would be a great idea. But then I was looking through his outfits and I'm like, what do I wear? Do I wear this weird white tank top with these like acid wash jeans [00:55:00] and a belt? Or is this the one where I'm wearing like five shirts and a long jacket? Is it that day? Mike: You know who he looks like that guy, Canus. Jessika: Yes! Yes, does. He has the lace shirt and everything. Mike: And the dog collar. Jessika: Oh my god, it was so funny. I told you, I think it was trying to be edgy. Mike: Yeah, and instead it comes off as really queer-coded. Jessika: It really does though. I know, my little queer brain was like bling. Mike: Yeah, It feels like they weren't really getting the essence of what Highlander actually was and who these guys were, because usually the Highlander characters are a little bit more believable and ordinary because that's the whole idea is that they're walking among us and we have no idea unless they tell us. Okay. On top of all this. So remember how I mentioned that trailer was just showcasing environments for the [00:56:00] game. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: There was a reason for that. The reason was that they couldn’t get the character models to work. Jessika: Oh! Mike: So the shot of Owen at the end it's actually just animated key art it's the same it's the same art that you just saw. It's that image. It was just slightly animated. And then they released a couple of screenshots for the game, but apparently they were really heavily photo-shopped well, beyond industry standards. So, it was one of those things where, this was a turd and it needed to be flushed. And it finally did. But Widescreen went under about a year after the game was formally announced. They were working on another big project and apparently that got taken away, and as a result, it just caused the studio to implode. By this point in time Square Enix the guys do all the final fantasy games had bought Eidos and they formally canceled it. We're not sure why exactly, my guess is that it was probably, they just looked at cost it would take to finish this game and then the [00:57:00] amount that it would need to sell in order to be profitable or to meet their sales expectations for it and they just thought it wasn't worth it. But yeah, my friend actually said they were embarrassed to work on it and they would have been fine even if it had been an average game, but it was just bad. Even one of those kind of middling average games, I think that would have been fine, that would have lived up to the Highlander bar. Finally, there's that Highlander game that spark unlimited was working on. I never even heard a whisper about this until. We watched that episode of Highlander Heart focusing on video games, and they brought Craig Allen on to talk about the project. Based on what we know now, I think this might be why Square Enix was holding onto the rights for another year after they shut down Highlander, the game, just because they had this other title, theoretically in development or very early development. Based on the footage that they have, it looks like they had at least done enough development work to put together a vertical slice that they could show for pitch [00:58:00] purposes and at conventions. But I thought it was really promising looking overall. What did you think? Jessika: I thought it did look really interesting the game play itself I did like the idea of having a female Highlander. That being said, they had this whole concept about what Craig Allen was calling beautiful damage. Mike: Yeah. Jessika: And it was this whole thing about, oh it was the first female Highlander and her looks go when she gets damaged, and that's her whole motivation is to stay pretty. And I just, that gave me a huge headache, and it of course was super male-gazey I mean, the game itself seemed that way. Mike: It was weird because I would love to see women and Highlander being built a little bit more like warriors, like a little bit more muscly, which would be in keeping with people who battle across the centuries. [00:59:00] They don't need to be super jacked like the Amazons in Wonder Woman, but making them look like stick thin suicide girl, punk rock chick from the late aughts. Didn't quite gel with me. I understood what he was talking about though, because that was the thing where they were starting to do permanent cosmetic damage in video games. That was something that was really big in the Batman Arkham games. Every time that you got knocked out, you'd come back and you'd have a little bit more of your outfit chipped apart. So, after a while Batman's looking pretty ragged and you realize maybe I'm not as good at this game as I think I am. Jessika: Yeah And the concept itself is really interesting It just I guess was the way it was phrased by this person. And it very much was he was so proud of the fact that it was the first Highlander female in a video game. And then everything was just like so incredibly sexist. I was excited that I wasn't Mike: We're also viewing it, with the lens of 2021 at this point. At that time, [01:00:00] that was before they had relaunched Tomb Raider, in 2013, 2014, where they made her much more realistic. She was still very fit, but she wasn't the Lara Croft that had generated a lot of criticism. I think possibly, I don't know, but I hope that it would have been marketed a bit differently if it had been done today. That said we also don't know exactly what it would look like as a final product. Jessika: Oh absolutely, yeah. Mike: It’s, I agree. It's a little bit problematic viewed through the current lens. At the same time, like a lot of the Highlander properties when it was being done, I think it was kind of just par for the course. Jessika: Yeah, fair enough. But, I did like the idea of having a female Highlander and having her have a whole story regardless of whether it's the first one to be completely [01:01:00] tragedy laden which was the other comment like her experience a ton of loss because she's female and experiences empathy unlike the male characters. Mike: I really didn't like that. Actually. I thought that was. I mean the, the whole thing where they were saying we wanted to focus on lifetimes of tragedy as opposed to enjoying multiple lives. And I'm like, that's the whole purpose of Highlander. That's what I really like is when you sit there and you watch them having fun and doing all this interesting stuff. Jessika: Women aren't allowed to have fun, Mike. Mike: Apparently. Jessika: We just have to have lives full of tragedy and pining for people that we've lost in our lives. Mike: Well, yeah. And we all know that the dudes don't have feelings, so we just, you know, go on and enjoy things. Jessika: That does suck that Hugh they don't give men the ability to have that capacity or give them the the credit to have that capacity. Mike: I will say, I am sorry that this one didn't get further along the development [01:02:00] stages, because it certainly seemed like it had a lot more promise than the title that was canceled right before it. Jessika: Yes, the gameplay itself looked more interesting, it looks more complex, it easier to navigate. What they were showing us was really intense. Mike: I really liked that whole idea of being able to view the environments in two different eras. It reminded me a lot of another Eidos game called legacy of Cain soul river, where there was a spiritual world and then a physical world. And you could flip back and forth between them, which was kind of cool. Jessika: Oh, that’s neat Mike: Yeah. I dug that. I liked the idea of exploring the same environment in two different areas. I thought that was really neat. Jessika: Yeah. Mike: Let's move on to Comics. Jessika: Sounds great. Mike: Okay, so, I’m curious. When do you think that Highlander got big enough to get a comic book? Jessika: I don't know maybe late nineties Mike: 2006. Jessika: Wow [01:03:00] That's later than I had expected. Mike: Yeah. There wasn't a comic adaptation of the movie when it came out, which is weird, there wasn't one here in the States. Highlander Heart, in their YouTube podcast, noted there was a series of five newspaper comic strips that were published as part marketing promotion. The hosts weren't entirely certain if they're exclusive to Europe or not. I don't know. I haven't been able to really find much reference to it. After the movie came out, though there was a two-part comic adaptation in Argentina. It was published through El Tony Todo Color and El Tony Supercolor they were sibling comic anthology magazines, and here's the weird twist. It looks like this was an unlicensed adaptation. Jessika: Mmhm, interesting. Mike: So now we're going to take another side tangent. The important thing that you need to know is that Argentina had just come out of a brutal military dictatorship that came about as part of Operation Condor, which is this horrific program the United States was involved in. And it isn't really taught about in high school history, at least it [01:04:00] wasn't when I was going through high school and I went to a pretty good one. did you ever learn about that? I'm curious. Jessika: No, I did not. Mike: Okay I'm giving you an extremely TLDR read of this, but basically this was a program in the seventies and eighties when the US backed military dictatorships across South America. So our country helped these groups, kidnap, torture, rape murder, thousands of political opponents, like Argentina was especially brutal. There were literally death squads, hunting down political distance across the country. It was a really horrific time. I want you to read this summary of what was going on during that time, actually. Jessika: Give me the really fun stuff I see. Mike: Sorry. Jessika: No you're good. It is estimated that between - 9,000 and 30,000 that's a huge span. Mike: I know, it’s such a margin of error I don't understand. Jessika: Lack of record taking will get you there quick, I think. I'm going to start over, but we’ll leave that in. It is estimated that between [01:05:00] 9,000 and 30,000 people were killed or disappeared, many of whom were impossible to formally report due to the nature of state terrorism. The primary target, like in many other South American countries participating in Operation Condor, were communist guerrillas and sympathizers, but the target of Operation Condor also included students, militants trade, unionists, writers, journalists, I don't love this, artists, and any other citizens suspected of being left-wing activists - well take me the goddamn way away. Mike: Right. Jessika: Including Peronist guerillas. I don't love that. Mike: No it's really awful. And based on that list of targets, it's not surprising that there was a lot of media suppression during this time. Democracy returned to the country in ’83, and there was this explosion of art across the mediums. Argentine Comics [01:06:00] saw this Renaissance period. A lot of them though, weren't really licensed and let's be honest. It's not like there's an internet where IP owners could monitor stuff like this and shut it down when they learned about it. There was also this drastic comics increase in the area due to create or publishing Zines because the eighties was the decade where personal computers suddenly became commonplace and all of a sudden pe

A quick note from your editor, Mike: There was a major issue with Noah's recorder in Delray halfway through, along with another issue which you'll hear about....so there's a noticeable audio difference when we had to switch to a cell line. Apologies, it's all we could do in a rushed situation. Now, a big thanks to our latest patreon sponsor, Steve Quick. He and our other patreon sponsors will be receiving a special pod later this week. You can join at patreon.com/behindtheracquetpod. The tennis world is absolutely chaotic right now. Yet here we are, embarking on another season. What's the vibe like in Delray, where Noah kicks off his season in a couple days? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Standout Quotes: "How many people do you keep employed by what you do?" - [Mike] "I think that a lot of times we don't succeed or we don't get to the place that we want to get cos we don't ask enough" - [Mike] "What is the control of your calendar... Do you let other people around you or in your business dictate the amount of time you get to spend with your family?" "You can't achieve anything unless you take the next step... so live ridiculously" - [Mike] "All smart business people know their numbers" - [Mike] "The mind works like a rubber band, anytime you stretch it, the elasticity comes out of it" - [Mike] "Investors are eager but often held back... Fear is what ultimately holds investors back" - [Mike] "There is no passion to be found in playing small, in settling for a life that is less than the one you are capable of living" - [Nelson Mandela]   Key Takeaways: Make sure you're thanking people and being grateful for the part that they play in your life and how important that is for you. The focus and goal of MCI is to teach you how to own and operate a multi-family Real Estate Right now there's a lot of first-time home-buyer grant money in the country, so a major city you might live in, might have a grant. If you think through every move that you're going to make, it makes a big difference in your investing strategy and career. Real Estate can be very distracting from everything else in your life unless you have control of your calendar Mike's coaching is aimed at delivering more straight forward factual data that's gonna grow your business  No matter what industry you're in, networking and team building is critically important and it's what helps your business grow Masterminding with people who are more successful than you, is going to help you grow. The 5 closest people to you in your life right now, are how you're going to turn out in 5 years from now. Every Real Estate investor possesses a continual desire to grow and learn Mike's mistakes over the years: Don't over-leverage, don't under leverage, don't overpay, and don't fall in love with a deal Make time for your education, make time to expand your mind   Episode Timeline: [00:11] Today's unique episode with Mike Morawski [02:54] Appreciation from Mike to everyone who has been a part of his life [05:36] MCI invests in her clients future through an educational platform [16:40] Making a transition into Commercial Real Estate [19:00] How do I help you live a more balanced lifestyle while still growing your business? [19:51] About Mike's newly released book, "Exit Plan" [26:29] How do we live a ridiculous lifestyle moving forward? [28:59] Mike shares some techniques he used to get more listings and sellers [32:45] Mike's Multi-family mastermind [39:38] Events lined up for the coming year. [42:00] The My Core Intentions Multi-family summit [51:43] Some of Mike's mistakes over the years

In this episode, Gina Cocking and Jeff Guylay continue their discussion on deal structuring. Today, we explore reps and warranties ("R&W") insurance. In this episode, we cover: · What is R&W insurance? · What is the pricing of R&W insurance? · What is the process to obtain R&W insurance? Key takeaways from this episode: · R&W insurance is a tried and true product, and securing it will not slow down the pace of a deal · Smaller deals, down to $10 million in size, can still get R&W insurance · R&W insurance is a great way for a seller to get more cash at close, rather than having 10%+ of the purchase price tied up in a multi-year escrow Other episodes in our series about deal structuring include price and terms, earn outs, rollover equity, and roll ups.  Later in this episode, Gina is joined by our guest Mike Wolf, who specializes in R&W insurance at Willis Towers Watson's M&A Group. In this episode, Colonnade Advisors addresses the following questions as related to R&W insurance: What is R&W insurance? (00:27) Jeff: "R&W insurance insures the seller and buyer from a breach of representation and warranties in the purchase agreement. " What is the difference between R&W insurance and an escrow? (01:27) Jeff: "R&W insurance avoids utilizing an escrow. An escrow is deferred consideration that is withheld to make sure that these reps and warranties survive and that they are fulfilled post-transaction." How often is R&W insurance used in transactions? (02:38) Jeff: "R&W insurance is a relatively new concept in the M&A world." Gina: "It really came into being about seven years ago. Now, it is used in almost 95% of all transactions." What is the purpose of R&W insurance? (02:48) Gina: "In a purchase agreement, there's always a section called reps and warranties regarding the company and the seller. The seller has to represent fundamentals such as that the organization is in good standing, is licensed in the state, and the sellers have the authorization to do the transaction and have the consents. " What are other typical reps and warranties in the purchase agreement? (03:45) Gina: "There is usually a representation that the capitalization is correct, all subsidiaries are listed, the financial statements are in GAAP or other accounting standards used, there is an absence of undisclosed liabilities, the contracts are true and all have been disclosed, all obligations to related parties have been disclosed, all real property has been disclosed, all intellectual property has been disclosed, listed, and truthfully identified, litigation has been disclosed, privacy and data security representations are made, taxes have been paid, and employees and labor matters have been disclosed." What is the typical coverage amount? (06:12) Gina: "The coverage is typically 10% to 15% of the purchase price. For deals under the size of $50 million, the coverage percentage may go up.” What is the typical premium for R&W insurance? Are there any other fees? (07:11) Gina: "Typically, we see premiums between 3% to 5% of the coverage amount. Economically, it does get cheaper with more coverage. Small deals are more expensive on a percentage basis; larger deals get a break. Another fee is the underwriting fee charged by the insurer, typically around $50k." Who pays for the R&W insurance? (08:50) (13:29) Gina: "This is where the negotiation comes in. Everybody has a different view. The buyer wants the seller to pay; the seller wants the buyer to pay." Jeff: "It is really a buyer's policy. No matter who is paying the premium or who is paying their share of it, it is the property of the buyer." Why do buyers prefer R&W insurance versus an escrow? (09:51) Gina: "Buyers do like R&W insurance. A breach of a representation and warranty can cause a lot of conflict between the seller and the buyer when there is an escrow, especially when the seller is continuing to manage the company. It's easier if there is a breach of representation and warranty and the buyer goes to the insurance--no conflict." What is Colonnade's typical process in representing sellers to negotiate who is paying for the R&W insurance? (11:02) Gina: "At Colonnade, when we ask for the indications of interest, the letters of intent, or bid letters, we ask the buyers to indicate whether they are going to pay the premium for the R&W insurance. Some buyers will pay the full amount, some won't, and some will pay a portion of it. It is a negotiated point. Another negotiated point is who pays the underwriting fee." What is the process of obtaining R&W insurance? (12:26) Gina: "The process starts very early. It starts when the seller is picking their legal counsel. It is important that the seller has legal counsel that has experience with R&W insurance. Also, the seller or buyer will need a broker." Why is the broker's role in obtaining R&W insurance? (13:37) Gina: "The broker will work with multiple insurance companies to get the best rate and the best coverage.” At what point during the transaction process should buyers or sellers speak with a broker? (13:37) Gina: "The proper time to speak to a broker is once the LOI has been signed and you have entered the exclusivity period." Generally, how long does it take to obtain the R&W insurance? (15:31) Gina: "Generally, it takes only one to two weeks to get through the underwriting process. For a 60-day exclusivity, contact the broker day one of 60 days, but probably around day 30 or day 35 is when the representation and warranty process in terms of getting the coverage starts." Jeff: "The timing is really important. Brokers and carriers are pretty aggressive these days, so they will move pretty quickly.” Who are the dominant carriers and brokers for R&W insurance in recent years? (19:19) Gina: "For brokers, two that I've seen a lot are Willis Towers Watson and Lockton. There are many carriers, including AIG, Zurich, Hartford, Allied, and Berkshire. The brokers will know who the right carrier is for the right types of companies.” Gina invites Mike Wolf, who specializes in R&W insurance at Willis Towers Watson's M&A Group, to share his insights. What is the typical cost of R&W insurance? (21:40) Mike: "Similar to other insurances, there is the premium, which is usually 2.6% to 3.3% of the limit purchase. Second, there is the underwriting fee, which is generally $30,000 to $50,000. Third, there are surplus lines, taxes, and fees, which is another 2% to 5% of the premium. Lastly, there is a fee to the broker to facilitate these products." What items are not covered by R&W insurance? (25:21) Mike: "There are the standard exclusions such as asbestos and PCBs, underfunded pension plans, certain types of NOLs and tax attributes. Right now, COVID-19 has become an interesting exclusion. Transfer pricing is sometimes an exclusion. In addition to the standard exclusions, there are deal-specific exclusions. Deal-specific exclusions arise either at the stage of getting the quotes or during the underwriting process." What are the common things that come up during underwriting? (30:38) Mike: "It depends on what the target does. The common themes are wage and hour, employee independent contractor issues, SLSA issues, anti-corruption and bribery." What size deal is too small for R&W insurance? (32:15) Mike: "Everybody will tell you something different, but I think $10 million." What is the typical brokerage process? (36:15) Mike: "Phase one is going out and getting the quotes, which doesn't take very long, and we don't charge any money for that. The first non-refundable fee is once the client selects an insurer, which is when the process really gets started." Featured guest bio and contact information: Scott Wolf: Email: scott.wolf@willistowerswatson.com Scott Wolf is a Client Relationship Director at Willis Towers Watson. Scott specializes in assisting strategic and financial buyers and sellers with transactional insurance, including reps and warranties insurance, tax insurance, and contingent liability insurance. Since joining Willis Towers Watson in 2017, Scott has worked on over 100 transactions involving representations and warranties insurance, ranging in enterprise value from approximately $9 million to $3 billion. Scott's prior experience includes working as an associate at DLA Piper, an associate at Gould & Ratner, and an associate at Kirkland and Ellis. Host Information: Gina Cocking: Gina Cocking serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Colonnade Advisors. She returned to Colonnade as a Managing Director in 2014. Gina began her career in investment banking at Kidder Peabody, was an analyst at Madison Dearborn Partners, and an associate at J.P. Morgan & Co. She was a Vice President at Colonnade Advisors from 1999 to 2003. She left Colonnade to gain operating experience as the Chief Financial Officer of Cobalt Finance, a specialty finance company. She went on to become the Chief Financial Officer of Healthcare Laundry Systems, a private-equity backed company for which she oversaw the successful sale to a strategic acquirer. Gina served as the Line of Business CFO – Consumer Banking and Lending at Discover Financial Services. Gina serves on the Board of Directors of CIB Marine Bancshares, Inc., a bank holding company based in Waukesha, Wisconsin, that operates banking offices in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Gina received her BA in Economics and an MBA from the University of Chicago. Additionally, Gina holds the Series 24, 28, 79, and 99 securities licenses. Jeff Guylay: Jeff Guylay is a Managing Director of Colonnade Advisors. Prior to joining Colonnade in 2000, Jeff was an investment banker at J.P. Morgan in the firm's Mergers & Acquisitions and Fixed Income Capital Markets groups in New York. He also spent several years in J.P. Morgan's Chicago office. Jeff has over 20 years of M&A and investment banking experience and has served as lead execution partner on over 25 M&A and financing transactions at Colonnade. Jeff received an MBA from Northwestern University's Kellogg Graduate School of Management and a Master of Engineering Management from the University's McCormick School of Engineering. Jeff received a BA from Dartmouth College and a BE from Dartmouth's Thayer School of Engineering. Jeff holds the Series 7, 24, 63, and 79 securities licenses. Jeff serves as a director of the non-profit Nurture, an organization dedicated to enhancing the nutrition and wellness of children and families. About the Middle Market Mergers & Acquisitions Podcast Get the insiders' take on mergers and acquisitions. M&A investment bankers Gina Cocking and Jeff Guylay of Colonnade Advisors discuss the technical aspects of and tactics used in middle market deals. This podcast offers actionable advice and strategies for selling your company and is aimed at owners of middle market companies in the financial services and business services sectors. Middle market companies are generally valued between $20 million and $500 million.

You can't just yell "Panic!" at the disco. That's like yelling "Bomb!" at the airport. Do these Sin City bad boys care? Not a groomsbride's chance in hell! Come one come all as we discuss an album that covers everything from alcoholism to adultery and touches on every novel Chuck Palahniuk has ever written. We swear to shake it up if you swear to listen... so what are you waiting for? Favorite Songs: Keanan: Lying Is the Most Fun... Mike: There's a Good Reason These Tables Are Numbered... "Lying Is the Most Fun..." Music Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AZxUtZ2ZgI "I Write Sins Not Tragedies" Music Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc6vs-l5dkc Michelle McNamara's "I'll Be Gone in the Dark": https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/books/michelle-mcnamara-patton-oswalt-book-serial-killer.html Gaston's song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVdgaSuAjII "Into the Unknown" Music Video (from Frozen 2): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp-CVYGEsjg War of the Worlds radio broadcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs0K4ApWl4g&t=223s Gladiator - "Are you not entertained?!": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI1ylg4GKv8 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/poppunkproject Tip Jar: https://tips.pinecast.com/jar/tppp IG: https://www.instagram.com/poppunkproject/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/poppunkproject Merch: https://teespring.com/stores/the-pop-punk-project

 Discover how to increase your brand discovery and sales through the use of Amazon Find out how to make your product “retail-ready” for Amazon Learn why Amazon is one of the best discovery platforms worth investing your product on and how to maximize that investment Resources/Links: Check out Mike's Website: AMZadvisers.com/landing Summary Have you already invested your product on the Amazon platform? Are you satisfied with the results it's getting? Do you want to know the secret to improving your sales and results and how to make the most out of your investment in Amazon? Mike Begg is an expert in eCommerce and digital marketing. He co-founded AMZ Advisers and has grown the business to over $10M/year in ad spend and $100M/year in Amazon sales. In this episode, Mike shares his experiences and ideas on how to increase your sales and brand discovery with the use of Amazon. He also shares the secret of how to maximize your investment in Amazon through making your product “retail-ready”. Check out these episode highlights: 01:25 - Mike's ideal client: “Our ideal clients are CPG brands and manufacturers that are either not satisfied with the results they're getting on the Amazon platform or haven't really invested into the platform or venturing into it but at the same time, they have to have that willingness to invest in the platform.” 02:02 - Problem Mike helps solve: “The problem that we solve and the reason we started this company was to help brands get the representation they need on the Amazon platform.” 02:55 - Typical symptoms that clients do before reaching out to Mike: “There can be a variety of problems but the biggest issue that most companies have is that they're not getting the sales they want, or they're not getting enough traffic their listings. And that can be for a variety of reasons, it really comes down to SEO and advertising.” 03:53 - Common mistakes that people make before they find Mike's solution: “A lot of the common mistakes are people just throw things up on the platform and expect that that traffic's immediately going to come without, you know, really considering what their sales copy is without doing the proper keyword research, and everything that really builds the foundation for you on the Amazon platform.” 04:45 - Mike's Valuable Free Action (VFA): “There is a term within the Amazon community which is called "retail readiness" and getting your listings to be "retail-ready" is extremely important for being on the platform. There are a few different things you can consider to get your listings "retail-ready" on your own.” 06:18 - Mike's Valuable Free Resource (VFR): Check out Mike's Website: AMZadvisers.com/landing 07:01 - Q: Why do companies need to invest in the Amazon platform? A: The reality is Amazon is the best brand discovery platform that there is right now, at least in the US and in North America. Tweetable Takeaways from this Episode: “You can't just throw things out there and expect to succeed without taking certain steps to make sure that you're set up for success.” -Mike BeggClick To Tweet Transcript (Note, this was transcribed using a transcription software and may not reflect the exact words used in the podcast) Tom Poland 00:10 Hello everyone and another very warm welcome to Marketing The Invisible. My name is Tom Poland, joined today by Mike Begg. Mike, good day. A very warm welcome from down under. Where are you hanging out, sir?

 Discover how to increase your brand discovery and sales through the use of Amazon Find out how to make your product “retail-ready” for Amazon Learn why Amazon is one of the best discovery platforms worth investing your product on and how to maximize that investment Resources/Links: Check out Mike’s Website: AMZadvisers.com/landing Summary Have you already invested your product on the Amazon platform? Are you satisfied with the results it’s getting? Do you want to know the secret to improving your sales and results and how to make the most out of your investment in Amazon? Mike Begg is an expert in eCommerce and digital marketing. He co-founded AMZ Advisers and has grown the business to over $10M/year in ad spend and $100M/year in Amazon sales. In this episode, Mike shares his experiences and ideas on how to increase your sales and brand discovery with the use of Amazon. He also shares the secret of how to maximize your investment in Amazon through making your product “retail-ready”. Check out these episode highlights: 01:25 - Mike’s ideal client: “Our ideal clients are CPG brands and manufacturers that are either not satisfied with the results they're getting on the Amazon platform or haven't really invested into the platform or venturing into it but at the same time, they have to have that willingness to invest in the platform.” 02:02 - Problem Mike helps solve: “The problem that we solve and the reason we started this company was to help brands get the representation they need on the Amazon platform.” 02:55 - Typical symptoms that clients do before reaching out to Mike: “There can be a variety of problems but the biggest issue that most companies have is that they're not getting the sales they want, or they're not getting enough traffic their listings. And that can be for a variety of reasons, it really comes down to SEO and advertising.” 03:53 - Common mistakes that people make before they find Mike’s solution: “A lot of the common mistakes are people just throw things up on the platform and expect that that traffic's immediately going to come without, you know, really considering what their sales copy is without doing the proper keyword research, and everything that really builds the foundation for you on the Amazon platform.” 04:45 - Mike’s Valuable Free Action (VFA): “There is a term within the Amazon community which is called "retail readiness" and getting your listings to be "retail-ready" is extremely important for being on the platform. There are a few different things you can consider to get your listings "retail-ready" on your own.” 06:18 - Mike’s Valuable Free Resource (VFR): Check out Mike’s Website: AMZadvisers.com/landing 07:01 - Q: Why do companies need to invest in the Amazon platform? A: The reality is Amazon is the best brand discovery platform that there is right now, at least in the US and in North America. Tweetable Takeaways from this Episode: “You can't just throw things out there and expect to succeed without taking certain steps to make sure that you're set up for success.” -Mike BeggClick To Tweet Transcript (Note, this was transcribed using a transcription software and may not reflect the exact words used in the podcast) Tom Poland 00:10 Hello everyone and another very warm welcome to Marketing The Invisible. My name is Tom Poland, joined today by Mike Begg. Mike, good day. A very warm welcome from down under. Where are you hanging out, sir? Mike Begg 00:22 Tom, thanks for having me here. I am based in Guadalajara, Mexico. Tom Poland 00:26 How's the weather today? Mike Begg 00:28 It's a little cloudy, you can see some rain rolling in but normally, it's pretty warm. So, can't really complain. Tom Poland 00:34 Yeah, I heard it's a pretty nice climate there,

Mike Chua is a physical therapist who helps therapists turn their passion into purpose and profit by becoming a mentor. He lays on us how to improve your influence and impact in the industry using mentor – * M – meet a need/niche* E – educate* N – network* T – finding a team* O – one on one coaching* R – repeat it Check out Mike’s website at Alternative Healthcare Careers and Facebook group Alternative Healthcare Careers for Rehabilitation Professionals. He has created multiple books on Alzheimer’s and Dementia to give more information to the patients and audience he serves. His Facebook lives not only benefit the audience who listen but are valuable to him by learning and understanding more about his topics. QUOTES “Find a team that will actually believe in you and actually push you to your next level.” – MIKE “In order to be a good leader, you need to be a good follower.” – MIKE “There’s two parts in being a therapist. Part one is being the business owner. Second one, we are always made to be clinicians. We will always go back to our first love which is taking care of patients.” – MIKE PARTING SHOT “You always want to do everything fast.” – MIKE * F – find friends that will push you to your next level* A – take action* S – shoot for the moon* T – teach it

In our first episode, Bob, Rebecca, and Mike discuss how they became makers and began their journeys in the world of social media.Rebecca discusses being a teacher, her creative process, some of her art pieces, and some of the people who influenced her creative side.Bob talks about the beginnings of RJBWoodturner, creating YouTube videos for both of his channels, and how Laney Shaughnessy convinced him he should start making videos in the first place.Mike talks about how Bob convinced him to become a YouTube maker, what he thinks makes his channel just a little different that some of the others, and about his more that spacious work shop! Mike’s Social Media OutletsInstagram @lostriverpencoYoutube:  Lost River PensWebsite:  www.lostriverpens.comBob’s Social Media Outlets:Instagram @rjbwoodturnerYouTube RJBWoodTurnerYouTube WhatchaDoinBobRebecca’s Social Media Outlets:Facebook Rebecca DeGrootYouTube Rebecca DeGrootInstagram @rebecca_degrootWebsite www.rebeccadegroot.comEtsy RebeccaDeGrootStudioRebecca will be sharing pictures of her spiky bowls on the show's instagram account @youmadethatpodcastMichael will add photos of Pine Cone Pen to IG after Father’s Day.Send us your questions or topic suggestions by email to Makers@ymtpodcast.comTerrible Dad Jokes:Bob:Where Did Noah keep the bees on the arc? In the Archives.Mike:There was an explosion in a Parisian cheese factor  All that was left was de brieRebecca:How many tickles does it take to make an octopus laugh? Ten tickles!!!!

In today's part two of two Chuck is talking once again to Mike Nunez about his tips for being a successful buyer. We first heard about Mike's nine tips for a successful acquisition, and today he delves into the types of things he looks for in a business he is considering for purchase. We're also diving deep into one tip that Mike shared on part one of this two-part series. Finally, Mike also shares some great efficiency tools he's loving these days. Episode Highlights: What Mike looks for when buying a business. What he brings to the business with his own expertise. Examples of things that stand out to Mike in a listing. Advertising account criteria he checks for in a potential new business. Goals and intentions he has and the opportunities he looks for when on the hunt for a business. The importance of keeping criteria lists. Tips for content sites looking for affiliates. Certain synergies to look for in a search. Lessons Mike has learned through his acquisitions. Tools Mike is using and recommending these days. Transcription: Mark: Chuck in the last podcast episode that we had we had Mike Nuñez on. He offered nine very actionable tips on how to be a very good buyer; how to be a buyer that can win deals by having the right disposition. And I know you guys talked; you guys are friends, you live close to each other there in Florida and all that. So you guys are friends and naturally, your conversations are long but also Mike's got a ton of content to share with us and you guys got into a second episode. What can we expect from the second episode with Mike Nuñez? Chuck: Yeah, so let's start off by saying if you haven't watched the first one or listen to it make sure you do because it kind of leads into this. On this one, we talked about what are the types of things that he's looking for as a buyer and you should be able to get some stuff out of that to help you figure out maybe some ideas for the types of things you're looking for. We also talked about; there was like one tip that we gave that he gave us somebody at Rhodium conference a year or two ago and it gave that guy a 25% boost in his revenue like overnight. So that was a nice little take away there and then at the end of the call, one of the things I always like to do is just ask for any special tools or things that he uses so he gives us a list of additional tools he uses so a pretty little bonus at the end. Mark: Fantastic. Mike is a great guy. I'm super glad that he was able to come back on the podcast. Let's get right into it. Chuck: All right welcome back everybody this is Chuck Mullins here with Quiet Light Brokerage and this is part two of a two-part segment with Mike Nuñez. Welcome, Mike; welcome back. Mike: Thank you, Chuck. Thanks for being accepting of my long-windedness. Chuck: No, I think we had a lot of great stuff in the last one. If anybody didn't get a chance to watch it you might want to go back and watch that one first. What did we end up on; nine super-secret tips? Mike: They go to 9, yeah 9 super-secrets. Chuck: 8 or 9 super-secret tips of how to be a great buyer which Mike Nuñez is a great buyer. Now we wanted to segway in and Mike wanted to make sure that everybody know that he's not wearing, or he is wearing the same suit but only because we're recording these back to back because the last one went pretty long. So you still look great Mike. For anybody who didn't watch the last one, Mike purchased a custom-tailored suit business from us so this is probably why he's wearing the suit because I've never seen him wear a suit before he had purchased that business. So he's definitely stepped up his wardrobe game since then. So today we wanted to talk about what you're looking for when you buy a business and maybe some of the lessons you've learned along the way. So again maybe let's start off; before we jump into that just give a brief introduction for anybody who didn't watch the first part of the series about you. Mike: Well, so I think it's important if you're listening to this one you probably should listen to the first one first because it does set up a lot of the things that we're going to talk about here. But for those that just don't listen, I've been in internet marketing for about 20 years now. I spent most of it working for an agency or owning an agency. I worked for Google for four years in their paid, search division. And so today I own a company called AffiliateManager.com that manages affiliate programs as well as the performance company which manages paid search for companies as well. So that's the super brief synopsis. Chuck: Perfect. So let's jump into what is it that you look for when you're buying a business? Always people come to me and they; Chuck what kind of business should I buy? And I say okay well what are your interests, what are you good at? So I think you probably you're looking…well, let me just let you tell what are you looking for. Mike: Yeah, so I think it's important to say what I look for or what we look for; so I do have a pretty solid team around me but what we look for is going to be very different than what somebody else looks for. And so please take that with a grain of salt; everything that I'm going to say today and I think is important for everyone to just recognize, just be self-aware what is it that you are incredibly good at? If you're good at sales go find a company that has an incredible product and but they're bad at sales and you plug yourself in and you now have an incredible business overall. Or if you're fantastic at operations go find a company that's selling like crazy but their operations just can't keep up with all the offers and plug yourself in there and that's going to work. I like to say that real opportunity is at the intersection of two different expertise or two different types of expertise. So for me, it's online business and online marketing and I'm not so great at everything else. So I'm not an operations person, I'm not a finance person so I don't look for companies that are lacking in those areas. I look for companies that are strong in those areas and that are; I don't want to say lacking because I think that's potentially disrespectful to either the people that I purchased businesses from or will in the future but it's more where I see opportunity where they wouldn't know unless they worked at Google for several years or they wouldn't know unless they've been in online marketing for 20 years or they never had an affiliate program. They never thought about it and we're incredible at it. So plugging what we are really good at into things that maybe they've tried that they're above average at because you have to be above average if you're going to own an online business but they've spread themselves so thin that they couldn't be an expert at just one thing. Another nice side effect that I've seen with buying these businesses, some of the previous owners they just worked so long and hard in the business that when you're so down in the weeds like that it's hard to pull yourself out and kind of take a 40,000-foot view picture. When acquiring a company it's almost a natural thing that happens along the way and you start to say okay let me take a step back and look at this not so closely; so close I can't tell exactly what this is and what's going on. And then as you start to peel that back and say okay this is something that the previous owner did, is this something that I need to take over, do I bring the value? The previous owner either maybe they enjoyed it, maybe they liked it, or maybe they were really good at it but I'm not and so the answer there is who else within the company can take that over. And I got to say that's probably one of the biggest benefits of purchasing an online company not only for the buyer but for the seller that they're able to peel themselves out and all the while that's the transition of okay these are the daily duties that this person does and this is who can take that over. So the new buyer; so myself as an example can go focus on what we're good at. So with that caveat to what it is that you're asking some of the things that I look for and I think just another quick note on this; this is an ever-evolving list, just because I've written this today doesn't mean that there's not more to come. Every time we go through a business or every time actually we have a call we run into an issue with the current business. I say okay that sounds like an opportunity that when we purchase the next business that we need to look at and say can we help there. So some of these are super simple and most listeners might say oh well that that's kind of common sense. Well, it's not always common sense. Somebody on this call is going to really or somebody listening to this podcast is going to really benefit from it but I listed because it's things that I want to make sure that I go and check every time that we're looking at a business. So, for example, we are like I said really good at online marketing specifically affiliate marketing and paid search. So we'll go look do they have an affiliate program? Are they overpaying? Are they not paying out commission based off of the influence that each affiliate had on that actual transaction? It's actually super interesting to see how much people overpay for things. And even more interesting to see when they're underpaying affiliate. So for example affiliates, they are business just like you, just like me and they want to maximize their revenue for their inventory. A lot of people get stuck and they look oh my competitor pays 5% commission, that's what I'm going to go pay. But a really good affiliate is equivalent to an upper-funnel page search keyword. And if you're paying a two to one for an upper funnel page search keyword; let's use my custom suit business, if I'm willing to get a two to one for the keyword custom suits or men's custom suits, if I'm willing to take a two to one return on ad spend for that I should be willing to pay an affiliate who is upper funnel; who's educating customers about me, I should be willing to pay them a 50% commission because they're upper funnel. Chuck: Alright so that makes a lot of sense to use something that you do on a day to day basis with your main business to look to acquire a company. So can you give some examples of specifically what something you might look for is? Mike: Sure. I'll give two examples one of where we succeeded at this and one where we failed but then you use that failure to learn and regroup. So the first business that we acquired we identified that there was a significant amount of overspent. It wasn't the previous owner's fault. They had hired an agency who was just; they were doing good. I would give them a six out of 10. But within 20, 30 minutes we can evaluate a Google Ads account and say we can save this account 10, $15,000 a month. Chuck: And you were talking about like an Ad Words account as opposed to affiliate stuff? Mike: Correct. Yeah, a Google Ads account that maybe this ad, the Google Ads accounts is spending 50, 60, $70,000 a month and if we can look in there and say we can save 10, 15, 20,000 on this and still get the same level of sales based off of our expertise we're adding 1 to $200,000 straight to the bottom line; straight to EBITDA and we did exactly that. We actually just finished reviewing January through October and we actually generated more sales than the same period last year and we spent I think it was $160,000 less to do so in that period. Chuck: It kind of goes against the thought of ad expenses are going up, right? There's more and more competition every day for ads so people think that but yet you're able to cut ad spend and make more money with it. Mike: That's 100% correct. You have to know what you're doing. There are very, very few good paid search companies out there. And I know because I used to work with a lot of them when I was at Google. Kevin who's on our team; his job was to go out and train agencies on how to appropriately use Google Ad Words. Pat who's the mastermind on our team has been doing Google paid search since Yahoo or as Yahoo started before Google was in existence. So it's just such a level of expertise that we have on our team overall that we can go and then apply and get these level of savings overall. And again it's straight to the bottom line and we take that money; the first acquisition was partly done via an SBA loan and the savings that we've got doesn't quite cover the SBA loan but it's about 75% of it. It's almost like we acquired the company for the price of the down payment and a much smaller SBA loan so to speak. So that's got to be our number one criteria; same thing with an affiliate program again with the first acquisition they weren't doing attribution based commissioning. It was a smaller effect on the overall business. We probably saved somewhere between 30 and 40,000 for the entire year on that one. So it's again a much smaller effect but that's a part-time person. That's an initiative that we can go fund now because we're saving 30 to 40 grand that we wouldn't have to spend otherwise. Chuck: So let's call out specifically there what it is you're looking for. So Mike looks at a company, requests access to their ad account, and then Mike looks for what? Mike: So in their ad account I'm looking at are they using negative keywords appropriately, what bidding algorithm are they using on Google, what matching types are they using, are they using segmentation correctly. And this is all super 40,000-foot level things but as Pat, our behind the scenes masterminds like to say, a poorly run paid search program is typically death by a thousand paper cuts. It's not one of these things. It's a thousand of these things that we meticulously go and identify, find, correct, and improve. Chuck: Alright so you will go into an account, you see all these things and they're doing everything right does that mean okay it's a great company I'm not looking to buy this one; like are you specifically, if there's not something you can fix you're not going to acquire it? Mike: Yeah, that's a fun question. The good news is for me at least I've never seen one. That's good. And to be fair I've seen; when we are getting an RFPN for the agency business I've seen two or three that were so well run that we tell them we can't help, they're doing an amazing job. You're going to look to us for growth in three or four months and we're not going to deliver because your current company is doing fantastic so don't leave them. But when acquiring a business and the research that I do before making an offer I have not yet come across that. If that were the case yes it's not a kiss of death but it is a factor in whether or not we feel like we should purchase the business because we know that there's so many out there that do it so poorly. Investing; I know I'm not teaching anybody on the call anything new with this but investing is where's the next best place to spend your dollar? And if they're doing a bad job with paid search that's a good place for me to spend my dollar because I know we can fix that. If they're doing an incredible job well there's probably a better place for me to go spend my dollar. Chuck: Sure. And I don't think it's a negative thing for you to say nope I'm just going to move on to the next one they're doing everything right. Like you're looking for specific things in order to want to acquire and like you said you've only got so many dollars to spend. You need to place it where it's going to do the most good for you. And if somebody else is doing everything right like that's not your area of expertise to grow the business. Maybe again they're not doing sales well and that's not what you're specifically looking at so sales is where the person that is going to end up ultimately acquiring the business is good at. And there's also people who maybe they don't have necessarily an expertise at something and they're just looking for an overall good run business that can keep chugging away for the years to come. And that's not a negative like just because you don't have some really specialized thing that you're good it doesn't mean that buying a business would necessarily be a bad idea for you. Mike: Yeah it's one of those things begin with the end in mind, right? And if the if your end goal is that you want a super stable business but it's not going to grow because everything is so well optimized and you're willing to pay the same multiple for it and you just want to kind of run that business day to day as is without expectation of growth then that's it. And there are people that want that. I would even consider a business like that if it was strictly almost a lifestyle business. But the businesses that we're buying; our goal, our intention is to take this 15 million dollar company and turn it into a 25, 50, 100 million dollar company and so there has to be opportunity when we're purchasing and the bigger the opportunity that we identify that we can do so fairly quickly with what we have the more we're willing to pay for it and the more we're willing to compete for it overall. Chuck: So we were talking recently we had lunch and you said that you recently discovered something with one of your businesses that was something you know I'm going to start looking for that and it revolved around shipping. Do you remember what we were talking about? Mike: Oh yes I have it. It's on my list. And that's funny and that's yet another reason to have a list right, right? Chuck: Right. Mike: And so as we're talking like; I know I'm not alone in this, right? I know you're like this Chuck. I'm sure you, the person listening to this right now is the same way. And I'll wake up in the middle of night and I feel like sometimes not thinking about things or telling yourself think about this in the back of my mind and you'll solve problems; like I'll get things out there just to solve them. I'll wake up in the middle and be like that's the answer to this and literally I'll roll over, I'll pick up my phone, and I'll just type a note to myself and say this is the answer and I'll go back to sleep. And the one that you're talking about is we have a warehouse for both of the business but the one that we're talking about now has a warehouse, a large warehouse; tens of thousands of square feet, I'm not sure exactly how big it is but we were getting fined by the shipping company because the dimensions of our packaging was incorrect. And so as we printed out the shipping labels for it, it was off maybe by an inch or whatever it was. And so when we send it to FedEx who was our shipping carrier and they would measure it we would be off by however much and they would actually fine us and so it added to tens of thousands of dollars in fines that we are receiving; not shipping costs, fines because our dimensions were wrong. And so for less than $10,000, we purchased a dim scanner and basically eliminated that. That dim scanner pays itself in one to two months and then from that point forward we now recovered yet another 20, $30,000 back. So you see the recurring theme here; paid search, this is how much we can save by doing it better, affiliate, this is how much we can save by doing it better, shipping, this is how much we can save by doing it better and then here's the freaking key. Like this is the thing though; don't just sit on that. And again I guess this depends on your goal. If your goal is to just absolute squeeze every penny out of these companies that you want then go and do it. My goal is growth and to turn these companies into large companies so that one day I may list with Chuck and get a great multiple on these companies. But take those dollars that you're taking and now do all of the things on the list; in that plan and the things that the previous owner said I could never afford, I could never get to, I can never pay somebody to do it. Now you found the funds to go and actually do those things. Use that money to fund that growth. Again I'll refer to Pat who runs our paid search; he calls that feed the winners starve the losers, so just taking the wasted money and putting it back into reinvest on growth and winning. Chuck: So with the shipping fines that you discovered how long have you been running this business; it's been a year and a half? Mike: A year and a half, yeah. Chuck: And you just discovered it now. Is there something that you are having; we don't know what we don't know, right? So we don't know what to look for. Is this something that you could have identified on day one to have seen even more value? Mike: Yeah, thanks for pointing it out Chuck. It's always painful to look back and say oh we could have made an additional 30 to 50 grand in the last 12 months if we just would have found this. Chuck: And this is probably not a common problem, right? But it's something you're going to look for in the future. Where would they have identified that; what due diligence would you have done in order to have seen that? Mike: Yeah, looking at the shipping invoices and seeing exactly what those are. And there are some pretty cool companies out there that will A) look at that for you and B) they'll actually monitor your shipping and make sure that it arrives on time. There's one called Late Shipment it's I think the one that we use; LateShipment.com and if FedEx doesn't deliver within the agreed-upon time; the one to two days, they'll actually refund; we get a refund on that shipping cost. So that's another example if they're not using; if you send out a million dollars or if you pay a million dollars in shipping costs every year and I think I know ours is above a million but I'll just use that, so a million dollars, if you can recoup 2, 3, 4% that's 20, 30, $40,000 back in your pocket that just appeared out of nowhere. So that's another one on my list. So are they using a dim scanner? Are they getting fined for this? Are they using LateShipment.com and getting a refund on anything that's late? Again stacking up this $160,000 in savings in paid search, $40,000 in savings in affiliate, 30 to 50,000 in dim scanner, late shipment another 30 to $40,000 just stacking and stacking and stacking. Another one is credit card fees; are they using a good credit card process? Have they negotiated their rates since they grew from zero to 15 million dollars in sales? And if they haven't that's an opportunity like just a one or two; what do they call them? Bits I think is what they call it but it could mean a huge difference in your overall company. Just one or two bits is 15 to $30,000 on a 15 million dollar business. Chuck: And so in your defense, I think on the shipping thing the company that you purchased did have one of those companies in place that were looking at the delayed shipments but that company wasn't looking at the penalties you were receiving. Mike: That's right. Chuck: So even if somebody is using a company that is monitoring the late shipping and getting those refunds they may not be looking at the fees which is strange. You think they'd be doing it but they weren't. Something I've heard you say at conferences when looking at it from a different type of business, so right now we're kind of talking about e-commerce but you also work with people who are doing content sites and their affiliates with other people. So what's your number one tip if you purchased a content site that makes money off affiliates; what's your number one tip for those people? Mike: Go ask for a raise. Chuck: What does that mean? Mike: Go to the affiliate management; either the advertiser or the affiliate management company who's managing them and say I want to make more. And there's many ways that you can position that. One is if you're a content site just know that my affiliate company, AffiliateManager.com is always looking for more content sites. We want to bring that value to our clients and you are in a position; it's a content site's market, let me put it that way. We all want what you have and some make the mistake of because they've been beat down and offered 1, 2, 3, 5, 10% commissions in the past day they just turn away affiliate marketing. Don't do that. You're leaving money on the table. If you find a good advertiser or a good affiliate management company that knows what they're doing and they know that this content site is upper funnel and bringing incremental business to the table they're going to be willing to pay for that and they might pay 20%, 25%, 30%. One of our clients pays 100%. Another one pays up to $150 for an acquisition and they might make zero on it. So it's just one of those things where you have to go and be willing to ask for a raise. And again a good affiliate management company they're going to look at the incremental value, we; not to get too much into us because I know this is more about acquisition but we actually have an attribution tool that we built because it didn't exist that shows where in the clickstream each of these sites are. And if it's a content site going back to your point and we look at their overall numbers and 70% of the time they're the first touch for anybody who's making a purchase on your site, yes we want that incremental traffic and sales coming from that content site. So to you content sites out there you are in a position of desire. We all want to work with you more and go and ask for raises. Somebody who recognizes your value is going to very much be willing to pay it. And if they're not go find somebody else; they're going to be willing to pay it. You are valuable. Chuck: And just to give an example of something like that. I've got a number of content sites and one of them the affiliates that I was getting paid from is a Canadian company and they send me a Canadian check. So every time I cash the Canadian check I get hit with like a 10 or $20 cashing fee. And it's just like annoying and it's small amount of money but it's annoying so I emailed them and I said hey can you just like PayPal me the money or wire me the money or do something else because I want to get ahold of the $10 fee every time I cash your check and they go oh how about we just double what we pay you? Okay, that'll work. So they really are willing; if they see the value in what you're providing them they are willing to pay more, so just a nice little tip there from Mike Nuñez. Mike: Yeah. And there was a guy Greg; I won't say his last name at Rhodium one year and I said that at a table and one year later he came back and said by that one tip that you just said because he was a content site or is a content site, I have grown my revenue by 25%. All I did; I didn't do anything else but go back and ask for a raise and the revenue on my site grew 25%. Chuck: Amazing. Mike: Free, yeah. Chuck: Alright, so we've talked about shipping, we've talked about affiliate, we've talked about ads, is there anything else specifically that you're looking for when you're acquiring? Mike: Yeah if they're not on Amazon I think that's a pretty obvious one. If they are on Amazon and either doing a poor job or no job at Amazon ads; Amazon ads I probably the biggest opportunity right now for everyone that sells on Amazon. Chuck: And this is kind of new to you in the last couple of years, right? Mike: Yeah. Well, I mean it didn't really exist a couple of years ago or it was very nascent. So it's still one of those things like if you remember Google back in the day when clicks used to be available for a penny or five cents and such. Chuck: Yeah man they sent me a refrigerator. I had spent so much money I got a Google refrigerator. Mike: So I'm not saying that pen that clicks are available for a penny on Amazon but if you incorporate the right system and how to manage it you can gross it; like I'll give you physical numbers year over year in November even those Cyber Monday fell outside of November this year. We grew Amazon sales on that outdoor brand by 50% using Amazon ads. So it's another example of having expertise in this paid search world and finding opportunities within it. Amazon ads; I think maybe that's super-secret number 10. I think we've gotten away from the super secrets but maybe super-secret number 10 and it's probably one of the most powerful ones I see right now available for people. Chuck: So what else are you looking for? Mike: So besides being on Amazon and Amazon ads, me personally I'm looking for a strong operational foundation because I'm not an expert at that. I'm not good at that but thankfully the businesses that I purchase have that. I'm looking for a barrier to entry like how replicatable is this business and what is the barrier that people have to get through? And this is a little bit less quantifiable but this is just a general do I want to be involved in this business; how hard is it for somebody who's just as good at paid search as me or Amazon or whatever, if they just got a hold of my supplier could they replicate this and do I want that? And if the answer is it's too easy then I move on. Is it a learnable industry? One of the things I was worried about with the custom suit company was maybe before purchasing it I wasn't as sharp a dresser, Chuck. Maybe my wardrobe might have consisted of free conference t-shirts but I was worried about that and… Chuck: You're pulling it off still. Mike: Thank you. And once I got into it I learned no this is a learnable industry. I can do this and it's worked great since then. Is it Amazon resistant? And I know that's a little counter to saying are they on Amazon. Is Amazon going to move into that space? Are they going to want to replicate what it is that you're doing? And on the outdoor brand, it's more of we joined to them; we couldn't beat them so we joined them and a good 50, 60% of our sales are on Amazon on that brand. On the suit brand, we're looking to sell accessories; expand our brand awareness because you can't sell custom suits on Amazon and it's unlikely that Amazon is going to get into that realm. So we're thinking how can we use Amazon to expand our brand awareness, generate some confidence in the brand, and yet not have to; since we're not able to send custom suits and sell custom suits on Amazon directly so is Amazon a threat to the business is something that we look at overall. Inventory management optimization; so leveraging just in time inventory because anybody that's involved in an inventory-based business knows that a lot of times your profit can go straight back into purchasing additional inventory. And if you want to realize any profits before you sell the business you've got have inventory optimization. Is the current ownership leveraging that inventory optimization? Are there conversion rate optimization opportunities; have they ever even tried it before? I just had a call today for the suit company and this is going to be ultra-specific but it is an indicator of what we've done. We launched a new cart in early November and we just ran the numbers and today on desktop for new customers we have doubled our conversion rate which anybody knows that the lifeblood of a business is acquiring new customers. So to do that is pretty amazing. Now on mobile, it was pretty static but we've also generated significant amounts of more traffic on mobile to the suit company. So that's a little bit misleading to say that it's exactly the same. Well anybody who knows conversion rate optimization and knows how traffic works; if you increase traffic the quality is potentially a little bit lower and so the fact that we slightly beat our previous conversion rate on mobile is a huge win. So are there conversion rate optimization to opportunities in the acquisition? Here's one that you know is near and dear to my heart, Chuck. What is the current platform; are they on Net Suite, on Shopify, on Magento? Because the one thing I never ever recommend is changing platforms. So can you accomplish all of the things on your list that you want to do on the platform? We use Net Suite as one of them and it is extremely difficult to get changes done but we are not moving. So it's just something that I think everybody should really consider. Or are you on an archaic platform like at Yahoo stores; something that's not being updated anymore and there's seven people in the world that can code to Yahoo stores? Now you're beholden to them. You have to pay exorbitant rates for their development because they're the only one that knows it as opposed to a Shopify or a Magento that developers are plenty. Chuck: If you're on Yahoo shout out to Rob Snell, look him up if you need help with your Yahoo business. Mike: There you go. See I didn't even mean that. That helps. And I think the last thing; us particularly we enjoy custom products, so custom made suits is a really good example or even for the branded products; things that other people makes, turning them into custom products. We really think that that's a good market to be and again slightly more defensible against an Amazon. And then finally this is my last on my company acquisition algorithm that I'll share today just I know we're limited on time is what synergies can you participate in? So if you listen to the last call you heard me talking about a brand that we made an offer on that it was a full price offer, quick close, no due diligence because it was a trusted brand. And before Chuck chimes in, he recommends that you never do that but the reason why we wanted that brand is because it was geared towards outdoor enthusiasts and we have tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of outdoor enthusiasts that come to our website every day. So looking for synergistic brands that are out there to acquire and diversify the income and now not only sell other people's brands but also sell your own brand; white labeling things like that, finding things with opportunities like that, that's the last opportunity that we're looking for in our algorithm. Chuck: Awesome. Alright, so now let's maybe move into what some of the lessons you've learned from the various acquisitions you've done. And you had acquired some stuff before Quiet Light as well. Mike: Yeah. So I think a lot of them are listed on what I just said but I will say there's; because every time I learn a lesson to me it's an opportunity for the next acquisition. So again I will buy another business on Net Suite but I wouldn't have bought the first one knowing what I know now about Net Suite. But now that we've had to learn it, now that we've had to; our developer is familiar with it now and can make the changes that we need and want, now I'll buy another one. And so to me there's an opportunity there, right? It's harder for people to do that than it is for me. It's yet another level of expertise. So that's one thing is a lot of the lessons are kind of listed already in that but there's one I would say recently and again it's with the custom suit business, don't get so caught up in your own expertise. Again we are really, really good at paid search and one of the reasons why is because we're so return focused. A mistake that we made with the custom suit business is we went straight for a return. If a dollar didn't turn into five; I'll just use that as an example, we didn't spend it. And because of that, we saw sales drop. And I talked to the previous owner about it and said hey we're seeing this, why? And he's like well yes cross-device tracking is good however it doesn't capture everything. And mobile devices; think about who buys suits these days, and it's somebody with a mobile life. It's a lawyer that's always in the courtroom. It's a doctor that's always walking about. It's a financial person that's not necessarily sitting at their desk, they're going to meeting after meeting after meeting and where are they searching up for their next suit? Well, it's probably their mobile device. They find it and then they go on the desktop and they go on and they purchase it. And we had pulled back pretty significantly on the mobile spend because the conversion rate just wasn't as good. And so that's one example of us kind of getting in our own way. But to our credit, we were able to kind of step back and say okay we learned a lesson here, let's get better at it and change our approach. And since then that's when we now had some of our best days that we've ever had. So I like to think of it as a lot of these owners or the previous owners they had levels of expertise; they were doing something right and so it's our job as experts that are better at it to take the lessons that they've learned and apply our expertise to it to just throw some gasoline on it. Chuck: Alright Mike so one of the ways I like to usually end these things is just to ask if you have any kind of tools that you use on a regular basis; just some things that can either help with productivity, it could even be outside of work. One example the other day I was kind of upset about it because you ordered the chicken sandwich from Popeye's through Uber Eats so that you didn't have to wait in line and you didn't bother sending me one. That's a great little life hack. So what else do you have? Do you have any tools that you might recommend or any other little things? Mike: I did the same thing with Amazon two years ago when they were operating like the one-hour delivery and we had a hurricane coming to Florida and I just ordered all the bottled water and had it delivered while everybody else is fighting each other at the store. But now that secret's out. That's no longer an advantage but yeah some tools that I like that we use; so for Google Ads, I'll say if you're using things like maximize for clicks run we prefer an enhanced CPC bidding algorithm or a target CPA. We always test to see which one's better. Prioritization, I love Air Table. I got to give a shout out to my business partner Daniel for that. Air Table is a prioritization tool and basically, it can help identify what is the easiest to implement to get the most impactful change that you can make. And so it just really helps to prioritize what it is that you're doing and the changes that you're making to the company because obviously, we all want to make the biggest impact as quickly as possible. I love Grammarly for sending emails so that I don't sound silly. Chuck: That one saves me all the time. Mike: It's so good. I haven't used their pro version but even just the regular version is fantastic. For the affiliate management company, I got to give a shout out to Mail Shake. We love Mail Shake. We use that very often. It's a terrific tool. I love Moz. So the Moz toolbar is something that I use a lot. And then I think we use a lot of the things everybody else uses like the Evernotes and Google apps and things like that. So I think the first ones that were probably some of the others may not have heard them. Chuck: Awesome. Well, I think everybody who's been listening appreciates your time. I'd love to have you back at another time. We can talk about some more stuff once you've hit that next goal of purchase through us we'll talk about that one. But again thank you for the time today and we'll talk to you again soon. Mike: Thanks, Chuck. Links and Resources: Affiliate Manager

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Mari: Hey, Mike, how's it going?Mike: Good! How are you?Mari: I'm alright. So you're from Florida right?Mike: Well, actually, I went to college in Florida.Mari: Why did you choose Florida?Mike: Well, the weather is similar to Hawaii, where I'm from, and I also got a scholarship to play soccer.Mari: Oh, wow, so you play soccer.Mike: Yeah, I played midfield for my college for four years.Mari: Wow, you must be really good.Mike: I don't know about that.Mari: Where was your university?Mike: It was in the Tampa Bay area, right on the bay, on Tampa Bay, and it's surrounded by the city of Tampa and Clearwater.Mari: So what is there to do in Tampa Bay?Mike: There's a lot of things. You can go fishing, boating, sailing, or kayaking. We used to do all of that when I was there.Mari: Wow, sounds like a really great city.Mike: Yeah, it was really fun if you like the outdoors type of thing.Mari: Do you think it's the best city in Florida?Mike: Yeah, I think it's a good location. It's right in the middle of Florida so you can go to Miami. It's a few hours away drive, or to Orlando, that has Disneyworld.Mari: Wow. Sounds like a really great place. Can you tell me about the weather?Mike: The weather's really nice in Florida most of the year, which is one reason why I went from Hawaii but in the summer time it gets really hot and when it gets hot you really need air-conditioning, but that's not problem.Mari: Does it rain?Mike: Actually in the summertime, there's really bad lighting storms. It's always... It lasts for about half and hour but it's always between three and five o'clock in the evening.Mari: Sounds pretty scary?Mike: Yeah, but when you're inside it's OK. It's kind of cool to watch.Mari: Is there something you don't like about Florida?Mike: The only thing I don't like is the bugs. There's so many bugs, especially during summer time. And really scary ants, and bugs you can't even see and they end up biting you.Mari: Wow. Sounds pretty scary.Mike: Yeah, but as long as you have bug repellant when you go outside in the summer, there's no problem.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Mari: Hey, Mike, how's it going?Mike: Good! How are you?Mari: I'm alright. So you're from Florida right?Mike: Well, actually, I went to college in Florida.Mari: Why did you choose Florida?Mike: Well, the weather is similar to Hawaii, where I'm from, and I also got a scholarship to play soccer.Mari: Oh, wow, so you play soccer.Mike: Yeah, I played midfield for my college for four years.Mari: Wow, you must be really good.Mike: I don't know about that.Mari: Where was your university?Mike: It was in the Tampa Bay area, right on the bay, on Tampa Bay, and it's surrounded by the city of Tampa and Clearwater.Mari: So what is there to do in Tampa Bay?Mike: There's a lot of things. You can go fishing, boating, sailing, or kayaking. We used to do all of that when I was there.Mari: Wow, sounds like a really great city.Mike: Yeah, it was really fun if you like the outdoors type of thing.Mari: Do you think it's the best city in Florida?Mike: Yeah, I think it's a good location. It's right in the middle of Florida so you can go to Miami. It's a few hours away drive, or to Orlando, that has Disneyworld.Mari: Wow. Sounds like a really great place. Can you tell me about the weather?Mike: The weather's really nice in Florida most of the year, which is one reason why I went from Hawaii but in the summer time it gets really hot and when it gets hot you really need air-conditioning, but that's not problem.Mari: Does it rain?Mike: Actually in the summertime, there's really bad lighting storms. It's always... It lasts for about half and hour but it's always between three and five o'clock in the evening.Mari: Sounds pretty scary?Mike: Yeah, but when you're inside it's OK. It's kind of cool to watch.Mari: Is there something you don't like about Florida?Mike: The only thing I don't like is the bugs. There's so many bugs, especially during summer time. And really scary ants, and bugs you can't even see and they end up biting you.Mari: Wow. Sounds pretty scary.Mike: Yeah, but as long as you have bug repellant when you go outside in the summer, there's no problem.

Welcome to our third episode of a weekly podcast that we are doing here at Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram! In this episode, we talk with the Owner Loyalty Manager of Miracle CDJR, Mike Woodruff. Mike is a Tennessee native, and has lived in Gallatin since 1987. In this episode, Mike talks about our VIP program, and our new service initiative, the Miracle Express Train. He also discusses the pro’s and con’s of purchasing a vehicle online in the digital world that we live in, and revisits the benefits of leasing as we spoke about in Episode 2. Enjoy! Transcript John Haggard: 00:02 Welcome to the Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram podcast, where each week we hope you will be able to learn the best ways to purchase, maintain and accessorize your new or preowned vehicle and how to sell your vehicle for the highest resale value possible, when you’re ready to do so. I’m your host John Haggard and throughout each month, right here we’re going to have different team members join us from Miracle to bring you tips that you can use. And by the way, we will also post a transcript of each podcast so that you can easily refer to it for information. Maybe something you heard on the podcast and you want to just go pick up that line, what was said, it will be right there for you right at your fingertips. On the podcast today we’re talking about different ways to own or lease a vehicle and how the process has changed over the last several years. And on today’s podcast we have Mike Woodruff, he’s the Owner Loyalty Manager at Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram. Hey Mike, welcome to the podcast. Mike Woodruff: 00:59 How are you John, my friend? New Speaker: 01:00 I am doing well. Hey, you know, before we get started, folks like to know a little bit about you and just anybody who is on the podcast. Hey, who is this guy and how did he get started? How did they get in the car business? Where is he from? That type of thing. So give us a little bit of background about you, Mike. Mike Woodruff: 01:14 Well, actually I’ve lived in the community since 1987. My previous career was in healthcare management and actually retired from that some years ago. And then later, I was looking for something to do at the suggestion of my wife. Ha, Yeah. And I knew some people at the dealership, and I’d spoken with a couple of people there and they suggested maybe working for the dealership. I had never done anything like that before. And I thought, well, that’ll be different. I thought it would something I would probably do for a couple of years. And, seven years later, here I am. John Haggard: 01:54 Seven years later, you’re still there. So when you were doing healthcare, when you said a manager, what were you doing? Mike Woodruff: 02:00 I was in health care management. I was managing clinical areas of one of the local hospitals and later went into practice management with group of physicians. John Haggard: 02:09 Gotcha, Gotcha. So, you knew some people down at Miracle and that’s how you wound up actually going to work for them. Mike Woodruff: 02:17 Exactly. John Haggard: 02:18 Gotcha. So you say you are you from Gallatin? Mike Woodruff: 02:21 I’m originally from Donaldson right outside of Nashville of course and been up here since 1987. John Haggard: 02:29 Gotcha. Now somebody said in the notes here that I’m reading that you have, I think it’s nine grandchildren. Mike Woodruff: 02:34 I have nine grandchildren I sure do. Nine beautiful grandchildren and four children. And that keeps me busy during my off hours. John Haggard: 02:42 I was going to say, what do you do on your off hours? Do you have any, ha! Well, Mike, I understand you are the Owner Loyalty Manager for Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram, and the title would seem obvious, but take us behind the scenes. What does that really mean? And really, what does it mean for customers? Mike Woodruff: 03:02 Well, it means not only that they purchased a vehicle, they’ve also become a member of the Miracle Family. That’s very, very important to us. They’ll be a part of our new customer service initiative that we call the Miracle Express Train through the Chrysler Corporation in conjunction with JD Power and Associates. So that’s something that we’re very proud to be working on right now. And that train is on a fast track to excellence. We want to be one of the premier examples of great customer service in the community and that’s whether it’s sales, service or parts. John Haggard: 03:47 All right. And when you say the express train, tell us a little bit more about that. What all’s involved? Mike Woodruff: 03:54 It’s a dealership wide program where we focus intently on customer service and what we can do to improve the different aspects of customer service, be it sales or service or parts. How we interact with the customer, how we follow up with a customer, and just that communication is key to maintaining the relationship that was begun when the customer purchased a vehicle from us. And we think that’s key to customer service and our success. John Haggard: 04:34 Yeah. A lot of lack of communication all over these days. That’s for sure. Just anywhere that you go. And are you responsible for training people on how to do that or do you handle all of that? How does that work? Mike Woodruff: 04:46 I do the training as well. Yes John Haggard: 04:48 You do. Okay. So you are trainers. Well, and do you also sell and lease vehicles yourself? Mike Woodruff: 04:59 In my spare time do that as well. I have a loyal base of customers that I continue to service and communicate with. But, yeah, I wear different hats, but it keeps me busy. It keeps me active, and I love it. John Haggard: 05:13 All right. Now on selling and leasing, what changes have you seen in the marketplace? I guess the way people go about making a decision to buy or lease a vehicle, say compared to a few years ago, has anything changed or is it pretty much the same? Mike Woodruff: 05:28 Well, I think the two biggest changes, John are, of course the Internet and the emergence of digital technologies that really have surfaced in the past two to three years. That’s been phenomenal. There are so many options that you can purchase with your vehicle now. And digital technology has driven a lot of the decision making. There are some people who really like a lot of technology and there are some people that still like the simple basics, but we can offer anything and everything. John Haggard: 06:11 All right. Now, as you see a lot of advertisements out there, speaking of I guess technology or different ways of doing things, there’ll be companies out there who tell people, “hey, you know, you can bypass the dealer and just buy online”. You’ve got these companies like Carvana and Cars Direct, Car Gurus, Vroom, is that really true or is there any advantage or what’s a pro and a con about buying a vehicle off the internet? Mike Woodruff: 06:38 Well, I think it does have a place in the industry, but it’s really a small niche market. Most people still like to see and touch any item. But before making a purchase, even minor items, you know, a small TV or article of clothing you want to try it on, you want to feel it, you want to actually see it in person. So buying a vehicle solely on internet photos and a little bit of information can be an uncomfortable experience for most people. And there are some times issues with, if you want to trade in a vehicle, some of those sites will accept trading and some will not, but they’re going to value your vehicle without having seen it. And many times, once we are able to put our hands on your trade and we’re able to look at it, that can result in more money for your trade John Haggard: 07:39 Alright, you know, sometimes those types of ads will also imply, “look, you can cut out the middleman or the middle woman by buying online” and with the inference that you get a better deal buying online cause you don’t have someone in between just you and the technology so to speak. Is that true? Mike Woodruff: 07:59 No, it really isn’t. You may save a small amount of money, and we’re talking about maybe two to $300. You’re going to lose a large amount of support and attention to detail after the sale. And, and that’s the critical portion. You know, there are pros and cons to buying off the Internet. The pros are you do have a larger selection and have convenient access because you can just sit at your computer and go from one dealership to another,, or one site to another. And it can be a great starting point to begin your research. But the cons are, you really don’t get a proper assessment for your trade in and you don’t get that personal attention during the sales process. And more importantly, afterwards you don’t get a proper delivery of the vehicle and training on all the different functions. John Haggard: 08:57 I know that, because I have a car and I didn’t realize, with what I drive that you could pop the key out of the electronic key. I didn’t know that for years, so when I was always handing my key off to a guy who parked my car and I’m trying to take it off the key chain and do all this and that. So I guess little things like that. Mike Woodruff: 09:15 Sure John Haggard: 09:15 Have you ever had anybody do that to you? Say, Hey, I didn’t know this thing came apart like this. Nice and easy. Mike Woodruff: 09:20 Ha! It happened to myself a couple of times John. John Haggard: 09:23 I gotcha. You know, a lot of people think that, or probably most people that car dealers will say anything to get somebody to come into the showroom. So if you were gonna tell people about Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram in terms of why they should really deal with the Miracle Auto Group and not somebody else down the street, what would you say? Mike Woodruff: 09:44 Simple. I don’t want to just sell you a vehicle. We want to sell the experience and the dealership. Because it’s not just selling you a vehicle today. It’s developing that relationship where we can sell you a vehicle three or four years down the road where you’re comfortable, and selling one of your family members or friends or people that you go to church or work with. That’s the important part. You know, Gallatin is growing, but it’s still a fairly small community. And it’s very important to us to maintain those relationships that we begin with the sale of a car. It’s not just a one and done process for us. John Haggard: 10:29 Well I guess that makes sense because you want referrals and most of the time research shows if someone is referred in, there’s what a 40 to 60% chance they’ll buy from the person they’ve been told about, versus somebody who just walks in. And of course if they want to trade in three years, you’d like to have that customer back. So I guess that certainly makes some sense. So when you’re not working all the time, Mike, cause it sounds like you are on and off the job a little bit. What do you do in your spare time? What do you, what do you really like to do? Mike Woodruff: 10:59 Okay. Well, of course, I like to spend time with my grandchildren. In fact, I’m going to take a couple of them fishing this week. So, the weather has kind of held off, so I think we’re going to be able to do that this week and, spending time with my wife and just enjoying life. I mean, I’m unfortunately too old to play competitive sports at this point, but my brain still thinks I can, ha! John Haggard: 11:33 Ha! A lot of wisdom up there for all that age, right Mike? There you go. Well listen, thanks for joining us today. Mike Woodruff, the owner loyalty manager for Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram. Hey, by the way, before we go, is there anything I did not ask you that you would want people to know, or maybe there’s a question that people ask all the time that we didn’t cover today? Mike Woodruff: 11:56 Nothing I can think of off hand. John, I thank you. We’ve pretty well covered that aspect of the dealership. I do want to mention, we just briefly skimmed over leasing there, but in a previous podcast Mark Ledford, who is our general sales manager, went into a lot more depth about leasing. And we talked today a little bit about the technology and how fast it’s moving. And that’s one of the prime reasons that people may want to think about leasing. Because if they’re the type of people who like the latest in safety features and technology, leasing is certainly the way to go, and should be strongly considered. John Haggard: 12:36 Okay. So what’s the difference there? Just so that we all understand, if you lease? Mike Woodruff: 12:41 At the end of three years, you have options. And that’s one of my favorite words. I mean, it’s always nice to have options. You can turn the car in. You can go ahead and turn around and lease another three years on a three year newer vehicle. Or you can just simply throw us the keys and walk away. But you do have options, particularly for younger people whose life situations sometimes change a little more quickly. It’s nice to have that option three years down the road to do something different with your vehicle rather than to be tied into five, six or seven years on a car payment. John Haggard: 13:19 Got You. That’s the difference. All right, I get that. Mike Woodruff, everybody again, the Owner Loyalty Manager for Miracle Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram. We invite you to join us again right here for other topics on the podcast throughout each month. And our goal is to show you the best ways to purchase, maintain and accessorize your new or preowned vehicle, or lease, and how to sell your vehicle for the highest resale value possible when you’re ready. And don’t forget, we’ve also posted a transcript of each podcast right here on the website so that you can easily refer to it for information that you would like to have at your fingertips. I’m your host John Haggard and we’ll see ya next time.

Donnie: Alright was this is going to be an amazing episodes we are going to sit down with mike Michalowicz, We didn’t spend whole lot of time on a back story, we just started jumping in a lot of the philosophy of business, entrepreneurism and there wasn’t any flop, it was a pretty cool conversation, I really enjoyed and I know a lot of you guys asked for me to get him on the show you could more of an intimate conversation with him so I think you are really going to enjoy this one. And this show has been for a quite few episodes now, is brought you by point blank safety services, so Stacy and Mike are doing awesome and amazing things for the freeways and highways and everything they do by protecting the constructions workers, drivers and just keeping everybody safe while helping police officers that we know aren’t just paid enough to do what they do and put their lives on the line every day for us, so they are really helping this police officers not only protecting us in the afterhours but protect their families financially by giving them additional jobs and work they can do on a regular basis, these guys are doing just tremendous work. And I love that they have taken their business success and turned it out over to the nonprofit they started which is called … family fund you know that organization is giving scholarships and is helping out the families of fallen officers, you know it’s really cool to see a company remember really where they came from and really giving back to the community as a whole, so do me a favor guys, go follow them on Facebook, go them out on Instagram, check out their website, send them messages and let them know Donnie sent you , you can find almost everything that they are at either at … family fund or point safety in almost all platforms, say hi to them, I couldn’t do this show without them. So I know a lot of you guys have been harassing me about get mike on the show, so I’m bringing on Mike Michalowicz and this going to be a lot of fun, we already smoke and joke about two Polish guys on a podcast, what could be wrong? But this is going to be interesting, I’m Donnie Boivin this is Donnie’s success champions, mike tell us your story brother, welcome to the show! Mike: Donnie thank you for having me, I’m an author, I’m excited to be here and I’m on a missing to eradicated entrepreneur poverty, there are so many elements I struggle with entrepreneurship and some many fellow entrepreneurs struggle with and my goal is to fix that for all of us. Donnie: I love the whole phrase, entrepreneur poverty, because that was my business for a long time you know. Mike: Well you know what it is, Donnie when you started your business I suspect is the same as I started mine and everyone listening, you star your business and his friends who never own a business, they look at you and they who “oh you started a business, you are millionaire and you sit in the beach and all you do is sit and all you do is drink margaritas” There is this perception as that if you are business owner, you are wealthy and you got all the time in the world, the reality is the opposite, so we have no time, we work our ass off, we sacrifice family, we don’t go on vacations anymore and we make no money! As the general population we are struggling financially, so there is this gap and I called entrepreneurial poverty and so my mission is to resolve that, to make us what we are envisioned to be and when you have wealth and you have time you can be of impact you can serve others, I mean we need to do this. Donnie: No I love this, because Ii think there is one more twist on that whole entrepreneurial jump, because if they don’t think are automatically super wealthy the other questions is, what the hell do you actually do for a living? Laugh Donnie: So you are not only battling how much money you are supposedly making and all this freedom that you have, you know my wife, people still ask her, what does Donnie do? And she’s like, he kind of does this podcast, speaking, I don’t know what he does. Mike: Is fine, so when I sold my first company I go proud, I came home to my dad and said “Dad I sold my business” and told them what happened, and he goes “congratulations, so you are gonna have a really job now” and I’m like what? And he’s “yeah because your security and all that” And I love my parents, they have been extraordinary to me, they love me, both of them tho are in trap in their perception of what success is, get a job, stick to a job for entirety of your life, and I think we are surrounded by that perception, spouse, have other perceptions, as entrepreneur the rule is to break the rules, to challenge industries, to bring in our concepts, is new to everyone, Everyone’s is like “what the F are you doing?” is not comprehensible. Donnie: You know is all interesting, I don’t about you, but when I launched my business, it took me a long time to realize that I spent so long as an employed so when I launched a business I kept constantly trying to almost create a job for myself vs a company and I get lost in the business because it was so hard to make that shift, that is why I tell people that entrepreneurs a made not born because you get punched in the face a lot by life to start figuring things out, was that kind of the same thing to you or you just stepped in gold and riches fell from the sky? Laugh Mike: Oh of course that was exactly my journey! I started the business and people where throwing money at me like what= Is this real? NO! No of course, my first business was in computers system, I was a computer guy and I open the door. Donnie: Where’s your pocket protector I don’t see it? Mike: Yeah well yeah, actually Donnie that’s what happens , I made a few phone calls and said I started a business and the money will flow in, I called a few people and they were “Oh congratulations, but I’m already taking care of” I said what? You know! I’m your friend! “No, I’m taking care of” and at the end of the day of and they didn’t mean, the holy crap moment kicked in, I think, in the beginning stages, and actual motivators for us entrepreneurs is fear, the first few years of my business I was terrified and what that terror does is kept me awake, I would wake up at 4 in the morning and get to work whatever it takes and I worked until midnight and repeat the process all over again because I was scared I was desperate as parent, the challenge tho is that fear in certain point becomes detrimental it gives you energy but it also gives you stress and start breaking you down, so illness kicks in or exhaustion so of course is a flip side, you don’t want to live in fear for the entirety of your life, use it as a spark and the over time you need to convert that idea was to confidence and when I started to get a bit of a routine I started to see some results, I said ok I’m gonna trying and repeat on that and I started to focus on what was working and doing more of what was working. Mike: But of course for none of us, you don’t start a business and the money falls in your laps and if it does, you are lottery winner but is actually a curse because then you believe that you don’t need and effort to make this money and so I think when you see on the cover of Ink Magazine “Oh started a business when she was 23 years old and by 24 is a billionaire” In many cases that becomes detrimental because they don’t understand the real journey of an entrepreneur, which is the struggle on the valley to get to the peaks. Donnie: Yeah Jim Ron when back to as far as motivational speakers go, he’s got a great phrase, he said, the first thing you done when you are handed a million dollars is you mentally have become a millionaire because most people will go through that ride and journey to whatever success they get through and is all those lessons that mold and prepared them for that success and I looked on people that entrepreneur is the new multilevel marketing thing because people go into multilevel marketing or neuro marketing and they are like “Oh Imma be a millionaire tomorrow you know, this I the greatest thing, I can sleep whenever I want t and do all that” so they launch businesses thinking along the same lines and I was just guilty of it, when I launched my business I thought the heaven was going to open up and everybody was going to be “Finally Donnie show up, let’s make a lot of money together” not knowing that you have to learn to run a business before you can try to find any sort of success but is a really interesting twist that how much you have to personally evolve along that journey to become a better version for yourself Mike: Holy F and true, and I love it you called the multilevel marketing but I sort of had a sentiment of it about a year ago kicked in, everything I talked about is entrepreneur and entrepreneurship and all the books I write, everything’s is of the entrepreneur, I’m sort started to becoming convinced that the word entrepreneur I a dastardly term now, I think is actually hurting us because entrepreneur has been equated to hustle and grind and I hate those terms, I hate them, so I understand the sentiment tho, I understand hustle and grind means you gotta make effort, like when I started my businesses fear was my motivator, I had to hustle and grind, here is the problem I think people are interpreting that entrepreneurship is perpetual hustle and grind and ten years into you belter be grinding out, in twenty years you better be grinding harder, you gotta carry this business on your back and this is the antithesis of what entrepreneurship is, the true definition is identifying n opportunity, taking a risk to make it happen and the choreographing all these resources, people, technology and even your clients to make that vision a reality, is not doing the work is the choreographing of other resources. I tell people, I was speaking yesterdays at an event and I’m on a room as an entrepreneur and I say yeah I got a challenge for you, when you are at a dinner party and someone ask you got you do, what do you say? And often is “I’m an entrepreneurs that does X” What about we don’t use the word entrepreneur anymore, and not even business owner because is the same thing, what if you call yourself a shareholder in a business, just by changing that label people are “what the what? Donnie: If somebody hit’s me that I would be like “what?” Mike: You know many people are shareholders, I own some stock, I’m in mutual funds, I’m a shareholder, no do I go to these companies and hustle to make successful? No, Do I do anything in the business? No! I do row when it comes to share holder boats and stuff, I do give I some directions as shareholder but I’m not actively participating in it, when we use the label entrepreneur we are saying that we actively work our asses of inside the business and I think we use the term shareholder is shocks ourselves back to reality, that our mission is to vote maybe through some action but. Donnie: Wait you should make a book out of this. Mike: How should I call it? Donnie: I don’t but something along the lines of start calling yourself a shareholder I think because is a cool philosophy. Mike: Is funny, so I may have a title now called “entrepewhore”. Laugh Mike: My publisher I told him and probably nah I don’t think so but maybe, because I think we bastardize ourselves so much we got to change our label if we change our label we change our behavior, is hard to change our behavior first still holding all labels Donnie: I agree with that, I got a funny book too, it’s called, “that’s not how you journal jackass”, so I got one of those too, is an eBook is free. Here is what I do, when I launched my business I had no idea how to call myself, I really didn’t think I was an entrepreneur because I think in true to my opinion, are the craziest sons of a bitch on the face of the earth because you got to be jut that shit crazy nuts to go launch a business, so I was warping my head around that I more this business owner that wanted to create this one business, this one company , this model and take it through, wasn’t it really worried about even a legacy type thing, I just wanted to get to that freedom state and I never been hung up on titles and such and people keep asking me, what do you put on a business card, my name? I didn’t know what to actually put in there, but it evolved, now is says business owner, I think I out CEO in one point but I’m like, Am I a CEO? I got virtual assistants but I don’t really have employees so am I a really a CEO? You know, but you dance with all this thought processes and I really love this whole idea of your shareholder because it really makes you shock your own system to reinvent how you position yourself in the market place. Mike: You know this plays out to employees too, my company is tiny we have 13 employees, I am number 14, we were a micro business and I used to give my colleagues big titles, so I bring someone on and maybe call them the CFO or the office manager and what I found is this that they just like me started believing the title as like who they are, so I had a person who has not even a degree in accounting, she was part time, but she was handling our number so instead of calling her the internal booking person I said we are going to call you the CFO, she went online and found that instead of paying $30.000 that’s what we were paying for that a typical CFO makes a $125.000 so she came back to me literally and said Mike I’m being so freaking underpay I’m being a CFO for this organization I’m not on 125.000 you are ripping me off, and I’m look whoa is just a title and she is no all CFO’s make that and my response was, you can’t got to Ford or GE and say I want to be your CFO and 125, is just a title , didn’t matter she quit, she couldn’t comprehend that, what I realize is that once we star owning a title that becomes who we are, is not just true for us the entrepreneurs, it’s true for all the humanity, if we call ourselves stupid then you become stupid if you say I’m lazy you will become lazy, if you say I’m driven you will become driven, but you have to keep on repeating enough times until you actually believe it to comply with that title otherwise we can’t own that title. So be very judicious in how you use titles is kind of the lesson here. Donnie: Yeah I love it, so Kevin is known to build all the automation to backing up my stuff, he put under the title of my first email campaign “founding badass of success champions “ and I’m like ok I take that, so if you are going yourself a tittle that you want to step into , you know that you want to own, like “founding badass” or something else along those lines, but is interesting I can see that, going through my career there was part that wanted to be a sales manager and I got sales manager and I’m said “fuck, I don’t want to be a sales manager” so there is a lot to be said in those roles, in corporate America structure formality, there’s a lot of responsibility in owning certain titles. Mike: Totally is, I think as a small business owner I aspired, not anymore, I aspired to be the big company, I wanted to have a billion dollar corporation, I wanted to be the CEO of Amazon after Jeff retire I wanted to take over, so I wanted to make my own version so I said if I want be that I have to act as if, that’s a popular term, act as if, so I’m gonna start using those tittle right now, but in the outside world that’s kinda of a shame, if I call myself the CEO and I walk in with my little company, people are like, who many people report to you? But none is only a couple of virtual people, are you really a CEO? O are you an entrepreneur that’s is starting in bootstrapping, so there is a risk there too, theirs is this disconnect and if we package ourselves in the wrong way is dangerous in fact our business … no titles whatsoever, because I do know that I go into a sales situation, sometimes it helps to say that I’m the owner and sometimes it helps to say that I’m the sales guy and being the owner is actually a detriment so I think a title is just a thing of conversation in what e aspire to have but also have to see the outside perception around titles. Donnie: I got other question because I know my followers have been counting on me and I got a lot of people that followed your book First, it was the first book that I read of yours and horrible book by the way. Laugh Mike: Worst book of all the time, hey at least I got a ranking somehow. Donnie: Hey you put profit in there; at least it has to sell one book. Mike: Right! I should have put an F bomb because that seems to be the popular books now, the subtle art of F’ing and I should put like F profit or something. Donnie: You know I’ve been getting a lot of the guys out of the UK right no on the podcast because they are really trying to make a push, they are calling it “the UK invasion” where a lot of the UK speakers are trying to come to the US and is so funny when they come to the podcast because I cursed a lot but those dudes say cursing to a whole other level. Mike: The brits do? Donnie: Oh my god yeah! And I have to forward warning because there a couple words they throw around like candy and I’m like, ok look, this is a US based primary show, I mean it plays in almost a 100 countries now but you got to be careful with the certain couple of words, the F bomb fine, but there are some other words they can’t just bring to the table! But profit first, that and pumpkin plan I think two of the two books of yours that get thrown around the most, at least on my circles, is profit first the first book out of the collection. Mike: So I’ve written 5 books, technically 6 as profit first has been re-released as revising expanded so that counts too, so I wrote this book of toilet paper entrepreneur. Donnie: Oh I remember that! Mike: Kind of a spit on the face of traditional authorship and it was my angry teenage years but it worked, it worked to put me on the map, at least with the publisher and it built a small … The pumpkin plan was my first kind of mainstream book and profit first was the break through. Donnie: That’s the one that really put you on the map, I’m in forward Texas, you know my hometown and I know there is a little workshop group to get together and discussed that book- Mike: Oh that’s awesome I love to hear- Donnie: And the content and everything is out of that, but I’m curious, when you wrote that book was that philosophy for your business? Or something you were attempting to do and you thought it would be the breakthrough for other people if you took on the same thing. Mike: No, it was purely for me, here’s interesting when you hear the resume of an entrepreneur like me I share the highlights, got a company, sold it, the thick of the story for most entrepreneurs is the struggle, the entrepreneur poverty and I have evaporated all the wealth I’d accumulated in some priors businesses that were dealing with debt, I was able to sell them pay off the debt and make money and never really understood profit, I started this 3rd business that … my resume I evaporated everything I had, lost my house over it, lost possessions, did not loss my family, that’s one thing, they stood by me, went through depression for a couple years, from 2008 to 2010, the highest level was called functional depression, you are a drinker and stuff and during that phase I realized that I fundamentally didn’t know the most basic elements of entrepreneurship, profits is one, I realized all the things I was doing was misunderstood, and profit what I realized is that we have been told profit is the bottom line or were you rent, every book I read is profit comes last, and I realized omg I’ve been putting profit last, I didn’t consider it until once a year I looked at profit and I’m like “Dammit, maybe next year”. Donnie: Wait so your business is supposed to profit? I’m confused by that. Laugh Mike: That’s what my old accountant said,” you don’t want to profit, hey congratulations you got nothing left” And I’m like “what?” Donnie: Hey that’s the whole reason I’m in business. Mike: And that made no sense, and entrepreneurship is not a parent child relationship, I call it BS on that, we often say hey I started a business I gave life to it is my child and one day I will nurture it and it will come back and feed me, no, is more of conjoint twins, as the business goes we go and as we go the business goes so if I’m struggling at home my business is going to struggle and if I’m going struggling on business my home is going to struggle, especially the finances, pour finances are in so last step, so I say I really gotta resolve this and I realize that is human nature when something comes last is insignificant , so profit can’t be last, profit has to be first, and the exclusion of course says, make profit to have it, every time you sell take a predetermined percentage of that money, is profit, hide it away in your business, repeat day in and day out and you will assure profitability. Donnie: Is awesome, is one of those book, at least it was for me when I read through it, it just made sense, because same thing, school hard … somebody could tell me the stove is hot three times and still touch twice to just to make sure. Laugh Donnie: But it’s one of those book that when you read you are like “ok that make sense to me why I don’t do it”? So I started to employing some of the principals of the company and the being typical growing up financially foolish, “oh we are hitting a down turn, let’s just pull form the profit pile we have already put into the business” and you are like ok that’s not the whole principles of the book but it was a fun read, what did the success of that book do for your business, you company, what evolved or changed for you? Mike: That’s an interesting question, there’s a couple of realizations, when the book hit, so it came out 4 years ago and 2 years ago I did the re-release and it hit right away, is funny how ego is, I got like omg all this main stages, Seth Golden move here comes Mike “Polish” Michalowicz. Donnie: Because you got that name that belongs in light. Mike: Right, exactly, when you hit the movie theatre and my name is two lines.. Donnie: Or is turned down on the edged Mike: I think the better one is a limp penis of an A, So first my ego is move over Seth Golden, here comes the new main stager and it was like deadly silence, I’m like for how long? The book is so popular and went on for a year like this and my agent who I spoke to me was “get ready for the pumped up fees” nothing, and so I was like I guess it takes more than just a popular book, and yea about a year ago also did … is not move over Seth Golden but is oh you are speaking Seth Godin is coming after you. So that happened, so I realize is when a book hits it takes time for it to start playing out in other facets which is speaking but I think that satisfies my ego and I love public speaking and is a joy. Donnie: Look, nobody writes a book without waiting a little bit of that ego. Mike: I call it C list celebrity. Donnie: So if there’s another alphabet out there I am in that I alphabet. Mike: I put myself in position C , what’s funny that means that if I walk through an airport none knows who I am, except one person every like 3 or 4 airport checks will say “AAAAA” and you get one fan that comes and say “ARE YOU MIE MICHALOWICZ?” actually one person came up and said “ARE YOU TONY HAWK?” And I’m like fuck no, but somebody will say that, and I’ll be like who is this guy, is very weird. Donnie: You next book you just gotta put your picture on the cover that is all. Mike: I will put a Tony Hawk picture, be my strange brother tony hawk. Is this kind of weirs moments when none knows who I am but one person who just happens and lose their shit but everyone else is confused by and everyone’s like why? Who’s this guy? Is he a doctor? Did he save your life? But the bigger thing is I’m on my mission to eradicated entrepreneurial poverty now we get the metrics in place, and I get emails actually I can see we get two since we started the interview, I get emails in 3-4 5-6 hour now of people saying, because I actually ask people to email me on the book, I say emails if you commit to this and they are coming constantly now and I can see I can measure the changes having in business and that is the greatest joy of my life, If I am ever down, for me is just log in the email now and sit there for an hour and everything is ok Mike, you are not looser. Donnie: I wanted people to hear that last phrase you said, everybody’s chasing something you know and I had a lot of coming even this morning with the couple guys I was talking to, they were liken men I could just have this happen to my life, life would be X, and I keep telling life is never X, life is right now, is that time you need to embrace you don’t need some sort of trigger mechanism to be catapulted to the next version of your life and I love the fact that you were humble enough to say that there are days like, this day sucks, this day is horrible and you gotta go look in the email to make sure life is on the same path and track, because is good for people who aren’t even in the first level on the alphabet list, you know you got the C list rockstar status to hear those kind of things because they are a lot of people, I know fans of the show I know were like “holy cow is Mike Michalowicz, he’s got “Profit First” and this and the other and they put you into rockstar status and often times when people put people on that rockstar status they gave them like the super power feed of strength and everything else, like nothing ever happens to them they are always killing it and crushing it and I really appreciate that humility you speak through. Mike: I want to speak that because I think is so important, I believe when we see someone as in a better position we put them on a pedestal, we look up to them, really that is a form of envy and I think is really damaging to ourselves, if you say “oh this guy is better than me, I wish I liked him” but in the same we are saying “I’m less than” and when we see ourselves as less then we want to disassociate, we actually one to pull someone down, as human nature say, well that person is not observing, Michalowicz they guy that probably got myself in driving, you pull in down, pity is just as damaging, pity is where you see yourself here and then there’s this homeless person in the street and “Thank god is not me” that causes a voidance when we move around them, both are form of dissociation an so I think they are very damaging. I don’t think we should ever use the term look up towards someone or look down to someone, I think we should always say look over, as cheesy as it is I’m big on like totems and this things you can see as the infinity circle and is my reminder that all of us are on the exact same path, no one is front or behind each other, we are on different positions of the path and we have just much to learn from someone who’s in the deepest struggles as someone that we perceived is having the greatest successes, all of them are learning experiences and we can call from each other but if we look up or look down we disassociate, I think we need to say Donnie I look over to you I want to learn from you, tell me your secrets, Mike I look over to you, so I say never look up, never look down. Donnie: I love that, I never heard it put in that perspective but you know Richard Branson when he takes people out to his private island , one of the first things he asked to everybody out there is, teach me something and I’ve always been fascinated by it because you got Richard Branson, one of the wealthiest man in the world , one of the most cool CEO, at least that is the brand he puts in the market place, a whole part of that is true but the fact that everybody comes back from me to the island going “Richard Branson asked me to teach him something” and I’m always curious to say, what could you teach as Richard Branson and I think a lot of those pull some random shit out their ass but “I taught Richard Branson” Really? Really!? Mike: I never heard that story I love it and I think it speaks therefore to great intelligence because I bet you, we all got something to teach as much as he teaches us, I don’t think he is more successful than a brand new startup entrepreneur, by certain definitions, the wealthy accumulated, the exposure he’s gotten, I don’t know and this is no judgment, I don’t know what his family is like , I don’t know what is balance is like, I don’t know his contribution to society is like, I don’t know, I also think that we hold people to a higher celebrity ship when they have broader impact as oppose to deep impact and I think most of us are designed for deep impact, Let me use doctor Oz because that example come to mine, Initially he was a cardiovascular surgeon with very deep impact, he saved some people’s life forever, he gave people not 6 more hours of life but 60 more year of life because of his work, he then made a choice to go broad meaning he went on Oprah he started to talking about health and then the guys is Impacting many people, the difference is , Doctor Oz now has a very broad impact but is very shallow you see him on tv shows and eat your vegetables is the lessons, when we worked as a cardiovascular surgeon, now he’s got a very deep impact, I think is a choice and I don’t think is one is better than the other, the shame is we hold up to celebrity ship people with only broad impact, it’s the famous football player, the famous movie start or the famous author like Malcom Gladwell, someone I exalt but never met Malcom Gladwell he just had an impact in some many people and is a name other people recognize I think is equal regardless of what we do of significance and people that are going for deep impact, I guess the lesson here is don’t aspire to be broad, aspire to be who you are call to be, if it’s deep go deep, if it’s broad is broad if it’s something else do it, just speak truly to yourself, they are all significant. Donnie: Man I love that, is such a powerful message because most people in my belief that have hit a celebrity status they are really good at one thing. It comes down to … marketing, I tell people all the time Tony Robbins, one of the biggest motivational speaker of the world and I ask people all the time and they are like omg is Tony Robins, Tony Robins, he’s done amazing things I’m not knocking down for anything but I ask people all the time, What’s Tony’s job? “Oh he is the CEO of the company blah blah blah” and I mean no he is not, and they look at me like “ what do you mean?” He is the face of the company, Garyvee, he is the face of the company and even Mike Michalowicz a C list celebrity is the face of the company, now all that to say is not meaning they are not making decisions, they are not having vision but they are the PR machine their job is to build brand new awareness for the company is the broad stroke. Mike: Is like a band, the front man is the one who everyone knows and is constantly with the groupies but the drummer and the bassist and the keyboardist who’s behind the curtains sometimes they are the ones collectively that need to make the music and I think that is what this organizations have, I think we can positon ourselves as the spokesperson and we will get all the accolades, I think the day I sort believe in that, over. Donnie: Have you seen bohemian rhapsody yet? The movie? Mike: Yeah. Donnie: I love the whole scene where the lead singer of Queen, can’t remember his name. Mike: Freddie Mercury. Donnie: Yes Freddie Mercury, thank you, that he hits all the fame and he goes out of his own and launches his own band and he’s trying to create the music and it all fails and he goes back to his guys and he goes “they did everything I told them to do” and I’m like that’s it! And he goes “They weren’t pushing back they did everything and the problem is I don’t know how to do all the stuff that you are great that” Mike: I think a great leader recognizes that , as a spokes persons you gotta be careful about being inauthentically humble, I see that too, and is like “oh is not me is not me” and declining as is actually discrediting the people who are fans of you, you can’t do that, the same thing you can’t say “this is all me” because you discrediting the people collectively making the product or the service that you do, so is a fine balance, I also think for the rest of the band, like Freddie mercury was the recognize brand and you have Brian May and then two guys like what was their names? That’s an ego check for them too but they are just as important. Donnie: Even if Freddie would have made it in a solo type carrier thing, even then he still has a band behind him. Mike: Even that is true. Donnie: The craziest thing about this whole ride and journey, I know the good things I’m good at, I’m really good on podcast, really good on interviews, well talking on stages but here is the thing I suck at the accounting side of things, I should read you book again “profit first” maybe probably help me out a little bit, but it’s a lot for entrepreneurs, business owners, whatever screwing tittle you want to give yourself, founding badass, is knowing your lane and knowing what you are good at and finding the right people that geek out on the stuff you suck at, is like I’ve got people that do some video editing for me, they freaking love that stuff, I’ve got people that do automated email for me, the gal who does some of the writing for me I call her a magician every Tim, I don’t know how she takes all the crap I put together spins it up and turns it into a master piece, she’s just got gift and a talent for it, but a lot of that is a humbleness for an individual to go “ok this is my lane, this is what I’m good at, how do I get other people to come along for that ride to pick up the slacks for me”. Mike: There is this thing I call the super hero syndrome when we first start a business we have to do everything, you have to do the accounting, you have to do marketing, there is no one else there, you have to, and we start believing wow I can do anything and then we start superheroing in swiping in when there’s problem oh I will fix this I will fix that, and the trap is, when we bring on employees we actually interning with their progress, they start doing something and we swop in we fix it we resolve, disabling them from doing the work themselves, plus we leave often awaken destruction behind us, entrepreneur like myself are known to fix the 5% of the problem, the big part that is noticeable and 95% like we can skip that and there is this shattered destruction behind us that needs to be swooped and cleaned up, I found that I can’t change my ego, I can’t tell “I’m just going to be mister Mike humble and everything is fine” what I did find is that I can rechannel my ego, I used to be very proud of being the superhero, the savior of my business, and now I use the term supervisionary and what that means to me is that I’m clear of where I want to take this organization but I am also as importantly clear about where my individual colleagues want to go with their lives and then my job is ok “how can I help Amy and Mike and Ron and Kelsey to achieve what their vision is personally and have that aligned the business” and I put more significance on that than being a super hero, now my ego is being filled, hey! I’m doing what I meant to do and the interesting is what I revert to being a super hero because I revert to that often and I say oh I fix this and I swipe in again, I realize that is a step down in where I see myself and put negative context around and I’m less likely to do it, before I thought if I had to remove myself form the business and no longer be the super hero I saw that as a step down so when I reverted back to this super hero role I was stepping up and therefore be stuck in it, so the goal is to put more significant to something else and it will naturally pull us put of doing the stuff that is actually not helping our business. Donnie: Yeah that’s a really interesting thought, I don’t have kids but I will say the next statement with that in front me, but often times, people that went through a rougher childhood, maybe didn’t have all the things they wanted as a kid and by the time they have kids they spoil they hell out of them because then have become success and the kids don’t learn the grind and drive that they learned to get and find the success, they hit the workplace and everything else and they will be a bit lost, entrepreneurs do the same thing with the employees, when you are taking care of the problem you are taking out he learning they need to evolve, I ran into this all the time in the creative side of things and Think this is probably the biggest screw that entrepreneur s have is they have a creative vision of their brand, their image, their everything else and when they try to explain to somebody else that other person doesn’t grasp their visions of what those color schemes or whatever else side of the businesses so they are like “Oh I screw up I will do this myself” Mike: I was talking to this guy Scott Alfred, I actually put him in one of my books, he said an entrepreneur would tell to an employee “hey we need to cook food here, get something that will cook food here” and they come back with sticks and rocks to spark a f ire and we are pissed of Like” Don’t you understand? I wanted a Viking?” and the employee is like “Oh I’m so sorry” but the reality is that we didn’t communicate what we wanted, they did the job, In other times they want the Viking and we just wanted sticks and rocks. So I think first of empowering them to make decision but also giving them the freedom that if they don’t comply to our vision to realize that maybe is not their fault, maybe we didn’t communicated well or maybe their vision for that thing is actually better than ours, maybe sticks and rocks is better, is this clinginess we have to what we have a personal vision or mission, how we see things in our mind and we can get upset when people don’t see what we see but we are often to communicating well at all. Donnie: Well and I would also add in there that I think, I want to speak for myself, there were a lot of times along this journey so far that I wanted somebody to swop in and take care of that problem for me, If this was an issue or problem and I wanted to go like “hey this is now yours” and take it completely of my plate and when it comes back and not what I had in vision and I am like “What the hell -” Mike: “ - Are you an idiot” Donnie: Right! Mike: That is called abdication; so many people think you are doing delegation when they are doing abdication. Donnie: Thank you I just added a whole new word today. Mike: Big word, I wanted to drop it, sort of finding where to use it. Laugh Donnie: You have been waiting the whole episode just to use that one. Mike: So I just thought of blurring it out if you didn’t have a question, but abdication is simply point someone and say you take care of this and that is the entire instruction said, and entrepreneurs are notorious for to scenarios, either micromanagement where is total control, here’s step 1, step 1.a - 1.b, or abdication which is the polar opposite and both of them are extremely ineffective, both of them prohibit growth to the organization. Donnie: So how does an individual doesn’t go to the extreme of both of those and actually find that happy medium combination because I’m guilty of both, Because sometimes I’m like “ok I have to tell them what to do or they are not going to figure it out so let’s roll out the power point and walk you through the 500 steps because I need it to get done” but other times I’m just off it, so how do I find the happy medium between those two? Mike: Is simply, you ask the employee, you say listen I want you to achieve certain results in the organization, I know you want to achieve these results, I will give you information, I need to know form you exactly what is enough information to give you direction or when am I going to the field that is too much, where’s actually hurting your creativity, I need the reverse too, if I’m giving just giving you way too little and you can’t achieve the visions that Ii have I need to know them too, is communication, is asking, shockingly we don’t do that often, is that you sit down the first day of the job and say “your job is to tell me when I’m not telling you what you need to know about me” that doesn’t make sense, is constant communication. Our little company we are going to a company retreat to Nashville Tennessee, literally next week and the whole thing is about communication, we are just going to sit there, have a talk, build a report, we have half day to set and learn from each other’s stories, because I know to grease the wheels of this organization is the communication and trust among each other is the ability of my colleague who I write her paycheck out to come back at me and say Mike you’re being an ass about so and so and not feeling threaten or in risk, that will only happen if we have a true connection beyond functional connection, if we have a human connection, I think there is where the answer comes. Donnie: And I love that, I think some people when they go into business they are looking for the pedestal, they are looking for people to look up to them and be that guy and I think that was a hard lessons for me because I know that was a part of my struggle as well is that I wanted people to seem me in a certain way which put me in this weird situation on how I was dealing with vendors and stuff until one of my mentors and coaches said dude, knock it off, but the whole thing is realizing that you are not superman, you are not creating something that hasn’t been created before, you are just repackaging somebody else’s shit up into a better more usable consumable product and format Donnie: I love the fact you are taking your employees in things like retreats and stuff, is that something you did out of the gate with your company or is that something you evolved into. Mike: Well we got it out the gate but is also something you have evolved into, well we had it out the gate but we’ve also evolved into, like going into Nashville is because we’ve had quarter after quarter of profitability that’s grown and we actually set an account called the retreat account so the firs retreat we went to Starbucks because we couldn’t afford lunch, me and my partner we jut said hey let’s just hang out before we get back to go back to work is something evolves, but what I did, recently I did the 4 week vacation, is something I wrote about in one of my book, so if you are going extract yourself from your business for 4 weeks, full disconnect and the business can grow or operate in your absence, you’ve proven the business can likely run into perpetuity in your absence. Donnie: I think that across the world every entrepreneur that just go and take this big gasp because they know way their business functions if they are gone. Mike: Which is a major problem, if you’re carrying the business on your back, and everyone will take the 4 week vacation or over, when get sick or die, so it’s going to happen, we are going to make it delivered so we are prepared for. The funny thing is that I’ve been presenting this concept around the world, when I was in Europe talking about this, we did this, literally yesterday, I flew back form BMW as there yesterday, all august, Germany shuts down and BMW ain’t going out of business, we need to do this for small businesses and so I went for 4 week vacation last year and when I did is not that business was perfect, I put a lot of structure in place to make it happen but there were some problems, one of the problems I realized is internal communication, I’ve become this choke point, when people have questions they come to me a group of come to me to see what’s Mike’s decision but they weren’t making laterally and internally, well I’m absence they were forced to, but there were some uncomfortable things like this person doesn’t really know the other person should approach them? Even if they went only 14 people, so that’s why we are doing this retreat, is all about just building report, we are going to do some cooking sessions together, we are going to have some wine together, we are just going to talk about our lives together, we are going to talk about our struggles and challenges, just to have that human connection, I really believe it greases the wheels. Donnie: Love it, I don’t why this popped to my head but I have strange question for you, what is your actual business? Mike: I don’t freaking know, laugh, I am a full time author, I write books, that’s what I do, so people think you can’t make any money out it, which is total bull, you can become very wealthy as an author if you do it right, the lessons here is I interviewed Tim Ferris on how to be an author a long time ago, he isn’t talking to me now, and he said of course you can make money, before that I was talking to people about being an author, and they said you make no money is horrible, and I said what has been your experience? I’ve never written a book, I don’t know, don’t trust people that haven’t done it, trust people who’ve done it, people that have failed learn why the fail and then learn and then I have talked to people who have been successful and find out the difference and go for the ones who are successful, I have a license: profit first, the pumpkin plan, clockwork, I have a new book coming out, to other companies and they pay me override of revenue so I have a constant revenue stream from all these different companies. Donnie: What do you mean by license, like program? Mike: Yes the program is called run like clockwork that teaches the clockwork system, they pay me a license in fee in front and 15% override … processionals for accountants. Donnie: You have accountants around the world. Mike: Yes over 350 and now and I license this organization but also in the case In that case I took an equity interest but the other two companies I don’t have any equity just the license in fee they pay me. So one of those things as people run their journey, one of the things I had to do was to turn to the people that has done it before , and realize somebody else had cut the trail, go learn from them and get advice from them along the way. Donnie: I gotta tell you man, this has been one hell of a ride I had no Idea about what you and I we were going to get into tonight and actually it has been kind of fun. Mike: Yeah on the recap my head says oh we talk about entreprewhore, you learned a new word abdicated. Donnie: Dude, don’t do the spelling bee on me, if you ask me to spell abdicate. Mike: I don’t know how to spell it I think it starts with an A Donnie: We talked about C level celebrities in there somewhere I am sure. Laugh Donnie: So that’s awesome, but dude I really appreciate the job done here, here’s how I like to wrap up every show and I do stump some people over this so get ready… Mike: 17 INCHES. Laugh Mike: Take it right? What’s the question? Laugh Donnie: I don’t want ask what 17 inches is! Now if you were going to leave the champions who listen to this show, people from all over the world, business owners, entrepreneurs, people who are trying to make the next movement in their life, if you were going to leave them with a quote a phrase a mantra or a saying, something they can take with them on their journey, especially when they are stack up against it and goring through what would be that quote or phrase you would say? Mike: So, I have it above my desk, Oscar Wilde says: Be yourself, everybody else is already taken. Donnie: Oh I love it is one of my favorite quotes from all time, didn’t know it came from Oscar Wilde, I saw it on a meme on Instagram and I thought “Oooh is brilliant”. Mike: Actually I went to Ireland, not specifically for this, but visited statue from him, visited his own home. Donnie: Where ahead in Ireland? because we were just there last year. Mike: Outside Dublin Donnie: Oh no kidding, Dublin was my least favorite city. Mike: Did you see the “Stiletto in the ghetto” the big spike in the middle of the city? Donnie: No we didn’t see that. Mike: I would say it was my least favorite too because is like any other metropolis. Donnie: That’s what my wife and I kept saying, is that if you go to Ireland go to Dublin and I would not knock in Ireland would no knock in Dublin by any means. Mike: No Omg. Donnie: Is like any other big city. Mike: The people in Ireland I would argue are the nicest people, India is number 2 but Ireland is number 1. Donnie: Did you do the breakfast thing? Mike: Yeah! Donnie: Dude I wanna tell you the nicest people, they were so genuine, and the breakfasts were insane. Mike: Insane, blood pudding. Donnie: And the two different styles and all that, so awesome, but look man I really appreciate what you doing, thanks for joining out and looking forward to many big things coming. Mike: Thank you! END OF INTERVIEW Donnie: Wow, what a fun episode, got to tell you, when you see one of these guys and hit some of the celebrity status and maintain this cool level of humility like Mike did all the way through this is just a fun thing to see is a great conversation you are part of. If you like those rise together authentic style conversations o a regular basis you really need to come and hang out with us in our Facebook group “success champions”, daily we are putting cool inspirational stuff or having awesome stories and we helping other rose and go together, so come hang out with us, just go to Facebook type In “success champions” look forward in groups join up and come tell us hi, we will be glad to have you there, if you got any value of this show whatsoever do me a favor, rate it, review it, share it with at least one fiend that would get value out of it, it would mean everything to me to get more people sharing and listening to these stories and ratings and reviews mean everything, so wherever you are listening this podcast, leave a rating leave a review, share it with a friend I really appreciate you guys, thank you for being a champion, thank you listening this show, keep on rolling shit up and keep going baby! Facebook https://www.facebook.com/MikeMichalowiczFanPage/ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/mikemichalowicz/ Twitter https://twitter.com/MikeMichalowicz Success Champions https://www.facebook.com/groups/SuccessChampion Music by Freddy Fri To book Freddy Fri or for more information -- freddyfrimotivation@gmail.com Follow Freddy Fri Motivation for WEEKLY MOTIVATIONAL VIDEOS and other content: Website -- http://www.freddyfri.com Twitter -- https://twitter.com/realplayya1000 Facebook -- https://www.facebook.com/FredWins/ Instagram -- http://instagram.com/freddyfrimotivation LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/freddyfri/

Donnie: Alright was this is going to be an amazing episodes we are going to sit down with mike Michalowicz, We didn’t spend whole lot of time on a back story, we just started jumping in a lot of the philosophy of business, entrepreneurism and there wasn’t any flop, it was a pretty cool conversation, I really enjoyed and I know a lot of you guys asked for me to get him on the show you could more of an intimate conversation with him so I think you are really going to enjoy this one. And this show has been for a quite few episodes now, is brought you by point blank safety services, so Stacy and Mike are doing awesome and amazing things for the freeways and highways and everything they do by protecting the constructions workers, drivers and just keeping everybody safe while helping police officers that we know aren’t just paid enough to do what they do and put their lives on the line every day for us, so they are really helping this police officers not only protecting us in the afterhours but protect their families financially by giving them additional jobs and work they can do on a regular basis, these guys are doing just tremendous work. And I love that they have taken their business success and turned it out over to the nonprofit they started which is called … family fund you know that organization is giving scholarships and is helping out the families of fallen officers, you know it’s really cool to see a company remember really where they came from and really giving back to the community as a whole, so do me a favor guys, go follow them on Facebook, go them out on Instagram, check out their website, send them messages and let them know Donnie sent you , you can find almost everything that they are at either at … family fund or point safety in almost all platforms, say hi to them, I couldn’t do this show without them. So I know a lot of you guys have been harassing me about get mike on the show, so I’m bringing on Mike Michalowicz and this going to be a lot of fun, we already smoke and joke about two Polish guys on a podcast, what could be wrong? But this is going to be interesting, I’m Donnie Boivin this is Donnie’s success champions, mike tell us your story brother, welcome to the show! Mike: Donnie thank you for having me, I’m an author, I’m excited to be here and I’m on a missing to eradicated entrepreneur poverty, there are so many elements I struggle with entrepreneurship and some many fellow entrepreneurs struggle with and my goal is to fix that for all of us. Donnie: I love the whole phrase, entrepreneur poverty, because that was my business for a long time you know. Mike: Well you know what it is, Donnie when you started your business I suspect is the same as I started mine and everyone listening, you star your business and his friends who never own a business, they look at you and they who “oh you started a business, you are millionaire and you sit in the beach and all you do is sit and all you do is drink margaritas” There is this perception as that if you are business owner, you are wealthy and you got all the time in the world, the reality is the opposite, so we have no time, we work our ass off, we sacrifice family, we don’t go on vacations anymore and we make no money! As the general population we are struggling financially, so there is this gap and I called entrepreneurial poverty and so my mission is to resolve that, to make us what we are envisioned to be and when you have wealth and you have time you can be of impact you can serve others, I mean we need to do this. Donnie: No I love this, because Ii think there is one more twist on that whole entrepreneurial jump, because if they don’t think are automatically super wealthy the other questions is, what the hell do you actually do for a living? Laugh Donnie: So you are not only battling how much money you are supposedly making and all this freedom that you have, you know my wife, people still ask her, what does Donnie do? And she’s like, he kind of does this podcast, speaking, I don’t know what he does. Mike: Is fine, so when I sold my first company I go proud, I came home to my dad and said “Dad I sold my business” and told them what happened, and he goes “congratulations, so you are gonna have a really job now” and I’m like what? And he’s “yeah because your security and all that” And I love my parents, they have been extraordinary to me, they love me, both of them tho are in trap in their perception of what success is, get a job, stick to a job for entirety of your life, and I think we are surrounded by that perception, spouse, have other perceptions, as entrepreneur the rule is to break the rules, to challenge industries, to bring in our concepts, is new to everyone, Everyone’s is like “what the F are you doing?” is not comprehensible. Donnie: You know is all interesting, I don’t about you, but when I launched my business, it took me a long time to realize that I spent so long as an employed so when I launched a business I kept constantly trying to almost create a job for myself vs a company and I get lost in the business because it was so hard to make that shift, that is why I tell people that entrepreneurs a made not born because you get punched in the face a lot by life to start figuring things out, was that kind of the same thing to you or you just stepped in gold and riches fell from the sky? Laugh Mike: Oh of course that was exactly my journey! I started the business and people where throwing money at me like what= Is this real? NO! No of course, my first business was in computers system, I was a computer guy and I open the door. Donnie: Where’s your pocket protector I don’t see it? Mike: Yeah well yeah, actually Donnie that’s what happens , I made a few phone calls and said I started a business and the money will flow in, I called a few people and they were “Oh congratulations, but I’m already taking care of” I said what? You know! I’m your friend! “No, I’m taking care of” and at the end of the day of and they didn’t mean, the holy crap moment kicked in, I think, in the beginning stages, and actual motivators for us entrepreneurs is fear, the first few years of my business I was terrified and what that terror does is kept me awake, I would wake up at 4 in the morning and get to work whatever it takes and I worked until midnight and repeat the process all over again because I was scared I was desperate as parent, the challenge tho is that fear in certain point becomes detrimental it gives you energy but it also gives you stress and start breaking you down, so illness kicks in or exhaustion so of course is a flip side, you don’t want to live in fear for the entirety of your life, use it as a spark and the over time you need to convert that idea was to confidence and when I started to get a bit of a routine I started to see some results, I said ok I’m gonna trying and repeat on that and I started to focus on what was working and doing more of what was working. Mike: But of course for none of us, you don’t start a business and the money falls in your laps and if it does, you are lottery winner but is actually a curse because then you believe that you don’t need and effort to make this money and so I think when you see on the cover of Ink Magazine “Oh started a business when she was 23 years old and by 24 is a billionaire” In many cases that becomes detrimental because they don’t understand the real journey of an entrepreneur, which is the struggle on the valley to get to the peaks. Donnie: Yeah Jim Ron when back to as far as motivational speakers go, he’s got a great phrase, he said, the first thing you done when you are handed a million dollars is you mentally have become a millionaire because most people will go through that ride and journey to whatever success they get through and is all those lessons that mold and prepared them for that success and I looked on people that entrepreneur is the new multilevel marketing thing because people go into multilevel marketing or neuro marketing and they are like “Oh Imma be a millionaire tomorrow you know, this I the greatest thing, I can sleep whenever I want t and do all that” so they launch businesses thinking along the same lines and I was just guilty of it, when I launched my business I thought the heaven was going to open up and everybody was going to be “Finally Donnie show up, let’s make a lot of money together” not knowing that you have to learn to run a business before you can try to find any sort of success but is a really interesting twist that how much you have to personally evolve along that journey to become a better version for yourself Mike: Holy F and true, and I love it you called the multilevel marketing but I sort of had a sentiment of it about a year ago kicked in, everything I talked about is entrepreneur and entrepreneurship and all the books I write, everything’s is of the entrepreneur, I’m sort started to becoming convinced that the word entrepreneur I a dastardly term now, I think is actually hurting us because entrepreneur has been equated to hustle and grind and I hate those terms, I hate them, so I understand the sentiment tho, I understand hustle and grind means you gotta make effort, like when I started my businesses fear was my motivator, I had to hustle and grind, here is the problem I think people are interpreting that entrepreneurship is perpetual hustle and grind and ten years into you belter be grinding out, in twenty years you better be grinding harder, you gotta carry this business on your back and this is the antithesis of what entrepreneurship is, the true definition is identifying n opportunity, taking a risk to make it happen and the choreographing all these resources, people, technology and even your clients to make that vision a reality, is not doing the work is the choreographing of other resources. I tell people, I was speaking yesterdays at an event and I’m on a room as an entrepreneur and I say yeah I got a challenge for you, when you are at a dinner party and someone ask you got you do, what do you say? And often is “I’m an entrepreneurs that does X” What about we don’t use the word entrepreneur anymore, and not even business owner because is the same thing, what if you call yourself a shareholder in a business, just by changing that label people are “what the what? Donnie: If somebody hit’s me that I would be like “what?” Mike: You know many people are shareholders, I own some stock, I’m in mutual funds, I’m a shareholder, no do I go to these companies and hustle to make successful? No, Do I do anything in the business? No! I do row when it comes to share holder boats and stuff, I do give I some directions as shareholder but I’m not actively participating in it, when we use the label entrepreneur we are saying that we actively work our asses of inside the business and I think we use the term shareholder is shocks ourselves back to reality, that our mission is to vote maybe through some action but. Donnie: Wait you should make a book out of this. Mike: How should I call it? Donnie: I don’t but something along the lines of start calling yourself a shareholder I think because is a cool philosophy. Mike: Is funny, so I may have a title now called “entrepewhore”. Laugh Mike: My publisher I told him and probably nah I don’t think so but maybe, because I think we bastardize ourselves so much we got to change our label if we change our label we change our behavior, is hard to change our behavior first still holding all labels Donnie: I agree with that, I got a funny book too, it’s called, “that’s not how you journal jackass”, so I got one of those too, is an eBook is free. Here is what I do, when I launched my business I had no idea how to call myself, I really didn’t think I was an entrepreneur because I think in true to my opinion, are the craziest sons of a bitch on the face of the earth because you got to be jut that shit crazy nuts to go launch a business, so I was warping my head around that I more this business owner that wanted to create this one business, this one company , this model and take it through, wasn’t it really worried about even a legacy type thing, I just wanted to get to that freedom state and I never been hung up on titles and such and people keep asking me, what do you put on a business card, my name? I didn’t know what to actually put in there, but it evolved, now is says business owner, I think I out CEO in one point but I’m like, Am I a CEO? I got virtual assistants but I don’t really have employees so am I a really a CEO? You know, but you dance with all this thought processes and I really love this whole idea of your shareholder because it really makes you shock your own system to reinvent how you position yourself in the market place. Mike: You know this plays out to employees too, my company is tiny we have 13 employees, I am number 14, we were a micro business and I used to give my colleagues big titles, so I bring someone on and maybe call them the CFO or the office manager and what I found is this that they just like me started believing the title as like who they are, so I had a person who has not even a degree in accounting, she was part time, but she was handling our number so instead of calling her the internal booking person I said we are going to call you the CFO, she went online and found that instead of paying $30.000 that’s what we were paying for that a typical CFO makes a $125.000 so she came back to me literally and said Mike I’m being so freaking underpay I’m being a CFO for this organization I’m not on 125.000 you are ripping me off, and I’m look whoa is just a title and she is no all CFO’s make that and my response was, you can’t got to Ford or GE and say I want to be your CFO and 125, is just a title , didn’t matter she quit, she couldn’t comprehend that, what I realize is that once we star owning a title that becomes who we are, is not just true for us the entrepreneurs, it’s true for all the humanity, if we call ourselves stupid then you become stupid if you say I’m lazy you will become lazy, if you say I’m driven you will become driven, but you have to keep on repeating enough times until you actually believe it to comply with that title otherwise we can’t own that title. So be very judicious in how you use titles is kind of the lesson here. Donnie: Yeah I love it, so Kevin is known to build all the automation to backing up my stuff, he put under the title of my first email campaign “founding badass of success champions “ and I’m like ok I take that, so if you are going yourself a tittle that you want to step into , you know that you want to own, like “founding badass” or something else along those lines, but is interesting I can see that, going through my career there was part that wanted to be a sales manager and I got sales manager and I’m said “fuck, I don’t want to be a sales manager” so there is a lot to be said in those roles, in corporate America structure formality, there’s a lot of responsibility in owning certain titles. Mike: Totally is, I think as a small business owner I aspired, not anymore, I aspired to be the big company, I wanted to have a billion dollar corporation, I wanted to be the CEO of Amazon after Jeff retire I wanted to take over, so I wanted to make my own version so I said if I want be that I have to act as if, that’s a popular term, act as if, so I’m gonna start using those tittle right now, but in the outside world that’s kinda of a shame, if I call myself the CEO and I walk in with my little company, people are like, who many people report to you? But none is only a couple of virtual people, are you really a CEO? O are you an entrepreneur that’s is starting in bootstrapping, so there is a risk there too, theirs is this disconnect and if we package ourselves in the wrong way is dangerous in fact our business … no titles whatsoever, because I do know that I go into a sales situation, sometimes it helps to say that I’m the owner and sometimes it helps to say that I’m the sales guy and being the owner is actually a detriment so I think a title is just a thing of conversation in what e aspire to have but also have to see the outside perception around titles. Donnie: I got other question because I know my followers have been counting on me and I got a lot of people that followed your book First, it was the first book that I read of yours and horrible book by the way. Laugh Mike: Worst book of all the time, hey at least I got a ranking somehow. Donnie: Hey you put profit in there; at least it has to sell one book. Mike: Right! I should have put an F bomb because that seems to be the popular books now, the subtle art of F’ing and I should put like F profit or something. Donnie: You know I’ve been getting a lot of the guys out of the UK right no on the podcast because they are really trying to make a push, they are calling it “the UK invasion” where a lot of the UK speakers are trying to come to the US and is so funny when they come to the podcast because I cursed a lot but those dudes say cursing to a whole other level. Mike: The brits do? Donnie: Oh my god yeah! And I have to forward warning because there a couple words they throw around like candy and I’m like, ok look, this is a US based primary show, I mean it plays in almost a 100 countries now but you got to be careful with the certain couple of words, the F bomb fine, but there are some other words they can’t just bring to the table! But profit first, that and pumpkin plan I think two of the two books of yours that get thrown around the most, at least on my circles, is profit first the first book out of the collection. Mike: So I’ve written 5 books, technically 6 as profit first has been re-released as revising expanded so that counts too, so I wrote this book of toilet paper entrepreneur. Donnie: Oh I remember that! Mike: Kind of a spit on the face of traditional authorship and it was my angry teenage years but it worked, it worked to put me on the map, at least with the publisher and it built a small … The pumpkin plan was my first kind of mainstream book and profit first was the break through. Donnie: That’s the one that really put you on the map, I’m in forward Texas, you know my hometown and I know there is a little workshop group to get together and discussed that book- Mike: Oh that’s awesome I love to hear- Donnie: And the content and everything is out of that, but I’m curious, when you wrote that book was that philosophy for your business? Or something you were attempting to do and you thought it would be the breakthrough for other people if you took on the same thing. Mike: No, it was purely for me, here’s interesting when you hear the resume of an entrepreneur like me I share the highlights, got a company, sold it, the thick of the story for most entrepreneurs is the struggle, the entrepreneur poverty and I have evaporated all the wealth I’d accumulated in some priors businesses that were dealing with debt, I was able to sell them pay off the debt and make money and never really understood profit, I started this 3rd business that … my resume I evaporated everything I had, lost my house over it, lost possessions, did not loss my family, that’s one thing, they stood by me, went through depression for a couple years, from 2008 to 2010, the highest level was called functional depression, you are a drinker and stuff and during that phase I realized that I fundamentally didn’t know the most basic elements of entrepreneurship, profits is one, I realized all the things I was doing was misunderstood, and profit what I realized is that we have been told profit is the bottom line or were you rent, every book I read is profit comes last, and I realized omg I’ve been putting profit last, I didn’t consider it until once a year I looked at profit and I’m like “Dammit, maybe next year”. Donnie: Wait so your business is supposed to profit? I’m confused by that. Laugh Mike: That’s what my old accountant said,” you don’t want to profit, hey congratulations you got nothing left” And I’m like “what?” Donnie: Hey that’s the whole reason I’m in business. Mike: And that made no sense, and entrepreneurship is not a parent child relationship, I call it BS on that, we often say hey I started a business I gave life to it is my child and one day I will nurture it and it will come back and feed me, no, is more of conjoint twins, as the business goes we go and as we go the business goes so if I’m struggling at home my business is going to struggle and if I’m going struggling on business my home is going to struggle, especially the finances, pour finances are in so last step, so I say I really gotta resolve this and I realize that is human nature when something comes last is insignificant , so profit can’t be last, profit has to be first, and the exclusion of course says, make profit to have it, every time you sell take a predetermined percentage of that money, is profit, hide it away in your business, repeat day in and day out and you will assure profitability. Donnie: Is awesome, is one of those book, at least it was for me when I read through it, it just made sense, because same thing, school hard … somebody could tell me the stove is hot three times and still touch twice to just to make sure. Laugh Donnie: But it’s one of those book that when you read you are like “ok that make sense to me why I don’t do it”? So I started to employing some of the principals of the company and the being typical growing up financially foolish, “oh we are hitting a down turn, let’s just pull form the profit pile we have already put into the business” and you are like ok that’s not the whole principles of the book but it was a fun read, what did the success of that book do for your business, you company, what evolved or changed for you? Mike: That’s an interesting question, there’s a couple of realizations, when the book hit, so it came out 4 years ago and 2 years ago I did the re-release and it hit right away, is funny how ego is, I got like omg all this main stages, Seth Golden move here comes Mike “Polish” Michalowicz. Donnie: Because you got that name that belongs in light. Mike: Right, exactly, when you hit the movie theatre and my name is two lines.. Donnie: Or is turned down on the edged Mike: I think the better one is a limp penis of an A, So first my ego is move over Seth Golden, here comes the new main stager and it was like deadly silence, I’m like for how long? The book is so popular and went on for a year like this and my agent who I spoke to me was “get ready for the pumped up fees” nothing, and so I was like I guess it takes more than just a popular book, and yea about a year ago also did … is not move over Seth Golden but is oh you are speaking Seth Godin is coming after you. So that happened, so I realize is when a book hits it takes time for it to start playing out in other facets which is speaking but I think that satisfies my ego and I love public speaking and is a joy. Donnie: Look, nobody writes a book without waiting a little bit of that ego. Mike: I call it C list celebrity. Donnie: So if there’s another alphabet out there I am in that I alphabet. Mike: I put myself in position C , what’s funny that means that if I walk through an airport none knows who I am, except one person every like 3 or 4 airport checks will say “AAAAA” and you get one fan that comes and say “ARE YOU MIE MICHALOWICZ?” actually one person came up and said “ARE YOU TONY HAWK?” And I’m like fuck no, but somebody will say that, and I’ll be like who is this guy, is very weird. Donnie: You next book you just gotta put your picture on the cover that is all. Mike: I will put a Tony Hawk picture, be my strange brother tony hawk. Is this kind of weirs moments when none knows who I am but one person who just happens and lose their shit but everyone else is confused by and everyone’s like why? Who’s this guy? Is he a doctor? Did he save your life? But the bigger thing is I’m on my mission to eradicated entrepreneurial poverty now we get the metrics in place, and I get emails actually I can see we get two since we started the interview, I get emails in 3-4 5-6 hour now of people saying, because I actually ask people to email me on the book, I say emails if you commit to this and they are coming constantly now and I can see I can measure the changes having in business and that is the greatest joy of my life, If I am ever down, for me is just log in the email now and sit there for an hour and everything is ok Mike, you are not looser. Donnie: I wanted people to hear that last phrase you said, everybody’s chasing something you know and I had a lot of coming even this morning with the couple guys I was talking to, they were liken men I could just have this happen to my life, life would be X, and I keep telling life is never X, life is right now, is that time you need to embrace you don’t need some sort of trigger mechanism to be catapulted to the next version of your life and I love the fact that you were humble enough to say that there are days like, this day sucks, this day is horrible and you gotta go look in the email to make sure life is on the same path and track, because is good for people who aren’t even in the first level on the alphabet list, you know you got the C list rockstar status to hear those kind of things because they are a lot of people, I know fans of the show I know were like “holy cow is Mike Michalowicz, he’s got “Profit First” and this and the other and they put you into rockstar status and often times when people put people on that rockstar status they gave them like the super power feed of strength and everything else, like nothing ever happens to them they are always killing it and crushing it and I really appreciate that humility you speak through. Mike: I want to speak that because I think is so important, I believe when we see someone as in a better position we put them on a pedestal, we look up to them, really that is a form of envy and I think is really damaging to ourselves, if you say “oh this guy is better than me, I wish I liked him” but in the same we are saying “I’m less than” and when we see ourselves as less then we want to disassociate, we actually one to pull someone down, as human nature say, well that person is not observing, Michalowicz they guy that probably got myself in driving, you pull in down, pity is just as damaging, pity is where you see yourself here and then there’s this homeless person in the street and “Thank god is not me” that causes a voidance when we move around them, both are form of dissociation an so I think they are very damaging. I don’t think we should ever use the term look up towards someone or look down to someone, I think we should always say look over, as cheesy as it is I’m big on like totems and this things you can see as the infinity circle and is my reminder that all of us are on the exact same path, no one is front or behind each other, we are on different positions of the path and we have just much to learn from someone who’s in the deepest struggles as someone that we perceived is having the greatest successes, all of them are learning experiences and we can call from each other but if we look up or look down we disassociate, I think we need to say Donnie I look over to you I want to learn from you, tell me your secrets, Mike I look over to you, so I say never look up, never look down. Donnie: I love that, I never heard it put in that perspective but you know Richard Branson when he takes people out to his private island , one of the first things he asked to everybody out there is, teach me something and I’ve always been fascinated by it because you got Richard Branson, one of the wealthiest man in the world , one of the most cool CEO, at least that is the brand he puts in the market place, a whole part of that is true but the fact that everybody comes back from me to the island going “Richard Branson asked me to teach him something” and I’m always curious to say, what could you teach as Richard Branson and I think a lot of those pull some random shit out their ass but “I taught Richard Branson” Really? Really!? Mike: I never heard that story I love it and I think it speaks therefore to great intelligence because I bet you, we all got something to teach as much as he teaches us, I don’t think he is more successful than a brand new startup entrepreneur, by certain definitions, the wealthy accumulated, the exposure he’s gotten, I don’t know and this is no judgment, I don’t know what his family is like , I don’t know what is balance is like, I don’t know his contribution to society is like, I don’t know, I also think that we hold people to a higher celebrity ship when they have broader impact as oppose to deep impact and I think most of us are designed for deep impact, Let me use doctor Oz because that example come to mine, Initially he was a cardiovascular surgeon with very deep impact, he saved some people’s life forever, he gave people not 6 more hours of life but 60 more year of life because of his work, he then made a choice to go broad meaning he went on Oprah he started to talking about health and then the guys is Impacting many people, the difference is , Doctor Oz now has a very broad impact but is very shallow you see him on tv shows and eat your vegetables is the lessons, when we worked as a cardiovascular surgeon, now he’s got a very deep impact, I think is a choice and I don’t think is one is better than the other, the shame is we hold up to celebrity ship people with only broad impact, it’s the famous football player, the famous movie start or the famous author like Malcom Gladwell, someone I exalt but never met Malcom Gladwell he just had an impact in some many people and is a name other people recognize I think is equal regardless of what we do of significance and people that are going for deep impact, I guess the lesson here is don’t aspire to be broad, aspire to be who you are call to be, if it’s deep go deep, if it’s broad is broad if it’s something else do it, just speak truly to yourself, they are all significant. Donnie: Man I love that, is such a powerful message because most people in my belief that have hit a celebrity status they are really good at one thing. It comes down to … marketing, I tell people all the time Tony Robbins, one of the biggest motivational speaker of the world and I ask people all the time and they are like omg is Tony Robins, Tony Robins, he’s done amazing things I’m not knocking down for anything but I ask people all the time, What’s Tony’s job? “Oh he is the CEO of the company blah blah blah” and I mean no he is not, and they look at me like “ what do you mean?” He is the face of the company, Garyvee, he is the face of the company and even Mike Michalowicz a C list celebrity is the face of the company, now all that to say is not meaning they are not making decisions, they are not having vision but they are the PR machine their job is to build brand new awareness for the company is the broad stroke. Mike: Is like a band, the front man is the one who everyone knows and is constantly with the groupies but the drummer and the bassist and the keyboardist who’s behind the curtains sometimes they are the ones collectively that need to make the music and I think that is what this organizations have, I think we can positon ourselves as the spokesperson and we will get all the accolades, I think the day I sort believe in that, over. Donnie: Have you seen bohemian rhapsody yet? The movie? Mike: Yeah. Donnie: I love the whole scene where the lead singer of Queen, can’t remember his name. Mike: Freddie Mercury. Donnie: Yes Freddie Mercury, thank you, that he hits all the fame and he goes out of his own and launches his own band and he’s trying to create the music and it all fails and he goes back to his guys and he goes “they did everything I told them to do” and I’m like that’s it! And he goes “They weren’t pushing back they did everything and the problem is I don’t know how to do all the stuff that you are great that” Mike: I think a great leader recognizes that , as a spokes persons you gotta be careful about being inauthentically humble, I see that too, and is like “oh is not me is not me” and declining as is actually discrediting the people who are fans of you, you can’t do that, the same thing you can’t say “this is all me” because you discrediting the people collectively making the product or the service that you do, so is a fine balance, I also think for the rest of the band, like Freddie mercury was the recognize brand and you have Brian May and then two guys like what was their names? That’s an ego check for them too but they are just as important. Donnie: Even if Freddie would have made it in a solo type carrier thing, even then he still has a band behind him. Mike: Even that is true. Donnie: The craziest thing about this whole ride and journey, I know the good things I’m good at, I’m really good on podcast, really good on interviews, well talking on stages but here is the thing I suck at the accounting side of things, I should read you book again “profit first” maybe probably help me out a little bit, but it’s a lot for entrepreneurs, business owners, whatever screwing tittle you want to give yourself, founding badass, is knowing your lane and knowing what you are good at and finding the right people that geek out on the stuff you suck at, is like I’ve got people that do some video editing for me, they freaking love that stuff, I’ve got people that do automated email for me, the gal who does some of the writing for me I call her a magician every Tim, I don’t know how she takes all the crap I put together spins it up and turns it into a master piece, she’s just got gift and a talent for it, but a lot of that is a humbleness for an individual to go “ok this is my lane, this is what I’m good at, how do I get other people to come along for that ride to pick up the slacks for me”. Mike: There is this thing I call the super hero syndrome when we first start a business we have to do everything, you have to do the accounting, you have to do marketing, there is no one else there, you have to, and we start believing wow I can do anything and then we start superheroing in swiping in when there’s problem oh I will fix this I will fix that, and the trap is, when we bring on employees we actually interning with their progress, they start doing something and we swop in we fix it we resolve, disabling them from doing the work themselves, plus we leave often awaken destruction behind us, entrepreneur like myself are known to fix the 5% of the problem, the big part that is noticeable and 95% like we can skip that and there is this shattered destruction behind us that needs to be swooped and cleaned up, I found that I can’t change my ego, I can’t tell “I’m just going to be mister Mike humble and everything is fine” what I did find is that I can rechannel my ego, I used to be very proud of being the superhero, the savior of my business, and now I use the term supervisionary and what that means to me is that I’m clear of where I want to take this organization but I am also as importantly clear about where my individual colleagues want to go with their lives and then my job is ok “how can I help Amy and Mike and Ron and Kelsey to achieve what their vision is personally and have that aligned the business” and I put more significance on that than being a super hero, now my ego is being filled, hey! I’m doing what I meant to do and the interesting is what I revert to being a super hero because I revert to that often and I say oh I fix this and I swipe in again, I realize that is a step down in where I see myself and put negative context around and I’m less likely to do it, before I thought if I had to remove myself form the business and no longer be the super hero I saw that as a step down so when I reverted back to this super hero role I was stepping up and therefore be stuck in it, so the goal is to put more significant to something else and it will naturally pull us put of doing the stuff that is actually not helping our business. Donnie: Yeah that’s a really interesting thought, I don’t have kids but I will say the next statement with that in front me, but often times, people that went through a rougher childhood, maybe didn’t have all the things they wanted as a kid and by the time they have kids they spoil they hell out of them because then have become success and the kids don’t learn the grind and drive that they learned to get and find the success, they hit the workplace and everything else and they will be a bit lost, entrepreneurs do the same thing with the employees, when you are taking care of the problem you are taking out he learning they need to evolve, I ran into this all the time in the creative side of things and Think this is probably the biggest screw that entrepreneur s have is they have a creative vision of their brand, their image, their everything else and when they try to explain to somebody else that other person doesn’t grasp their visions of what those color schemes or whatever else side of the businesses so they are like “Oh I screw up I will do this myself” Mike: I was talking to this guy Scott Alfred, I actually put him in one of my books, he said an entrepreneur would tell to an employee “hey we need to cook food here, get something that will cook food here” and they come back with sticks and rocks to spark a f ire and we are pissed of Like” Don’t you understand? I wanted a Viking?” and the employee is like “Oh I’m so sorry” but the reality is that we didn’t communicate what we wanted, they did the job, In other times they want the Viking and we just wanted sticks and rocks. So I think first of empowering them to make decision but also giving them the freedom that if they don’t comply to our vision to realize that maybe is not their fault, maybe we didn’t communicated well or maybe their vision for that thing is actually better than ours, maybe sticks and rocks is better, is this clinginess we have to what we have a personal vision or mission, how we see things in our mind and we can get upset when people don’t see what we see but we are often to communicating well at all. Donnie: Well and I would also add in there that I think, I want to speak for myself, there were a lot of times along this journey so far that I wanted somebody to swop in and take care of that problem for me, If this was an issue or problem and I wanted to go like “hey this is now yours” and take it completely of my plate and when it comes back and not what I had in vision and I am like “What the hell -” Mike: “ - Are you an idiot” Donnie: Right! Mike: That is called abdication; so many people think you are doing delegation when they are doing abdication. Donnie: Thank you I just added a whole new word today. Mike: Big word, I wanted to drop it, sort of finding where to use it. Laugh Donnie: You have been waiting the whole episode just to use that one. Mike: So I just thought of blurring it out if you didn’t have a question, but abdication is simply point someone and say you take care of this and that is the entire instruction said, and entrepreneurs are notorious for to scenarios, either micromanagement where is total control, here’s step 1, step 1.a - 1.b, or abdication which is the polar opposite and both of them are extremely ineffective, both of them prohibit growth to the organization. Donnie: So how does an individual doesn’t go to the extreme of both of those and actually find that happy medium combination because I’m guilty of both, Because sometimes I’m like “ok I have to tell them what to do or they are not going to figure it out so let’s roll out the power point and walk you through the 500 steps because I need it to get done” but other times I’m just off it, so how do I find the happy medium between those two? Mike: Is simply, you ask the employee, you say listen I want you to achieve certain results in the organization, I know you want to achieve these results, I will give you information, I need to know form you exactly what is enough information to give you direction or when am I going to the field that is too much, where’s actually hurting your creativity, I need the reverse too, if I’m giving just giving you way too little and you can’t achieve the visions that Ii have I need to know them too, is communication, is asking, shockingly we don’t do that often, is that you sit down the first day of the job and say “your job is to tell me when I’m not telling you what you need to know about me” that doesn’t make sense, is constant communication. Our little company we are going to a company retreat to Nashville Tennessee, literally next week and the whole thing is about communication, we are just going to sit there, have a talk, build a report, we have half day to set and learn from each other’s stories, because I know to grease the wheels of this organization is the communication and trust among each other is the ability of my colleague who I write her paycheck out to come back at me and say Mike you’re being an ass about so and so and not feeling threaten or in risk, that will only happen if we have a true connection beyond functional connection, if we have a human connection, I think there is where the answer comes. Donnie: And I love that, I think some people when they go into business they are looking for the pedestal, they are looking for people to look up to them and be that guy and I think that was a hard lessons for me because I know that was a part of my struggle as well is that I wanted people to seem me in a certain way which put me in this weird situation on how I was dealing with vendors and stuff until one of my mentors and coaches said dude, knock it off, but the whole thing is realizing that you are not superman, you are not creating something that hasn’t been created before, you are just repackaging somebody else’s shit up into a better more usable consumable product and format Donnie: I love the fact you are taking your employees in things like retreats and stuff, is that something you did out of the gate with your company or is that something you evolved into. Mike: Well we got it out the gate but is also something you have evolved into, well we had it out the gate but we’ve also evolved into, like going into Nashville is because we’ve had quarter after quarter of profitability that’s grown and we actually set an account called the retreat account so the firs retreat we went to Starbucks because we couldn’t afford lunch, me and my partner we jut said hey let’s just hang out before we get back to go back to work is something evolves, but what I did, recently I did the 4 week vacation, is something I wrote about in one of my book, so if you are going extract yourself from your business for 4 weeks, full disconnect and the business can grow or operate in your absence, you’ve proven the business can likely run into perpetuity in your absence. Donnie: I think that across the world every entrepreneur that just go and take this big gasp because they know way their business functions if they are gone. Mike: Which is a major problem, if you’re carrying the business on your back, and everyone will take the 4 week vacation or over, when get sick or die, so it’s going to happen, we are going to make it delivered so we are prepared for. The funny thing is that I’ve been presenting this concept around the world, when I was in Europe talking about this, we did this, literally yesterday, I flew back form BMW as there yesterday, all august, Germany shuts down and BMW ain’t going out of business, we need to do this for small businesses and so I went for 4 week vacation last year and when I did is not that business was perfect, I put a lot of structure in place to make it happen but there were some problems, one of the problems I realized is internal communication, I’ve become this choke point, when people have questions they come to me a group of come to me to see what’s Mike’s decision but they weren’t making laterally and internally, well I’m absence they were forced to, but there were some uncomfortable things like this person doesn’t really know the other person should approach them? Even if they went only 14 people, so that’s why we are doing this retreat, is all about just building report, we are going to do some cooking sessions together, we are going to have some wine together, we are just going to talk about our lives together, we are going to talk about our struggles and challenges, just to have that human connection, I really believe it greases the wheels. Donnie: Love it, I don’t why this popped to my head but I have strange question for you, what is your actual business? Mike: I don’t freaking know, laugh, I am a full time author, I write books, that’s what I do, so people think you can’t make any money out it, which is total bull, you can become very wealthy as an author if you do it right, the lessons here is I interviewed Tim Ferris on how to be an author a long time ago, he isn’t talking to me now, and he said of course you can make money, before that I was talking to people about being an author, and they said you make no money is horrible, and I said what has been your experience? I’ve never written a book, I don’t know, don’t trust people that haven’t done it, trust people who’ve done it, people that have failed learn why the fail and then learn and then I have talked to people who have been successful and find out the difference and go for the ones who are successful, I have a license: profit first, the pumpkin plan, clockwork, I have a new book coming out, to other companies and they pay me override of revenue so I have a constant revenue stream from all these different companies. Donnie: What do you mean by license, like program? Mike: Yes the program is called run like clockwork that teaches the clockwork system, they pay me a license in fee in front and 15% override … processionals for accountants. Donnie: You have accountants around the world. Mike: Yes over 350 and now and I license this organization but also in the case In that case I took an equity interest but the other two companies I don’t have any equity just the license in fee they pay me. So one of those things as people run their journey, one of the things I had to do was to turn to the people that has done it before , and realize somebody else had cut the trail, go learn from them and get advice from them along the way. Donnie: I gotta tell you man, this has been one hell of a ride I had no Idea about what you and I we were going to get into tonight and actually it has been kind of fun. Mike: Yeah on the recap my head says oh we talk about entreprewhore, you learned a new word abdicated. Donnie: Dude, don’t do the spelling bee on me, if you ask me to spell abdicate. Mike: I don’t know how to spell it I think it starts with an A Donnie: We talked about C level celebrities in there somewhere I am sure. Laugh Donnie: So that’s awesome, but dude I really appreciate the job done here, here’s how I like to wrap up every show and I do stump some people over this so get ready… Mike: 17 INCHES. Laugh Mike: Take it right? What’s the question? Laugh Donnie: I don’t want ask what 17 inches is! Now if you were going to leave the champions who listen to this show, people from all over the world, business owners, entrepreneurs, people who are trying to make the next movement in their life, if you were going to leave them with a quote a phrase a mantra or a saying, something they can take with them on their journey, especially when they are stack up against it and goring through what would be that quote or phrase you would say? Mike: So, I have it above my desk, Oscar Wilde says: Be yourself, everybody else is already taken. Donnie: Oh I love it is one of my favorite quotes from all time, didn’t know it came from Oscar Wilde, I saw it on a meme on Instagram and I thought “Oooh is brilliant”. Mike: Actually I went to Ireland, not specifically for this, but visited statue from him, visited his own home. Donnie: Where ahead in Ireland? because we were just there last year. Mike: Outside Dublin Donnie: Oh no kidding, Dublin was my least favorite city. Mike: Did you see the “Stiletto in the ghetto” the big spike in the middle of the city? Donnie: No we didn’t see that. Mike: I would say it was my least favorite too because is like any other metropolis. Donnie: That’s what my wife and I kept saying, is that if you go to Ireland go to Dublin and I would not knock in Ireland would no knock in Dublin by any means. Mike: No Omg. Donnie: Is like any other big city. Mike: The people in Ireland I would argue are the nicest people, India is number 2 but Ireland is number 1. Donnie: Did you do the breakfast thing? Mike: Yeah! Donnie: Dude I wanna tell you the nicest people, they were so genuine, and the breakfasts were insane. Mike: Insane, blood pudding. Donnie: And the two different styles and all that, so awesome, but look man I really appreciate what you doing, thanks for joining out and looking forward to many big things coming. Mike: Thank you! END OF INTERVIEW Donnie: Wow, what a fun episode, got to tell you, when you see one of these guys and hit some of the celebrity status and maintain this cool level of humility like Mike did all the way through this is just a fun thing to see is a great conversation you are part of. If you like those rise together authentic style conversations o a regular basis you really need to come and hang out with us in our Facebook group “success champions”, daily we are putting cool inspirational stuff or having awesome stories and we helping other rose and go together, so come hang out with us, just go to Facebook type In “success champions” look forward in groups join up and come tell us hi, we will be glad to have you there, if you got any value of this show whatsoever do me a favor, rate it, review it, share it with at least one fiend that would get value out of it, it would mean everything to me to get more people sharing and listening to these stories and ratings and reviews mean everything, so wherever you are listening this podcast, leave a rating leave a review, share it with a friend I really appreciate you guys, thank you for being a champion, thank you listening this show, keep on rolling shit up and keep going baby! Facebook https://www.facebook.com/MikeMichalowiczFanPage/ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/mikemichalowicz/ Twitter https://twitter.com/MikeMichalowicz Success Champions https://www.facebook.com/groups/SuccessChampion Music by Freddy Fri To book Freddy Fri or for more information -- freddyfrimotivation@gmail.com Follow Freddy Fri Motivation for WEEKLY MOTIVATIONAL VIDEOS and other content: Website -- http://www.freddyfri.com Twitter -- https://twitter.com/realplayya1000 Facebook -- https://www.facebook.com/FredWins/ Instagram -- http://instagram.com/freddyfrimotivation LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/freddyfri/

In part two of the incredible exit of Mike Jackness's Colorit, we are hearing his first-hand perspective on what the process is like from the side of the seller. Mike honestly and openly goes through the process, from the letter of intent through due diligence, all the way to the handoff and transition. He reveals the humbling moments, the surprises, and things he would do differently. This episode is for anyone thinking about being on the seller or the buyer side of the acquisition process. Ending your involvement in a business can happen more easily and smoothly if you are in a good position and absolutely prepared no matter what. The takeaway to all business owners is put your business in that position from inception in case of an eventual sale. Episode Highlights: Mike's background and how he found himself in the coloríng business. How the due diligence process went and how in many ways it was harder work than running the actual business. The things that came up during the process that were surprising and how to approach number discrepancies in due diligence. The value of using a professional firm for due diligence. Why early preparation is critical. The creation and review of the asset purchase agreement and how it went for Mike. The small things he relayed to the buyer in order to make the transition smoother. Why in-person meetings are very important during the hand-off. The importance of doing everything you can to facilitate while still creating limits to your involvement in the process. What's next for Mike. Transcription:   Mark: Mike Nuñez. Yes, Mike if you're listening to this podcast congratulations for sending in the right answer to the movie quote. And which one was it; that was the Boiler Room, right? Joe: I think so. You expect me to remember. I don't know. We need Chris Moore our content director on here. Come on Chris. Mark: Hey Chris, we need your show notes for before we actually record these. But I do know that Mike you sent in a correct answer. Thank you for doing that. I don't know the prizes although the next time I see you I'll buy you a drink for sending that in and getting the right answer. Joe: For people that don't know, why don't we tell who Mike Nuñez is? Mark: Yeah, Mike Nuñez is an old friend of Quiet Light Brokerage. He is also a buyer with Quiet Light Brokerage and what are we getting out Joe what am I missing? Joe: Doesn't he run AffiliateManager.com? Mark: He does run AffiliateManager.com. Joe: He's huge in the affiliate space so if there's anybody out there with products that are looking for a great affiliate company to connect with look up Mike Nuñez on Linked In and connect with him. He's one of the nicest guys in the country and you'll love working with him and his company. Mark: You know what this movie quote is going to become, right? All of the show vendors, all of the other vendors out there that want us to make a pitch on the podcast are going to start sending in the right answers to us here on out. So those of you listening whatever the movie quote was send us an email and let us know what that's from. We'll give you a shout out on the podcast. But now let's talk a little bit about today's podcast episode. I'm excited about this. I love the actual stories of selling some of his business. Joe, you've been working with Mike Jackness is on ColorIt.com getting his business sold and today we're continuing the story. We already have one podcast on this where we talked about getting the offer, preparing the business for sale, going through all that, and now we're looking at the other side of it. And that is preparing for the close and doing that due diligence and some of that stuff that gets pretty difficult towards the end of a sale. Joe: Yeah the 1st podcast was right up until the letter of intent and now we're talking honestly and openly about the process that we had to go through; that Mike really had to go through with his team from the moment you're under a letter of intent all the way through the due diligence, that financial trusted exam if you will, negotiating the asset purchase agreement, meeting the buyers face to face, working with transitioning your virtual assistants over to them, closing, and training and transition after. We go through all of it. Nothing is left out. Mike is honest and humbled and surprised in some cases. I don't mean to plug people but Centurica did the due diligence and Mike—we'll let people listen to it but Mike made a promise to Bryan at Centurica and he said something about this process and his accounting and how it's going to work out and Bryan said yeah okay we'll see and Mike was a little humbled and surprised in the process. Mark: Well, that's great. Mike is a good guy. We plugged him before. He's been on the podcast now a few times. Let's get over to this because I think anyone that is thinking about selling or even if you're a buyer and you're going through this process, it's so useful to get that perspective of what it's like to go through this process as a seller. Because boy it can be frustrating sometimes, it can be stressful and just getting to the psyche of what's going on there I think is invaluable. Joe: And not to go on too long but one of the most important things you're going to hear is what Mark and I say all the time but you're not going to hear it from us, you're going to hear it from Mike. He's built, he's bought, he sold, and he's gone through this process most recently as a seller. And there are some things if he could turn back time that he would absolutely do and he would have made more money. But he was at a certain emotional state and life state where he wanted to sell and we made that happen. And we achieved his financial goals but if he could turn back time that would have changed things a little bit. So we're hoping that the lesson that you'll get out of this is planning; planning your exit eventually. If you may wake up one day and decide okay today's the day I need to reach out to Joe or Mark or anybody at Quiet Light and begin that process what will you plan well in advance for that? That's part of the mistake that we talked about with Mike. So that's it, let's go to the podcast. Joe: Hey folks it's Joe Valley with Quiet Light Brokerage and we have another great episode of the Quiet Light Podcast here with our good friend Michael Jackness. How are you today Mike? Mike: I'm doing good man. Joe: It's good to have you back. I know that we've been chatting a lot lately because we just closed a transaction together. Mike: We did. It's good to be on the other end of it now. Joe: It is and it's been a process. We're recording this folks on April 18th and we started in mid-December. And we ended up closing the transaction on April 5th. So giving you a little bit of a recap; this is Part 2 of the process of selling Mike's business Color It. Mike those that are just tuning in and didn't hear it the 1st time why don't you give a 60 second background on yourself so they know who you are. Mike: Yeah. So I always joke that this background story gets longer and longer as I get older but the short version is that I have a background in IT. I'm an entrepreneur by heart and was doing affiliate marketing. I quit my day job in 2004 and I've been out on my own doing various things since then. I got into e-commerce in 2012 when we bought Travelo.com and sold that—had an exit to that in 2015 in January. Four e-commerce brands one of which we just sold through you. And we've been blogging and podcasting about that journey since 2015 at EcomCrew. Joe: And you're being a little humble there because you really travel all over the world and speak now. Not just with EcomCrew but also on your email marketing campaigns that you do with Klaviyo. So I'm going to boost you up a little bit. Mike: Thank you. Joe: You're famous man, I'm humbled just having you on the podcast and to call you my friend I think. Mike: Inaudible[00:07:06.7] has this show notes that say famous on Amazon I had one that says famous in my own head. Joe: I'm famous in my house but the least famous according to my family. There you go. Alright, so just a quick recap; again we launched Color It for sale in mid-December against my better judgment but you're influential and you pushed me and we did it anyway. But we try normally to have three to five conference calls in the 1st 30 to 45 days and at least one acceptable offer. We had three or four. We can't remember. We talked about this the other day and I didn't bother looking it up. But we had enough so that we got two offers. We ended up under LOI on Feb 5th, intentionally chose not to close for 60 days so you could move three of the brands out of the seller account into other seller accounts and that was a fun process, right? Mike: Oh yeah. Lovely. Joe: And then we ended up closing on April 5th, roughly 60 days later after going under the LOI. So we talked about the process, getting to LOI in the previous recording. Let's talk about what happened afterwards and talk about due diligence. How was your experience in due diligence; how painful was it, how good was it, how easy, all that good stuff? Mike: It was a lot less enjoyable than receiving the wire. Joe: Is this a yes or a no that you really worked harder getting the business sold than you did actually operating the business? Mike: I'd say absolutely. It was a lot of work. It was stressful just because—I kind of strive for perfection and I wanted everything to be exactly what we had communicated in the preliminary process. But Centurica is really good and they found stuff that I didn't even know about my own business which was really frustrating for me. It was a little bit unnerving. I was worried about how that would be perceived if it would—how it would affect the deal. What I realized I guess eventually was that every one of these deals I think that goes through due diligence stuff comes off and we were kind of within that normal boundaries of acceptable tolerances I guess or whatever they would call it and I probably was making [inaudible 00:09:12.1] but for me at the moment that it was happening I was pretty upset. Joe: Yeah so we had two or three things that came up where the P&L wasn't exactly right; the discretionary earnings wasn't exactly right for the trailing 12 months. And it's funny I had a call this morning, I'm working on launching a listing tomorrow and the owner of that business said well what happens in due diligence if that happens? And he was worried that the whole deal would just fall apart and you start from scratch. That's not normally the case. Normally you just use logic and math and say okay if you're off by $1,000 and your multiple is a 3 time you take $3,000 off the contract price of the business. That's really important when you build that trust that you've built over the last two or three months with the buyers of your business Mike. But in your case we didn't make any adjustment at all even though your numbers were not exactly the same as in discretionary earnings, right? Mike: Yeah and I think a few things kind of happened and number one as we were going to do diligence and working towards closing our January numbers came out and our February numbers came out and eventually we kind of knew what March was looking like and we were up significantly year over year. So I mean it was getting to be to a point where in some respects I was kind of hoping the deal will fall apart just like be realistic for money. Joe: Yeah. Mike: Obviously, that wasn't what I wanted to happen because I didn't want it to go through [inaudible 00:10:37.3] but that certainly probably helps. And I think a little of the trust kind of was established like you said that they knew that there was nothing the fairest going on there or at least they hope that that's what they were thinking. I'm sure that's what they were thinking obviously. And I also think that just based on talking to Bryan over at Centurica like after the whole thing was done it was basically like when a report comes out it's always going to be—there's always something that's kind of found and I just—it's kind of like a home inspection. When you go buy a home there's going to be a home inspection and there's always going to be stuff that that guy finds. Some of the stuff you can try and negotiate for to lower the price of the home but a lot of it you just accept. It's just like there are things that you're going to just go okay well I didn't know that when I signed the agreement to buy this house and put it in Escrow but I want to buy the house nonetheless and here I am and I'm going to just go ahead and still do it. So I think all of those things combined and I just I mean legitimately was willing to walk away. I wasn't willing to sell it for less. Because I feel like the number that we picked in my mind was the least I was willing to sell the business for. I was willing—we had talked about willing to—because we had already started separating our companies and making things better that if we waited another year we would have gotten more money for it. But at the same time, I also had set my mind to sell it. So I mean there was a bunch of things going on there but luckily all kind of worked out in the end. Joe: Yeah, you were emotionally ready to sell. There's no question about it. I talked to you three times about waiting; separate them all out, wait another year or so, and you definitely were ready. Mike: It wasn't about the money. I mean it was just a lifestyle adjustment and realizing we had too much going on and leaving some money on the table for this transaction to almost certainly put us in a better situation moving forward. So all and I think we're going to do much better by selling one of these businesses. Joe: Yeah, and you're going to be able to narrow your focus with the sale. So with regards to Centurica; for those that are considering using them or are fearful that you're under LOI and your buyer is hiring Centurica. I've never had a deal go sideways with Centurica. What they do is they find out like Mike said what the issues are with the business and really what it is, it's a little scary but for the buyer of the business it's really things that can be fixed and it's a path towards future growth and making the business stronger. So I like it when somebody else steps in on a buyer's behalf and really digs into those numbers. It helps the process and instills confidence in everybody that it is a good investment and that nothing's going to come back to you Mike in this situation after the sale if you closed and the buyer found something after the fact. It's better that they find it during due diligence like we did here. Mike: I think the only reason you really need to be fearful is if you are hiding something and you know it. And these guys will find it. I promise you—I mean they're incredible. And if I ever go buy a business I will absolutely hire them. They are incredible. I almost want to hire them just to tell them to come do an audit on our existing businesses to make sure we'd get things fixed before we go sell it—another piece of it a year or two from now. They're really good. Joe: It's not a crazy idea preparing in advance for the sale of a business 12 to 18 months out. You know now that that is critical. We've talked about it recently. You got a good value for Color It but I think realistically if the brands had all been separated out and you had clean tax returns, a staff that was delegated just towards Color It, it's possible you would have gotten a higher multiple. And with your January, February growth numbers and December was just killer, there's no doubt that the buyer of your business is really excited and didn't even think about making an adjustment because some of the numbers were off by a little bit. Because the numbers were so high for January and February he knew that he was getting a great business. And he told me personally that he thought that this one is probably the best of the three Amazon FBA businesses that he's bought for me in the last eight months. So we got through due diligence, it was a little painful, a little tough. Centurica helped. We had some trust built early on so we didn't make any adjustments and mostly because of that trust and because of you keeping your foot on the gas in terms of the numbers and the growth of the business. The worst thing you can do folks is once you're under LOI have a bad month or two during due diligence. It scares the buyer. They're making a lifetime investment putting their life savings on the line and they want to see positive numbers, not negative numbers. So we got through it and the next phase sort of when we got most of the way through it was to end up drafting, editing, and signing a 30 to 45 page asset purchase agreement. And that can be kind of scary and overwhelming in itself but the situation was pretty smooth, don't you think Mike? Mike: Yeah. I mean it was incredible. I expected it to go one way. This is actually funny, I expected due diligence to go one way and it kind of went a different way because I was building to Centurica when I had did the kickoff call that this will be the most accurate—I forgot exactly how I said but I really hear myself on that [inaudible 00:15:57.3] accurate company that have ever gone through diligence with you, you're not going to find anything off here by a penny. He was like yeah we'll see about that. That went one way and then the legal actions in my career and the ones where the other party drops the agreements are usually just an awful experience of their lawyer is dropping the agreement on behalf of their clients and all the things that they would want in a perfect world for their client with complete disregard to what the other party would want to see in that agreement knowing exactly what they want. They already know what the 3rd party is going to want but they don't care about that. They hope that of a hundred things that are in there you only asked to change 50 or something and the other 50 stays in the other party's best interest. So what I got was an agreement and—so I'm not a lawyer and I've been through these a million times and I don't really get emotional about this. I just send it immediately off to my attorney I was like let me know and I was expecting pages of stuff that were going to be really difficult to go back and forth on. And I really hate this part of the negotiation process because you've already signed a deal and now you're negotiating over a bunch of other points that you weren't expecting to have to fight over and there was none of that. Like she just like make sure you fill in the blank for this number and they haven't created this LLC that they're talking about in the agreement and make sure that that's done so it's actually a legal entity before you sign. I mean there was little pebbly stuff like that, there was a couple of small things that had some substance but it made me so happy not to have to go through a tough process. It kept our legal fees down only spending 2,500 bucks reviewing and editing the APA which I was expecting 10 or 20k just from previous experience of having to go back and forth. And it was such a great experience. I actually emailed the buyer afterwards and I was like dude I just want to let you know that I really appreciate this because somebody along the way from your team said do not send an agreement off to Jackness and Terran that's just lopsided. Like, make this a middle of the road agreement from day one. Like that was clearly someone communicated that because otherwise, I think it would have been the other way. Joe: Yeah. This is the 4th transaction I've done with Matt and his attorneys; the 1st one years ago and the last three within the last eight months. And every one of those contracts had been fair and balanced and turned around very quickly. And we actually have an attorney referral list now where we just want people to have good attorneys because we've had situations where people have awful attorneys. So we started gathering a list and we put this firm Jones and [inaudible 00:18:35.7]. if anybody is working on an asset purchase agreement and doing it directly with another buyer or seller and you want a referral to an attorney, shoot me an email at joe@quietlightbrokerage and I'll be happy to send it off to you; I'm happy to do that. So that's good, we got through that APA and we actually signed it. It's interesting because we signed it on the 14th of March and normally when we sign it money goes into Escrow and then we're right off to closing. But in this case, we waited almost another three weeks. So it could have been even longer. Mike: It did [inaudible 00:19:16.7] Escrow. You might not recall but there was like a $25,000 deposit. Joe: Yeah because of the request—actually it was necessary because you moving things out of the seller account. It was a nonrefundable $25,000 earnest money that was put in Escrow after signing the asset purchase agreement. I think it was nonrefundable. But that went to the attorney Escrow agreement and then the balance was sent in just prior to closing. It all worked out very well. We ended up closing on March 5th. But prior to that, we had to have some calls and some meetings and doing some planning but there were times when you were a little nervous because there wasn't a whole lot of planning and a whole lot of conversations going on. Mike: Yeah, and it was from my point of view like I wasn't worried about me because like I knew the money was going to be there. But I'm the kind of guy as you know that I'm looking out for the other guy. They just spent a lot of money, I want to make sure it's a good experience for them. And I was just like guys you're buying this business in a couple of days and we haven't talked about changing passwords and billing and things are going to just start breaking if you aren't paying attention to them and the team needs kind of a handoff to know exactly where to look for things etcetera. So it was a little bit weird to me that it didn't seem to be—like they were the kind of guys like everything was like T's crossed I's dotted, really highly motivated and passionate about everything that they're doing but that didn't seem to be as big of a concern. And I think we were talking a little bit—I think it was a combination of they just purchased another business like right before that. Joe: Yeah. Mike: I was also coming to visit them for two days like a couple of days after closing to be with them two, four days in person which I think probably they were just mostly waiting for that to happen. And I think the last part is that they just basically trusted me by that point that I was a good guy and wasn't going to rake them over the coals. But there were definitely some moments where I just like I—if I wanted to like really screw these guys [inaudible 00:21:09.4] kind of I was like thinking that and more just from the perspective of I think they probably should just be more careful because not everyone is a good person and I've seen scribbly stuff happen. Joe: And remember you didn't read every line of the purchase agreement. I'm sure whatever the potential screwing was or could have been was covered there. Mike: There's probably, I did not read the agreement. My lawyer read it but yeah I'm sure there was some legal stuff on there that had I screwed them—I mean again that wasn't even like—I was [inaudible 00:21:39.9] that I was just more—I'm worried for them. Joe: Yeah. Mike: The biggest was that if a wire did come in and we still had that lump in the Amazon accounts and—who knows someone could just like catch a fly out of the country and really see it later and it was a little bit scary for me on their behalf. I just worry about stuff like that. Joe: Yeah. Well, I think that the last minute stuff was due to they had just closed one so they were busy with that and they also knew what was coming. And they are so busy they have so little capacity for anything about what's in front of them that they were like we'll get to that when it's necessary and it's necessary just after closing; after the money is wired. The other thing you mention was that you went to meet with them in person. You happened to be going on a road trip and going to be in their neighborhood just after closing. So that worked out perfectly. Mike: Yeah. Joe: I always recommend to people, to buyers in particular regardless of the size of the transaction that if you can; if there's any possible way, you get in a car, you get on a plane and you go visit your seller during due diligence. Once you're under a letter of intent get in front of them; have lunch with them, have dinner, get a tour. You don't want to let the staff know that the business is forsold, the large part until the APA is signed. But you could go in as a consultant or at the very least meet them so that you can gain that level of trust because it makes a huge difference. The worst situation I've ever had—I actually had a guy from San Diego where you're from. Early on when I 1st started back in 2012, he bought a business from me that was $35,000 and there was about $40,000 worth of inventory. He flew from San Diego in January to Minnesota and he didn't have a winter coat and I was trying to talk to him because I grew up in Min and I'm like you really—you don't know what 10 degrees is and with the wind chill factor of 20 below but it worked out. And he said to me later, he said look if I hadn't met them in person and learned everything I learned in due diligence I would have walked away because due diligence was tough when you've got a business that's $35,000 and there's $40,000 worth of inventory. But he met them in person and that made a difference. He still owns it today. I saw him at the Prosper Show a few years ago. So definitely in person meetings are really, really important. So let's talk now about those two days; in most transactions, there's a transition period, a training period that is part of the purchase price. The standard asset purchase agreement says up to 40 hours over the 1st 90 days after closing. I don't think you're going to use 40 hours or they're going to use 40 hours from you but you put in a couple of very long days right after closing, right? Mike: Yeah. I mean I don't know that it was required and I committed to be there whatever but I'm again that type of guy and I want to see them have success with this business; bottom line. And part of it is just treating others like I like to be treated. And I have been in transactions before when I bought Ice Wraps on the wire hit the guy ghosted me. It was like I literally never heard from him again. Joe: That's why we do hold backs people. Mike: Yeah but I mean it was a $50,000 purchase. It was actually the exact same situation as going—I went to Michigan, it was also in January. I also didn't have a winter coat. And I was also [inaudible 00:25:13.8] I thought you're talking about me for a second. But the employees did help me with the transition. The owner just was gone. And there were a couple of things that I could have used his help on that would have just taken him 30 seconds to answer. So again I just would never want to be that guy. And there is a lot—I mean a lot of things are going on in our business that I probably needed to hand off you realize it is all complicated; they are but it seems so easy to you because you learned them one day at a time. And when you're trying to take five years of something that you learned one day at a time that for me they're like sending orders into Amazon or you have something come from our 3PL or coming from China go to a 3PL and go to Amazon or deal with the customer service issue or do Facebook Ads, I mean all the different pieces of the business it all just seems so 2nd nature to me. It's no different than breathing. But when you try to start explaining to somebody you realize like just how much there is. And so I actually made a list of like 40 items as I just started thinking of them over and above what they were asking for or things that I thought that I needed to explain to them. And I just I wanted to feel like when I left there that I felt good about myself that they had everything from me to make sure that they were going to be successful. Now what they do with things from here on out isn't really—I look at that and that's not my problem. I mean I've done everything I can it's up to them now if they want to end to the ground there's nothing I can really do about that. I'd rather that they'll make a billion dollars with it. I'd be much happier with that result but I want to tell they felt good about me. Like I gave them every tool possible to be successful and I'm still there for them. They still have been in contact with me but they've been really good about it and respectful. And I've been spending 10 to 15 minutes a day maybe since I left there helping them which I think is completely reasonable. And I see the light at the end of the tunnel in that within two to three weeks I'll probably never hear from them again other than to say hi and maybe have a drink some day because they're really awesome guys. I really like them and I'd love to hang out with them just on a personal level next time we're in the same city. But they're obviously not going to take advantage. That's when I would get upset is like if the other parties are taking advantage and like asking you to continue to do stuff and spend eight hours a day helping them and just taking advantage. And they're not doing that and again I just want to make sure that I do the best that I could and I can feel good about myself with the hand off. And that's kind of how things transpired. Joe: Yeah. And that's why as far as the taking advantage that's why it's called transition and training. It's not operating the business. Mike: Yeah. Joe: So we've always got a certain period up to and over, the reality is that even after three months they may send you a note, a Skype message, a text, an email with a quick question that you're going to respond to. It happens. There's just no way that you can pack everything that's in your head inside of a two day training period. Because they're going to come up against something that may not happen for four months and it's new to them and it wasn't covered in training. It's just the nature of all of the pieces and parts. But at the same time, it's not overly complicated. These businesses are fairly easy to transfer and the training is fairly easy. It's just running on its own now and it's the key thing that I always tell people is especially people that are leaving the corporate world and are used to working 60 hours a week and they take over a business like yours that might take 15 hours a week on a high side that just put in 30 but 15 working in 15 observing and training and don't fix anything that's not broken. I see that happen too often. People come from the corporate world and they're just fixers; they want to fix things even if it's not broken so they do break it. So that's the big piece that I try to have them not do which is really important. Okay, so we're doing a video here. Most people listen to audio but you've got the EcomCrew shirt on so I want to talk about that a little bit. I want to know; we've closed, the money is in the bank, you've dropped one of four brands so you've got a little bit more free time. Not a lot, I know you're crazy busy but what's next for Mike Jackness? Mike: Well immediately following as just I have the EcomCrew shirt on is because we're doing an EcomCrew webinar right after this. That's what's immediately next but I think you're talking bigger picture. I'm trying to get—I have some life goals, I do a podcast every year about yearly goals and a couple of big themes are less is more. I think that would be just trying to do too much. We've been successful in spite of ourselves, in spite of running at full scene. I'm concerned about burning out because I've been there before and I can kind of feel that coming to [inaudible 00:30:01.6]. So before running off the rails and feeling like I'm completely burned out, I wanted to make some changes. And one of those things was selling one of those businesses to make sure that the burnout thing doesn't happen. And overall like the thing that I really enjoy doing is the teaching and education part with EcomCrew. It's just been awesome. I talk about how I feel like I have enough in life. I mean it's always nice to make more money. I'm not going to be one of those guys that's like I'm not going to take any money when I have enough to make money but there's different ways to make money. And one of the things that have been really cool is just to help others while doing that. It might be a situation where I might make 10,000 instead of $20,000 but somebody else might make $100,000 so it's like a net win for the role and it's still good for me and it's still in an environment where I get way more enjoyment out of it and it's a lot better than coming to the office every day and just kind of grinding which is not really for me. That was the reason why I left my day job in 2004. So those are kind of some big picture things that we're working on. I also want to get into an e-commerce business I have just a personal interest in. I think that that's really important after just being in e-commerce and business stuff over a long period of time. The things that you are personally interested and passionate about are just way easier. And Color It was an amazing business, amazing brand for a whole bunch of reasons that we don't time to get into here but it's just not something that I'm personally into. And the same thing with Ice Wraps and Tech Miner and Water Baby, those are just things that they make money. I'm an entrepreneur at heart, I think a really good business person at heart like I am very strappy. I will figure out a way to make money doing just about anything but it's not just about that. It's doing something that I actually have an interest in and enjoy which I think will be a lot better. So those are some big picture things for me. Joe: But I think a lot of that estranged and left comes with age and experience; hustled in the past and you did what you had to do and you got ahead and you're giving back. For those that have not listened to EcomCrew, the podcast, I highly advise it. We talk about it often here on the podcast for people that have just purchased businesses or even those that have them and are trying to expand their channels either to Amazon or email marketing or anything like that. You got to tune in and listen to Mike and Dave on EcomCrew. They've got a great series, Under the Hood, we're going to try to do something like that on valuations here at Quiet Light someday but Mike is one of those guys that has been there, done it, and now he's helping. He's not teaching because he had nothing else to do. He's teaching because he's been very, very successful in sharing his experience with others. So I appreciate that. Mike, any last thoughts, any last words in terms of what you'd say to people that are thinking about selling in the future and how to prepare? Mike: Specifically, on thinking about selling and how to prepare, the 1st thing I would say is that everything comes to an end at some point. So even if you're like I'm never going to sell my business that's complete B.S. because everything comes to an end. And what I've learned in life, entrepreneurial life is a lot of times it sneaks up on you. You think you're in a good spotting and you're happy with what you're doing but there's a lot of things that happen in business that are irritating and wear on you. And eventually one day you might just throw your hands up and you'll be like I've had enough of this. And if you're in a better spot to sell and you're prepared to sell all along the way that can happen a lot easier and smoother than if you haven't prepared. And you'll also get way more money for your business if you have prepared. So it's something that you should be thinking about at all times. It will probably make you a better business person and make your existing business better anyway because if you're always thinking about it from the perception of I might need to sell this business any time it will force you to have better procedures in place. It will force you to be looking at your accounting every month and scrutinizing all your expenses. Making sure that your net profit is always as high as possible. There's a lot of [inaudible 00:34:09.9] benefits having that thought process. And even if you “never do sell” it will probably put you in a better position no matter what. So if there are things that I wish I'd—if I could go—if you try and go back and change things and I was thinking a lot about this; our plan was to sell the whole thing as like a big conglomerate originally. But things changed and so I wasn't—I had been marching towards to sell everything as a conglomerate goal, everything was together and I thought one day e when I was done with e-commerce I would just be done with e-commerce. But that's not how it worked out. What ended up happening was we got too big for what I was comfortable with in terms of risk to reward and I want to take some money off the table and I still immensely love e-commerce and I want to be involved in e-commerce. So I could have better prepared ourselves for that by having multiple LLC's for each brand that maybe one LLC owned each one of those and it still would have been that conglomerate thing and structured in a better way. You can't foresee the future all the time but you can definitely plan—put yourself in a better position when the unexpected comes. Joe: I don't know if I could have said it any better than that so we're just going to wrap this up, Mike. Mike: [inaudible 00:35:20.4] Joe: It's about a complete pleasure working with you. I'm glad to have been your broker in helping you achieve these goals and maybe another year or two we'll do it with the next one. Mike: I'm looking forward to it. Joe: Alright, thanks, Mike.   Links and Resources: ColorIt.com MIke's Podcast Email Mike Centurica

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Todd: Hey, Michael, I just met your wife. She's a really nice woman. Really friendly.Mike: Yeah. yeah. We met a long time ago. We've been married a lot of years, now.Todd: How did you meet actually?Mike: Oh, gosh, we back when we were both students, at Arizona State University in Tempe Arizona, and I had volunteered to be one of the tour guides for new students, foreign students who just come in for that school year, and it was the end of August, and it was very steamy, a very hot day, and I remember I met the students, there were maybe four or five of them at the Student Union for this walking orientation tour of the campus. It's a beautiful campus, by the way, and so, you know, I remember she was sitting on this bench and I went and, you know, she smiled at me and I smiled at her, and there was some kind of spark.Todd: Yeah, yeah, like a connection.Mike: There was a connection. There was a connection there, and I, you know, we went on this walking tour of the campus and when we were you done, you know, I kind of reluctantly, sort of said goodbye to her and the rest of the group, and you know, kind of said, see you around, and I think the next day even, she went found out who I was and where I worked and she dropped in my office.Todd: Wow, that's pretty cool. That's pretty romantic.Mike: It was very cool. Very romantic. You know the funny thing is, that particular bench, where we met, on our anniversary, 20th anniversary, we went back to the campus (no way) where we met and we took a picture of ourselves on the same bench because this is where we first met.Todd: What a great story.Mike: It was very cool to go back there.Todd: So, in terms of your personality, how are you guys similar?Mike: How are we similar? Oh, man, I think we're more different than anything. I think our biggest similarity is that we're both so different, in other words, that we're both very tolerant (yeah) of people who are different and so we, you know we kind of get along. We have an understanding that's we're going to misunderstand each other most of the time.Todd: Right, right.Mike: But we sort of approach that with a kind of humor and flexibility so I think that's what makes our relationship work is that we got that kind of agreement.Todd: So you think that's the key to any successful marriage?Mike: Is not getting so upset at misunderstanding each other or kind of using misunderstanding as a way of getting to know each other. I think that is one of the keys.Todd: That's nice. Thanks.Mike: Sure.

In this episode, Stan and Mike talk with CCW Safe Accounts Manager, David Darter.  They talk about some of the most common questions from our members and prospective members, and some of the best practices for getting help with your account.   Full Transcription below! Speaker 1: Welcome to the Inside CCW Safe podcast with founders Stan Campbell and Mike Darter. If you're forced to fight the battle for your life, CCW Safe will fight the battle for your future. Mike: Okay. All right. Peter Gordon. Mike: Hi, welcome back to the Inside CCW Safe podcast. I'm Mike Darter with CCW Safe in Oklahoma City. Here, we're with Stan Campbell. Stan Campbell: Yeah, Stan Campbell holding down Los Angeles today. Mike: You're what? Stan Campbell: I said I'm holding down Los Angeles, sorry about that. Mike: Holding down Los Angeles. I hit my little mute button to turn off all ... I'm turning off all my phones and beeps and stuff, and I accidentally hit the mute button on my computer which muted you. Mike: So, Stan man, it's been freezing here. We've been like had two school days. Stan Campbell: You said two school days? Mike: Two no school days. Stan Campbell: Oh, two no school days. Yeah, you guys have ice storms out there, right? Mike: Yeah, it's been crazy. But I think today it's supposed to get up to like 40. So, it should be pretty good. What's LA like? Stan Campbell: LA is kinda overcast. It's not that pretty, but it's no ice. I haven't seen ice over there. No ice. Mike: Good deal. Anything else going on recently we need to know about? Stan Campbell: No. I mean, we're following the ... And we will get to talk about it at a later podcast, but we're following the constitutional carry that just got passed here in Oklahoma, and that's a good thing. Mike: Yeah. I think it goes in November? Stan Campbell: Yeah. November 1st is gonna be when it pushes through. So, that's a good thing. It's always good to hear some governors willing to stand up for those who support the Second Amendment and take care of concealed carriers and such. Mike: Yeah. I didn't know that was even going through until yesterday. I know it went through last year and then the governor didn't sign it. But, cool. Mike: Well, today we got on my brother. My real brother, not my first [inaudible 00:02:23]. Mike Darter: Not a brother from another mother. Stan Campbell: They're brothers from the same mother. Brothers from the same mothers. Mike: David Gardner, he's our account manager. David, thanks for coming on. David Darter: You bet. Mike: Thank you, Dave. David Darter: Good to see you around. Mike: Did you still end up in the city as well, fighting this ice? David Darter: Yeah, I already fell yesterday. I busted my butt. Stan Campbell: That's not good. Well, what, as long as it wasn't on CCW Safe property, I'm okay with it. So get back to work, Dave. Get back to work. David Darter: That's hilarious. Stan Campbell: For those who don't know, I mean, we always talk about our support staff. You guys heard about, we had just added Justin. The usual suspects, Don and Gary, but behind the scenes, who really keeps this thing moving and who coordinates all the efforts of customer service is David Darter. He is the star really of CCW Safe because if you're not involved in a critical incident and they need our support because of an arrest or use of force to defend your life, you're dealing with just simple issues of customer service and just simple questions that you just might have if you just chose to join us without really learning about us. And David is the one who really ... He holds down that position and he does an awesome job with our customers. Stan Campbell: I really love having him in that position and being over the specialist, just coordinating all the efforts and all the help with the members in our CCW Safe family. I just wanna let you guys know, David is a rockstar. David Darter: Thank you, Stan. I appreciate that. Stan Campbell: No, it's okay. David Gardner: We take a great pride in our customer service. Stan Campbell: Yeah. That's true. And what, David, I was really trying to invest. That was the opening for Michael to list. It's obvious that there's some big brother, little brother issues going on here, where he can't give you a simple account- Mike: This is what happened. I'd just plugged in my headphones at the time he said that 'cause I didn't know if my mic was picking up you coming over the deal. So, I was like, "Maybe I'll just talk to my headphones." I'm taking them off now because it's like watching a- Stan Campbell: A Chinese movie? Mike: ... a 1970s movie. So I didn't hear what you said. Stan Campbell: That's hilarious. Mike: There you are. Now you're talking in your mouth. Stan Campbell: Yeah, we're here Michael. Mike: So yeah, he is a rockstar. Stan Campbell: Yeah, he is. Mike: He does great with our customer service, and that's one of the things that ... It's hard when you're dealing with tens of thousands of members and trying to provide good customer service for a nationwide covering. It's very hard to do that. I know that some of our competitors have the same issues that we do, but I think we handle ours very well and I think that we have a very good handler of our customer support, and a lot of it is because of David. Stan Campbell: Absolutely. David, and David sorry, we're gonna talk about you first. So David, he is the accounts manager, and of course, like I said, he's over the CCW Safe specialists who get your non-emergency calls. If I had to really do an estimate, I'd say about 98% of the calls for service are non-emergency. The 2% would be emergency calls, talking about arrest and use of force issues. Stan Campbell: So it's a lot of work. What everybody needs to understand, and let's start out with backstage, stating that, we have a great system in place, and it's a layered system. Number I, we want everyone to know that if you have account issues, absolutely send them to David. Don't call the non-emergency number if it's an account issue because, by design, we don't have them ... The contracted organization who handles our non-emergency calls, we don't have them able to have access to your accounts. And that's just to protect you guys. It's all about protecting you all from police officers here. Everything that we do, even what we desire for customer service, is so to protect you, your credit card, access, and all that. Stan Campbell: So if you guys have any account issues, please send it to david@ccwsafe.com, or support@ccwsafe.com. That way, you don't waste any time, you don't get frustrated because the non-emergency agents you can't have access or can't access your account. So you don't want to put that information out there. Stan Campbell: The other thing that I want you guys to understand is that this is a very unique business and it's a very unique service. And when people call us to get answers, it's not usually a quick one-minute phone call. We spend a lot of time with our members on the phone. I wish we could do it a little bit faster but those who call can really, and please send emails supporting my statement right now for those who have enjoyed the time and effort that we have spent with you 30 minutes to an hour, to really give you an understanding of this service, your protection, because a lot of this stuff is built in legal leads. Stan Campbell: Although our agreement is pretty cut and dry, there's still some legal leads in there; it has to be because of contractual agreements. But people usually you don't understand a lot of this stuff without lawyers. So when they called David, or when I see there's an overflow and I jump on the phone, because I oversee all of it as well: If I see there's a pending call, I'll jump on it as well and take some calls. But when we spend that time with you, please understand if we don't get back with you, we have to put it in a priority and we're getting back to you as fast as we can. So, make sure that you guys just really be patient with us. Kudos to David for spending that amount of time and giving these people a real understanding of their coverage. Stan Campbell: But before we start with David, I wanna talk about a call that I just received, because Dave is going to go over today. Not the Top 10, nor the most significant, the calls that we get most often, the frequently asked questions that come across his computer most. But before he starts, I'm gonna jump ahead of him and talk about one that I received today. Stan Campbell: One of our members who has been with us for a long time, I'll just call him Jim S., it becomes [inaudible 00:10:07] listen to this, but Jim called me and he and I, we've been ... I've been trying to give him understanding and we finally kind of got through to him today 'cause I got on the phone. Sometimes it's best to get off the computer and get on the phone. Stan Campbell: I talked to Jim about his services that he's providing for his church with a volunteer security. Please understand that we absolutely support what you guys are doing when you, as concealed carriers, are getting together, teaming up with your churches, and trying to give them some extra support beyond who they hire for security, their armed security outside or if they don't have it. Putting teams together, training together, and doing all those things. That is a noble thing that you do will be a church and it's absolutely needed. Stan Campbell: Well, Jim and I discussed today because he has one of our older plans and he's moving toward the ultimate plan, which has a special coverage for volunteers security, for churches only. So, he and his wife are moving to the ultimate plan to have that coverage because I sent him some other alternatives. Because, for us, CCW Safe, what we try to do is really cover you and give you advice and recommendations that even protect you from yourself. Stan Campbell: What I mean by that is, I already stated, and you all will agree with me, it's a great thing to defend the church, and those that go there, but please understand, if you get into a use of force, you will absolutely be a hero that first day, second day, that first week. But if you overshoot and you make a mistake while all the members of the church are running around, and you accidentally shoot an innocent person, although they will thank you initially for defending their life, please understand they will be contacted by a lawyer and they will sue you and the church for damages. It's just going to happen. It's human nature, it's the process. It's unfair, but it's just what's gonna happen. Stan Campbell: And that's the reason why Mike and myself and Kyle, the partners, decided to protect you guys a little bit with the ultimate plan because it's a dedicated million dollar civil liability coverage that will cover you for that type of incident when you're in a legitimate shooting, and you're trying to protect others or yourself and you shoot an innocent bystander. It's needed. Stan Campbell: So, I went over those things with him. I made it known. He told me that he even got permission from his pastor, who created this volunteer group. But I told him. I said, "Please protect yourself and get that in writing, because at the end of the day, when the smoke clears and they start trying to sue the church, it's gonna be every man for himself regardless of how long you guys have known each other. I mean, it's every man for himself. So, we're trying to get you guys to protect yourselves. If you are in church security, please protect yourself no matter what you think and upgrade to the ultimate plan so that you can cover yourself, because at the end of the day, that's what it's all about and that's what we care about. Stan Campbell: On that same note, I'll give this one more little tidbit before we add David in. Sorry for taking up all this time, but it is very important. The reason why it's important to go beyond your homeowner's insurance and any other insurance entity, we hire civil attorneys for you, not for CCW Safe, to protect you and your actions with that as the agenda. Other entities, homeowner's insurance, they're gonna hire lawyers associated with that insurance company to protect that company first, and you second. That makes a big difference, and that's why we open this thing up for you. Stan Campbell: Guys, please research. Research your own ... I'm not gonna tell you that. Research your homeowner's policies, make sure that they say that they cover, and it has to in its verbiage, "We cover intentional acts because, although you didn't force a shooting, it is an intentional act." If it does not say that in your policy, you are not covered no matter what your broker may try to slide to you in between the smiles and laughing. Please protect yourself, and that's what I had to say on that. Mike I'll let you jump in. Mike: No, that's great points. And we do have a lot of that. So, what do we want to do? Let's get right into it. Just for time, do you have some questions that we were gonna go over today or did you- Stan Campbell: Well, what we did was we had David pick up some of his top questions and, as he's going forward, I'll add some more, ask some more- Mike: Yeah, we can jump in. Stan Campbell: Yeah, we'll jump in. Mike: Okay. What we figured was that we would kinda get a list of our top questions, because we do get these spurts of questions too, that we get one question that starts coming in and then we get a bunch of those questions coming in. I don't know where ... Mike: (silence) Mike: ... have some that are more common than others. So we figured we'd kind of go through that, and somebody maybe who listens to our podcast, who's not a member, might be able to get some insight. Or if you're a member, you might not have full understanding of everything that we do. So, let's just jump right in. Stan Campbell: Okay. Who'll be your first? David Darter: Okay. Let me start just real quick by kind of talking and following up on what you said, Stan. We try to do the best job we can. We take great pride in our customer service. We are in the midst of an upgrade to make the check out much easier right now. Stan Campbell: That's right. David Darter: And then within the next probably four to six months, we are going to be updating some of our phone systems and things like that. So, we constantly try to make it better and easier for new members to get ahold of us and we wanna answer your phone just as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, you can't have an infinite number of specialists. Stan Campbell: That's right. David Darter: So, sometimes it might take us a little bit, but we try to get used as quickly as we can, and we are doing a lot of updating that's going to make your whole experience I think much easier. So, I just wanted to throw that out there. So I think- Mike: And, on that too, there are other ways that people can can find out answers to their questions. We have a new chat that we kind of rolled out maybe six months ago. Some of that is automated; kind of takes you through. So if you ask a certain question, email support at ccwsafe.com is a good one. Sometimes, if you have a pretty simple question, if you email it, you might get an e-mail back before you would if you were to try to call in. So, we have different ways that people can get ahold of us. Stan Campbell: Absolutely. Mike: The chat, I think, has been a really get additional niche right on the website. If you go to ccwsafe.com, you'll see it pop up there. Stan Campbell: Yes. Just to piggyback what Mike's saying, hey guys, this works Central time because that's where our hub is located. We also have the West Coast times, but the West Coast Times but West Coast [inaudible 00:18:27]. So, if you do have issues that you need dealt with pretty quickly, you don't try to contact David between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in Central Time. Stan Campbell: Once again, we're trying to get ahead of any frustrations you might have or delays. David also does not work on the weekends. So, be mindful of that. If you say, "Hey, I contacted David on Friday at 10:00 p.m., you're not gonna get a response from him until Monday morning. So, please be mindful of that as well. Stan Campbell: Also, Mike did mention some of the other ways that you can gather information. A lot of people don't know that you can go to the website and you can find our frequently asked questions. Locate the frequently asked questions. I mean, there's two pages of them. So, you can get ahead of it and really study what your policy is about. Look at our terms of service. Look at the terms of service and copy that now. I mean, it too is on the website. Make sure that you go to the terms of service and have an understanding of what you actually have as coverage. Stan Campbell: But those means there, and to go along with Michael, you did mentioned the Chat function as well. We have a live chat, but a lot of the questions that you guys have can be answered on the FAQs, either in the Chat function or automated function, also has FAQs that we've seen with the live agents there. You can go there, look at the frequently asked questions on chats, look at their frequently asked questions on the website, and you actually have your answers when you put it together before having to call us. If you don't have an understanding then .... Stan Campbell: And we actually designed the chat function. It is automated initially so that it can answer simple questions. But if you ask a question a second time, please understand that the automated function is gonna state, "I'm gonna send you to a live representative." Okay? Then it sends us a message and we pick up on it. All of that's by design, like real simple stuff that it won't take us a long time to deal with. We can deal with the medium level request, and also semi-emergencies and emergencies. Stan Campbell: We're doing all this to try to keep the machine moving because at the end of the day, it's all about the emergency calls and everything else, it's not really an emergency, we can help you through. It's a non-emergency or an elevated non-emergency where you have a credit card issues, please, by all means, call David to get it taken care of. Stan Campbell: I wanted to kinda jump in and let you guys know about that so that you know those are the working hours. Don't frustrate yourself. I'll also give you a little head's up. Thursdays is the day, for some reason, that we don't have a lot of calls and e-mails. So, if you have something that can wait to Thursday, call at us Thursday. But if you try to hit us on a Monday, we're catching up on weekend stuff, non-emergencies and David is swamped on Mondays. You're probably not gonna catch him as fast on a Monday as you would on a Tuesday, and then Wednesday and Thursday. And please be mindful of that. Stan Campbell: We're trying to really assist tens of thousands of people, and just to be honest, we're still talking about hundreds a day. Let's be honest. 50 to 100 contacts a day is what we're dealing with, and these people all expect 30 minutes to an hour and it's only an eight-hour day. So, if you guys do the math, I hope you understand that. You have to just be mindful of that. Stan Campbell: Anyway, sorry. I get to talk too much, but go ahead Michael. God bless. David Darter: So, I think one of the first things that is probably one of our most frequently asked questions now, and is probably due to the political climate, the things that have been happening in some of the states. Do we cover New York? Do we cover Washington? Both of those states now have passed legislation where some of the other companies can't service members in those states. We still do. And Stan, I don't know if you wanna kind of explain the [inaudible 00:22:49] of the business. Stan Campbell: Absolutely, I will. Stan Campbell: Hey, guys. Those who are already members, kudos to you because you chose the right company. Those who are not, research, make an independent decision, and be Michael especially if you're in some of these questionable anti-gun states. Stan Campbell: David brought up New York and Washington state. We know the issues with New York. About a year ago, their governor all out, assault on, one of our competitors and also anybody associated with the Second Amendment. The reason why I say kudos to those who are members and part of our family already is the fact that we saw this coming years ago. And in 2016, 'cause we talked about it in 2015, we saw the writing on the wall. That's the importance of having people that know what they're doing and experienced in the criminal justice system, and handing handling a serious civil litigation across the nation. That's what you have in CCW Safe, and we are also leaders in the industry and forward thinkers. So we tried to get ahead of the anti-gun campaigns, and one was New York. Stan Campbell: So we saw the fact that we should not follow everyone else and attach ourselves to a traditional insurance and broker for insurance coverage backed by a foreign entity in Europe. We knew not to do that because we knew that it left you open as vulnerable to that traditional insurance industry that is regulated, while our competitors, all of our main competitors did that. They went for about a year or so, doing a really, really good job and taking their members. Stan Campbell: What I mean my good job is taking in a lot of members, but then once they got attacked, the anti-gunners, they were smart enough to attack the brokers, not the actual company. So they attacked the brokers and stated technically, 'cause this is what it comes down to, technically they are engaged in selling their illegal insurance products by teaming up with this competitor of ours. And by doing that, because they're allowing them to sell products and they're outside of the traditional regulation, it makes it illegal in that state. That's why the government sued our competitor and they exited out of New York. There's another competitor that is still not selling any additional ones but allowing its members to stay on board until their memberships expire, and then they give them a letter to say, "Now you're no longer covered in the insurance, which is a different conversation. Stan Campbell: One thing that I'm gonna fall back on again is the way that we designed our model. Our model was designed so that CCW Safe is insured through our insurance company that we own, backed by reinsurance as well. So, we have a two-layered protection for CCW Safe to help us to deal with these catastrophic events and these critical incidents in support of our benefits for our packages. Stan Campbell: So CCW Safe is the insured, we are not an insurance company. Let me say that one more time. We are not an insurance company, and we do not sell insurance policies. Our competitors do that. We are a legal service subscription plan, and we facilitate finance and coordinate all the efforts and resources associated with defending your actions in the use of force that is critical. Therefore, we are allowed to stand strong in those states because we're not doing what these other companies are doing. We are not presenting ourselves as an insurance company, nor an associate with traditional insurance product. Therefore, we are the only one standing strong in Washington State and New York. There are no other products there, just us. Stan Campbell: And there are other there other states that are doing the same thing, like California and New Jersey. So please, if you live there, pay attention to what's going on there in your legislation because they're trying to put a stop to you guys being covered as well. And then once that happens again we're going to be the only one standing strong and only ones that's going to be able they truly state that we cover everyone in 50 states. No one else in the industry is gonna be able to state that, unless they follow suit and design themselves like CCW Safe, and it takes about a year to do that. So, in that time, in the next year, we're gonna be the only organization standing strong in certain states because of the way that we're designed. Stan Campbell: You got anything to add on that, Mike? I know I said a lot. Mike: No, no. That's good. Good point. Stan Campbell: Thank you. I did my job, thank you. Mike: You did your job, and you did it well. David Darter: You did. You did it. Stan Campbell: [inaudible 00:28:28] David Darter: No, I just wanted to bring it up. That has been a very popular question. David Darter: So, one of the other questions that we get a lot of is, what is the difference between civil defense versus civil liability? So, all of our basic packages cover unlimited civil and criminal defense stemming from a self-defense incident. That covers attorneys expert witnesses, private investigators, any fees that come along; deposition fees, filing fees, trial cost, court costs, mistrials or retrials appeals, anything that has to do with your actual defense is covered unlimited on what we pay. David Darter: Now, the civil liability is a little different animal, in that your civil defense is covered while the trial is going on. After a trial, if there was a civil monetary judgment brought against you, then that's what the civil liability covers, up to $1 million dollar civil liability. And that's after a civil trial. That comes after a civil trial, and so that's what the difference is to those two. While one covers defense costs, the other one covers after a trial for any liabilities that would be brought against you. Mike: Yeah. One good point I want to bring up is, it's a dedicated one. If you have a civil liability coverage, meaning that after the trial is over and the judge says, "Okay, you're found in judgment of $1 million, if you have the civil liability protection, then that is a dedicated $1 million. So it's not a wasting policy where, if the cost of the trial was $400,000, then you have $600,000 left over. That's a wasting policy. So that's taken out of that million. Ours is the dedicated millions. So if you have $400,000 trial costs, then you still have $1 million dedicated on that civil liability policy because it's a add-on separate policy or a separate membership. So, that's just one point I wanted to make. Stan Campbell: Absolutely. Just piggybacking both of your thoughts, I want to caution everyone who hasn't made a decision to get coverage thus far. I wanna caution you to truly be careful about how some of these companies market their product. And really, at the end of the day, anybody that's watched a used car dealerships commercial or you've been up at night and, you've got, while you are punch, drunk and tired, you end up buying something from a commercial when you know you went to purchase that thing in the morning. Be cautious of the tricks that are associated even in our industry. Because some of these companies, I mean, wow, they are masterful in their marketing attempts. Stan Campbell: Some these companies spend more money on marketing than they do on their members. No, we don't. But there's a reason for that. We keep all of our resources for you guys when you need it, and of our stuff is word of mouth as well, but I want you to be careful because they use a lot of scare tactics, videos, to scare you into submission, and buying their product so that you think that the civil liability is your first fight, and it is not. Stan Campbell: I mean, if you can do any research, because part of my job is to research the industry, and in doing so, I challenge anyone listening to my voice at this time, to locate three, more than three, incidents across the nation, in the past 20 years, in which a concealed carrier has used legitimate self-defense, and has won a criminal trial, but the system allow a civil proceeding to continue and a civil suit to go through, and in that they actually lose a civil suit because, Number I, you're not gonna find too many where someone that is not or that's acquitted of the criminal charges, are not protected by the state for the civil proceedings. But you're not going to find any, unless you find it in Philadelphia. I think I found one in Philadelphia. Philadelphia is the only place that you might find one or two, where someone has won a criminal case and they lost the civil ... The civil was allowed and they lost it, and they had damages. Stan Campbell: So, I'm saying all that to say, you being sued for your use of force, if you just hit the suspect ... If you just hit the suspect, it's so small of a chance. We only deal with, to be honest with our listeners, 0.1% of our members, there are tens of thousand of them, 0.1% get involved in the deadly use of force incident. 0.1%. Less than that, 0.1% of that, will be those involved in a civil proceeding. In the seven years that we've been doing business, and we serviced a lot of members in shooting cases, We've only had one that went to the beginnings of a civil proceeding before we were able to resource it out and to negotiate it out. We have not had anyone, and we have not had to pay out, on a civil lawsuit. Stan Campbell: And we and we do the most work out of everyone. We're the only ones with a documented use of force by one of our members that went from an allegation of murder and completed an entire murder trial with the Stephen Maddox case. We're actually sitting on two other deadly force cases that we cannot mention for confidentiality reasons. But I need you guys to know that. And challenge these companies. When they tell you, "Hey, we've got a gun for you." Or, "Hey, we've got this and that," or, "We'll give you extra two months on your service if you join us now," challenge them and say, "How much work have you done? Show me. How many members have you paid out on civil cases?" They're not gonna be able to produce anything because it just doesn't happen that often. Stan Campbell: So, you guys, be careful about that because it's really tricky in the way they bring you in. Just like Mike talked about the wasting policy. Nobody really knows what that is. They think with somebody tells them that you have $2 million of coverage, you go, "Well, my God, that's twice the amount of everybody else's coverage." Well, really it's not. They're saying, out of all of the things that you can do, all of the little elements that you can use them for and you can be resourced for, that it amounts to that. The problem is, it wastes and it takes away for every dollar that you use, and it starts off with $100,000 for a retainer if you take someone's life. That's where they turn you. Stan Campbell: You can do your own independent research on this, guys. Look at the industry, check with your local criminal defense attorneys, ask anyone that has tried cases for murder, how much do they require for a retainer. And the retainer just readily, it started working. That's not all that it cost. So, I want you guys just to be mindful of that because it's scary. Stan Campbell: This is why we're so upfront with you guys and we're so truthful. Number I, we all come from a background of servicing citizens, but we like to lead with honesty, integrity, and good character, and it stands by and it supports our core values as well. So, we give you information in support of our core values. Mike: Yes. Next up, David. David Darter: Okay. So, I think next we came out with some new plans here. It was late 2017, fourth quarter of 2017, and anybody that had plans, who'd had been a member with us longer than that, you were grandfathered in with what you had. And so, basically, pretty much what happened was they just renamed the plans and made a few changes like bond amount. David Gardner: So, if you had the military law enforcement plan, which was what it was called up until 2017, and you go to the site now, what you're gonna wanna look at is the protector plan. 'Cause the difference, one of the main differences between what you have and that protector plan is the amount of the bond. Unless you've upgraded to the $1 million bond on the old plans, you're covered for $250,000 bond and the new plans cover up to $500,000 bond on the basic plans. Mike: And David, before we go any ... Or I'm gonna let you wrap this up, then I'll talk about the bond. David Darter: Okay, all right. So, if you had the military law enforcement, you would basically wanna look at the protector plan, which is the renamed plan with some changes. If you had the annual single membership, you can look at the defender plan. And if you had the dual membership, it would be either one of the protector or defender with spouse. So, we get that a lot. You are grandfathered into those. You could keep those as long as you want. A lot of members do, but you do not have to update, upgrade, or switch to one of the new plans. Stan Campbell: Yeah, and then just to cut and jump in real quick David, hey guys, remember you're allowed the grandfather in as long as your automated payment does not stop. If you're automated payment because there's a guy that they'd have to e-mail you. But there's a guy that allowed his payment to lapse back in 2018, and back then he was on the 129 payment plan, which is our old basic. He wants to get the 129 plan again, and it's just we can't do that. I mean, if you allow your payment to continue on, then you can be grandfathered in. Stan Campbell: If it does cease and you stop it, and you try to come back later, we can't give you that. We're not selling that any longer. I mean, it doesn't even compute. We can only allow it to continue. Our computer doesn't allow us to go back to that price because it's not attached any longer. You cannot get the old plans. We know what the pricing in the old plans if you did not have it and it's not a continuous cycle. That's the point of being grandfathered in. Just to let you guys know, that that came from Mike Darter. Stan Campbell: Mike Darter wanted to take care of those who wanted to hold their pricing, but at the same time, when he explains the reason for us changing the standard, which he will do in a minute, there's a reason why we did what we did and moved away from those plans. We're trying to give you guys more protection. If you don't mind, I might just jump in real quick and handle that, and we will let David finish. Mike: Yeah. So there's two things that went into this decision. One was the Maddox trial, and one was the fact that his bail was set at $500,000 just based on the fact that there was a man that was killed and he was the shooter. Didn't really take anything into effect about the case, about that it was a self-defense case. I mean, that was just based on the fact that, "Your honor, we have one dead, we have one deceased, and this man shot him." Boom! $500,000. Mike: Again, there's another- Stan Campbell: Hey Mike, also I think that was because he lived in another county. So he lived outside that county as well, is reason why. They made that soft justification 'cause it is really weak what they used that one. Mike: All right. Yeah, it was weak. There's another article that came out on priceonomics.com, and I'll try to put this in a show notes but it was on America's peculiar bail system. It came out kind of talking about the Freddie Gray in Baltimore, and some of the other cases. And it was really a kind of a more liberal piece talking about, why is bail for murder cases so much higher than the other cases? Mike: In the bail system, you have bail starting at $1,000 or so going up to, I think it was around $55,000 for most cases, felony cases, and then, I think it went up to $250,000 for rape and sexual cases, and then murder cases, manslaughter cases, jumped to $500,000 to a million. It was basically saying that the bail system is unfair, but it's just another key piece that made us realize that if we have, in the case of Steven Maddox, he had coverage for up to a million dollars bail. If he would have got that bail set at $500,000 and would have had the standard $250,000, we might not have been able to get him out of jail. Stan Campbell: Yeah. And the reason why Mike says that is because, we would pay 10% or up to 10%, which would be 25,000, and Stephen would have had to pay 25,000, which he did not have. Mike: One of the whole things that we have to worry about, that we have to kinda moderate with our members is, keeping them in the best physical, mental, and emotional shape to prepare them for that trial. We can only do so much. If somebody is in jail and cannot get out of jail, and some people think, "Well, if I could get a bond out." Well, you might bond out. The judge may say he's not issuing any bail. And in the case of Stephen Maddox, it was 30 days later. He's gonna miss Thanksgiving with his family. Mike: We were able to get that within, I think, eight days or seven days, something. But, we have to make sure that our members stay healthy emotionally, mentally, physically to prepare them for this time. Stephen went to a two-year trial process before he even went to trial. You can see from some of the videos of Stephen, there are many days that he woke up and he didn't really want to even stick around. As far as, he just wanted to just give up. He would call our critical response coordinator, which was John Risenhoover at that time, which did a phenomenal job on that. Stan Campbell: He did. Mike: He had dietary guidelines and workout regimens for Steven. So that's why we said, "If there's a case of a self-defense case that is gonna be a murder 1 charge, a murder 2 , manslaughter, it's going to be most likely $500,000 or more. Stan Campbell: Sure. Mike: And if we can better cover our members, that's why we took our bail up to $500,000 'cause we didn't wanna have to have one of our members get stuck in a situation where, based on our terms of service, that we couldn't help them and get them out. That's another reason why, if you look at our website, our whole site ... We do three posts a week. Last week, we didn't do a podcast. We kinda took a week off because we've been re-strategizing some things. This week we're back on and every Wednesday we're gonna have a podcast, or try to I can't say that we will for sure have one, but we're gonna try to do this weekly. Mike: We've been doing weekly for the last three, four months. We also have posts every Friday from Shawn Vincent and Don Weston, in self-defense, which looks at high profile cases and what they did right, what they did wrong. We also have posts by either us, or Steve Moses, or Bob O'Connor on Mondays, and all those, if you look at our site, all those are trying to help people to avoid these situations. So, if we can help our members avoid these situations and give them examples of what should be done, and we're doing the best we can to help them mitigate the risk, that they're not gonna be in a situation that is not gonna be defendable as self-defense. So that's the whole reason why we took that. Mike: I'll put that link in the show notes, it's priceonomics.com. If you search America's peculiar bail system, you'll probably get it in a search and you can look at it. It has all the kinda statistics on that. Based on that and the fact that we had our own experience with Steven Maddox is why we took that up. Stan Campbell: That's right. I couldn't say anything better than that, Mike. That was awesome. What Mike is saying ... Like I said, we invite you guys to grandfather your plans, but our new standard, and we're trying to make this to the industry's. The standard is a $500,000 bail coverage. I think there's only one other company that has matched that standard, but that's where actually they tap out. We tap out at a million dollar bank coverage. Stan Campbell: But the reason why we do that, like Mike said, we really need you guys out of jail. It doesn't help us at all for you to stay in jail. If Steven Maddox would have, and I know you didn't hear the numbers from Michael, right? If he couldn't get out of jail, please understand that's two years in jail waiting for trial. That's not where you wanna be. And for $50 or more, and that's the reason why we made the increase to 170 now, for the defender plan, you get the $500,000 coverage. Stan Campbell: So, even all of you who are coming up on your renewal date, please do, do so thinking about how should I be covered? Or do I have? Or really, you don't have to upgrade because it's really not about the money for us. We're just trying to help you. Put $25,000 aside in a savings account so that you can match our $25,000 so we can get you out of jail. And if you don't have that, like most Americans, please allow us to take the financial burden off of you. That's it. David Darter: All right. Let's move on to the next one. On the dual plans, we have quite a few people. Lot of members getting the ultimate plan now where it automatically covers a spouse. And the question that always comes up is, where do I put my wife's name and why is she not showing up on the account? David Darter: Most likely, she's there. If you go to your ... If you log into your account, or if you're in your account, and you go to My Memberships, you'll the primary membership card, and then right next to it, you'll be able to sign a second card. Now, that second card is therefore your spouse only. That's not for a friend that lives in another town or anything like that, that's for your spouse. David Darter: So, if you go to that, you'll be able to enter your spouse information and then she will be listed right there next to you. And you can look at her membership card if you like, by, I think there's a view button, or you can click on her account number that's there. But that's where you'll enter your spouse's name, and that's what that second card is for. It is for a spouse for one of the dual memberships. We have a lot of people that think that that's, "Hey can I put somebody else in there? Can I put my neighbor in there?" Whatever. That's not the case for that. It is for spouse only. You can do that under the My Membership selection under My Account on the top menu bar. Stan Campbell: That's right. David Gardner: Just like- Mike: Ultimate plan has a lot of ... If you haven't looked at that, it has a civil liability. I mean, it's our top-tier plan. It has everything available. So, if you do have a spouse, whether they just wanna be covered in the home or if they do have a permit, that would be a great plan to look at. Stan Campbell: That's right. And then also, that plan still does cover you guys for your spouse if you wanna cover her for provisional terms. She'll be covered on the provisional terms as well, but she will not be covered for civil liability. Only the primary is. Because we get that question as well. Unless you add civil liability, that's an additional $220 a year, you make the decision whether or not it's worth it. Weigh out the options of your wife. If she carries, she doesn't have as much as you do in public while you guys are together, weigh out the options whether or not you wanna pay that. We don't push that upon you. We leave it up to the member whether or not they wanna just be primary covered or not. Stan Campbell: But please understand, she is not covered, or he ... Your spouse is not covered unless you have that additional civil liability coverage. And David Darter explained that yes they do get civil defense. And although David said unlimited, sort of you guys are gonna use our words against us, what that really means is that, your defense funds are not capped for everything needed to prepare you for, or to get through trial. Because something might say there is no such thing as unlimited. There is a limit. When the trial's over, then that's over. Stan Campbell: We don't have a cut-step plan. That's one of the reasons why our defender plan, we can match against ... And that's our standard plan. Our defender plan, we can match against most companies' higher plans because we created the ultimate plan through the brilliance of Mike Darter to be the best in the nation [inaudible 00:53:59], and the most amount of benefits for the most reasonable amount of cost. So, for 4.99, you get all of that, that we give you, and it covers a lot. Stan Campbell: And people that don't understand, even those companies that they say, "You have over $2 million of coverage," but look at the coverage you have for your defense. Because if you'd only have $500,000 of coverage or less, to $250,000 of coverage, say this is worse, for your defense, when that money runs out, where do you think it's coming from? They're not gonna just say, "Hey you, I owe you. It comes from the member." So, when they say, "This is all you need," or, "You only need 20% because we're a reimbursement plan," please don't fall for that. Use your good judgment, please understand what happens in these cases, and how much money you would need. If you run out of money, if your plan runs out of money with these other companies, you're gonna pay. That's it. Stan Campbell: Now David. David Darter: Okay. All right. Next one I just wanted to touch on was credit cards. With credit cards, we have a lot of people that will have a change of address. And they change their address in their mailing address, in their profile, but because billing addresses can be different than mailing addresses, if you change your address in your profile, you'll also need to go into your billing information, which is under My Subscriptions. You can go in there. There's a Change Payment Method, you can go in and change that, and make sure you get that changed there as well. Because if you change your profile address, it does not automatically change your billing address. Stan Campbell: That's correct. David Darter: Absolutely. Stan Campbell: Yeah. The reason why they've told you guys that is because your plan is gonna fail. It is gonna fall. You went in and changed your profile, but you didn't go in and change what you need. And he's giving you that information now that let's you know, go in there and edit your credit card. Don't get mad at us because you get a failure and it has a mismatch. It's just part of the system. You need to upgrade it, just like you would at your bank. All of these need to be upgraded. And it's the same thing for us, you gotta update that information so that it doesn't fail. David Darter: And the failure is the security. Stan Campbell: Yeah, is is. David Darter: It's therefore your security. So yeah, that's just something that we don't wanna change a lot for people because they don't realize that but they can do that right there on their own account. So, I think the last thing I wanted to just touch on was our membership cards. At the end of 2017, I did a digital membership card, which is a membership card that you can download to a phone, iPhone or Android, and have it with you always on your phone. It just gives you another place to have our emergency information. David Darter: The wallet card is is not automatically sent out any longer. However, if you have to have a wallet card, then you can always request that by just sending me an email at david@ccwsafe.com, and we will send you one. But it's not an automatic thing. The digital card is a card of choice, currently. Stan Campbell: That's correct. And then, in saying that too, David, guys please remember, 'cause I know that there's some folks that either don't have a ... There's a small number of you don't have a smartphone, or you're just old school, because this is what I say all time, "I'm old school. I need something in my pocket." Even if you request one from Dave and he sends it out to you, I just wanna caution you guys again. Although we used to back when we first started ... We used to say, "Show them your CCW Safe membership card and say that you're having a lawyer on the way, we no longer do that. I mean, we put that word out a couple of years ago, that we don't want to sway a decision of a responding officer, investigator, or anyone, that you planned for this to happen. So, we don't wanna give that to them. All we need you to do is say that, "Hey, I will give you the details of this incident in the presence of my attorney, and I've already called my attorney." Stan Campbell: So, to just add another quick one before Michael closes this down, but that's also why we want you guys, don't stay on the phone with 911. Do it long enough to give them your description, that you've been attacked and you had to defend your life. You need medical and police. Get off the phone and call us. Because we do that, we tell you that for a reason. We don't want you to have to say, "Here's my card." You don't have to try to make a phone call in a police car, in front of a police car, because of the videotapes, the car cams, and anything you say in the police department as well, you don't have any expectation of privacy initially. When you make a phone call there, everything's recorded. And they wanna take you to a recorded interview room for your statement. Stan Campbell: So, please know that if you want your phone call with the lawyers to be privilege, do it prior to the officers getting there, from a safe place. Make sure that you're not in high shot of the suspect, get behind cover, and make the call. Even if there's a car or something like that. Stan Campbell: I had to add that. Sorry Mike. Mike: No, you're good. You're good. It is going on rather than an hour, so we're gonna have to turn off. Shut it down. Mike: Do we have any other questions that we wanna address today? David Gardner: I don't have any. We are constantly trying to keep questions updated on our FAQ page. So, it's always good to go look there first. I think most of our main questions that we get asked over and over are on that Frequently Asked Questions page. Stan Campbell: Hey, Mike. Can I ask? I have one more and I'll get off of it. Mike: Yeah. Stan Campbell: Just because it comes up so much. This is for those guys who really concentrate on the forums and the information they're getting about zones that say no guns. I'm gonna talk about this real quick before I have to bring it back later, 'cause I'm gonna David back. Although Dave is saying he doesn't have anything, we doesn't have time for you, he went to come back and assess for Part II. But no gun zones, if it is a felony or a misdemeanor in itself to possess a firearm at a location like a federal building et cetera, you're not covered. You're outside the scope of coverage because it's illegal to do so. You know that. Stan Campbell: If you are in a state in which it is not a misdemeanor crime to walk on to private property of someone else's, and it only becomes a crime after they tell you to leave and you refuse to do so, the crime of trespassing, if you accept that charge of trespassing you refuse to leave, you're outside of the scope of your coverage. If you agree to leave, or if they don't know that you have it and you accidentally ... Stop trying to challenge these, don't use us to challenge people. If you accidentally walk on to property and you didn't see their sign, and something happens you defend others and then they come back with a charge, and they didn't tell you to leave, we will cover you. Stan Campbell: If you will on your way out after they tell you to leave, and Al-Qaeda or ISIS comes in the front door and you handle the threat, we will cover you. So, I just want you guys to know, this is not a game for us. This is really not a Second Amendment issue. This is about using deadly force, which is not a Second Amendment issue. We're trying to protect you from yourself as well. So, please, stop trying to challenge these things and know how you're covered. Stan Campbell: Go Michael. Mike: Well, I'm just gonna say, a lot of the examples we get from people, the only answer is, "Well, that would be a challenge case and that's not what we're here for." Like Stan said, that's why we put all these case studies and stuff online, so you can see what other people have done, and what life sentences other people have gotten for what they've done, and it's just not worth it. Mike: (silence) Mike: (music)  

Connecting Security, Technology, Leadership and Sales with Guest Mike Kail Mike Kail is the CTO of Everest.org, with over 25 years working in technology companies from large to early-stage startups.  We discuss Security, SecDevOps, Sales and Software Development Alignment, Sales Rep Outreach, Compensation, Leadership, Focus, etc.  This discussion crosses a number of different critical areas that will impact your organization. Thank you Mike for joining us this week - the discussion was awesome. Questions Addressed What are some lessons Mike learned as he has become more experienced on the sales side of the equation? Why do sales reps forget empathy? If Mike's working with a vendor, what are some questions a rep can ask to reveal timeline, focus, plan? How often does Mike delegate research to other members of the team?  Where does collaboration fit? How can we build better rapport? How often does Mike see the same type of outreach communication? What is DevSecOps? Why do people worry about security teams in the organization? What Leadership traits are necessary in successful organizations? How do you create better alignment to support the building of culture? Key Takeaways Technical founders tend to focus on the how.  Alternatively, focus more on the why, the business problems that you address.  Maintain a partnership vs a hands-off relationship. It is difficult to read the context. Hope and desperation fuel sales tactics, this is never good. Layout the "Why Strategy" on a proper timeline. Spamming and hoping something sticks does not work. "Don't make your problem my problem" - Mike There is nothing magical in the end of quarter theory. Questions to consider. Is this tied to something larger? What are the side-effects? Who are the cast of characters? How will this impact the business? Ask questions, set expectations. Establish communication protocol sooner rather than later. Play poker - learn how to read tells. Transparent conversations are important, build relationships, earn trust. Be personal, do the work. If you are going to send canned messages - remember to edit. DevSecOps - helps to make security a first-class citizen. There has been a shift from control based to more contextual Sometimes security is perceived as a weapon.  In less forward-thinking orgs it may be perceived as a checkbox. Involve security early in the discussion. The security team does not need to be software engineers, but they need to understand how security impacts or should be considered in the pipeline. Software engineers should be aware of security hygiene. Culture of transparency, open communication, empathy, are all important.  You can't play the blame game. In a disagreement, take the position of the other person, start solving problems, and not worry about who is right. In many organizations, the sales data is about reporting up, and does not include context.  Design is important in security, operations, and sales. Empathy - in the DevOps world you have a post mortem, which is blameless.  Think about how this can apply to your sales organization. Post-Mortems - there is value in having them not be "anonymous" Two foundational leadership traits - Trust & Respect You are on the same team. Identify your north star, and remind people of that. Everybody is human. Early technical founder - trying to improve sales - focus on the why, the value proposition, the business impact. Call to Action/Engagement Question How are you taking an operational oriented approach to your business? Think about how you can apply the post mortem in your organization. Important Show Links Mike Kail on Twitter What they are working on Everest.Org Mike Kail on Medium Thank You  Thank you for rating and reviewing the podcast via iTunes, Google Play, or your favorite podcast platform.  Ratings & reviews help others discover the podcast - thank you for helping us get our message out to the community. Please send listener questions and feedback to hello@catalystsale.com or contact us directly on twitter, facebook or LinkedIn. Catalyst Sale Service Offerings Growth Acceleration - Plateau Breakthrough Product Market Fit ---------------------- Subscribe to the Catalyst Sale Podcast Subscribe via iTunes Subscribe via Google Play Catalyst Sale In every business, in every opportunity, there is someone who can help you navigate the internal challenges and close the deal.  There is a Catalyst.  We integrate process (Catalyst Sale Process), technology and people, with the purpose of accelerating revenue. Our thoughtful approach minimizes false starts that are common in emerging markets and high-growth environments. We continue to evolve our practice based on customer needs and emerging technology. We care about a thinking process that enables results versus a process that tells people what to do.  Sales is a Thinking Process.  

MemberVault is a game changer in the relationship marketing and content delivery space. This first episode is with co-founder Mike Kelly, who is the developer (his wife Erin was an OBM who was looking for a solution for a client and shared with him what she wanted to use – he said “I might be able to create that!) The need in the market can best be described as follows: Online service providers put out a lead magnet of some kind, they get on your email list and then when you are in “launch mode” you get your entire email list to whatever funnel software and they buy or they don't buy. Everything feels really disconnected. Lead Magnets are delivered and stored in one place. Hangout is in another. Paid products are in another place And there is no visibility into what people are actually doing with your content… who is going through it? Where did they fall off? Does anyone actually care about your other offers outside of the free? MemberVault brings your free content and paid content together and it is essentially an extension of your email list. Mike describes MemberVault as a deconstructed funnel where people can pick and choose from free and paid offers, they call it the Binge And Buy Marketplace. 88% of people who went in to get the freebie that they opted in for will click into your paid offers and at least check them out! That's a lot more potential buyers on your offers than you'd get by emailing the freebie! Now regardless of the type of buyer you have attracted (a quick adopter or a slow adopter) the availability of your products and services is ready for them when they are ready – sending them back to the MemberVault Subscriber Hub regularly is going to help move the needle. I want to directly quote Mike here: “The real power is, Jaime, we're tracking everything that happens! Because they're logged into MemberVault , we can track everything that they do.” This allows you as the content creator to know what content they're engaging with, what is resonating, where drop off is, who is looking at the paid offers! There are so many nuggets in this episode, I probably should have had it word-for-word transcribed… here's another great quote from Mike: “There's a lot of fence sitters. And what's really interesting is those fence sitters are silent. They don't email you to have you talk them into it…” TALK ME INTO IT – Said nobody EVER With the data knowing that they are sitting on the fence and looking at your content, you can use the integration with your email marketing platform (like ActiveCampaign) to send them an enticing email prodding them along the path to become a paying client. Inside your MemberVault not only can you put online consumable content like text, images and video, there is also room to insert downloadable documents and ASK Questions. Every action that someone takes inside MemberVault is tracked and can be viewable in their profile. They also get a numerical value based on the activity and whether you use automation or manual processes, you have valuable data to know who to reach out to to help them get off the fence. Here's an example of how a 5-day free challenge would look using MemberVault : Challenge landing page and signup can live on your main WordPress website Signup is done through a form on your WordPress website that links into ActiveCampaign ActiveCampaign has a trigger to add the user to the associated product on MemberVault Challenge content is delivered inside MemberVault Each challenge participant will receive a score as they progress through the challenge As the challenge host, you'll be able to look at the participant level and reach out to the most engaged! At this point, Mike goes into describing the user log in great detail. And this is where the platform really sets itself apart as a relationship marketing platform. Inside the user log you can see everything that user has ever done inside your MemberVault – and every question they have answered to really be able to personalize outreach and grow the relationship. The sweet spot of MemberVault is creating a deep and authentic relationship with those people who are engaging with your content. My next question for Mike was “Who was MemberVault built for and who are you finding are your most loyal clients?” MemberVault actually started as a course platform but Mike and Erin pivoted to this entirely different model because they originally build it with openness and flexibility inside. Most successful MemberVault accounts are digital content or service providers. Mike said that the most successful account right now is Jenni Waldrop who is coming up in this mini-series next week. (I'll link to that right here once the episode is live!) The digital accompaniment to Mike Michalowicz's book Clockwork is on MemberVault . Sign up for that here: https://clockwork.life/signup.html Inside the Clockwork MemberVault they have free content and a live group program. They constantly have new leads and regularly fill the program based on the value provided in the free content, brand reputation and of course the book itself. The flow here is book – free digital content – upsell into group program. Another way to look at the Binge and Buy market place with a freebie entry point is that it's like a store giving away free popcorn to everyone who comes in the store. Some people may come in for the popcorn and leave, but a number of people who would never have come into the store eat their popcorn and walk around to see what the store actually sells! And they're like “I'm really glad the popcorn got me into this store!” I took the analogy further – the next time that person pops microwave popcorn at home they will recall the experience at the store and it will remind them to go back to the store. This is the recall scenario and bringing this back to the MemberVault space – when that person opts into something new that you've created and lands back in your MemberVault and is even more enamored with your products and will dig deeper into the other opportunities you present inside there. MemberVault is an extension of your email list and a simple reminder inside your emails (rather than pitching or launching all the time) is to redirect them back to your MemberVault . MemberVault helps you keep the conversation going. Someone may not access your content for weeks or months after opting-in but then will have a flurry of activity inside there and become a paying client. The unique advantage of putting all your free content into MemberVault is that you are able to sell a lot more passively because your free content gets people in and your paid offers sit alongside them. “You want them to engage with your free content.” – Mike Kelly, MemberVault Co-Founder The concept behind MemberVault  makes me as a user feel warm. I am thrilled to poke around and see what is there. You are inviting me into the space rather than sending me something that may never see outside of my inbox. A great story to show the value of meeting your new subscriber where they are and not over-complicating: Mike was looking to get into shape. Found a website with a trainer he was interested in buying a course, guidance or support from. But there was no way to directly work with him – instead the only thing was to sign up for his 5-day workout package. So he signed up. Day 1 received a video and he liked it. Next day he got the email but it didn't come at a good time, so he saved it for later and managed to find time to watch it. He's starting to lose touch, by Day 3 saved it but never went back to it. Day 4 and Day 5 emails were deleted straight away – he was done, it wasn't taking him on the journey he was looking for back on Day 1. Then on Day 6 he got a congratulations for finishing the 5 day challenge… the wallet was open on Day 1 but by Day 6 he was over it and had found another option. Instead, if that trainer was using MemberVault , Mike would see the 5 day challenge, the other ways to work with the trainer and other free or low cost options. Even if the content is dripped inside MemberVault there is a carrot sitting there waiting for him at the end of the challenge. “The first impression that you give someone is paramount.” – Jaime Slutzky, host Tech of Business podcast TLDR; MemberVault allows you as the business owner: To be able to connect and engage with your audience To nurture your list, by giving them gift after gift after gift each time you add something new to your MemberVault  To get passive sales and hot leads With the free tier of MemberVault  all features are unlocked as well as access to the MemberVault Collaborative and training resources. The only limit is 50 people.