Podcasts about paul no

EQUINOX [ˈekwəˌnäks] - РавноденствиеTrack list:Dj Utah & M.Paul - No track (Pogoda pink 13)Dimi Mechero - PerceptionF.A.R - Walking With FireHaft - Flow GRAJ & Audrey Vee - Nos Adieux (MPathy rmx)Lane 8 - Nuclear LethargyDeltium - NashiraThomas Schwartz, Fausto Fanizza, Elliot Vast - Hymn to the DawnAVALAN ROKSTON - Something to Believe In MIVARI feat. Ben Davydov - MonaDenis Kenzo feat. Sveta B. - Lullaby Lonely Filatov & Karas, Bobina - Slow (Papa Tin Extended rmx)Misha Klein - Chase the Sun AVIRA feat. Azyla - DisconnectedAlexander Alar, Indie Elephant - Berberia KLUB XIII Soundsystem, Sentin, Alex Laine - My SystemHelvetic Nerds - Chamberlain Rawnn, Savan(Ind), Arken X - Restored (Nightnews Space Vox rmx)Dub Pepper, Pashura - Take It Up Levitone - Elemental Drop (Four Days rmx)White Fox Music feat. Константин Лем - Sun DanceShofik - FeelCompiled & mixed by Paul SidorovOnlyMusic™ & OM Library™

Paul Frazee is the CTO of Bluesky. He previously worked on the Beaker browser and the peer-to-peer social media protocol Secure Scuttlebutt. Paul discusses how Bluesky and ATProto got started, scaling up a social media site, what makes ATProto decentralized, lessons ATProto learned from previous peer-to-peer projects, and the challenges of content moderation. Episode transcript available here. My Bluesky profile. -- Related Links Bluesky ATProtocol ATProto for distributed systems engineers Bluesky and the AT Protocol: Usable Decentralized Social Media Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) ActivityPub Webfinger Beaker web browser Secure Scuttlebutt -- Transcript You can help correct transcripts on GitHub. [00:00:00] Jeremy: Today I am talking to Paul Frazee. He's the current CTO of bluesky, and he previously worked on other decentralized applications like Beaker and Secure Scuttlebutt. [00:00:15] Paul: Thanks for having me. What's bluesky [00:00:16] Jeremy: For people who aren't familiar with bluesky, what is it? [00:00:20] Paul: So bluesky is an open social network, simplest way to put it, designed in particular for high scale. That's kind of one of the big requirements that we had when we were moving into it. and it is really geared towards making sure that the operation of the social network is open amongst multiple different organizations. [00:00:44] So we're one of the operators, but other folks can come in, spin up the software, all the open source software, and essentially have a full node with a full copy of the network active users and have their users join into our network. And they all work functionally as one shared application. [00:01:03] Jeremy: So it, it sounds like it's similar to Twitter but instead of there being one Twitter, there could be any number and there is part of the underlying protocol that allows them to all connect to one another and act as one system. [00:01:21] Paul: That's exactly right. And there's a metaphor we use a lot, which is comparing to the web and search engines, which actually kind of matches really well. Like when you use Bing or Google, you're searching the same web. So on the AT protocol on bluesky, you use bluesky, you use some alternative client or application, all the same, what we're we call it, the atmosphere, all one shared network, [00:01:41] Jeremy: And more than just the, the client. 'cause I think sometimes when people think of a client, they'll think of, I use a web browser. I could use Chrome or Firefox, but ultimately I'm connecting to the same thing. But it's not just people running alternate clients, right? [00:01:57] Paul: Their own full backend to it. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. The anchoring point on that being the fire hose of data that runs the entire thing is open as well. And so you start up your own application, you spin up a service that just pipes into that fire hose and taps into all the activity. History of AT Protocol [00:02:18] Jeremy: Talking about this underlying protocol maybe we could start where this all began so people get some context for where this all came from. [00:02:28] Paul: For sure. All right, so let's wind the clock back here in my brain. We started out 2022, right at the beginning of the year. We were formed as a, essentially a consulting company outside of Twitter with a contract with Twitter. And, uh, our goal was to build a protocol that could run, uh, Twitter, much like the way that we just described, which set us up with a couple of pretty specific requirements. [00:02:55] For one, we had to make sure that it could scale. And so that ended up being a really important first requirement. and we wanted to make sure that there was a strong kind of guarantees that the network doesn't ever get captured by any one operator. The idea was that Twitter would become the first, uh, adopter of the technology. [00:03:19] Other applications, other services would begin to take advantage of it and users would be able to smoothly migrate their accounts in between one or the other at any time. Um, and it's really, really anchored in a particular goal of just deconstructing monopolies. Getting rid of those moats that make it so that there's a kind of a lack of competition, uh, between these things. [00:03:44] And making sure that, if there was some kind of reason that you decided you're just not happy with what direction this service has been going, you move over to another one. You're still in touch with all the folks you were in touch with before. You don't lose your data. You don't lose your, your your follows. Those were the kind of initial requirements that we set out with. The team by and large came from, the decentralized web, movement, which is actually a pretty, large community that's been around since, I wanna say around 2012 is when we first kind of started to form. It got really made more specifically into a community somewhere around 2015 or 16, I wanna say. [00:04:23] When the internet archives started to host conferences for us. And so that gave us kind of a meeting point where all started to meet up there's kind of three schools of thought within that movement. There was the blockchain community, the, federation community, and the peer-to-peer community. [00:04:43] And so blockchain, you don't need to explain that one. You got Federation, which was largely ActivityPub Mastodon. And then peer-to-peer was IPFS, DAT protocol, um, secure scuttlebutt. But, those kinds of BitTorrent style of technologies really they were all kind of inspired by that. [00:05:02] So these three different kind of sub communities we're all working, independently on different ways to attack how to make these open applications. How do you get something that's a high scale web application without one corporation being the only operator? When this team came together in 2022, we largely sourced from the peer-to-peer group of the decentralized community. Scaling limitations of peer-to-peer [00:05:30] Paul: Personally, I've been working in the space and on those kinds of technologies for about 10 years at that stage. And, the other folks that were in there, you know, 5-10 each respectively. So we all had a fair amount of time working on that. And we had really kind of hit some of the limitations of doing things entirely using client devices. We were running into challenges about reliability of connections. Punching holes to the individual device is very hard. Synchronizing keys between the devices is very hard. Maintaining strong availability of the data because people's devices are going off and on, things like that. Even when you're using the kind of BitTorrent style of shared distribution, that becomes a challenge. [00:06:15] But probably the worst challenge was quite simply scale. You need to be able to create aggregations of a lot of behavior even when you're trying to model your application as largely peer wise interactions like messaging. You might need an aggregation of accounts that even exist, how do you do notifications reliably? [00:06:37] Things like that. Really challenging. And what I was starting to say to myself by the end of that kind of pure peer-to-peer stent was that it can't be rocket science to do a comment section. You know, like at some point you just ask yourself like, how, how hard are we willing to work to, to make these ideas work? [00:06:56] But, there were some pretty good pieces of tech that did come out of the peer-to-peer world. A lot of it had to do with what I might call a cryptographic structure. things like Merkel trees and advances within Merkel Trees. Ways to take data sets and reduce them down to hashes so that you can then create nice signatures and have signed data sets at rest at larger scales. [00:07:22] And so our basic thought was, well, all right, we got some pretty good tech out of this, but let's drop that requirement that it all run off of devices. And let's get some servers in there. And instead think of the entire network as a peer-to-peer mesh of servers. That's gonna solve your scale problem. [00:07:38] 'cause you can throw big databases at it. It's gonna solve your availability problems, it's gonna solve your device sync problems. But you get a lot of the same properties of being able to move data sets between services. Much like you could move them between devices in the peer-to-peer network without losing their identifiers because you're doing this in direction of, cryptographic identifiers to the current host. [00:08:02] That's what peer-to-peer is always doing. You're taking like a public key or hash and then you're asking the network, Hey, who has this? Well, if you just move that into the server, you get the same thing, that dynamic resolution of who's your active host. So you're getting that portability that we wanted real bad. [00:08:17] And then you're also getting that kind of in meshing of the different services where each of them is producing these data sets that they can sink from each other. So take peer-to-peer and apply it to the server stack. And that was our kind of initial thought of like, Hey, you know what? This might work. [00:08:31] This might solve the problems that we have. And a lot of the design fell out from that basic mentality. Crytographic identifiers and domain names [00:08:37] Jeremy: When you talk about these cryptographic identifiers, is the idea that anybody could have data about a person, like a message or a comment, and that could be hosted different places, but you would still know which person that originally came from. Is that, is that the goal there? [00:08:57] Paul: That's exactly it. Yeah. Yeah. You wanna create identification that supersedes servers, right? So when you think about like, if I'm using Twitter and I wanna know what your posts are, I go to twitter.com/jeremy, right? I'm asking Twitter and your ID is consequently always bound to Twitter. You're always kind of a second class identifier. [00:09:21] We wanted to boost up the user identifier to be kind of a thing freestanding on its own. I wanna just know what Jeremy's posts are. And then once you get into the technical system it'll be designed to figure out, okay, who knows that, who can answer that for you? And we use cryptographic identifiers internally. [00:09:41] So like all the data sets use these kind of long URLs to identify things. But in the application, the user facing part, we used domain names for people. Which I think gives the picture of how this all operates. It really moves the user accounts up into a free standing first class identifier within the system. [00:10:04] And then consequently, any application, whatever application you're using, it's really about whatever data is getting put into your account. And then that just exchanges between any application that anybody else is using. [00:10:14] Jeremy: So in this case, it sounds like the identifier is some long string that, I'm not sure if it's necessarily human readable or not. You're shaking your head no. [00:10:25] Paul: No. [00:10:26] Jeremy: But if you have that string, you know it's for a specific person. And since it's not really human readable, what you do is you put a layer on top of it which in this case is a domain that somebody can use to look up and find the identifier. [00:10:45] Paul: Yeah, yeah, yeah. So we just use DNS. Put a TXT record in there, map into that long string, or you could do a .well-known file on a web server if that's more convenient for you. And then the ID that's behind that, the non-human readable one, those are called DIDs which is actually a W3C spec. Those then map to a kind of a certificate. What you call a DID document that kind of confirms the binding by declaring what that domain name should be. So you get this bi-directional binding. And then that certificate also includes signing keys and active servers. So you pull down that certificate and that's how the discovery of the active server happens is through the DID system. What's stored on a PDS [00:11:29] Jeremy: So when you refer to an active server what is that server and what is that server storing? [00:11:35] Paul: It's kinda like a web server, but instead of hosting HTML, it's hosting a bunch of JSON records. Every user has their own document store of JSON documents. It's bucketed into collections. Whenever you're looking up somebody on the network you're gonna get access to that repository of data, jump into a collection. [00:11:58] This collection is their post collection. Get the rkey (Record Key), and then you're pulling out JSON at the end of it, which is just a structured piece of stuff saying here's the CreatedAt, here's the text, here's the type, things like that. One way you could look at the whole system is it's a giant, giant database network. Servers can change, signing keys change, but not DID [00:12:18] Jeremy: So if someone's going to look up someone's identifier, let's say they have the user's domain they have to go to some source, right? To find the user's data. You've mentioned, I think before, the idea that this is decentralized and by default I would, I would picture some kind of centralized resource where I send somebody a domain and then they give me back the identifier and the links to the servers. [00:12:46] So, so how does that work in practice where it actually can be decentralized? [00:12:51] Paul: I mentioned that your DID that non-human readable identifier, and that has that certificate attached to it that lists servers and signing keys and things like that. [00:13:00] So you're just gonna look up inside that DID document what that server is your data repository host. And then you contact that guy and say, all right, I'm told you're hosting this thing. Here's the person I'm looking for, hand over the hand over the data. It's really, you know, pretty straightforward. [00:13:18] The way that gets decentralized is by then to the fact that I could swap out that active server that's in my certificate and probably wanna rotate the signing keys 'cause I've just changed the, you know. I don't want to keep using the same signing keys as I was using previously because I just changed the authority. [00:13:36] So that's the migration change, change the hosting server, change out the signing keys. Somebody that's looking for me now, they're gonna load up my document, my DID document. They're gonna say, okay, new server, new keys. Pull down the data. Looks good, right? Matches up with the DID doc. [00:13:50] So that's how you get that level of portability. But when those changes happen, the DID doesn't change, right? The DID document changes. So there's the level of indirection there and that's pretty important because if you don't have a persistent identifier whenever you're trying to change out servers, all those backlinks are gonna break. [00:14:09] That's the kind of stuff that stops you from being able to do clean migrations on things like web-based services. the only real option is to go out and ask everybody to update their data. And when you're talking about like interactions on the social network, like people replying to each other, there's no chance, right? [00:14:25] Every time somebody moves you're gonna go back and modify all those records. You don't even control all the records from the top down 'cause they're hosted all over the web. So it's just, you can't do it. Generally we call this account portability, that you're kinda like phone number portability that you can change your host, but, so that part's portable, but the ID stays the same. [00:14:45] And keeping that ID the same is the real key to making sure that this can happen without breaking the whole system. [00:14:52] Jeremy: And so it, it sounds like there's the decentralized id, then there's the decentralized ID document that's associated with that points you to where the actual location of your, your data, your posts, your pictures and whatnot. but then you also mentioned that they could change servers. [00:15:13] So let's say somebody changes where their data is, is stored, that would change the servers, I guess, in their document. But [00:15:23] then how do all of these systems. Know okay. I need to change all these references to your old server, to these new servers, [00:15:32] Paul: Yeah. Well, the good news is that you only have to, you, you got the public data set of all the user's activity, and then you have like internal caches of where the current server is. You just gotta update those internal caches when you're trying to contact their server. Um, so it's actually a pretty minimal thing to just like update like, oh, they moved, just start talking to update my, my table, my Redis, that's holding onto that kind of temporary information, put it on ttl, that sort of thing. Most communication won't be between servers, it will be from event streams [00:16:01] Paul: And, honestly, in practice, a fair amount of the system for scalability reasons doesn't necessarily work by servers directly contacting each other. It's actually a little bit more like how, I told you before, I'm gonna use this metaphor a lot, the search engines with the web, right? What we do is we actually end up crawling the repositories that are out in the world and funneling them into event streams like a Kafka. And that allows the entire system to act like a data processing pipeline where you're just tapping into these event streams and then pushing those logs into databases that produce these large scale aggregations. [00:16:47] So a lot of the application behavior ends up working off of these event logs. If I reply to somebody, for instance, I don't necessarily, it's not, my server has to like talk to your server and say, Hey, I'm replying to you. What I do is I just publish a reply in my repository that gets shot out into the event logs, and then these aggregators pick up that the reply got created and just update their database with it. [00:17:11] So it's not that our hosting servers are constantly having to send messages with each other, you actually use these aggregators to pull together the picture of what's happening on the network. [00:17:22] Jeremy: Okay, so like you were saying, it's an event stream model where everybody publishes the events the things that they're doing, whether that's making a new post, making a reply, that's all being posted to this event stream. And then everybody who provides, I'm not sure if instances is the right term, but an implementation of the atmosphere protocol (Authenticated Transfer protocol). [00:17:53] They are listening for all those changes and they don't necessarily have to know that you moved servers because they're just listening for the events and you still have the same identifier. [00:18:10] Paul: Generally speaking. Yeah. 'cause like if you're listening to one of these event streams what you end up looking for is just the signature on it and making sure that the signature matches up. Because you're not actually having to talk to their live server. You're just listening to this relay that's doing this aggregation for you. [00:18:27] But I think actually to kind of give a little more clarity to what you're talking about, it might be a good idea to refocus how we're talking about the system here. I mentioned before that our goal was to make a high scale system, right? We need to handle a lot of data. If you're thinking about this in the way that Mastodon does it, the ActivityPub model, that's actually gonna give you the wrong intuition. Designing the protocol to match distributed systems practices (Event sourcing / Stream processing) [00:18:45] Paul: 'cause we chose a dramatically different system. What we did instead was we picked up, essentially the same practices you're gonna use for a data center, a high scale application data center, and said, all right, how do you tend to build these sorts of things? Well, what you're gonna do is you're gonna have, multiple different services running different purposes. [00:19:04] It gets pretty close to a microservices approach. You're gonna have a set of databases, and then you're going to, generally speaking for high scale, you're gonna have some kind of a kafka, some kind of a event log that you are tossing changes about the state of these databases into. And then you have a bunch of secondary systems that are tapping into the event log and processing that into, the large scale, databases like your search index, your, nice postgres of user profiles. [00:19:35] And that makes sure that you can get each of these different systems to perform really well at their particular task, and then you can detach them in their design. for instance, your primary storage can be just a key value store that scales horizontally. And then on the event log, you, you're using a Kafka that's designed to handle. [00:19:58] Particular semantics of making sure that the messages don't get dropped, that they come through at a particular throughput. And then you're using, for us, we're using like ScyllaDB for the big scale indexes that scales horizontally really well. So it's just different kind of profiles for different pieces. [00:20:13] If you read Martin Kleppman's book, data Intensive applications I think it's called or yeah. A lot of it gets captured there. He talks a lot about this kind of thing and it's sometimes called a kappa architecture is one way this is described, event sourcing is a similar term for it as well. [00:20:30] Stream processing. That's pretty standard practices for how you would build a traditional high scale service. so if you take, take this, this kind of microservice architecture and essentially say, okay, now imagine that each of the services that are a part of your data center could be hosted by anybody, not just within our data center, but outside of our data center as well and should be able to all work together. [00:20:57] Basically how the AT Proto is designed. We were talking about the data repository hosts. Those are just the primary data stores that they hold onto the user keys and they hold onto those JSON records. And then we have another service category we call Relay that just crawls those data repositories and sucks that in that fire hose of data we were talking about that event log. App views pull data from relay and produces indexes and threads [00:21:21] Paul: And then we have what we call app views that sit there and tail the index and tail the log, excuse me, and produce indexes off of it, they're listening to those events and then like, making threads like okay, that guy posted, that guy replied, that guy replied. [00:21:37] That's a thread. They assemble it into that form. So when you're running an application, you're talking to the AppView to read the network, and you're talking to the hosts to write to the network, and each of these different pieces sync up together in this open mesh. So we really took a traditional sort of data center model and just turned it inside out where each piece is a part of the protocol and communicate it with each other and therefore anybody can join into that mesh. [00:22:07] Jeremy: And to just make sure I am tracking the data repository is the data about the user. So it has your decentralized identifier, it has your replies, your posts, And then you have a relay, which is, its responsibility, is to somehow find all of those data repositories and collect them as they happen so that it can publish them to some kind of event stream. [00:22:41] And then you have the AppView which it's receiving messages from the relay as they happen, and then it can have its own store and index that for search. It can collect them in a way so that it can present them onto a UI. That's sort of thing that's the user facing part I suppose. [00:23:00] Paul: Yeah, that's exactly it. And again, it's, it's actually quite similar to how the web works. If you combine together the relay and the app view, you got all these different, you know, the web works where you got all these different websites, they're hosting their stuff, and then the search engine is going around, aggregating all that data and turning it into a search experience. [00:23:19] Totally the same model. It's just being applied to, more varieties of data, like structured data, like posts and, and replies, follows, likes, all that kinda stuff. And then instead of producing a search application at the end. I mean, it does that too, but it also produces a, uh, you know, timelines and threads and, um, people's profiles and stuff like that. [00:23:41] So it's actually a pretty bog standard way of doing, that's one of the models that we've seen work for large scale decentralized systems. And so we're just transposing it onto something that kind of is more focused towards social applications [00:23:58] Jeremy: So I think I'm tracking that the data repository itself, since it has your decentralized identifier and because the data is cryptographically signed, you know, it's from a specific user. I think the part that I am still not quite sure about is the relays. I, I understand if you run all the data repositories, you know where they are, so you know how to collect the data from them. [00:24:22] But if someone's running another system outside of your organization, how do they find, your data repositories? Or do they have to connect to your relay? What's the intention for that? Data hosts request relays to pull their data [00:24:35] Paul: That logic runs, again, really similar to how search engines find out about websites. So there is actually a way for, one of these, data hosts to contact Relay and say, Hey, I exist. You know, go ahead and get my stuff. And then it'll be up to the relay to decide like if they want it or not. [00:24:52] Right now, generally we're just like, yeah, you know, we, we want it. But as you can imagine, as the thing matures and gets to higher scale, there might be some trust kind of things to worry about, you know? So that's kind of the naive operation that currently exists. But over time as the network gets bigger and bigger, it'll probably involve some more traditional kind of spiraling behaviors because as more relays come into the system, each of these hosts, they're not gonna know who to talk to. Relays can bootstrap who they know about by talking to other relays [00:25:22] Paul: You're trying to start a new relay. What they're gonna do is they're going to discover all of the different users that exist in the system by looking at what data they have to start with. Probably involve a little bit of a manual feeding in at first, whenever I'm starting up a relay, like, okay, there's bluesky's relay. [00:25:39] Lemme just pull what they know. And then I go from there. And then anytime you discover a new user you don't have, you're like, oh, I wanna look them up. Pull them into the relay too. Right. So there's a, pretty straightforward, discovery process that you'll just have to bake into a relay to, to make sure you're calling as much the network as possible. ActivityPub federation vs AT Proto [00:25:57] Jeremy: And so I don't think we've defined the term federation, but maybe you could explain what that is and if that is what this is. [00:26:07] Paul: We are so unsure. [00:26:10] Jeremy: Okay. [00:26:11] Paul: Yeah. This has jammed is up pretty bad. Um, because I think everybody can, everybody pretty strongly agrees that ActivityPub is federation, right? and ActivityPub kind of models itself pretty similarly to email in a way, like the metaphors they use is that there's inboxes and outboxes and, and every ActivityPub server they're standing up the full vertical stack. [00:26:37] They set up, the primary hosting, the views of the data that's happening there. the interface for the application, all of it, pretty traditional, like close service, but then they're kind of using the perimeter. they're making that permeable by sending, exchanging, essentially mailing records to each other, right? [00:26:54] That's their kind of logic of how that works. And that's pretty much in line with, I think, what most people think of with Federation. Whereas what we're doing isn't like that we've cut, instead of having a bunch of vertical stacks communicating horizontally with each other, we kind of sliced in the other direction. [00:27:09] We sliced horizontally into, this microservices mesh and have all the different, like a total mix and match of different microservices between different operators. Is that federation? I don't know. Right. we tried to invent a term, didn't really work, you know, At the moment, we just kind of don't worry about it that much, see what happens, see what the world sort of has to say to us about it. [00:27:36] and beyond that, I don't know. [00:27:42] Jeremy: I think people probably are thinking of something like, say, a Mastodon instance when you're, when you're talking about everything being included, The webpage where you view the posts, the Postgres database that's keeping the messages. [00:28:00] And that same instance it's responsible for basically everything. [00:28:06] Paul: mm-Hmm [00:28:06] Jeremy: And I believe what you're saying is that the difference with, the authenticated transfer protocol, is that the [00:28:15] Paul: AT Protocol, Yep. [00:28:17] Jeremy: And the difference there is that you've, at the protocol level, you've split it up into the data itself, which can be validated completely separately from other parts of the system. [00:28:31] You could have the JSON files on your hard drive and somebody else can have that same JSON file and they would know that who the user is and that these are real things that user posted. That's like a separate part. And then the relay component that looks for all these different repositories that has people's data, that can also be its own independent thing where its job is just to output events. [00:29:04] And that can exist just by itself. It doesn't need the application part, the, the user facing part, it can just be this event stream on itself. and that's the part where it sounds like you can make decisions on who to, um, collect data from. I guess you have to agree that somebody can connect to you and get the users from your data repositories. [00:29:32] And likewise, other people that run relays, they also have to agree to let you pull the users from theirs. [00:29:38] Paul: Yeah, that's right. Yeah. [00:29:41] Jeremy: And so I think the Mastodon example makes sense. And, but I wonder if the underlying ActivityPub protocol forces you to use it in that way, in like a whole full application that talks to another full application. [00:29:55] Or is it more like that's just how people tend to use it and it's not necessarily a characteristic of the protocol. [00:30:02] Paul: Yeah, that's a good question actually. so, you know, generally what I would say is pretty core to the protocol is the expectations about how the services interact with each other. So the mailbox metaphor that's used in ActivityPub, that design, if I reply to you, I'll update my, local database with what I did, and then I'll send a message over to your server saying, Hey, by the way, add this reply. [00:30:34] I did this. And that's how they find out about things. That's how they find out about activity outside of their network. that's the part that as long as you're doing ActivityPub, I suspect you're gonna see reliably happening. That's that, I can say for sure that's a pretty tight requirement. [00:30:50] That's ActivityPub. If you wanted to split it up the way we're talking about, you could, I don't know, I don't know if you necessarily would want to. Because I don't know. That's actually, I think I'd have to dig into their stack a little bit more to see how meaningful that would be. I do know that there's some talk of introducing a similar kind of an aggregation method into the ActivityPub world which I believe they're also calling a relay and to make things even more complicated. [00:31:23] And NOSTR has a concept of a relay. So these are three different protocols that are using this term. I think you could do essentially what a search engine does on any of these things. You could go crawling around for the data, pull them into a fire hose, and then, tap into that aggregation to produce, bigger views of the network. [00:31:41] So that principle can certainly apply anywhere. AT Protocol, I think it's a little bit, we, we focused in so hard from that on that from the get go, we focus really hard on making sure that this, the data is, signed at rest. That's why it's called the authenticated transfer protocol. And that's a nice advantage to have when you're running a relay like this because it means that you don't have to trust the relay. [00:32:08] Like generally speaking, when I look at results from Google, you know, I'm trusting pretty well that they're accurately reflecting what's on the website, which is fine. You know, there's, that's not actually a huge risk or anything. But whenever you're trying to build entire applications and you're using somebody else's relay, you could really run into things where they say like, oh, you know what Paul tweeted the other day, you know, I hate dogs. [00:32:28] They're like, no, I didn't. That's a lie, right? You just sneak in Little lies like that over a while, it becomes a problem. So having the signatures on the data is pretty important. You know, if you're gonna be trying to get people to cooperate, uh, you gotta manage the trust model. I know that ActivityPub does have mechanisms for signed records. Issuers with ActivityPub identifiers [00:32:44] Paul: I don't know how deep they go if they could fully replace that, that utility. and then Mastodon ActivityPub, they also use a different identifier system that they're actually taking a look at DIDs um, right now, I don't know what's gonna happen there. We're, we're totally on board to, you know, give any kind of insight that we got working on 'em. [00:33:06] But at, at the moment, they use I think it's WebFinger based identifiers they look like emails. So you got host names in there and those identifiers are being used in the data records. So you don't get that continuous identifier. They actually do have to do that hey, I moved update your records sort of thing. [00:33:28] And that causes it to, I mean, it works like decently well, but not as well as it could. They got us to the point where it moves your profile over and you update all the folks that were following you so they can update their follow records, but your posts, they're not coming right, because that's too far into that mesh of interlinking records. [00:33:48] There's just no chance. So that's kind of the upper limit on that, it's a different set of choices and trade-offs. You're always kind of asking like, how important is the migration? Does that work out? Anyway, now I'm just kind of digging into differences between the two here. Issues with an identifier that changes and updating old records [00:34:07] Jeremy: So you were saying that with ActivityPub, all of the instances need to be notified that you've changed your identifier but then all of the messages that they had already received. They don't point to the new identifier somehow. [00:34:24] Paul: Yeah. You run into basically just the practicalities of actual engineering with that is what happens, right? Because if you imagine you got a multimillion user social network. They got all their posts. Maybe the user has like, let's say a thousand posts and 10,000 likes. And that, activity can range back three years. [00:34:48] Let's say they changed their identifier, and now you need to change the identifier of all those records. If you're in a traditional system that's already a tall order, you're going back and rewriting a ton of indexes, Anytime somebody replied to you, they have these links to your posts, they're now, you've gotta update the identifiers on all of those things. [00:35:11] You could end up with a pretty significant explosion of rewrites that would have to occur. Now that's, that's tough. If you're in a centralized model. If you're in a decentralized one, it's pretty much impossible because you're now, when you notify all the other servers like, Hey, this, this changed. How successful are all of them at actually updating that, that those, those pointers, it's a good chance that there's things are gonna fall out of correctness. that's just a reality of it. And if, so, if you've got a, if you've got a mutable identifier, you're in trouble for migrations. So the DID is meant to keep it permanent and that ends up being the anchoring point. If you lose control of your DID well, that's it. Managing signing keys by server, paper key reset [00:35:52] Paul: Your, your account's done. We took some pretty traditional approaches to that, uh, where the signing keys get managed by your hosting server instead of like trying to, this may seem like really obvious, but if you're from the decentralization community, we spend a lot of time with blockchains, like, Hey, how do we have the users hold onto their keys? [00:36:15] You know, and the tooling on that is getting better for what it's worth. We're starting to see a lot better key pair management in like Apple's ecosystem and Google's ecosystem, but it's still in the range of like, nah, people lose their keys, you know? So having the servers manage those is important. [00:36:33] Then we have ways of exporting paper keys so that you could kind of adversarially migrate if you wanted to. That was in the early spec we wanted to make sure that this portability idea works, that you can always migrate your accounts so you can export a paper key that can override. [00:36:48] And that was how we figured that out. Like, okay, yeah, we don't have to have everything getting signed by keys that are on the user's devices. We just need these master backup keys that can say, you know what? I'm done with that host. No matter what they say, I'm overriding what they, what they think. and that's how we squared that one. [00:37:06] Jeremy: So it seems like one of the big differences with account migration is that with ActivityPub, when you move to another instance, you have to actually change your identifier. [00:37:20] And with the AT protocol you're actually not allowed to ever change that identifier. And maybe what you're changing is just you have say, some kind of a lookup, like you were saying, you could use a domain name to look that up, get a reference to your decentralized identifier, but your decentralized identifier it can never change. [00:37:47] Paul: It, it, it can't change. Yeah. And it shouldn't need to, you know what I mean? It's really a total disaster kind of situation if that happens. So, you know that it's designed to make sure that doesn't happen in the applications. We use these domain name handles to, to identify folks. And you can change those anytime you want because that's really just a user facing thing. [00:38:09] You know, then in practice what you see pretty often is that you may, if you change hosts, if you're using, we, we give some domains to folks, you know, 'cause like not everybody has their own domain. A lot of people do actually, to our surprise, people actually kind of enjoy doing that. But, a lot of folks are just using like paul.bsky.social as their handle. [00:38:29] And so if you migrated off of that, you probably lose that. Like your, so your handle's gonna change, but you're not losing the followers and stuff. 'cause the internal system isn't using paul.bsky.social, it's using that DID and that DID stays the same. Benefits of domain names, trust signal [00:38:42] Jeremy: Yeah. I thought that was interesting about using the domain names, because when you like you have a lot of users, everybody's got their own sub-domain. You could have however many millions of users. Does that become, does that become an issue at some point? [00:39:00] Paul: Well, it's a funny thing. I mean like the number of users, like that's not really a problem 'cause you run into the same kind of namespace crowding problem that any service is gonna have, right? Like if you just take the subdomain part of it, like the name Paul, like yeah, only, you only get to have one paul.bsky.social. [00:39:15] so that part of like, in terms of the number of users, that part's fine I guess. Uh, as fine as ever. where gets more interesting, of course is like, really kind of around the usability questions. For one, it's, it's not exactly the prettiest to always have that B sky.social in there. If we, if we thought we, if we had some kind of solution to that, we would use it. [00:39:35] But like the reality is that, you know, now we're, we've committed to the domain name approach and some folks, you know, they kind of like, ah, that's a little bit ugly. And we're like, yeah that's life. I guess the plus side though is that you can actually use like TLD the domain. It's like on pfrazee.com. [00:39:53] that starts to get more fun. it can actually act as a pretty good trust signal in certain scenarios. for instance, well-known domain names like nytimes.com, strong authentication right there, we don't even need a blue check for it. Uh, similarly the .gov, domain name space is tightly regulated. [00:40:14] So you actually get a really strong signal out of that. Senator Wyden is one of our users and so he's, I think it's wyden.senate.gov and same thing, strong, you know, strong identity signal right there. So that's actually a really nice upside. So that's like positives, negatives. [00:40:32] That trust signal only works so far. If somebody were to make pfrazee.net, then that can be a bit confusing. People may not be paying attention to .com vs .net, so it's not, I don't wanna give the impression that, ah, we've solved blue checks. It's a complicated and multifaceted situation, but, it's got some juice. [00:40:54] It's also kinda nice too, 'cause a lot of folks that are doing social, they're, they've got other stuff that they're trying to promote, you know? I'm pretty sure that, uh, nytimes would love it if you went to their website. And so tying it to their online presence so directly like that is a really nice kind of feature of it. [00:41:15] And tells a I think a good story about what we're trying to do with an open internet where, yeah, everybody has their space on the internet where they can do whatever they want on that. And that's, and then thethese social profiles, it's that presence showing up in a shared space. It's all kind of part of the same thing. [00:41:34] And that that feels like a nice kind of thing to be chasing, you know? And it also kind of speaks well to the naming worked out for us. We chose AT Protocol as a name. You know, we back acronymed our way into that one. 'cause it was a @ simple sort of thing. But like, it actually ended up really reflecting the biggest part of it, which is that it's about putting people's identities at the front, you know, and make kind of promoting everybody from a second class identity that's underneath Twitter or Facebook or something like that. [00:42:03] Up into. Nope, you're freestanding. You exist as a person independently. Which is what a lot of it's about. [00:42:12] Jeremy: Yeah, I think just in general, not necessarily just for bluesky, if people had more of an interest in getting their own domain, that would be pretty cool if people could tie more of that to something you basically own, right? [00:42:29] I mean, I guess you're leasing it from ICANN or whatever, but, [00:42:33] yeah, rather than everybody having an @Gmail, Outlook or whatever they could actually have something unique that they control more or less. [00:42:43] Paul: Yeah. And we, we actually have a little experimental service for registering domain names that we haven't integrated into the app yet because we just kind of wanted to test it out and, and kind of see what that appetite is for folks to register domain names way higher than you'd think we did that early on. [00:43:01] You know, it's funny when you're coming from decentralization is like an activist space, right? Like it's a group of people trying to change how this tech works. And sometimes you're trying to parse between what might come off as a fascination of technologists compared to what people actually care about. [00:43:20] And it varies, you know, the domain name thing to a surprising degree, folks really got into that. We saw people picking that up almost straight away. More so than certainly we ever predicted. And I think that's just 'cause I guess it speaks to something that people really get about the internet at this point. [00:43:39] Which is great. We did a couple of other things that are similar and we saw varied levels of adoption on them. We had similar kinds of user facing, opening up of the system with algorithms and with moderation. And those have both been pretty interesting in and of themselves. Custom feed algorithms [00:43:58] Paul: So with algorithms, what we did was we set that up so that anybody can create a new feed algorithm. And this was kind of one of the big things that you run into whenever you use the app. If you wanted to create a new kind of for you feed you can set up a service somewhere that's gonna tap into that fire hose, right? [00:44:18] And then all it needs to do is serve a JSON endpoint. That's just a list of URLs, but like, here's what should be in that feed. And then the bluesky app will pick that up and, and send that, hydrate in the content of the posts and show that to folks. I wanna say this is a bit of a misleading number and I'll explain why but I think there's about 35,000 of these feeds that have been created. [00:44:42] Now, the reason it's little misleading is that, I mean, not significantly, but it's not everybody went, sat down in their IDE and wrote these things. Essentially one of our users created, actually multiple of our users made little platforms for building these feeds, which is awesome. That's the kinda thing you wanna see because we haven't gotten around to it. [00:44:57] Our app still doesn't give you a way to make these things. But they did. And so lots of, you know, there it is. Cool. Like, one, one person made a kind of a combinatorial logic thing that's like visual almost like scratch, it's like, so if it has this hashtag and includes these users, but not those users, and you're kind of arranging these blocks and that constructs the feed and then probably publish it on your profile and then folks can use it, you know? [00:45:18] And um, so that has been I would say fairly successful. Except, we had one group of hackers do put in a real effort to make a replacement for you feed, like magic algorithmic feed kind of thing. And then they kind of kept up going for a while and then ended up giving up on it. Most of what we see are actually kind of weird niche use cases for feeds. [00:45:44] You get straightforward ones, like content oriented ones like a cat feed, politics feed, things like that. It's great, some of those are using ML detection, so like the cat feed is ML detection, so sometimes you get like a beaver in there, but most of the time it's a cat. And then we got some ones that are kind of a funny, like change in the dynamic of freshness. [00:46:05] So, uh, or or selection criteria, things that you wouldn't normally see. Um, but because they can do whatever they want, you know, they try it out. So like the quiet posters ended up being a pretty successful one. And that one just shows people you're following that don't post that often when they do just those folks. [00:46:21] It ended up being, I use that one all the time because yeah, like they get lost in the noise. So it's like a way to keep up with them. Custom moderation and labeling [00:46:29] Paul: The moderation one, that one's a a real interesting situation. What we did there essentially we wanted to make sure that the moderation system was capable of operating across different apps so that they can share their work, so to speak. [00:46:43] And so we created what we call labeling. And labeling is a metadata layer that exists over the network. Doesn't actually live in the normal data repositories. It uses a completely different synchronization because a lot of these labels are getting produced. It's just one of those things where the engineering characteristics of the labels is just too different from the rest of the system. [00:47:02] So we created a separate synchronization for this, and it's really kind of straightforward. It's, here's a URL and here's a string saying something like NSFW or Gore, or you know, whatever. then those get merged onto the records brought down by the client and then the client, you know, based on the user's preferences. [00:47:21] We'll put like warning screens up, hide it, stuff like that. So yeah, these label streams can then, you know, anybody that's running a moderation service can, you know, are publishing these things and so anybody can subscribe to 'em. And you get that kind of collaborative thing we're always trying to do with this. [00:47:34] And we had some users set up moderation services and so then as an end user you find it, it looks like a profile in the app and you subscribe to it and you configure it and off you go. That one has had probably the least amount of adoption throughout all of 'em. It's you know, moderation. [00:47:53] It's a sticky topic as you can imagine, challenging for folks. These moderation services, they do receive reports, you know, like whenever I'm reporting a post, I choose from all my moderation services who I wanna report this to. what has ended up happening more than being used to actually filter out like subjective stuff is more kind of like either algorithmic systems or what you might call informational. [00:48:21] So the algorithmic ones are like, one of the more popular ones is a thing that's looking for, posts from other social networks. Like this screenshot of a Reddit post or a Twitter post or a Facebook post. Because, which you're kinda like, why, you know, but the thing is some folks just get really tired of seeing screenshots from the other networks. [00:48:40] 'cause often it's like, look what this person said. Can you believe it? You know, it's like, ah. Okay, I've had enough. So one of our users aendra made a moderate service that just runs an ML that detects it, labels it, and then folks that are tired of it, they subscribe to it and they're just hide it, you know? [00:48:57] And so it's like a smart filter kind of thing that they're doing. you know, hypothetically you could do that for things like spiders, you know, like you've got arachniphobia, things like that. that's like a pretty straightforward, kind of automated way of doing it. Which takes a lot of the spice, you know, outta out of running moderation. [00:49:15] So that users have been like, yeah, yeah, okay, we can do that. [00:49:20] Those are user facing ways that we tried to surface the. Decentralized principle, right? And make take advantage of how this whole architecture can have this kind of a pluggability into it. Users can self host now [00:49:33] Paul: But then really at the end of the day, kind of the important core part of it is those pieces we were talking about before, the hosting, the relay and the, the applications themselves, having those be swappable in completely. so we tend to think of those as kind of ranges of infrastructure into application and then into particular client side stuff. [00:49:56] So a lot of folks right now, for instance, they're making their own clients to the application and those clients are able to do customizations, add features, things like that, as you might expect, [00:50:05] but most of them are not running their own backend. They're just using our backend. But at any point, it's right there for you. You know, you can go ahead and, and clone that software and start running the backend. If you wanted to run your own relay, you could go ahead and go all the way to that point. [00:50:19] You know, if you wanna do your own hosting, you can go ahead and do that. Um, it's all there. It's really just kind of a how much effort your project really wants to take. That's the kind of systemically important part. That's the part that makes sure that the overall mission of de monopolizing, social media online, that's where that really gets enforced. [00:50:40] Jeremy: And so someone has their own data repository with their own users and their own relay. they can request that your relay collect the information from their own data repositories. And that's, that's how these connections get made. [00:50:58] Paul: Yeah. And, and we have a fair number of those already. Fair number of, we call those the self hosters right? And we got I wanna say 75 self hoster going right now, which is, you know, love to see that be more, but it's, really the folks that if you're running a service, you probably would end up doing that. [00:51:20] But the folks that are just doing it for themselves, it's kind of the, the nerdiest of the nerds over there doing that. 'cause it doesn't end up showing itself in the, in the application at all. Right? It's totally abstracted away. So it, that, that one's really about like, uh, measure your paranoia kind of thing. [00:51:36] Or if you're just proud of the self-hosting or, or curious, you know, that that's kind of where that sits at the moment. AT Protocol beyond bluesky [00:51:42] Jeremy: We haven't really touched on the fact that there's this underlying protocol and everything we've been discussing has been centered around the bluesky social network where you run your own, instance of the relay and the data repositories with the purpose of talking to bluesky, but the protocol itself is also intended to be used for other uses, right? [00:52:06] Paul: Yeah. It's generic. The data types are set up in a way that anybody can build new data types in the system. there's a couple that have already begun, uh, front page, which is kind of a hacker news clone. There's Smoke Signals, which is a events app. There's Blue Cast, which is like a Twitter spaces, clubhouse kind of thing. [00:52:29] Those are the folks that are kind of willing to trudge into the bleeding edge and deal with some of the rough edges there for pretty I think, obvious reasons. A lot of our work gets focused in on making sure that the bluesky app and that use case is working correctly. [00:52:43] But we are starting to round the corner on getting to a full kind of how to make alternative applications state. If you go to the atproto.com, there's a kind of a introductory tutorial where that actually shows that whole stack and how it's done. So it's getting pretty close. There's a couple of still things that we wanna finish up. [00:53:04] jeremy so in a way you can almost think of it as having an eventually consistent data store on the network, You can make a traditional web application with a relational database, and the source of truth can actually be wherever that data repository is stored on the network. [00:53:24] paul Yeah, that's exactly, it is an eventually consistent system. That's exactly right. The source of truth is there, is their data repo. And that relational database that you might be using, I think the best way to think about it is like secondary indexes or computed indexes, right? They, reflect the source of truth. [00:53:43] Paul: This is getting kind of grandiose. I don't tend to poses in these terms, but it is almost like we're trying to have an OS layer at a protocol level. It's like having your own [00:53:54] Network wide database or network-wide file system, you know, these are the kind of facilities you expect out of a platform like an os And so the hope would be that this ends up getting that usage outside of just the initial social, uh, app, like what we're doing here. [00:54:12] If it doesn't end up working out that way, if this ends up, you know, good for the Twitter style use case, the other one's not so much, and that's fine too. You know, that's, that's our initial goal, but we, we wanted to make sure to build it in a way that like, yeah, there's evolve ability to, it keeps, it, keeps it, make sure that you're getting kinda the most utility you can out of it. Peer-to-peer and the difficulty of federated queries [00:54:30] Jeremy: Yeah, I can see some of the parallels to some of the decentralized stuff that I, I suppose people are still working on, but more on the peer-to-peer side, where the idea was that I can have a network host this data. but, and in this case it's a network of maybe larger providers where they could host a bunch of people's data versus just straight peer to peer where everybody has to have a piece of it. [00:54:57] And it seems like your angle there was really the scalability part. [00:55:02] Paul: It was the scalability part. And there's great work happening in peer-to-peer. There's a lot of advances on it that are still happening. I think really the limiter that you run into is running queries against aggregations of data. Because you can get the network, you know, BitTorrent sort of proved that you can do distributed open horizontal scaling of hosting. [00:55:29] You know, that basic idea of, hey, everybody's got a piece and you sync it from all these different places. We know you can do things like that. What nobody's been able to really get into a good place is running, queries across large data sets. In the model like that, there's been some research in what is, what's called federated queries, which is where you're sending a query to multiple different nodes and asking them to fulfill as much of it as they can and then collating the results back. But it didn't work that well. That's still kind of an open question and until that is in a place where it can like reliably work and at very large scales, you're just gonna need a big database somewhere that does give the properties that you need. You need these big indexes. And once we were pretty sure of that requirement, then from there you start asking, all right, what else about the system [00:56:29] Could we make easier if we just apply some more traditional techniques and merge that in with the peer-to-peer ideas? And so key hosting, that's an obvious one. You know, availability, let's just have a server. It's no big deal. But you're trying to, you're trying to make as much of them dumb as possible. [00:56:47] So that they have that easy replaceability. Moderation challenges [00:56:51] Jeremy: Earlier you were talking a a little bit about the moderation tools that people could build themselves. There was some process where people could label posts and then build their own software to determine what a feed should show per a person. [00:57:07] Paul: Mm-Hmm [00:57:07] Jeremy: But, but I think before that layer for the platform itself, there's a base level of moderation that has to happen. [00:57:19] Paul: yeah. [00:57:20] Jeremy: And I wonder if you could speak to, as the app has grown, how that's handled. [00:57:26] Paul: Yeah. the, you gotta take some requirements in moderation pretty seriously to start. And with decentralization. It sometimes that gets a little bit dropped. You need to have systems that can deal with questions about CSAM. So you got those big questions you gotta answer and then you got stuff that's more in the line of like, alright, what makes a good platform? [00:57:54] What kind of guarantees are we trying to give there? So just not legal concerns, but you know, good product experience concerns. That's something we're in the realm of like spam and and abusive behavior and things like that. And then you get into even more fine grain of like what is a person's subjective preference and how can they kind of make their thing better? [00:58:15] And so you get a kind of a telescoping level of concerns from the really big, the legal sort of concerns. And then the really small subjective preference kind of concerns. And that actually that telescoping maps really closely to the design of the system as well. Where the further you get up in the kind of the, in that legal concern territory, you're now in core infrastructure. [00:58:39] And then you go from infrastructure, which is the relay down into the application, which is kind of a platform and then down into the client. And that's where we're having those labelers apply. And each of them, as you kind of move closer to infrastructure, the importance of the decision gets bigger too. [00:58:56] So you're trying to do just legal concerns with the relay right? Stuff that you objectively can, everybody's in agreement like Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know, no bigs don't include that. The reason is that at the relay level, you're anybody that's using your relay, they depend on the decisions you're making, that sort of selection you're doing, any filtering you're doing, they don't get a choice after that. [00:59:19] So you wanna try to keep that focus really on legal concerns and doing that well. so that applications that are downstream of it can, can make their choices. The applications themselves, you know, somebody can run a parallel I guess you could call it like a parallel platform, so we got bluesky doing the microblogging use case, other people can make an application doing the microblogging use case. So there's, there's choice that users can easily switch, easily enough switch between, it's still a big choice. [00:59:50] So we're operating that in many ways. Like any other app nowadays might do it. You've got policies, you know, for what's acceptable on the network. you're still trying to keep that to be as, you know, objective as possible, make it fair, things like that. You want folks to trust your T&S team. Uh, but from the kind of systemic decentralization question, you get to be a little bit more opinionated. [01:00:13] Down all the way into the client with that labeling system where you can, you know, this is individuals turning on and off preferences. You can be as opinionated as you want on that letter. And that's how we have basically approached this. And in a lot of ways, it really just comes down to, in the day to day, you're the moderation, the volume of moderation tasks is huge. [01:00:40] You don't actually have high stakes moderation decisions most of the time. Most of 'em are you know pretty straightforward. Shouldn't have done that. That's gotta go. You get a couple every once in a while that are a little spicier or a policy that's a little spicier. And it probably feels pretty common to end users, but that just speaks to how much moderation challenges how the volume of reports and problems that come through. [01:01:12] And we don't wanna make it so that the system is seized up, trying to decentralize itself. You know, it needs to be able to operate day to day. What you wanna make is, you know, back pressure, you know, uh, checks on that power so that if an application or a platform does really start to go down the wrong direction on moderation, then people can have this credible exit. [01:01:36] This way of saying, you know what, that's a problem. We're moving from here. And somebody else can come in with different policies that better fit people's people's expectations about what should be done at, at these levels. So yeah, it's not about taking away authority, it's about checking authority, you know, kind of a checks and balances mentality. [01:01:56] Jeremy: And high level, 'cause you saying how there's such a high volume of, of things that you know what it is, you'd know you wanna remove it, but there's just so much of it. So is there, do you have automated tools to label these things? Do you have a team of moderators? Do they have to understand all the different languages that are coming through your network? [01:02:20] Yes, yes, yes and yes. Yeah. You use every tool at your disposal to, to stay on top of it. cause you're trying to move as fast as you can, folks. The problems showing up, you know, the slower you are to respond to it, the, the more irritating it is to folks. Likewise, if you make a, a missed call, if somebody misunderstands what's happening, which believe me, is sometimes just figuring out what the heck is going on is hard. [01:02:52] Paul: People's beefs definitely surface up to the moderation misunderstanding or wrong application. Moderators make mistakes so you're trying to maintain a pretty quick turnaround on this stuff. That's tough. And you, especially when to move fast on some really upsetting content that can make its way through, again, illegal stuff, for instance, but more videos, stuff like that, you know, it's a real problem. [01:03:20] So yeah, you're gotta be using some automated systems as well. Clamping down on bot rings and spam. You know, you can imagine that's gotten a lot harder thanks to LLMs just doing text analysis by dumb statistics of what they're talking about that doesn't even work anymore. [01:03:41] 'cause the, the LLMs are capable of producing consistently varied responses while still achieving the same goal of plugging a online betting site of some kind, you know? So we do use kind of dumb heuristic systems for when it works, but boy, that won't work for much longer. [01:04:03] And we've already got cases where it's, oh boy, so the moderation's in a dynamic place to say the least right now with, with LLMs coming in, it was tough before and

A sermon by Pastor Ryan Proudfoot. Listen along as ACC Downtown wraps up our series on the life of the apostle Paul.

Today we talk about how listening to the Holy Spirit doesn't always mean life will be easy.

Listen and share all the podcast --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/l1vel1fe100/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/l1vel1fe100/support

En este episodio hablamos sobre el Friday Night Smackdown donde continuaron las luchas por el torneo de King and Queen in the Ring. Mientras que WWE se hecho para atras y al final del día Logan Paul no pondra su titulo de los Estados Unidos en juego como parecia que iba a ser. #WWE #SmackDown #FridayNightSmackDown  #CodyRhodes #Cody #Bloodline #TamaTonga #SoloSikoa #PaulHeyman #LoganPaul #RandyOrton #JadeCargill #NiaJax#ChampionVsChampion --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/oasisgeek/support

Join us for a jam-packed visit to Frodsham Woods, Cheshire, where 80 volunteers were planting thousands of trees to help transform a former golf course into a fantastic new space for wildlife and people. We visit the neighbouring ancient woodland and admire hilltop views with site manager Neil and chat to Tim, supervisor of this army of tree planters, about how the new wood will develop. We also meet Esther, lead designer of the project, hear from comms guru Paul about the Trust's #plantmoretrees climate campaign, and speak to the volunteers about what the day means to them. Transcript You are listening to Woodland Walks, a podcast for the Woodland Trust presented by Adam Shaw. We protect and plant trees for people to enjoy, to fight climate change and to help wildlife thrive. Adam: Well, today's podcast is a bit of an unusual one because I'm off to an abandoned golf course in Cheshire, overlooking Liverpool. Not far away, in fact. And the vision is to create this once golf course into a thriving mosaic of habitats, including lush broadleaved woodland, grassland meadows and wooded glades dotted with wildflowers. Throughout the site, they're creating a network of grassy paths so people can walk through them and get far-reaching views of the Welsh borders, the western Pennines and the Bowland Fells, along with, of course, Liverpool and the Mersey Estuary. And very excitingly, the man actually who's running all the tree planting there is also in a band, and it's his music and his band's music you can hear in the background. More about that a little later. It's called Frodsham Woods, and it's near the Frodsham train station. Guess where? In Frodsham. Well, today we are starting, I'm starting sitting down with Neil Oxley, who's the site manager here. Hi Neil. Neil: Good morning, Adam. Adam: Good morning. So, just explain where we are because we are, well, I'm not gonna take away your thunder. Explain. It's an unusual location. Neil: So, we're sat on a bench overlooking the River Mersey and Liverpool. We're on the old golf course that was closed about three years ago. Adam: Yeah, well that's what I think is unusual – sitting on a golf course. I gotta take, it doesn't look like a golf course. They, the greenkeeper would have had a heart attack seeing the state of this place. But what's amazing is, well, I'm looking over a forest of planted trees. I mean, just within 10 yards, probably a couple of hundred of them, just been planted. So, this has got to be unusual. Take buying a golf course, turning it into a forest? Neil: It is, yeah. I think it's probably the first golf course that the Woodland Trust has taken on and it's just a great opportunity, though, that when it became available, it's adjoining some of our existing woodlands, including ancient woodland. And it's given us an opportunity to plant lots of trees and work with local people and engage the community in doing something good for the climate. Adam: And we're sitting down, looking over what might be, I don't know. Is that a bunker? Do you think that's a bunker? Neil: It is, yep. So, there there's probably about 40 bunkers on the golf course and we've kept them all, so some of those old features are still here. Adam: And I saw one, some gorse growing, just naturally growing in the bunker there. Neil: There is. Just in the two or three years since it stopped being maintained. There's gorse, there's silver birch, there's all sorts of trees and plants that are now appearing. Adam: I love the gorse. It's bright. It comes out early. Bright yellow. Real splash of colour in early spring. It's really. Neil: It is, yeah, it's lovely and colourful. Adam: And we're looking over a range of wind turbines. And is that the Mersey ahead? Neil: That is, that's the River Mersey. Adam: Although there's not much river, it looks, it looks like it's out. It's mainly mud. Neil: It's probably low tide at the moment. Yeah, and Liverpool just beyond the other side. Adam: Very nice. So, you're going to be my main guide today. We've got lots of people to meet, I know. Alright. Brilliant. So, explain to me the plan for the day. Neil: So, we're gonna have a walk round and look at some of the tree planting that we've already done here. We've got some groups of corporate volunteers and Woodland Trust staff here today also who are planting trees. So, we'll go and see them later on. But I thought maybe to start off with we could go and visit some of the ancient woodland that borders the site and show you sort of why it's important that we're doing what we're doing today. Adam: Brilliant. I'm of an age where sitting down is quite nice, but that's not going to get, that's not gonna get nothing made, is it? It's alright. We better get up and you lead on. Neil: OK, let's go. This lady, by the way, coming with the pug. She's up here all the time. She's really lovely, friendly, always talks to me and Paul. And we've already said hello to her, but he... Adam: Oh, this dog wants a lot of attention. Neil: He loves that. He loves that, yeah. Adam: We'll let the rest of the team pet the dog. You know, you've paused here for a special reason. Why? Neil: Yeah. So, this area, we're on the edge of the ancient woodland now and the part of the site in front of us is going to be left for what's called natural regeneration to develop. So, that will be where trees can self-seed and set and grow naturally. So, we're not actually planting any trees in this area in front of us. And you can see there's some silver birch trees there that probably self-seeded five or 10 years ago on the edge of the golf course. And they're growing quite well already. Adam: So, and what's the advantage of that? There's a big debate about rewilding and all of that. So, why has that become an important issue? Neil: It is, I mean to different people it can mean slightly different things as well. But basically it's leaving the land to develop and rewild itself, you know, for nature to colonise it. It's a slower process. Adam: So, because if you're planting them yourself, you're planting all the trees at the same time. They're all the same age, so they get wiped out. Everything gets wiped out. Neil: Potentially yes. You could lose a lot more. Adam: Actually, I'm surprised those are natural regeneration because they've, it's very regimented. Those silver birch, they've all come up in exactly the same space, very close together. It looks like there's been some thought behind that. Neil: It does. It does and again nature can do things very similar to how people plant trees. You know, you often can end up with them very densely packed, more densely packed than we're planting them, actually. Adam: Yeah, OK. Well, we're still surrounded by these young, young trees. So, you lead on. Where are we heading off to? Neil: So, we're just walking into, towards the ancient woodland area. So, this this is called Woodhouse Hill and it's mostly oak and some silver birch, some holly growing in here, plus a few other species as well. Adam: And wonderfully of you, you've taken me to the muddiest bit of land there is. Are we going through this? Neil: This, well, we can do. It's unfortunately because of the winter we've had, some of the paths are very wet and muddy around here now. Adam: So, I have my walking boots on. You squelch ahead and I'll squelch behind you. Neil: OK. We'll carry on then. Adam: So, we're heading up, give us a better view of the Mersey, a better view of Liverpool. Neil: That's right. Just around the corner, there's a really good viewpoint where the view will open up and a sunny day like today get quite good views. Adam: And is it used by the locals a lot? I mean, it's relatively new then. I mean, presumably a lot of locals don't know about it. Neil: Well, I mean since, the golf course was closed down during the pandemic, and at the time the owner allowed the public to come and walk on the site. So, suddenly from people being not allowed to use it unless they were playing golf, local people were allowed to come and walk the dogs or just walk themselves around with the family. So, people did get to know the site and start using it, but it also borders some existing woodlands with footpaths, which is where we are now. So, these existing woodlands were already well-used. Adam: Right. And what's the reaction of the locals been to the development here? Neil: Very positive. Yeah. I mean obviously there's always a fear when a piece of land is up for sale that it might go for some sort of development, housing or be sold to a private landowner who fences it off and stops people using it. So, people have been, yeah, really positive, really supportive. The consultation that we did before we started anything was all very much in favour of creating woodland and allowing public access. Adam: I think we're coming up to a viewpoint here where there's a bench. Neil: There is, we should have another sit down. Adam: And it's very steep here. You wouldn't want to be falling off that, but this is a beautiful view. Neil: Yeah. The weather today is just great for the view. Adam: We've been blessed. Look at this. And then you look across a sort of flat valley floor with some wind turbines, which some don't like but I always think they're really majestic. And beyond the wind turbines, the Mersey, where the tide is out. And beyond that, that's Liverpool. And is that Liverpool Cathedral? The grey building in the sort of middle there. Neil: That's the main Anglican cathedral, and then the Catholic cathedral is just off to the right and beyond in the far distance is North Wales, so that low line of hills you can see is just within North Wales. Adam: Oh, that's, those hills over there, beyond the chimneys, that's Wales. Neil: Beyond the chimneys, yeah. Adam: And some other lovely gorse and, whoops don't fall over, I thought it was going to be me that would be falling over, not the site manager. Neil: Mind the rock. Adam: Ice and sea. So, we've come to the sign. ‘The view from Woodhouse Hill holds clues to the distant past, the Mersey Basin and Cheshire's sandstone hills were both shaped by advancing ice sheets during the last Ice Age.' Do you know what? I wanted to say that because I remember from O-level geography, I think a flat-bottomed valley is a glacier-made valley. But I was, I didn't want to appear idiotic, so I didn't say that and I should have had the courage of my convictions. So, this is an ice-formed landscape. Neil: It is. It is. I understand that the ice sheets came down to this part of the north of England back in the Ice Age. And there's some interesting features that are found here called glacial erratics. Adam: Right. Neil: Which is rocks from other parts of the north of England and Scotland that were brought down on the ice sheets. And then when the ice sheets melted, those rocks were left behind. But they're from a different geological area. Adam: Right. Amazing. Neil: So, around here it's sandstone. The erratics are all kind of volcanic rocks. Adam: Brought down from the north, from Scotland. Neil: Lake District and Scotland. That's right. Adam: Beautiful. We were with a few other people. Neil: I think they couldn't be bothered to come through the mud, could they? Yeah. Adam: We seem to have lost them. OK, alright. Well, maybe we'll have to, we've lost our team, our support team. Neil: We'll head back, but yeah, no, this was the view I thought we'd come to. Yeah, because it is a nice view. Adam: Well, I'll tell you what. Let me take a photo of you, for the Woodland Trust social media. Neil: Thought you were gonna say falling over the rock again. No, no, I'll try not to. Adam: Yeah, let's not do that. Yeah, so to explain, you're running me across the field for some... Neil: Walking fast. Adam: Well, for you walking fast. I've got short legs. Why? Neil: Well, we've walked over now to where we've got the people who are helping plant trees today with us. So, we've got a mix of corporate volunteers, Woodland Trust staff and some of our volunteers here to help us and we're gonna go over and meet Tim Kerwin, who's in charge of the tree planting and supervising the tree planting with us today. Adam: Oh right, so these are, this is his army of tree planters. Neil: It is, yes. Tim keeps things in check and makes sure they're doing the right thing. Adam: OK. I mean, let's just look, there's scores of people I've no idea of who Tim is. Neil: Tim? Tim, can we get your attention for a few minutes? Tim: Yes. Adam: Hi, nice to see you, Tim. Tim: I've seen you on telly. Adam: Have you? Adam: Well, Tim, as well as being in charge of everyone planting the trees today is also the sax player in a band. And of course we have to talk about that first and he very kindly gave me one of his original tracks, which is what you can hear right now. A first for the podcast. *song plays* Tim: You know, you know what? We probably do about eight gigs a year, right? But we're trying to find venues where people like jazz. We don't want to, you know, we don't want to do Oasis. That's not what we're about. There's plenty of bands like that. We play music for ourselves, and if people turn up and appreciate it, those are the people we want. I'll play for one person. Adam: You know, I was in a wood a few years ago and, can't remember where it was, and we just came across a violinist, just playing to herself. And it was just like can I record it? And it's like, just playing amongst the trees, and I thought it was really lovely. Tim: You know what? I would, I would do the same. I mean, the places I like to play, like churches are fantastic because of the acoustics. Adam: So, you might play that under this chat and what's the name of the band? Tim: The Kraken. Adam: The Kraken? Tim: Yeah. Adam: OK. Alright, The Kraken *laughs* So, all of which is a bit of a divergence. Tim: I know, sorry *laughs* Adam: So, I'm told you're in charge of this army of tree planters you can see over here. Three men having their sandwich break there. So, you've been working them hard. Tim: We have been working them hard, indeed. Adam: So, just explain to me a little bit about what's going on here. Tim: So, today we can almost see the finishing line for our 30,000 trees. So, this morning we've actually planted just shy of 2,000 trees with the group that we've had, of which there's about 80 people. Adam: That's a lot of trees. People always talk about how long does it take to plant a tree? It's not that big a thing is it? Tim: No, but what we're keen about is it's not about necessarily speed, it's about accuracy. We want quality. So, what we're asking people to do is plant each tree really well. So, today I have to say the standard of planting has been amazing. From the first to the last, I haven't found one that I'm not happy with. Adam: So, explain to me, and we're standing by a tree that's just been planted. It looks like they've scraped a bit of the grass away. So, explain to me, how should you plant a tree and what goes wrong? Tim: OK, so what we've done here, we took the grass off before the guys came, so that's called scriefing. So, the purpose of that is the tree needs water. And this grass also needs water. So, we take that grass away, and the competition's gone away for the tree. So, it won't be forever, because within two years, that grass will have grown around that tree. But those first two years are quite critical. So, if we can get the new roots from, so those trees and little plugs, new roots which are going to come out in the next couple of weeks because the soil's warming up. I mean, the air's warming up, but the soil's warming up. Those will send out shoots. They're already starting to come in to leaf, which is why the urgency to get these trees in now. They will take in the water around them and then keep on spreading with that root system. Enough root system will go out there and it will then not be competing with the grass because in fact the tree will be competing with the grass and actually taking over. So, eventually that grass will probably die because it will be shaded out in the future. Adam: And talking about shade, I'm surprised how closely planted these are, about five foot apart or thereabouts. If this was a forest in 20 years', 30 years' time, it's exceptionally dense. Or are you expecting a lot of them to fail? Tim: So, imagine you've got an oak tree and that throws down 40,000 acorns in usually every four years. So, it doubles its weight above ground. Adam: Sorry, 40,000? Tim: 40,000. A mature oak, yeah. Adam: It's worth pausing on that *laughs* A mature oak drops 40,000 acorns a year? Tim: Every four years, roughly. Adam: Because it doesn't do it every year, do they? Tim: No. So, it has what they call a mast year, which is the year when everything's come together. It's usually based on the previous weather, weather conditions. So, that doubles the weight of the tree above ground, that throws all those acorns. Now you imagine they're gonna be a couple of centimetres apart on the ground. They're not all going to make it. What they're hoping is that something will take those away. So, a jay or a squirrel, they'll move those acorns away. Not all of them will get eaten. In fact, jays let the acorn germinate, and then they eat the remains. So, they wait to see where the oak tree comes up and then they come back and eat the remains of the cotyledon. So, you imagine if all those were going to germinate, there'd be a mass rush, and what they're waiting for is for the parent plant to die. And if that falls over, then they can all shoot up, but they're not all going to survive. So maybe only one, maybe two will survive out of those 40,000 if they're close to the tree. Now, what we're doing here is, imagine there's the parent plant, the parent plant's not here. We've already spaced these out by this distance already. So, we've given them a better chance. So, they can now flourish. In time, so within sort of 10 to 12 years, we're going to start to be sending this out. So, you won't see this line. There are other parts on this site, 23 years old, and we've done a lot of filling through that. You wouldn't know it's been planted by, in a plantation. Adam: So, what would you, what's the failure rate? What's a good failure rate to stay with? Tim: It can really, really vary. I have to say that the soil here is tremendous. It's very rich. I'd be very surprised if we have a high failure rate. It could be 95% take. Adam: So, that's really interesting. And what are you planting then? I've seen some oak. I've seen some silver birch. What are you planting? Tim: So, Cheshire is all about oak and birch. So, 25% of these trees, so 7,500 are oak. And then 10% are silver birch. So that's 3,000. And then there's another 18 species that are all native to the UK that we're planting in here. So, things like rowan, holly, Scots pine and then we've got hazel, some large areas of hazel on this site that we've put in and then we've got hawthorn, blackthorn, couple of types of cherry, and then some interesting ones as well. So, we're putting some elm in and, specifically for a butterfly. So, there's a butterfly called white letter hairstreak. And the caterpillar feeds on the leaves of that tree. So, we've got those in Cheshire, but we're trying to expand it. And we've been working with the Butterfly Conservation group to get it right. So, they've given us some advice. Adam: I thought elm was a real problem with the Dutch elm disease? Tim: It still is. It still is. Adam: There was some talk that maybe some had found some natural resistance to Dutch elm disease. Tim: There are some resistant elm. And so, the plantings that we've done on here are what's classed as wych elm. It will still get Dutch elm disease, but it can last up to 16 years. And then there's always the opportunity to replant so we can get elm established. Then we can carry on spreading that through the site, so it's a starting point for that species we have. So again, we're trying to increase the biodiversity of the site by having specific trees for specific species. So, it's exciting. I mean, a lot's been lost and it won't become a beautiful wildflower meadow, although we are going to be doing some wildflower planting. We've already bought the seed. And in the next couple of weeks as it gets a little bit drier and a little bit warm, we're going to be, we're going to be sowing that in and that will come through the spring and summer. So, we've got lots to happen here as well. Adam: Oh brilliant. Well, it's so nice to see it at an early stage. I'll come back in a couple of years. Tim: It's probably one of the most exciting projects, tree wise, in Cheshire in a long time, because I've been doing this for a long, long time and these opportunities don't come up. So, for this to happen. And for the size of it as well. I mean, you're talking about a huge area of woodland now, over 180 acres. So, the second biggest area of woodland in Cheshire, so it's amazing. It truly is amazing. Adam: Well, I'm walking away. In fact, all tree planting has stopped for lunch. What is the time? Yeah, it's 12:45. So, everyone has stopped for sandwiches and teas, and they're spreading branches of some trees. And while they're doing that, two people are still working. That's me. And Paul? Hi. Paul: Hi. Adam: So, just explain to me what you do, Paul? Paul: I work as the comms and engagement manager for the north of England, so this is one of the best tree planting games we have had in a long time. Adam: And the people we've got here today, they're just locals? They from any particular groups? Paul: No, the Woodland Trust staff as part of our climate campaign now get a day to come out and we've got various corporate volunteering groups out also planters. We've got about 80 people out planting today. Adam: Well, that's amazing and we've just paused by this gorse bush. I'm rather partial to the gorse, so we'll take some shelter there. So, you talked about that this is part of a bigger campaign. What is that campaign? Paul: It's our climate campaign. And very simple hashtag plant more trees. So, trees are one, probably one of the best things we've got in the battle against climate change to help. And they have the added benefit that also they're good for biodiversity as well. So, twin track approach if you plant a tree. Obviously they're not the solution to everything, but we're hoping, as the Woodland Trust just to get more people planting trees. Adam: What is the target then? The sort of tree planting target you have? Paul: Well we have a target to get 50 million trees planted by 2030. Across all of the UK, so quite, quite a number. Adam: 50 million trees by 2030, so six years? Paul: Yeah, yeah. And we've, I think we've planted 6 million trees, 2023, yeah. Adam: Why is everyone taking a break? They've got millions to get in. That's quite an ambitious thing to get done, isn't it? Paul: Yeah. And we need, we need to plant billions of trees longer term. So, it's really important we get everyone planting trees, but it's all that message as well, right tree in the right place, and get trees planted where they're needed. Adam: And this is an unusual project, not least cause it's on an old golf course, which I've never heard of before. Has it attracted much interest? Is there a lot of engagement from the media and the public? Paul: Yeah, this site has had a remarkable amount of attention from the press. It started with local radio, then regional TV and then we've had things like Sky News Climate Show out here and then even international press coverage looking at rewilding of golf courses. CNN covered it alongside international golf courses and here in the UK, Frodsham. So, it's been amazing how it's captured everyone's imagination and it's been such a really positive good news story. It's a site that's a key site within the Northern Forest. So, the Northern Forest is another project that I'm involved with in the north of England, but. Adam: Did you say a little project? *laughs* Paul: Another, another project. Adam: Oh sorry. I was gonna say, a massive project. Paul: That's a massive project, which is again stretching, looking to plant 50 million trees from Liverpool to Hull and we're working with the Community Forests in each area, in this case the Mersey Forest and again just promoting grants and support to landowners and communities to get more, more trees planted and to help acquire land for tree planting and give the grants for tree planting. Adam: It must give you a warm feeling that your communications are actually being so well received that there is, it's not just you pushing out a message, that people want to hear this message. Paul: Yeah, it's really, really good to not have a negative message. Generally it's a really, really positive message that people wanted to hear because it's great for the community. They're getting some amazing green space with stunning views of the Mersey on the doorstep. It's interesting story about how we're changing from a golf course to a woodland site. We've got the ancient woodland, got natural regeneration. And just the fact that everyone's smiling, everyone's really happy and just so pleased that they're playing their small part in helping us create this new woodland site. Just great to be part of that, that positive good news story. Adam: Well, I'm going over to a group of people who have been busy planting all day but are now on their lunch break, just to bother them and ask them how their day has been and why they got involved in this. Adam: OK, well, you can, first of all, you can just shout out so, well we've, you all are hard at work I hear, but I've seen very little evidence of it cause everyone's sat down for lunch now. Have you all had a good day? Everyone: Yes. Adam: That would have been awful had they said no. Anyway, they all had a good day. So, I mean, it's lovely that you're out. You're all out here doing, I mean, very serious work. You've all got smiles on your face and everything. But this is important. I wonder why anyone's getting involved, what it means to you. Anyone got a view or get a microphone to you? Adam: So, what's your name? Volunteer 1: Rodon. Adam: Rodon. So, why are you here? Rodon: Well, nature, wildlife, planting, and I know the area quite well, so it's nice to see being developed in a sustainable way and being something for nature. It's a great place to come and visit, not far from the sandstone trail. I visit lots of Woodland Trust sites. I live in Warrington so it's sort of down the road, and it's, as I say, with the old wood over there that's quite an adventurous path. It's got lots of like sandstone sort of steps and little caves, and it's on the side of a cliff. So, this has kind of extended that over here as well. Adam: It would be a lovely thing to return to in a few years. Rodon: Well, it's a nice place now to be honest. Adam: Brilliant. Volunteer 2: My name is David Mays. I'm also from the from the town of Warrington as well. I'm an MSC and BSc student from local Hope University. I've finished both of them now, thankfully. I'm trying to get a job in the ecological management sector and I feel doing this working with people like Tim and Neil will help me massively get a, you know, it looks good on my CV. Most importantly, I really enjoy being out here and getting to know how the areas of ecological development, particularly in the woodland industry, is developing over the past few years and what are the plans for the future and what they hope to achieve in the long term and short term. Adam: That's very good. So, it's also very innovative of you putting out your CV live on air there. Good. Hopefully someone needing a job, with a job to offer will contact us. Good luck with that. So, oh yeah, we've come under another lovely tree. I mean it looks set. I was just saying to Kerry, it's so beautiful here. It looks like we've set this shot up. Really, you know? But here you are with your spades behind you taking a break from the trunk. So, first of all, have you, has it been a good day? Volunteer 3: Yeah. Yeah, it has been. It's been dry. Adam: It's been dry. OK. Alright. Well, let's get, so, the best thing about today is that it was dry. Volunteer 3: It's one of the positive points. Definitely. Yeah, after the trees. Adam: Yeah, with experience. So, why did you want to come out? What made you want to be part of this? Volunteer 3: Well, I think it's because we are having a bit of a push with the climate change agenda at the moment, so it's, working for the Woodland Trust it's just a nice opportunity to get away from the sort of the day job for me and get out into the field and actually do something practical and help towards that. Adam: Yeah. Did, I mean, has it been very physical for you today, has it? Volunteer 3: It's not been too bad, actually. It's been fine. Yeah. No, it's been OK. Ask me tomorrow, but yeah *laughs* Adam: Have you done this sort of stuff before? Volunteer 3: No, this is my first, this is my first planting day with the Trust. Adam: Yeah, and your last? Volunteer 3: No, no, I'll definitely no, it hasn't put me off. We'll definitely, definitely be back out again when I get the opportunity. It's been great. Adam: So, go on. Tell me what's all been like for you today? Volunteer 4: It's been really good. Yeah. I just can't believe we've covered so much ground in so little time, really. Seems we've only been here a few hours and because it's, I've been quite remote working from home, so it's quite nice kind of seeing some people I've met on screen, so it's nice to now, yeah, meet people in the real world and yeah, give back. I've never, I've not done anything like this before. Adam: So yeah, so is this your first time planting trees? Volunteer 5: It's not my first time planting trees, but it's my first time planting with the Trust. I was planting trees in my garden on the weekend, so I've done my back in. So, I've not quite got the planting rate of everyone else today I don't think, but you know, as the other guys were saying, we work office jobs really rather than on the front line of the Trust. So, it is good to get our hands dirty and to get involved with what we're supposed to be all about and contribute to our climate change campaign. So, hashtag plant more trees. Adam: Yeah. There we are, on message as well. Volunteer 5: I work in the brand team *laughs* Adam: There we are. There we are. Thank you. That's excellent. Adam: Now, really I should have started with this because we're nearing the end of my morning in the forest. But I've come to meet Esther, who's really one of the big brains behind the planting scheme. I know a bit modest about that, but tell me a little bit about what your involvement has been with this project. Esther: I've been a lead designer on this project, so I've been putting together the planting plans and lots of maps and really working with Neil, he's the site manager, to make sure that we make this the best scheme that we can make it. We've included coppice coupes for biodiversity and. Adam: Right, what's a coppice coupe? Esther: A coppice coupe is just an area of where you're planning to coppice. So, cut a tree down to its very base and then it grows back up as shoots. So, it only works with a few species and the species that we've chosen is hazel. So, those areas are 100% hazel. And it's great for biodiversity because you sort of go in a rotational like a 10-year cycle or something like that and you cut back say 10% of your trees in that year and then you get a lot of light to the ground and then you get hopefully a lot of floristic diversity coming through. Adam: And so, is that a job that, it sounds terrible the way I'm saying it – is that a job? Is it a job that you sit down and you go, you have a piece of paper or computer and you go, this is where we're, how we're gonna design the forest. We're gonna put ash over there. We're gonna put oak over there. Is that what you do? Esther: Yeah. Yeah. So, we use something called GIS. So, geographical information systems which basically let you draw shapes on a map and then you can colour code it and basically make a really coherent design of something to tell people, you know, what you're trying to achieve. What's gonna go where. Adam: And it's not every, it's not like building an extension to a house where you go well, there's probably thousands and going on all the time. There can't be that many forests being planted each day, so this must be a significant thing in your career I would have thought. Esther: Oh yeah, this is my first woodland creation scheme that I've seen from pretty much the start to the finish, so I've been working on it for 18 months and then an awful lot of hours gone into it. It's been really enjoyable and it's just a wonderful, wonderful to see it coming together. And yeah, and we're nearly finished now, so. Adam: And I know people often think, oh well, I'll come back in 100 years' time and you know, my great grandchildren might see these trees. But actually, within your career, you will see a forest here won't you. Esther: Yeah. So, I think within 10 years it will look like a woodland. It's had, this site has a history of agriculture, so it should in theory have a lot of nutrients in the soil. So, the trees should grow really well. So yeah, I would say within 10 to 15 years, it should look like fully fledged woodland, if not a bit young, but yeah. Adam: And are you optimistic about really the change that you and your colleagues can make? Cause there's a lot of pessimism around. What's your view? Esther: I think it's a really exciting time to be working in the environment sector and there's a lot of enthusiasm for making big changes in our lives and big changes in our landscape. I think there's a lot of hope to be had. And yeah, just seeing like the amount of enthusiasm on a planting day like this really fills me with a great deal of hope, yeah. Adam: Yeah. Have you planted any trees yourself? Esther: I have, yeah. Adam: How many of these have been yours, you reckon? Esther: We have 15, probably not that many *laughs* Adam: Oh, that's not bad. I thought you were gonna be like The Queen. I planted one. There was a round of applause and I went home *laughs* Esther: No, I put a lot of guards on, but yeah, not planting that many trees myself. Adam: Fantastic. Well, it's been a great day for me. Our half day out here and I'll definitely return. It's amazing, amazing, positive place. Esther: Wonderful, yeah. Adam: And the sun has shone on us. Metaphorical smile from the sun. Brilliant. Thank you very much. Esther: Thank you so much. *song plays* Adam: Well, if you want to find a wood near you, you can do so by going to The Woodland Trust website which is www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/findawood. Until next time, happy wandering. Thank you for listening to the Woodland Trust Woodland Walks with Adam Shaw. Join us next month, when Adam will be taking another walk in the company of Woodland Trust staff, partners and volunteers. Don't forget to subscribe to the series on iTunes or wherever you're listening to us and do give us a review and a rating. And why not send us a recording of your favourite woodland walk to be included in a future podcast? Keep it to a maximum of five minutes and please tell us what makes your woodland walk special. Or send us an e-mail with details of your favourite walk and what makes it special to you. Send any audio files to podcast@woodlandtrust.org.uk. We look forward to hearing from you. Don't forget to rate us and subscribe! Learn more about the Woodland Trust at woodlandtrust.org.uk

Have you noticed that the number three seems to be a big deal for the apostle Paul in Ephesians? For example, in the first fourteen verses we read of the three-fold role our Triune God has in our salvation: God the Father chose us before the foundation of the world (1:3-6), Jesus the Son made our redemption possible (vv. 7-12), and the Holy Spirit sealed us for the Day of redemption (vv. 12-13). We see it in the way Paul prays for the Ephesian Church: I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the boundless greatness of His power toward us who believe (vv. 18-19a). I thought one way to help you see this was to reimagine Pauls series of threes as his answer to a series of questions by Mr. Worldly-Wiseman, a character from John Bunyans Pilgrims Progress, a book first published in 1678 and is currently listed as the fifth most translated book in the world. If you are not aware of who John Bunyan was, all you know for now is that he wrote Pilgrims Progress while in prison for twelve years for preaching the gospel, his book is an allegory on the Christian life. In Bunyans book, the protagonist, Christian Pilgrim leaves his home, The City of Destruction, to embark on a pilgrimage for the salvation of his soul and to find the Celestial City where he can live for all eternity in the company of God. While on his journey he is helped and guided by other characters such as Evangelist, who is known as a preacher of the Holy Word and is eager to help those who are seriously concerned about the state of their souls. Christian also meets Interpreter who shows Christian many wonders and shows Christian many exhortations on the way he should go. There are others who join Christian on his journey such as Pliant who quits the pilgrimage after facing his first obstacle, and Hopeful, a refugee from Vanity Fair, who proves to be a faithful companion to Christian all the way to the Celestial City. There are others who Christian encounters that try to turn him away from the narrow way to the Celestial City who go by the names of Giant Despair, Apollyon, Flatterer, and Mr. Worldly Wiseman. Bunyan described Mr. Worldly-Wiseman, in this way: not an ancient relic of the past. He is everywhere today, disguising his heresy and error by proclaiming the gospel of contentment and peace achieved by self-satisfaction and works. If he mentions Christ, it is not as the Savior who took our place, but as a good example of an exemplary life. Do we need a good example to rescue us, or do we need a Savior? Imagine what a conversation might look like if Mr. Worldly Wiseman visited the Apostle Paul in prison during the same time the epistle to the Ephesians was written: Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Paul, tell me how you can be sure that you are Christian since you are now in prison? Paul: Regardless of my circumstance, I am a Christian for these three reasons: I was chosen by God before the foundation of the world (1:4-6), I am redeemed through the blood of Jesus Christ for sins I am guilty of (vv. 7-12), and I am sealed by the Holy Spirit for a full and future redemption (vv. 13-14). Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Why spend your years in prison and suffer when you can be free so long as you dont keep blabbing about Jesus in places people dont want to hear it? You know, you can be a Christian and be compliant too! Paul: How can I be quiet about something so important? Jesus commands me not to be quite about my relationship with Him and how he saved me even though I was, Dead to God (2:1), A slave to sin (vv. 2-3a), and A child of the wrath of God because of the sins I committed against Him (v. 3). What this means, Mr. Worldly Wiseman, is that I was once like you: A friend of the world (2:2a), A child of the devil (v. 2b), and A slave to my own flesh (v. 3). Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Im not sure if I should feel insulted or pity for you because you believe such rubbish. So, tell me, what is so different between you and me? Paul: Jesus is the difference between you and me! Jesus lived a perfect sinless life that I could never live; He died a death I deserved on a cross for sins I committed, and He validated all of that by rising from death on the third day. What is true of me is true of every real Christian, and this is why I have chosen to follow Him: I was dead in my sins, but now I am alive in Christ (1:7; 2:4) My nature was bound by my sins, but now I have been raised with Christ (v. 6a) I stood condemned by a holy God, but now I am seated with Christ and am covered by His righteousness (v. 6b). Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Come on Paul! I am a religious person and I admire Jesus as a great example to aspire to. We need to do our best and let God do the rest, but you have taken your Christianity too seriously! Paul: No one can do enough for the kind of salvation you and I need! The only thing God required of me was a faith that was only possible because of His grace. It is a grace that I could not, nor ever will earn, by anything I could ever do! I am the recipient of, A rich mercy we did deserve (v. 4a). A great love God was not obligated to give (v. 4b). An all-sufficient grace no one could earn (v. 5) All of which is only possible in and through Jesus Christ alone! So, now we come to Ephesians 2:8-10 and are immediately faced with another set of three words and why it is that God saved us in the first place. If you were asked the same questions or interrogated in the way I had Mr. Worldly-Wiseman interrogate Paul, how would you answer? My two points are in the form of two questions that this passage answers for us in a way that should be deeply discouraging or encouraging to you. How Does God Save? Now, considering all that we have studied together, we find ourselves at the threshold of Ephesians 2:8-9. What I want to do with you this morning is to walk you through these verses in light of the context of Ephesians 1:3-2:7. I want us to look at these verses together against the backdrop of my warning at the beginning of this sermon series which was this: Beware of imposing your view and thoughts of what God should be like, upon the text of His holy Word. You must allow the authority of Gods Word to impose its teaching upon your heart for the purpose of shaping it in a way that the eyes of your heart are able to see God more clearly. Now, before I go any further, let me say first and foremost that I want you to make your own conclusion with these verses based on the evidence of what you see in Ephesians and the rest of the Bible. I am not concerned if you end up seeing things differently than the way I see them so long as you do not impose what you think the Bible should say upon what it actually says. My only concern before you this morning is that I preach and teach the Bible in such a manner that I am faithful to the Word of God so when I stand before Him, I will do so knowing that I was faithful with what He has entrusted to me. So, here we go! Buckle up because it is going to be a fun ride. Lets start with verses 8-9, For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. The three words I want you to see in this verse are grace, saved (i.e. salvation), and faith. To answer the question, How does God save? we need figure out what is the gift that He gives so that no one may boast. Is grace the gift given by God, or is salvation the gift given by God, or is a persons faith the gift given by God? Whatever the gift is, it eliminates any notion on our part that we did something to get it, otherwise Paul would never have felt the need to include verse 9, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. If I am right about what I see in Ephesians 2:8-9, it will open up verse 10 in a way that will encourage you and blow your mind at the same time. So, what have we seen in Ephesians so far leading up to these verses? Permit me to put what Paul lists concerning our salvation in sequential order from spiritual death to life: We were spiritually dead in our offenses and sins (2:1) We know we were spiritually dead because we were slaves to our sin (2:2a) Because we were slaves to our sin against God, we were by nature children of His wrath (2:3). But God, whose mercy is rich, love is great, and grace is sufficient, did three things (vv. 2:4-5): He made us alive with Christ (2:5b). He raised us up with Christ (2:6a). He seated us with Christ (2:6b). As a Christian, you can know that your salvation involved three acts of God Before the foundation of the earth, God chose to adopt you as His child through Jesus (1:4-6). In order to adopt you as His child, God redeemed you through the blood of Jesus for the forgiveness of all your wrongdoings (1:7-12). Because God will not lose any who He has redeemed, He has sealed you with His Holy Spirit until your redemption and salvation is complete (1:13-14). So, in light of all that Paul wrote concerning what God has done for the Christian, what does he mean by Ephesians 2:8-9? Let me offer up some fair and legitimate questions: If I am spiritually dead, how can a spiritually dead person respond to God in faith? If I am able to respond to God in faith in order to receive salvation through Jesus, then is my faith exempt from the kinds of works Paul is talking about in verse 9? If faith is a gift God imparts on me on some level, then how is my trust in Jesus for the salvation of my soul legitimate? Does your brain hurt from trying to process these sorts of questions? I have wrestled over these verses for nearly 30 years and have understood them in three different ways that I think may help give you some perspective. In my early years, I was convinced that the gift of God was a salvation that could only be received by faith. Sometime after I started reading guys like Jonathan Edwards and St. Augustine, I leaned towards thinking that it was faith that was the gift of God. To be honest, what makes all of this even more confusing is the Greek allows the person interpreting these verses to make either one of these conclusions. Here is where I sit now, and I believe that how I see it fits best with everything Paul has written leading up to these verses, and it fits with the rest of the Bible. So, what is the gift of God? It is His Grace, our faith, and our salvation in that order! The this is Gods grace, our faith, and our salvation. Think about what grace is for a moment. Biblical grace is Gods unmerited favor; it is favor given to someone who does not deserve it. Do you remember what I said in the second sermon I preached in this series on Ephesians 1:4-6? I told you that at the very least, when it comes to God, what we read in these verses leads to the conclusion that God moved first. We see the very same thing here in Ephesians 2:8! At the very least, it is the sheer grace of almighty God that I had reached a point in my life on July 18, 1991, when all that I heard about Jesus made sense and I surrendered my life to Jesus and was genuinely and categorically saved from the wrath of God and forgiven all my sins! Every step and experience leading up to that moment was also the demonstration of a God who pursued me, found me, and overcame my sin because His mercy was rich, His love was great, and His grace sufficient to do what a 16-year-old teenage boy could not do. God made me alive with Christ, God raised me up with Christ, and God seated me with Christ on that summers day on July 18, 1991, but He did not believe for me; I had to believe to be saved. He did the same thing with you Christian, but He did not believe for you! But my believing in Christ for the salvation of my soul, and your believing in Him for the salvation of your soul is not only a testament of Gods grace, but the proof that miracles happen. For What Purpose Does God Save? So, why did He do it? Why did he save you? Why did He choose you, redeem you, seal you, and made you, who were once dead, the recipient of the, boundless riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus (2:7)? After all, what Jonathan Edwards said concerning what we bring to our salvation is the resounding testimony of all of Scripture: You contribute nothing to your salvation except the sin that made it necessary. God didnt have to do it! God was not morally obligated to do it! But God did it; He saved you and redeemed you for the forgiveness of all your sin according to the riches of His grace, which He lavished upon you (1:7). But why? The answer is found in Ephesians 2:10, For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. The first word in verse 10 is the word For, which is telling us something. What it is telling us is that considering Ephesians 2:1-9, the following is true! You who were dead in your sins, walked according to the course of this world, lived in the lusts of your flesh, indulged the desires of the flesh and of the mind as a child of the wrath of God (vv. 1-3), God made you alive in Christ, for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that you would walk in those good works. This is exactly why God choose you, Christian, before the foundation of the world; listen to Ephesians 1:4 again: He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. What this means, and this is so important to see with the eyes of your heart: We were not saved to coast until we enter into the presence of God in heaven but were saved so that God could reveal His presence through us because of His resurrection power to change us! It is absolute nonsense to think and believe that you can encounter Jesus on the level Paul describes in Ephesians and remain unchanged! It is like saying that you can remain the same after you walk in front of a bus traveling 65 MPH; the force of the bus will change you permanently. Listen carefully, the God who spoke 300 billion suns into existence is the same God who makes alive the spiritually dead through the power of the Gospel of a resurrected Christ! How is it that a person can remain unchanged by a power greater than 300 billion suns? I will tell you; it is because that person has never truly encountered Christ, whose mercy is richer, love is greater, and grace more sufficient than all of our sins and the sins of 8.1 billion people combined! What we read in Ephesians 2:8-10 is that in light of the resurrection power of God through the redeeming work of Jesus the Son, and the empowering work of the Holy Spirit who seals us, it is the grace of God that leads to faith in God, for our salvation by God, for the purpose of a life of good works that glorifies God. The work that God is doing in your life is ongoing. I feel that it is fitting to close with something Sinclair Ferguson wrote concerning these verses: Heaven may be the final showroom; but here on earth God is already showing what he can do.. The church triumphant is an art gallery where God displays reflections of his glory. It is a portrait gallery in which the family likeness is seen in countless different individuals who together display his infinite glory. The church visible, here, and now, is a workshop. The Divine Artist is still painting his likeness on the canvas of our lives, the Divine Potter still has the clay in his hands. The time for final exhibition has not yet come. But one day it will. Then all that God has done in us in secret, invisible to the naked eye, will become visible for all to see. What a day that will be![1] [1] Sinclair B. Ferguson, Lets Study Ephesians (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust; 2021), p. 53.

Have you noticed that the number three seems to be a big deal for the apostle Paul in Ephesians? For example, in the first fourteen verses we read of the three-fold role our Triune God has in our salvation: God the Father chose us before the foundation of the world (1:3-6), Jesus the Son made our redemption possible (vv. 7-12), and the Holy Spirit sealed us for the Day of redemption (vv. 12-13). We see it in the way Paul prays for the Ephesian Church: I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the boundless greatness of His power toward us who believe (vv. 18-19a). I thought one way to help you see this was to reimagine Pauls series of threes as his answer to a series of questions by Mr. Worldly-Wiseman, a character from John Bunyans Pilgrims Progress, a book first published in 1678 and is currently listed as the fifth most translated book in the world. If you are not aware of who John Bunyan was, all you know for now is that he wrote Pilgrims Progress while in prison for twelve years for preaching the gospel, his book is an allegory on the Christian life. In Bunyans book, the protagonist, Christian Pilgrim leaves his home, The City of Destruction, to embark on a pilgrimage for the salvation of his soul and to find the Celestial City where he can live for all eternity in the company of God. While on his journey he is helped and guided by other characters such as Evangelist, who is known as a preacher of the Holy Word and is eager to help those who are seriously concerned about the state of their souls. Christian also meets Interpreter who shows Christian many wonders and shows Christian many exhortations on the way he should go. There are others who join Christian on his journey such as Pliant who quits the pilgrimage after facing his first obstacle, and Hopeful, a refugee from Vanity Fair, who proves to be a faithful companion to Christian all the way to the Celestial City. There are others who Christian encounters that try to turn him away from the narrow way to the Celestial City who go by the names of Giant Despair, Apollyon, Flatterer, and Mr. Worldly Wiseman. Bunyan described Mr. Worldly-Wiseman, in this way: not an ancient relic of the past. He is everywhere today, disguising his heresy and error by proclaiming the gospel of contentment and peace achieved by self-satisfaction and works. If he mentions Christ, it is not as the Savior who took our place, but as a good example of an exemplary life. Do we need a good example to rescue us, or do we need a Savior? Imagine what a conversation might look like if Mr. Worldly Wiseman visited the Apostle Paul in prison during the same time the epistle to the Ephesians was written: Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Paul, tell me how you can be sure that you are Christian since you are now in prison? Paul: Regardless of my circumstance, I am a Christian for these three reasons: I was chosen by God before the foundation of the world (1:4-6), I am redeemed through the blood of Jesus Christ for sins I am guilty of (vv. 7-12), and I am sealed by the Holy Spirit for a full and future redemption (vv. 13-14). Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Why spend your years in prison and suffer when you can be free so long as you dont keep blabbing about Jesus in places people dont want to hear it? You know, you can be a Christian and be compliant too! Paul: How can I be quiet about something so important? Jesus commands me not to be quite about my relationship with Him and how he saved me even though I was, Dead to God (2:1), A slave to sin (vv. 2-3a), and A child of the wrath of God because of the sins I committed against Him (v. 3). What this means, Mr. Worldly Wiseman, is that I was once like you: A friend of the world (2:2a), A child of the devil (v. 2b), and A slave to my own flesh (v. 3). Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Im not sure if I should feel insulted or pity for you because you believe such rubbish. So, tell me, what is so different between you and me? Paul: Jesus is the difference between you and me! Jesus lived a perfect sinless life that I could never live; He died a death I deserved on a cross for sins I committed, and He validated all of that by rising from death on the third day. What is true of me is true of every real Christian, and this is why I have chosen to follow Him: I was dead in my sins, but now I am alive in Christ (1:7; 2:4) My nature was bound by my sins, but now I have been raised with Christ (v. 6a) I stood condemned by a holy God, but now I am seated with Christ and am covered by His righteousness (v. 6b). Mr. Worldly-Wiseman: Come on Paul! I am a religious person and I admire Jesus as a great example to aspire to. We need to do our best and let God do the rest, but you have taken your Christianity too seriously! Paul: No one can do enough for the kind of salvation you and I need! The only thing God required of me was a faith that was only possible because of His grace. It is a grace that I could not, nor ever will earn, by anything I could ever do! I am the recipient of, A rich mercy we did deserve (v. 4a). A great love God was not obligated to give (v. 4b). An all-sufficient grace no one could earn (v. 5) All of which is only possible in and through Jesus Christ alone! So, now we come to Ephesians 2:8-10 and are immediately faced with another set of three words and why it is that God saved us in the first place. If you were asked the same questions or interrogated in the way I had Mr. Worldly-Wiseman interrogate Paul, how would you answer? My two points are in the form of two questions that this passage answers for us in a way that should be deeply discouraging or encouraging to you. How Does God Save? Now, considering all that we have studied together, we find ourselves at the threshold of Ephesians 2:8-9. What I want to do with you this morning is to walk you through these verses in light of the context of Ephesians 1:3-2:7. I want us to look at these verses together against the backdrop of my warning at the beginning of this sermon series which was this: Beware of imposing your view and thoughts of what God should be like, upon the text of His holy Word. You must allow the authority of Gods Word to impose its teaching upon your heart for the purpose of shaping it in a way that the eyes of your heart are able to see God more clearly. Now, before I go any further, let me say first and foremost that I want you to make your own conclusion with these verses based on the evidence of what you see in Ephesians and the rest of the Bible. I am not concerned if you end up seeing things differently than the way I see them so long as you do not impose what you think the Bible should say upon what it actually says. My only concern before you this morning is that I preach and teach the Bible in such a manner that I am faithful to the Word of God so when I stand before Him, I will do so knowing that I was faithful with what He has entrusted to me. So, here we go! Buckle up because it is going to be a fun ride. Lets start with verses 8-9, For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. The three words I want you to see in this verse are grace, saved (i.e. salvation), and faith. To answer the question, How does God save? we need figure out what is the gift that He gives so that no one may boast. Is grace the gift given by God, or is salvation the gift given by God, or is a persons faith the gift given by God? Whatever the gift is, it eliminates any notion on our part that we did something to get it, otherwise Paul would never have felt the need to include verse 9, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. If I am right about what I see in Ephesians 2:8-9, it will open up verse 10 in a way that will encourage you and blow your mind at the same time. So, what have we seen in Ephesians so far leading up to these verses? Permit me to put what Paul lists concerning our salvation in sequential order from spiritual death to life: We were spiritually dead in our offenses and sins (2:1) We know we were spiritually dead because we were slaves to our sin (2:2a) Because we were slaves to our sin against God, we were by nature children of His wrath (2:3). But God, whose mercy is rich, love is great, and grace is sufficient, did three things (vv. 2:4-5): He made us alive with Christ (2:5b). He raised us up with Christ (2:6a). He seated us with Christ (2:6b). As a Christian, you can know that your salvation involved three acts of God Before the foundation of the earth, God chose to adopt you as His child through Jesus (1:4-6). In order to adopt you as His child, God redeemed you through the blood of Jesus for the forgiveness of all your wrongdoings (1:7-12). Because God will not lose any who He has redeemed, He has sealed you with His Holy Spirit until your redemption and salvation is complete (1:13-14). So, in light of all that Paul wrote concerning what God has done for the Christian, what does he mean by Ephesians 2:8-9? Let me offer up some fair and legitimate questions: If I am spiritually dead, how can a spiritually dead person respond to God in faith? If I am able to respond to God in faith in order to receive salvation through Jesus, then is my faith exempt from the kinds of works Paul is talking about in verse 9? If faith is a gift God imparts on me on some level, then how is my trust in Jesus for the salvation of my soul legitimate? Does your brain hurt from trying to process these sorts of questions? I have wrestled over these verses for nearly 30 years and have understood them in three different ways that I think may help give you some perspective. In my early years, I was convinced that the gift of God was a salvation that could only be received by faith. Sometime after I started reading guys like Jonathan Edwards and St. Augustine, I leaned towards thinking that it was faith that was the gift of God. To be honest, what makes all of this even more confusing is the Greek allows the person interpreting these verses to make either one of these conclusions. Here is where I sit now, and I believe that how I see it fits best with everything Paul has written leading up to these verses, and it fits with the rest of the Bible. So, what is the gift of God? It is His Grace, our faith, and our salvation in that order! The this is Gods grace, our faith, and our salvation. Think about what grace is for a moment. Biblical grace is Gods unmerited favor; it is favor given to someone who does not deserve it. Do you remember what I said in the second sermon I preached in this series on Ephesians 1:4-6? I told you that at the very least, when it comes to God, what we read in these verses leads to the conclusion that God moved first. We see the very same thing here in Ephesians 2:8! At the very least, it is the sheer grace of almighty God that I had reached a point in my life on July 18, 1991, when all that I heard about Jesus made sense and I surrendered my life to Jesus and was genuinely and categorically saved from the wrath of God and forgiven all my sins! Every step and experience leading up to that moment was also the demonstration of a God who pursued me, found me, and overcame my sin because His mercy was rich, His love was great, and His grace sufficient to do what a 16-year-old teenage boy could not do. God made me alive with Christ, God raised me up with Christ, and God seated me with Christ on that summers day on July 18, 1991, but He did not believe for me; I had to believe to be saved. He did the same thing with you Christian, but He did not believe for you! But my believing in Christ for the salvation of my soul, and your believing in Him for the salvation of your soul is not only a testament of Gods grace, but the proof that miracles happen. For What Purpose Does God Save? So, why did He do it? Why did he save you? Why did He choose you, redeem you, seal you, and made you, who were once dead, the recipient of the, boundless riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus (2:7)? After all, what Jonathan Edwards said concerning what we bring to our salvation is the resounding testimony of all of Scripture: You contribute nothing to your salvation except the sin that made it necessary. God didnt have to do it! God was not morally obligated to do it! But God did it; He saved you and redeemed you for the forgiveness of all your sin according to the riches of His grace, which He lavished upon you (1:7). But why? The answer is found in Ephesians 2:10, For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. The first word in verse 10 is the word For, which is telling us something. What it is telling us is that considering Ephesians 2:1-9, the following is true! You who were dead in your sins, walked according to the course of this world, lived in the lusts of your flesh, indulged the desires of the flesh and of the mind as a child of the wrath of God (vv. 1-3), God made you alive in Christ, for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that you would walk in those good works. This is exactly why God choose you, Christian, before the foundation of the world; listen to Ephesians 1:4 again: He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. What this means, and this is so important to see with the eyes of your heart: We were not saved to coast until we enter into the presence of God in heaven but were saved so that God could reveal His presence through us because of His resurrection power to change us! It is absolute nonsense to think and believe that you can encounter Jesus on the level Paul describes in Ephesians and remain unchanged! It is like saying that you can remain the same after you walk in front of a bus traveling 65 MPH; the force of the bus will change you permanently. Listen carefully, the God who spoke 300 billion suns into existence is the same God who makes alive the spiritually dead through the power of the Gospel of a resurrected Christ! How is it that a person can remain unchanged by a power greater than 300 billion suns? I will tell you; it is because that person has never truly encountered Christ, whose mercy is richer, love is greater, and grace more sufficient than all of our sins and the sins of 8.1 billion people combined! What we read in Ephesians 2:8-10 is that in light of the resurrection power of God through the redeeming work of Jesus the Son, and the empowering work of the Holy Spirit who seals us, it is the grace of God that leads to faith in God, for our salvation by God, for the purpose of a life of good works that glorifies God. The work that God is doing in your life is ongoing. I feel that it is fitting to close with something Sinclair Ferguson wrote concerning these verses: Heaven may be the final showroom; but here on earth God is already showing what he can do.. The church triumphant is an art gallery where God displays reflections of his glory. It is a portrait gallery in which the family likeness is seen in countless different individuals who together display his infinite glory. The church visible, here, and now, is a workshop. The Divine Artist is still painting his likeness on the canvas of our lives, the Divine Potter still has the clay in his hands. The time for final exhibition has not yet come. But one day it will. Then all that God has done in us in secret, invisible to the naked eye, will become visible for all to see. What a day that will be![1] [1] Sinclair B. Ferguson, Lets Study Ephesians (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust; 2021), p. 53.

Hablemos sobre Amanda Serrano, Jake Paul y las declaraciones del doctor que canceló la pelea de Amanda REDES

No balanço bem-humorado da semana, Gilberto Amêndola dá conselhos para Maduro sobre a questão envolvendo a Guiana e tenta convencer Paul McCartney a viver no Brasil.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

E a temporada dos rumores está oficialmente aberta! A festa do título do Denver Nuggets nem acabou, mas a offseason da NBA já está pegando fogo. Semana passada, a notícia de que o Phoenix Suns iria rescindir o contrato de Chris Paul pegou o mundo de surpresa e pôs LeBron James e o Los Angeles Lakers em alerta. Já nessa semana, as bombas ficaram por conta da decisão de Fred VanVleet, do Toronto Raptors, de negar seu player-option e testar a free-agency; da notícia de que o Washington Wizards estaria perto de um rebuild e de que o New Orleans Pelicans estaria disposto a trocar Zion Williamson. Mas, afinal, o que de fato vai acontecer? E quais os melhores destinos e fits para estes nomes? Tudo isso e muito mais no programa de hoje!

I met the Yonder Oak Wood team back in March to discover how this landscape will be transformed for people and wildlife, and what designing a new wood involves. The vision is to attract plentiful wildlife with healthy habitat that offers refuge from weather extremes and fights climate change. The local community has been involved from the off - volunteer Sally Burton joins us to explain what she gets up to, how excited everyone is about the future and what volunteering means to her. We also hear of efforts to make the site more sustainable, from re-usable fences to tree guard trials, and I get my hands dirty planting a tree. Don't forget to rate us and subscribe! Learn more about the Woodland Trust at woodlandtrust.org.uk Transcript You are listening to Woodland Walks, a podcast for the Woodland Trust presented by Adam Shaw. We protect and plant trees for people, for wildlife. Adam: Well, today I'm off to, well, the wonderfully named Yonder Oak Wood. And although it's called a wood, it's not really a wood yet. This is a very exciting project, but it's in the very early stages of creation. It's near Exmouth in Devon. The Woodland Trust plans on planting, I think something like 13,000 trees there, creating a new environment for nature and wildlife to bounce back. Sounds a great place to go, I'm going to meet a few people there. First off, though, is my contact at the Woodland Trust today, Rachel Harries. Rachel: So this site is Yonder Oak Wood, it's not quite a wood yet, as you can see, but the Woodland Trust bought it in March last year with the aim of creating, creating a new wooded landscape here. So it's 54 hectares, we think it is the biggest woodland creation site that the Trust has done in the South West in in 20 years, so 54 hectares, that's equivalent to about 100 football pitches, and it sits on the sort of two sides of a hidden valley, just a couple of miles inland from the South Coast of Devon. So where we're stood, we can actually see out to the mouth of the Exe estuary, to Dawlish and and possibly to Torquay there as well. Adam: I I think you can just see the estuary over there can't you, just beyond that last bunch of trees is that right? Rachel: You absolutely can, yeah, you absolutely can. And actually the other day when I was here, I saw a white bird fly over that was an egret that was obviously based in the estuary, so really exciting. Adam: And why, now this site, I happen to know is, it it's quite important because of the anniversary and just explain to me, explain to me a little bit about that. Rachel: That's right. Last year was the 50th anniversary of the Woodland Trust and the first site that our founder Ken Watkins ever bought was in Devon. So it's really emblematic that we are now creating a new woodland, probably I think it's about 30 miles away as the crow flies from the Avon Valley Woods where we were started. But we're now creating a new woodland in the county of our birthplace, which is incredibly exciting, and we wanted to create something that would have meaning for local people and it would like, it would be tied into the local environment, so we did things like we looked at the name of the stream, we looked at old field names and we came up with a shortlist of names that we could then offer out to the local community and ask them which one, which one they wanted and what they wanted to call this new site. And one of the field names was Yonder Oak Park. And that's really quite special because as you look across the site, you can see all these incredible old oak trees over yonder, off in the distance. So I have to admit that was my favourite but we let the community choose and they voted for Yonder Oak Wood. Adam: Right well you're gonna take me on a little walk around here, so just explain to me a little bit about what we're gonna see. Rachel: OK. Well, we're starting here on a sloping field that has old oak trees dotted about the landscape. Some of these are a couple of hundred years old and there's one in particular which we can see just off in the distance, which is one of my, one of my favourites that is standing almost on on stilts. And the stilts are actually its roots that would have once been embedded in a Devon bank, which is a sort of a solid hedgerow that we find in Devon that has trees planted on the top and the hedgerow and the bank has been taken away. So the tree now kind of stands about a metre above the height that it would have once been. Adam: Which one, I can't tell which one that is? Rachel: So can you see there's two in that field over there, we'll walk past it so we can have another look at it. Adam: Yes, I see that, I see that. OK, maybe my eyesight's not very good. So and this goes, these are currently separate fields and there's what a field and then a hedgerow, another field, then another hedgerow, then the tree supposedly on stilts and beyond that what looks like a solar panel farm. So is this the, what will be the new woodland all the way up to the solar panels? Rachel: We've worked to design a mixture of of habitats here, so we have about 5 different fields where we're doing much more intensive planting and that's what people would kind of imagine that would grow into what people would imagine a woodland would look like, but then in some of these other fields, so the field that we're stood in and a couple of other fields that you can kind of see off in the distance there, we're going to do a mix of open space, glades and groves. We'll plant some more of these kind of trees that will be allowed to to thrive and to spread on their own, but we'll also plant a mixture of of scrub and shrubs, so that's more lower growing trees, things like blackthorn, hawthorn dogrose, spindle, just to create a really good mix of habitats for all the birds and insects and bats that we, you know, we know are going to thrive here. Adam: And you, you've arranged for us to meet a a couple of people, haven't you? Rachel: Yeah. So we're going to be walking around with Paul Allen, he's our site manager and we're going to meet Sally Burton, who is one of our volunteers here. Adam: The weather's been kind to us so far, but it is a little nippy so we shouldn't keep them waiting. So do you wanna lead on and we'll go meet them. Rachel: Yes, let's go. Adam: And I'm told there there was some sea shantying going on here, which strikes me as odd because we're not, we're not in the middle of the sea or anything. So what's the story behind that? Rachel: Well, we're not far from the sea. We can see, we can see the, we can see the sea here. But we were contacted by a a group of local acapella singers who were inspired by what we're doing here and had decided to take some modern folk songs and to rewrite them to to reference the wood. So they came out one weekend and they sang to our to all of our planters, but we also talked a little bit about sea shanties, which I like the idea of becoming tree shanties. So they took a traditional sea shanty and they changed the lyrics. So we now have a song all about Yonder Oak Wood that we could sing along to. Adam: Great. And that we're going to hear that now from from you. So here's Rachel with her tree shanty. Is that right? No? Rachel *laughs* I don't think so. Adam: Do you have a recording of it? Rachel: I we do have a recording of it actually, yes. Adam: You never know. I don't know. Maybe a couple of teas or beers later, I might persuade you to sing. Alright. Brilliant, Rachel. Thank you very much. Rachel: Thank you. That's great. So here's Paul. He's the site manager and he's going to take us on a little walk down through Yonder Oak Wood. Adam: Paul, thank you very much. Nice to see you. So you are the site manager. Paul: Hello there. I am. Yes, I'm responsible for turning these fields into a wild, wildlife rich area. Adam: OK. Well, go on. Let's lead on. We can have a chat about that. Brilliant. So yeah. So these are early days, Paul. I understand you you are responsible for designing the woodland. What does that actually involve? Paul: So really, I mean the the the first place you you start is is kind of kind of getting a sense of where the place is and what the place is and the the key bit here as we walk through it is you can see these big old oak trees and so we've based a lot of the design on that. So you can picture in the future lots more of these big old trees that will have lots of deadwood, lots of rot holes where birds can nest, and invertebrates burrow in. And the way we're kind of going to maintain it is we're we're going to put animals in and have low intensity grazing and then you kind of build in where the views are. Adam: I mean it must be really exciting because it can't be that often that you you get actually a green field or literally a greenfield site. But it's more or less bare. It's a plain piece of paper for you to design. That's quite, I mean, it's exciting, quite an honour, perhaps a little daunting? Paul: I've I've done probably 30 years of nature conservation and most of what you do is you take bits of habitat and you try and restore them, you try and protect them. You very rarely get a chance to actually create something brand spanking new. It is really phenomenally exciting for all of us, because if you think about it in the future, 100 years time, this place will be on maps. It will be on aerial photographs, you know so not only are we doing stuff that's great for wildlife and great for climate, we're effectively creating history as well, which is an awesome thing to be a part of. Adam: Yeah, so on the map it should say Yonder Oak Wood, brackets Paul Allen. *both laugh* Rachel's in the background going it's my wood, it's my wood. There might be a battle for the name. Paul: I'm I'm doing the design that says it from the sky it'll say Paul was here. *both laugh* Adam: Yes, yes very good, on Google Maps you can, you know, in 100 years time they'll go well how did those trees get planted in the shape of Paul? *laughs* So, OK, look, we're, we're, I've paused because we're at the we're at the top of the hill, almost. So what will happen around us? At the moment there are three or four trees in a line and not much else. So what will be here? Paul: So if you if you picture it in the future, what we'll have is we'll have a a, a a scattering of big old oak trees like we can see across the site and if you look over to our left, you can see an area that actually was the former quarry on the site. But if you look at it, you can see gorse that's currently in flower, even though we're in a freezing day at the beginning of March. And all of that is really good for wildlife. It's got lots of pollen and and nectar and lots of edge that birds and insects really like. And essentially what we're gonna get in the future is a combination of these big old oak trees and that lovely scrubby stuff that's great for wildlife. Adam: So here not too dense? Paul: Not too dense here no, not at all. Adam: So you get the view, you get a nice view and it's a mixed habitat. Paul: You, you, you, you get a view, it's it's very, we've we've constantly said we're creating a kind of a wooded landscape not a wood. Adam: Right. Well, we should carry on walking out, I have a tendency, just not to walk. I can see right over there some white poles which look like tree guards. Which does raise this issue I mean of how you're going to protect the trees because plastic tree guards have become quite controversial. Do you have a plan around that? Paul: Yeah, so we've got we've got, last year the the Woodland Trust decided that it would stop using the virgin plastic tree guards on its sites, which is actually a bit problematic because there aren't really any other types of tree guard that are commercially available at scale, so we're doing a combination of things here. The the main way is we're going to deer fence the site to stop the deer coming in and then we're also in some places we're trialling different types of tree tubes, so we're looking at one at the moment that bizarrely, has been made of sugar beet so it smells like golden syrup when you walk up to it, which is quite weird, and the ones you can see over there are actually recycled from another site. So we're, we're still, we're still using the tree guards that are effectively usable. Adam: Right. You talk about trying to protect the trees from deer. Which does raise the issue of other wildlife. I mean, clearly, we're gonna be hoping that wildlife get attracted into the area once this starts growing. At the moment though, have you have you seen much evidence of sort of new wildlife or any wildlife? Paul: It's still very early days yet. But we've seen lots of buzzards there's there's actually quite a lot of hornets nests in, in the existing oak trees. Adam: Is that a good thing? That sounds terrifying. Paul: *laughs* I I I personally I quite like it. Adam: You're pleased about that, OK. I think a lot of people always feel it takes generations and generations to plant trees. I know I have been at planting events where some young people have planted and said, oh, I think my children and my grandchildren might come to see this tree and then are surprised, actually, they come back to see their own tree and it grows quicker than they might expect. How quickly is this going to develop into anything recognisable as woodland? Paul: So I mean, with within 10 years, it will absolutely look like a woodland, although obviously still a young woodland and different tree species grow at different rates. So the silver birches and the rowans will actually be 6 foot high within two or three years potentially, whereas the the oak trees clearly will grow a lot slower. Adam: Wow, silver birch and rowan, 6 foot high in how long? Paul: Two or three years, if they if they take well. I mean it it it it varies depending on the soil type and all that sort of stuff, but they do grow very, very quickly. Adam: Blimey. And tell me a bit about how you got into all of this. I mean, I know you say you've been doing this a while. Paul: I started well I started off volunteering actually with the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers a long time ago, and I got known by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust and rather randomly, I was having a beer in a pub and they went, do you fancy a job, and I went, alright then. Adam: Very good. So you've learnt on the job about trees? Paul: I I reeducated a few, some time ago but yeah a lot of it was learned as I went along. Adam: I've been very insulting, you've you've probably got a PhD in trees or something. But I do like the idea of, I got my job from a pub, I think I think that's always, I remember a story, so I don't know if you remember a film critic called Barry Norman, he always used to say, I I remember him telling a story, there's a pub around the BBC called, I think it's the White, White Horse or something like that. And he went when he was unemployed, he used to sit there pretending he was writing scripts so that BBC producers would come in for a lunchtime beer, which they don't do anymore, but they used to and they would go, oh, Barry, yeah there's a job we have and he wasn't working at all, he was just trying to be in the pub around and that's how he got his work, so that's clearly not just media, it's it's the tree world as well. Paul: It's it's it's very much very very clearly, a lot harder now than it was, because at that point in time, I guess nature conservation really wasn't a career. Adam: Yeah. We've come across a locked fence, but Paul has a key, there we are. There we are. Into the next next field. Ah, right away. Here's a very different type of fence, and I presume this is to keep the deer out. So first of all, massive fence, is this to keep the deer out? Paul: This is to keep the deer out. Yes, absolutely. And what will happen where we're standing, the hedgerow will creep out into the fence and obviously the wood that we're planting inside will also start to hide the fence. So the fence over time will disappear apart from the gateways. Adam: So I mean, there's a good 7 odd foot here between the hedgerow and the fence. You're saying that that hedgerow will naturally grow another 7 foot? Paul: Yep. So what what what we've got in this hedgerow, actually it's it's it's quite specific to this area is we've got a lot of a lot of small leaved elm and we've also got a lot of blackthorn in it and both of those sucker. So as as we've taken the the the intensive farming off the land the the shrubs will just sucker out and gradually spread into the field. Adam: And look, and we're standing by the main gate and there's a huge tree trunk here, which is holding the post. And I can see the bark coming off. Now is that is that deer trying to get in there do you think? Paul: No, that that's actually that's just part of the process of actually creating the post. Adam: Ohh, that's just that's just me being an idiot. OK, I thought I was being a clever nature detective *laughs* Paul: I mean what one of the one of the key bits about this fence though, is that that the Woodland Trust is now focusing very heavily on sustainability with everything it does. The, the, the reduction in use of plastic is one of those key bits. But these are sweet chestnut posts, so they there's no chemical preservatives in them or anything like that, and they're kind of the the the main posts at the corners, if you like, of the fence. And then we're using a metal fence with metal posts and and the idea is that when the trees have grown up after 20 years and they're no longer a threat from the deer, we can take this and reuse it elsewhere, so we're constantly thinking about that sustainability stuff all the time. Adam: Right. So we're in this more protected field. Which I can see has been laid out actually. Is this for the planting scheme, little posts and sort of lines of rope? Paul: Yeah. So one of the issues with going plastic free is it becomes very difficult to actually see what you've planted. Because if you look at here it just still looks like a field but actually there's somewhere in the region of well around 2 to 3000 trees already in there. Adam: Oh gosh, I didn't realise that. So yes, with the plastic safe, plastic guards on a tree you see these white telescopes sticking up all over the field, so there's thousands of trees here, we just can't see them. Right and a a lot of that has been planted by volunteers? Paul: We've had somewhere in the region of 400-500 members of the public come over four days, so we've got a a set of volunteers who have who've have have they've been brilliant actually, they've come and they've helped kind of manage all the public and they've helped work with the schools, they've helped us set out where the trees are going, we couldn't have done it without them at all. And here is one of our volunteers now, here's Sally. Adam: Brilliant. Alright, well, let's go over and chat to Sally. So Sally. Sally Burton. Hello. So I've heard lots of lovely things about you. So just tell me you're a volunteer, which in this context means what? Sally: Hello. That's nice. All sorts of things. I've helped this in during February with the public planting days and with the school planting days, helped children dig holes, some of the children are too small to get the spade in the ground very easily. I've planted quite a lot of trees myself. Adam: And why why did you get involved? Sally: I'd been looking for a while to volunteer for an organisation that does things outdoors and something a bit physical and so when the Woodland Trust appeared in the village hall I just went up and said do you need volunteers and they said yes please so I signed up straight away. Adam: And I mean, what does it offer you? Why is it a fun thing to do? Sally: I enjoy working with the other people. The staff are great and the other volunteers have been great fun. In fact, I've reconnected with someone I knew a few years ago and she's been helping up here as well, so that's been great. I like being outside, I love being outdoors. I don't mind about the weather. I like doing physical things and it's it's great to see, to make a difference. Adam: So yeah, so what what sort of difference do you feel you're making then? Sally: Well contributing to turning this basically what looks like an empty field into a forest. That's really amazing. People have been very excited about it. Lots of local people came up and planted on the public open days. Everyone's looking forward to being able to come up here and experience it themselves and enjoy the trees and the views obviously the views across the estuary and out to sea are beautiful. And there are lots of birds already. It's a very beautiful place. Adam: And so how much of your time does it actually take up? Sally: Well, during February and the beginning of March, quite a lot, I've been coming up for days, getting here about 8:15 and going home about 4 o'clock. Adam: Right. So why is that, why is that the the busy period? Sally: Because that's when the tree planting has been going on. Adam: First time you've ever planted a tree? Sally: I've planted a couple on my allotment, but certainly the first time I've planted on such a scale. Adam: Right. Have you kept count, how many trees are you in? Sally: No. Well, on one of the public planting days, I'd finished registering people and I planted 25 I kept count of those and on Wednesday this week, a school was in and when they cleared off, I finished planting the trees in their little area. And I think there was about 30 there. I'm not sure I lost count after about 12. Adam: There should be scouts or sort of brownie badges, shouldn't there, I'm I'm 100 tree-er, you know. Very good. Fantastic. Well, look, thank you very much. I can't believe this is the the the the field in which you've planted. Sally: It is, you can't see many of the trees. Adam: I I can't see any of the trees, what do you mean many of them. Ohh a couple yes. Sally: Across there you can see some with leaves on those are sessile oaks which were planted a little while ago, and they show up. Adam: Any of those yours? Sally: Possibly *laughs* They show up because of the leaves. But over there, most of the area there is planted. Adam: OK, brilliant. You're talking about planting, Rachel has appeared over the hill. She's brandishing a erm Sally: A spade. Adam: A spade *laughs* I forgot the name. You can see how ill equipped I am to do this. I forgot the name of what she's, so I think she's tempting us to go plant so let's go off. Adam: *coughs* Sorry, I'm already having a heart attack from the idea of physical exercise, I haven't done anything yet. OK, so we we have a spade and this is a virgin bit of land, no, no trees planted yet? Sally: No trees in this section yet. Adam: So I get the honour of planting the first tree. Sally: The first one. Adam: So you're gonna talk me through this and I'm gonna. Sally: So the first job... Adam: Oh yes alright, I'm already jumping ahead of myself. Sally: The first job is to screef? To screef the area... Adam: What what is what is screefing? Sally: ...which is where you do this to kick away the grass with your shoe to make a square or an area to get rid of the grass, doesn't have to be too big, not much wider than the blade of the spade, put the spade in there, and then don't lift it yet come round that side and make a square on that side. Yeah, cut it down. Then on that side... Adam: I feel I've hit the... Sally: One of the pebbles. And then the final side and then you could probably lever out a lump of turf. Adam: Then I can lift it out. Sally: OK, here's a tree. And we need to make sure when it's in the hole, the soil covers up to just above the top of the the highest root. So if we test that, that's not deep enough, so need to go deeper. Adam: It's not deep enough. Overall, I'm not doing particularly well I have to say. Sally: Let's have a look. That's looking good there. Adam: You think that's all right? Sally: Yeah, that's OK. So the next job is to crumble the soil. Adam: With our hands? Sally: With our hands, back into the hole, loose bits first. Adam: They didn't say I was actually gonna get my hands dirty. Sally: *laughs* And then if you've got any clods that have got grass on them make sure they go in with the grass facing down. Adam: Ok do you know why? Sally: So that the grass will die and then it won't be in competition with the tree as the grass uses a lot of the water. Adam: It's a bit leaning a bit, isn't it? Sally: It is a bit, let's push some more soil in. Adam: You see, it's fine now, in 20 years time, someone will come and go, who the hell planted that tree, it's at 45 degrees! Sally: Then the last job is you stand up. Adam: Yeah, stand up. Sally: And use your heel to press the soil down to push out all the gaps so that it doesn't dry out if it's sunny. Adam: And how compact, we don't want to make it too compact. Sally: Quite firm, quite firm. Adam: Yeah? Do you know what I don't, I feel that's leaning, that's no good. Sally: Don't worry, it'll straighten itself up. And the final thing is you do the tug test. Where you just get hold of it and just pull it gently. And if it stays where it is, then it's planted properly. Adam: I name this tree, well and truly planted. Sally: Congratulations. Adam: Thank you very much. Very good. That's brilliant. Well, I have to say although me and Sally were planting, Rachel and Paul were looking were looking on. So Paul's still here, how did I do? Paul: Well, let me just check, shall I? Adam: *laughs* You're doing the tug test. Paul: It's it's been really fun actually with with, with the the the public when you come and kind of just check it, you can see them all hold their breath to make sure they're doing it right. Adam: And it comes out *laughs* Is it alright? Paul: No, it's grand. Absolutely brilliant. Dog rose it, it's a little bit crooked, but you know dog rose will naturally straighten itself up. Adam: Will it correct itself? Paul: Yeah and it's kind of you can already see it's a bit of a straggly thing and it'll do its thing and it'll be fine. Adam: Fantastic. What is your sense, really, of of what this might be in the future and how exciting is that for you? Paul: I think in the future, you know, we're we're we're we've got something here that at the very beginning that is gonna be hopefully really important for wildlife and that most of the design is about trying to get as much wildlife here as possible because we're close to the pebblebed heaths it will it will act as a little bit of a refuge in the heat as potentially the climate heats up in the future and that's all really brilliant. And then the other exciting bit is the fact that we've started from the beginning with people involved. That, that, that scenario, but when you look in the future, the you know the the trees that we're planting today are going to be like these big old oak trees in 3-4 hundred years time that when you get your head around it is really quite amazing. And these trees and this wood will be on maps in in the future, and you know, we're creating history, we're changing landscapes and it's all such a a positive thing to be involved in. Adam: That is amazing that in 3-4 hundred years there'll be a woodland here, the history of who planted it, the history of us being here today will be lost. They won't know who planted these trees perhaps, they won't know the story, but the trees will be here. They'll be there, they'll tell their own story in the future. It's an amazing thing to be part of isn't it. Paul: Yeah and you know if if you think about how many times do you get to do something that will still be here in three, four, 500 years time? That's just incredible. Adam: Well, if you want to find a wood near you and don't have any idea of where to look, do go to the Woodland Trust website and its woodlandtrust.org.uk/findawood, so that's woodlandtrust.org.uk/findawood. Until next time, happy wandering. Thank you for listening to the Woodland Trust Woodland Walks with Adam Shaw. Join us next month, when Adam will be taking another walk in the company of Woodland Trust staff, partners and volunteers. Don't forget to subscribe to the series on iTunes or wherever you're listening to us and do give us a review and a rating. And why not send us a recording of your favourite woodland walk to be included in a future podcast? Keep it to a maximum of five minutes and please tell us what makes your woodland walk special or send us an e-mail with details of your favourite walk and what makes it special to you. Send any audio files to podcast@woodlandtrust.org.uk. We look forward to hearing from you.

So Aaron, Anthony, and Kyler cover the Jake Paul Tommy Fury fight directly after the fight to give you their immedite thoughts on the outcome.

This passage in the book of James is often misunderstood and has caused a lot of confusion in Christianity and in the presentation of the Gospel. Paul makes it clear that we're saved by faith apart from works but then James comes along and says, seemingly, the exact opposite! How do we square this circle? This teaching shows that we AREN'T supposed to try to fit James in to Paul or Paul in to James because they're talking about two TOTALLY different aspects of the Christian life.  Follow my ministry with InFaith by going to:https://www.facebook.com/DennisInFaithIf you have any questions or comments that you'd like me to address you can shoot me an email to dennissutherby@infaith.orgAnd if you'd like to support my ministry with InFaith you can text the word "discipleship" to 41444 or head over to https://infaith.org/dennis-sutherby and give there. Articles on understanding the Objector in James 2:14-16"Even the Demons Believe"https://redeeminggod.com/even-the-demons-believe/"Epistolary Diatribe in the Letters of Paul (No, really! It's Interesting. I promise!)"https://redeeminggod.com/epistolary-diatribe-letters-of-paul/Theme Music:Overseas by Vlad Gluschenko | https://soundcloud.com/vgl9Music promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comCreative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en_USSupport the show

O Podcast SUPER LUTAS analisa a derrota de Charles do Bronx no UFC 280 contra Islam Makhachev. O time formado por Miguel Angelo, Igor Ribeiro debatem o caminho para que o brasileiro volte a disputa de cinturão. O time SUPER LUTAS ainda trazem um superaquecimento para a badalado duelo de boxe entre Anderson Silva contra o youtuber Jake Paul.

Allen: All right, passive traders, we have a treat in store for you today. Many of you know about the option continuum, which is basically, you know, our levels of breakdown of where you are as an options trader, you start with level one, you don't know anything. And then you get to level 10, maybe if you want to, which is option professional. And basically a professional means that you are so good at trading options, that you are now trading and managing other people's money and you're getting paid for it. Many of you have reached out to us in the past and said, Hey, I want more information on that. And we haven't really put it out there because I am not doing it myself. Right now, as a professional, I don't I'm not measuring anybody else's money. And so, you know, I'm not the best person to talk to about that. But we keep getting people and be like, hey, you know, I want to learn, I want to learn. So one of our members, Paul Ashcraft, has volunteered to join us today. And I want to thank you, Paul, for coming and helping out. A few a couple of months ago, I think in one of our groups, I think it was a passive group, where I had put in there like, Hey, I'm thinking about starting a hedge fund. So I'm thinking about going professional, right? And he reached out and said, hey, you know, I'm already doing it if you want to, if you want to talk and I can answer your question. So we had an amazing conversation, I learned a lot. And I was like, You know what, this would be really helpful for everybody else. So I asked Paul, hey, could you do it again? And we can record it this time? It was like, Yeah, sure, no foul. And so he's here, Paul, thank you. Thank you for being on thank you for taking the time to do this. Paul: Thank you very much. Pleasure. Allen: And you're Paul is a member of our of a lot of our programs. So passive trading formula, the blank check, and now the credit spread mastery as well. So you know, it's good to see that, hey, if you're a money manager, then you're continuously getting learning and learning new things to help out your students, or your clients, I guess. So. Well, tell me, why did you get into management? What was it that drawed you through that? Paul: Well, I sort of got tricked into it. I had a, I'm a CPA by trade, and I had a client who was becoming an NFL player agent. And he trusted me and wanted me to help him manage his people's NFL players money. So I started the licensing process at that time. And so that sort of tricked me into it. So that sort of fell apart. And then he wasn't getting more leads for what he was doing. So I basically continued since then, so Allen: Okay, so were you already trading on your own? Or before that? Or did you learn as you want to? Paul: Yeah, I've been trading, you know, for quite a while. Off and on. So yeah, I've had some experience of trading. Allen: Okay. So you are comfortable, you could do it? Paul: I knew I needed to learn, I do need to learn some more. But yeah, I feel like I could I knew enough about the world to do that. Allen: Okay. And so you are known as what is a RIA, a registered independent advisor? Paul: Right. That's correct. Allen: So that's one of the ways of managing money. What exactly is an RIA? Paul: It's basically a firm that is licensed by the FINRA basically, and you are licensed to where you can manage other people's money. Allen: And all RIAs, are fiduciaries, right? Paul: That's correct. Yeah.  Allen: Right. Because a lot of people don't know the difference between a fiduciary and a non fiduciary. And so a fiduciary, if you don't know you are legally bound to do what's in the best interest of the client. A lot of these other companies that people think about when they're talking about money management, or Wealth Advisors, retirement advisors, all these words that they use, they have no license, or maybe they do have a license, but they're not a fiduciary. So they're not required to do what's best for the client. And so they can sell you a product that they get the highest commission on, even if it's not really a good thing, a good fit for you. So that's why..  Paul: Yeah one of the ways I deal with that fiduciary criteria is basically whatever I do for other people, I do for myself. Allen: Okay. Okay, interesting. So, what does it take to open an RIA? Paul: Well, if you want to legal structure and need, like, I have an LLC got a creative for that. And I have had to pass a serious 65 test, which you'd like an SEC test, and get to come up some kind of agreement you have with your clients that's approved by FINRA to sign them on as clients. Those are the basics you have to do. Allen: Okay, and like how long did it take you to go through all that? Remember? Paul: I'm gonna say, basically of six to nine months. Allen: Okay, and how long have you been? How long have you been an RIA? Paul: Since 2014, so roughly eight years. Allen: Awesome. Yep. Cool. And for those of you, you know, I'm going to repeat it later on, but Paul's business website is Businessadvisors.Pro. So if you ever or if you need a good adviser, you know, please reach out to Paul. And I'll repeat at the end, and we'll put it in the show notes. I just wanted to get that out there. Paul: And that's mainly my CPA website, just so you know. Allen: Very cool. BusinessAdvisors.Pro, there you go.  Paul: And then sort has been done about creating my Wealth Advisors website, because you're so under scrutiny when you were you advertise things, so I just sort of steered away from that a little bit. Allen: Interesting. Okay. So I guess there's certain things you can say and certain things you cannot say. Paul: Basically, anything you put out there to the public, you have to like, monitor it for five years, and they can question you about it anytime. So I just figured one way to get around that is just not to do it. Allen: Okay. So then that leads me to my next question, like, how do you find clients if you're not advertising? Paul: Well, you know, I have CPA clients, probably like half the clients, I have my Wealth Advisors from CPA side. Other thing is like, from friends, and referrals from other people who use me. Allen: Okay. So it takes time to build all that up?  Paul: Yes, yes. And I'm currently working on more. More advertising. Allen: Okay. All right. So the advertising is possible. It's not it's not like it's restricted. But you have to be careful of what you do and how you do it. Paul: Yes, yes, yeah. Allen: Now, what are your clients looking for? Because, you know, if somebody comes to you and says, Hey, you know, I'm looking to make more money, obviously, but they have so many, so many choices. They can do it themselves, it could go to like, like Fidelity and have them do it. They could go to they're really rich, they can have their own private like, you know, Bank of America, has their own private wealth, people. So when they come to you, what do they tell you? Like? What are they looking for in terms of an advisor? Paul: Well, I mean, I had someone recently come to me, and, you know, we're signing them up, or things that I'd say we, if we look, if we're here a year later, what do you want to what your criteria are saying, I did a good job. And he wanted a 10% return, which has been difficult in this market. But that's, that's one thing. Another thing? I you know, most advisors out there, these basically are, they're buying hold people, I mean, and they bid six things in a bucket, and don't look at it too often. So I, I basically say that I'm actively working in their account, and I'm not sure I'm going to just put it there and not be looking at it. Allen: So obviously, you probably tell them about your options experience and the different types of strategies you use. Paul: Yeah, a lot of times just the casual person warnings on the manager money that, that if I tried to tell them all that it would go way over their head. Because, you know, it took me like two years talking about options to actually start doing it myself, you know, so I'm trying to be a little bit of conscientious about what they can and cannot handle information wise. I'll be glad to talk about it, they want to, but I'm not gonna write too much about it. Allen: And I bet that would that would set you apart, right? You know, it's like, hey, you know, we can do plain vanilla stuff. Or we can do if you're a little bit more aggressive than we can do this, and this and this. And then if it goes over there, that's fine. But as long as they're like, whoa, this guy knows. Paul: Yeah, definitely. That's certainly part because like, my CPA, well, I deal with investment advisors. And like, no one, no one that I know of is actually managing costs. I mean, like, you know, every week or things like that, Allen: yeah, yeah, they just don't I mean, part of it is they have, depending on where they are some of these guys that I know, they have broker dealers, and the broker basically tells them what they can do and what they can't do. And trading is like, No, you're not doing it. They just they can't, they're not allowed. And so, you know, we get we get clients that are financial advisors, they come in, they're like, oh, yeah, I'm a financial advisor, like, oh, they shouldn't, you know, all this stuff. And they're like, oh, I don't do any of this for my son. I don't know, they don't even teach us this stuff. In financial advisors. Cool. So it's like, once I call again, I'm like, Oh, my God. Paul: Yeah, most of them are just like, call themselves people. And it is this, they don't necessarily know that much about investing. It's more about they have relationships with people, and they train their people to be accustomed to five to 7% returns. So so don't want you to do that as that's, you know, not a hallmark. Allen: Yeah, yeah. Like, you know, when I go to if I go to a dinner party, or whatever, and, you know, always comes up. So what do you do? It's like, well, I teach people how to do this. And the first they're like, really, is that, you know, what do you what do you mean? And then we tell them a little bit about it, and they go, Yeah, you know, we try to aim, you know, for 5% a month, and they're like, what a month. Really? Oh, wow, I gotta learn about that. And then, you know, you explain a little bit and then they're, like, bored and then they go talk to somebody else. Because, you know, it's cool. They want, they want it. They just want to do the work. So that's cool. Now as an advisor, how do you How do you charge? Like, what do you charge? How do you do it? Paul: So I have what's called a serious 65 license. So I'm able to charge a percentage of what assets are under management. Okay, so the basic generic, charged with as generally 1% of assets under management. Okay, that if I'm doing more as a some different strategies, things like that, I'm probably going to up the field more because it's, it is active trading. Allen: It takes more time. Yeah, yeah. Because I remember way back when I had a guy at America ice, and he was my advisor. And yeah, he would charge a minimum of 1% on assets every year. Every time you put money, you gave him money, they would take 5% off the top. And then every every mutual fund and every index fund or whatever that they put you in. And most of them were, you know, Ameriprise products. Each of those things would have a separate fee every year. So I mean, I got dealing left and right. I didn't know what I was doing. At the time, I was thinking I am going to you know, I'm smart. I got an advisor. But yeah, he was the one getting rich. And so.. Paul: They made that money, whether they go down or go up it. Allen: Yeah, I mean, they take the money right up front, 5% off the top. As soon as you make a deposit, it's like, man, you haven't done anything. Even if I turn around and ask for the money back, I just love fibers. Do you have like a lot of Is There a lot of overhead for being a advisor? You need a large staff? Paul: Right now, it's just me. And so I'm already have all my setup for my CPA business. So there's not really that much more to do.  Allen: And you can run it from the same location. Yes, yes. Okay. So then who does the like the backend stuff, you know, statements, and compliance audits, all that stuff. Paul: So we use Interactive Brokers as the broker dealer. So they basically, so all my clients have their own account set up with them, and it sort of goes underneath my master account. So so they take care about the then get a statement from there anytime they want to find out what their balances. And if they need to take up money, they can contact them and get the money taken out. So they saw him. So we're doing a lot of the back office stuff. Allen: Awesome. So you really don't have to do anything. And they they opened the account themselves, the client opens the account themselves, they deposit the money themselves, they can take it out whenever they want, they can go and log in, see all the trades, see whatever is there. So you really don't have a lot of customer service issues. And so you don't have to send send out statements, because Interactive Brokers will do that. Right. Paul: And one of my strategies is if someone is, I call it high maintenance, then I probably can't handle that, you know, they probably need to find someone else because, you know, I got enough things to do is it is. Allen: Awesome, cool. And then. So you don't handle any of the money either. Because they just go straight to interactive. So you're like a hands off, okay, I'll do the trades, but I'm not touching your money. So you don't have to worry about me taking your money and running away and flying to Bermuda or something.  Paul: Yeah, just like the Bernie Madoff deal where he was. He they call it having custody of the funds, and he had custody. And so they, they talked about that when you're going through your testing and things like that, about having custody and not having custody and things like that. So yeah, it's a big red flag. Allen: Yeah. Because I mean, like, I've been looking into starting my own hedge fund, you know, using the the passive trading strategies and such. And I looked at RIA first and then I looked at, you know, hedge fund as another way, and I think from what I've been able to find so far is that if you start a hedge fund, and you don't charge any management fees, you don't need the license, you can set it up in a way where you know, you get you only take a percentage of the profit. So if there's a gain, you can get a percent, but you don't get that yearly management fee. If you want the yearly management fee, then you do have to separate a separate Ria, to do the management of the fund. Okay, I didn't know that. Yeah, so I thought that was pretty cool. So we've been looking at that as well, different things. So now, what percentage of your management is active? versus, you know, index funds, mutual funds, etc? Paul: I'd say about half. Allen: Okay, and all of the clients are okay with that, or do you do client by client? Paul: I pretty much put everybody under the same model. Yeah. So Allen: And so with interactive, how does that work, you have to go into each account to put a trade on or you just put one trade on and it just trickles.. Paul: There's a master account and I can set up different  classification. So I could I could buy 1000 shares of IBM and have it spread it putting all the accounts did that.  So they have to watch out for is some of the accounts can trade certain things, some can't, like RIAs cannot do you know, futures and naked options and things like that as far as, at least on the credit side. Allen: Okay. All right. So can does that get confusing? If you want if you want like, Okay, I want like a say IBM, I want my IBM stock to be 5% of all of my everybody's portfolio. Paul: Yeah, that would be a different the different equation. So basically, like I did a trade today where I figured, you know, want to take a $10,000 risk. So divided by what that option was going for. And I bought that many contracts to take on that kind of risk. So not necessarily rebalancing everyone is usually trade by trade. So putting on a certain set of circumstances, set a step stop loss and things like that. Allen: Okay, cool. So you can do it as easy or as simple as you want. Or you can make it as complicated as you want. Yeah, up to you. Yeah. Nice. So what types of what types of trades do you do? Paul: Well, some of what you teach. So I do some swing trading. And of course, you know, credit spreads and things like that. And some, you know, some some of the dividend paying stocks and covered calls and things like that. Allen: And do you do any any oil futures options? Paul: Well, I'm not. I'm just at the point to get licensed for that. Allen: It's a separate license? Paul: That's as a separate license. Yes. So you have to you have to get licensed through the, Chicago Board of Trade, the NFA and National Futures Association. Allen: Okay. Okay. And then will you be able to do it the same as everything else through Interactive Brokers? Paul: Yes, I think so. Sometimes you don't know to actually do it. So I think it's pretty similar. Allen: Sweet. Okay. Now, as a as an RIA, do you also advise your clients on other alternative investments, you know, real estate, crypto anything else? Or is it just stocks, bonds, options? Paul: I'm always getting to ask questions, you know, because I'm in, you know, really, I'm gonna CPA world or the IRA world, I'm getting asked questions. So I will advise on that if I think I have a good opinion. You know, I'm not roll up on that rolled up on crypto Allen: Right, right. Are you still bound by the same fiduciary type rules on that or?  Paul: You could come under some scrutiny. You know, you'd like an offsetting handed comment, and then someone does something crazy. And so you got to be a little careful. Allen: Yeah. All right. And okay, so him now with the interactive account, or the broker dealer, is the software any different? Like, versus if you open a regular account by yourself? Is there anything you have to learn a new platform? Or is it basically the same thing?  Paul: It's pretty much the same platform, you just have to understand how to do the trading, like I was telling you about, like, allocating between all the accounts, but the platform itself is basically the same. Okay. Cool. Yeah. Allen: What do you see as the future of money management, because like, you know, they got these robo advisors now, and they got like Robin Hood, trying to get everybody to trade on their own. And so what do you see down the pike? You know, do you see like, your clients are like, yeah, rather just have you do it? Or are robots or whatever? Paul: Yeah, I can see, you know, some of the robot picking up. But on average, most people out there don't know, hardly anything about the investing world. My average client, so I think it's going to be still a good field you know, way up currently doing it. Allen: Okay, and who is like your average client? Paul: They're probably like 50 years old, that did 60. And probably, you know, got assets anywhere from, you know, 50 to 50,000 to over a million dollars, you know? Allen: And do you have any limits on who can invest with you? And how much? Paul: No, I mean, like, I'm not, I'm just gonna take on any account right now. It would need to be over a certain dollar amount for me to I just always have to keep that in mind about, you know, do I want to take on a five or $10,000 account? Because it's gonna be extra work. Taking that versus the capital issue at-- You don't have to be you don't have to comply with the day trading rules. You know, because because if you if you accidentally in and out three, three trades in a week, then your account gets shut down. You know, so you have to deal with that. So yeah, so I'm trying to gradually move up from like a minimum of 25,000 to 50,000, 200,000. Allen: Okay. And then you also have a certain criteria like a certain person that you want right? Certain somebody they can handle the options and that Intertek can handle that because I mean, it does swing a little bit. So if they have a 5,000 to $10,000 account, they freak out if they lose $1,000, obviously, that's not the right person for you anyway. Paul: Right. But on that same note, I had a client the other day that, you know, they have, you know, an excess a half million dollars with me. And they want to know how they could put in more money since this market was down so they could capture, capture that now mark? I love that kind of client. expecting them to call you and tell you, why is my account down? Actually, that question is dead. They're saying, How can we put more money in?  Allen: Yeah, that's a smart, that's a Smart Client. So that's, that's got to be your email, you know, going out, like, Hey, he's trying to give me more now. double down on your investments. Okay. Now, How has being a money manager improved your own trading? Or hasn't? Paul: Well, I mean, it's made me to seek out new avenues of investing. You know, because I'm looking out for my clients. By the same token, when I do that, I find things that I can use to, you know, like, I don't know, if I would have found the old future options without that, you know, seeking out new new investment strategies, you know, so I could do a better job for my clients. Allen: Okay. Now, we've had a lot of volatility lately. And you've, you've alluded to it already. When stocks down about 20% or so right now, how do you deal with the investor concerns or expectations? Paul: I'm continually learning that. The more, the more proactive you can be with that, I find that it's better. Like, if you have a bad day or a bad trade that, you know, that affects it so much, and then maybe call and talk to them about it versus waiting for them to call you later, and they get their quarterly statements. And they call you know? Allen: Right. So do you find that a large portion of your job is just talking to people and just calming them down? Or explaining certain things to them? Or educating them? Paul: In the beginning? Yes. If someone's with you for a while, and they haven't gotten, understood your ways, and why you do what you do. And it would be generally in the first year of a client relationship, you indeed do that more, but there is sort of they get to know you, you you get to know them and sort of like a training curve there. Allen: And now, most of your clients, are they either they know you or they were referred to you. Right. So there's always there's already that trust built in from the beginning. Most of them yes, yeah. So if you, you know, advertising, somebody comes in cold, they're like, oh, yeah, I like what you're doing here. You know, here's $100,000, there's gonna be a lot more back. Paul: Yeah. Allen: Okay. So how are you handling? How are you handling the volatility? Like when somebody calls up and says, Oh, my count is down. How do you? What do you do there? Paul: Well, number one, what I did when I saw when I saw the market starting to tank, I basically, was going more into cash. So like, I the client won't know why we aren't investing. I said, Well, I'm waiting for the market to give me indication has, it's found the bottom or, you know, it is headed back up. So I don't want to, I'm not a bottom picker. But I don't want to like, write it further down. You know. So that's one way of dealing with it. And they seem to appreciate that quite a bit and understand that. So I don't think that's something you get out of a typical advisor. Allen: So yeah, but what if somebody calls you and says, Oh, my God, you know, I'm down 10%? What am I going to do? I can't handle this. How do you handle that? Have you ever had that happen? Paul: Yeah. I tried to change up their strategies a little bit to get them a little more solid, or maybe not trade as much in their account. Just being a little more cautious. Allen: Okay, so Okay, so you can actually choose, like, let's say, we talked about that IBM thing. So if you're like, Hey, I'm buying IBM, you could choose and say, okay, don't put it in this account in this account, just because in all these other ones,. Yeah. All right. So you can actually tailor it because like, if somebody goes, Yeah, I just want to be long stocks, or I just want tech stocks. And I just want you know, credit spreads. So they you can, you can do that. Yeah, okay. Yep. So, do you have any shortcuts that you can share? You know, for somebody that's thinking, hey, you know, this sounds like cool, I'm gonna I'm gonna get into this. RIA business, anything that you probably didn't know, ahead of time that you would have liked to have known? Paul: This is sort of like a unknown territory. Because, I mean, when I was doing it, I couldn't get anybody to actually figure it out what like a serious 65 license would do. And I was sort of going into blindly a little bit. So I mean, I think the number one thing is maybe you know, then contact me. Shortcuts is, you know, I don't know like I had to find a place to take the take the course for that. And then I hired a guy to tutor me some. And, you know, there's, there's these firms out there wanting you to sign up with them for them to do oh, you know, like your paperwork and so forth. And I just sort of like fumbled my way through it and plagiarized another agreement online affected us. And so another thing is to know if you're in this world, you will get audited. Personally. Well, the your investment firm, right, yeah. Yeah. Like I'm in the CPA world, and I probably will never get out a different CPA world. But the investment side, I will get audited probably time and time again. So far, it's only been once one step Florida, but yeah, Allen: okay. Yeah. I mean, that's a good thing. I guess, you know, that, that the advisors and like you said, you know, the Bernie Madoff, he keeps him at bay as much as he can a little bit. So some of that, I guess, from a consumer standpoint, and that's a good thing to hear. Paul: Yeah, but a lot of a lot of us, they don't necessarily understand the world as much as you do. And it's more like them checking a box somewhere in a city. They ask this question, or I did that, but they don't really find that don't really necessarily know exactly what they're doing, you know, Allen: Yeah. So but do you mean tax audited or audited by like the audit by Paul: the state by the financial regulatory people for the state you're in Allen: The state regulatory? Okay, so every state has their own regulatory stuff that you have so far. Paul: Yeah. So just just sort of background here. Usually, as you're managing under $100 million, you're managed by the state. But then once you hit $100 million in the SEC is basically is going to your watchdog, it's gonna look over your shoulder. Allen: Okay. All right. Cool. And you're in Florida, right? Correct. But you can take clients from anywhere? Paul: I can. But different states have different rules, most of them allow you to take five to 15 clients, and not really be registered with them. But then once you hit over that threshold, they want you to fully registered with them. But there are a few states that require you if you get one client, they want you to be registered. And Louisiana was one of those states. Allen: So I guess, depending on how much capital the guy is gonna give you whether it's worth it to register there.. Paul: Exactly, exactly, yeah. Okay. All right. Allen: So would you knowing what you know, now, are you happy that you went this route? Paul: Ask me again, in a few years. Allen: Well, you've been doing already for like, eight years. So kind of got some kind of track record here. Paul: Yeah, it's been, you know, it's been definitely a learning curve, you know, from the regulatory side. And then from the investment side, too, so? Yes, I'm glad I did it. But it' had its rough moments. Allen: Well, give me an example. Paul: Well if you if you lose on a trade, you know, it can affect your account and other people's account. So that's probably the biggest things that has happened to me, you know? And then you got to figure out how am I gonna tell this person this?  Allen: Yeah. So how did you how did you deal with that? Paul: I prayed a lot. Basically, if I knew the fact that someone so much, I would, I call them and talk to him about it. But in a certain situation, like, because it was spread over so many accounts, it didn't really affect anyone that much. It wasn't that big of a deal. Like, you know, if I'm managing $5 million of money, and I lose 20,000, you know, the most Someone's probably gonna lose is maybe 2 or 3000. So the overall number is a big number. But you know, we spread between all the counts, it's not that big of a number. Allen: Interesting. Okay. Yeah, I mean, that's that thing, right? There is like, the biggest thing that's kept me out of it for all these years, you know, people have been asking me from the beginning, okay, can you take my money? I'm like, nope, nope, because I don't know how I'm gonna handle the stress. I don't know if, um, we will sleep, I can lose my own money, you know, market down 20% Okay, whatever, it'll go back up, I got time, you know, but somebody else if I lose your money, and I don't know, I don't know how I'm gonna handle it. And so that's the one thing that that's really caused me to be hesitant up till now. And I agree what you said about not having that much information out there. You know, I mean, there are companies out there that will like if you want to be in RIA you type in how to be an RIA and there's a company that hey, you if you give us like 30 grand, you know, we'll do all the paperwork and we'll file everything for you. So you Okay, but what do I actually get? You know, they're like well you do the paperwork. Well what about after that? How do I get clients how do I do this how to do that they will help you at all and these two guys they had approached, they had talked that a because I'm you know Option Genius is in what's called the financial publishing space that world, so we have our own little conventions and all the Guru's come and hang out and talk marketing and stuff. And so there was there was these two guys who were speakers, and they were telling all of the financial publishers that hey, you guys need to get into the into the management business, because you guys already have all these clients? They already trust you? You know, and they probably have a lot of money because people coming to me, you know, they say, Hey, I want to learn how to trade options. Okay, cool, you know, and how large is your account? They're like, Oh, 50,000. Okay, cool. And they trading options with 50,000. But they also have like, maybe a million dollar IRA, that they're not touching, or their wife has $500,000 that is with some other financial advisor that she doesn't want her husband to touch with options. So it's like, yeah, everybody that comes in has a lot more money. So if you started an IRA or an advisor, then you know, they'll give you that money as well. And you can make all this money. And I was like, Okay, that's interesting. But, you know, what are the legalities and all that and they wanted, I don't know, obtain $1,000 plus a percentage of the company to actually teach me all this stuff. And I'm finding a there's a lot of secrecy, as you can say, you know, and Wall Street, I think puts it like that on purpose. Because they don't want everybody to know what they're doing and what they that they don't know what they're doing. Pretty much. So cool. Paul: I don't know, that's intentional, but it just got I think there's so few people who are looking to do it. And like, it's not a widespread throughout the population thing. So you don't find as much about it, you know. Allen: Maybe okay, yeah, I'll take that. Yeah. Because like, you know, even like, what is the difference between an RIA and a hedge fund? You know, I've been beating my head, like, which one? Which way? Do we go? Which way? Do we go? If we go this way? Or this? Or what are the pros? What are the cons, and there's like, no one person that can that can tell me, if you want to go to a hedge fund, they got a little hedge fund world, and, you know, you got to you got to pay the dues to get in. If you want the RA world, then it's more common, but it's, it's for the guys, you know, for people who are like, Yeah, you know, I just want to put everybody's money in an index fund, you know, so it's like, what you're doing is totally different, like, I have not met any advisors that are actually, you know, trading that actively for people. So I mean, compared to the other guy, Joe Schmo that charges 1% a year, or 2% a year, just to put their money in an index fund compared to what you're doing, you know, your value is just so much more. But it does seem like it's very similar to a hedge fund where, you know, a hedge fund is a little bit different, where all the money is pooled into one spot. And then, you know, the, the trader controls it, you're doing kind of similar, where you can look at it and be like, Okay, I got, you know, $10 million under management, how am I going to split that up into different trades? And it just happens to be in different people's accounts? So have you ever thought about increasing your rates because like a hedge fund, they can charge a percentage of the gains? An RIA can't? Can they do that? Paul: They can do that on their certains particulars criteria? I think like you have to have an investor who's has at least $2 million in investable assets. They have at least $1 million invested with you. And then you can have certain arrangements where you say, Well, if I make whatever percentage I'll make about what the s&p does, you'll split it with me, or something like that, you know? Okay, so again, it's very, it's has a lot of criteria to it can't be done, though. Okay. Yeah. Because I wouldn't say the hedge fund world is based on what you're telling me is, cuz you're basically commingling all the funds. Right? So you got to do like a statement for each person or something. Yeah. And so I think the advantage is, you can just commingle it all and then do whatever you need to do. And then at the end of the day, you somehow allocated? Allen: Right, so the thing with the hedge fund is that all the investors have to be accredited. Okay, so accredited, as you know, probably, you know, you basically you have a million dollar net worth not putting your house, or you're making upwards of 300,000 a year. So, you know, basically, so at least Paul: They have to tell you, they're accredited. Right? Allen: I think we would actually want them to be proof, you know, give me proof otherwise, we're not letting you in. Paul: That was actually in so my testing I just did is like, yeah, you want this criteria? But are you actually gonna go go check it? No. So Allen: Interesting. Okay. Because I mean, you know, the government says that the hedge funds, you know, if you're an accredited investor, you should be smarter than the average bear. And so, if you lose money, it's not that big a deal. Like you are smart enough to get into it. You know, somebody with $5,000 or $10,000. That's my life savings. No, sorry, you can't invest in this. Even though the hedge fund might be like doing 1,000,000% a year, you can't invest because you're not accredited. Ras can take basically everybody, so that was one of the things okay, somebody comes in with 50,000 as an RIA, you might just take it because it's not that much paperwork. It's not extra for you. But for a hedge fund. Yeah, no, I can't do it. Because I gotta, I gotta pay the auditing company. I gotta pay the statement company. I got to pay the customer. You know, whoever's doing customer service and answering the phone and doing all that, and salespeople and all that. So 50,000 is not going to cut it, you know, the limit is a lot higher. For sure. Okay. Yeah. So yeah, that, in that sense, totally different world. But very similar from what I'm seeing is that, you know, you're doing probably what we're gonna be doing, you know, similar. Paul: So you probably can't take qualified money like IRAs and things like that. Allen: I think they can. Yeah, yeah, I think they can, as long as a person is accredited. And so there's different regulations, 5063 C, or six, C, five, or six D, they'll those tell you, you know, if you can take accredited and non accredited, and then can you advertise or not, I'm still learning all this, it's all different, because like, if you start a Real Estate Fund, different from if you're doing a hedge fund, versus a private equity fund, so some of the rules apply to everything. Some of the rules are just separate. So I'm still learning all that. But I know that the Interactive Brokers, people, they've done webinars in the past with attorneys. So if anybody wants to start a hedge fund, you can still use the Interactive Brokers platform. And they have they actually have a separate portal, I think, for hedge funds. Yeah, I've seen that. You've seen that too? Where you can actually see what other people are doing. And what are the trades that they're making? Paul: I didn't know about that. I just knew that they had some kind of hedge fund portion of what they're doing. I didn't know exactly what it meant. Allen: Yeah. So So what they said was that, you know, the attorney was like, you know, it'll take several, you know, maybe $30,000, to set up your hedge fund, you can probably do it with a smaller amount, if you want to start an incubator fund, which is like, you know, if you have your own money, and you put in and say $300,000, and you trade it as if it's a fund, and you don't maybe that that paperwork might be like 7000, and you set that up, you treat it as a fun, you build up your track record, and be like, Oh, hey, look, you know, I was trading for six months, I got this, that or not, and then you can start advertising it, and you convert it to a full fund. And then you can say, well, look at my track record, this is what I did. And then people can come in for the full fund. So that was one of the things that they were they were talking about. But so yeah, we were we were looking at an interactive, but the one thing that interacted with their software is a little bit more clunky or less user friendly than some of the most user friendly software. Yeah, it was my personal accounts. Now. So when, do you still trade on on your own on the side? Or is all of your money in the big? Paul: I have some money still in the in the huge fund? And then, you know, I have some I have an account on the side, right? Allen: So that separate account, did that change it all after you got licensed? Because they always, you know, when you open an account, they always ask you, are you licensed? And then they're I don't know why they do that. Is there to change anything on? You're not gonna recall? Paul: Yeah. So, there's, there's occasions where you can link up an account with the master fund, and you can D link the account. So I think at one time I had, it's actually my 401k account for my accounting firm attached to the IRA account, but then I detached it. One of the main reasons was for futures. Okay, because I knew I wasn't qualified to do futures for the whole fun. But I could on a mountain account. Allen: Ah, okay. So you have to keep it separate to do the futures options. Yeah. Until you get licensed by them. And is that like a lengthy process as well? The futures options? License? Yeah. Paul: I took a series three exam back a month or so ago. So I'd studied for two or three months, and again, got a tutor. Yeah. Okay. Allen: All right. How many clients do you have right now? Paul: I'd say about 20-25. Allen: Okay. All right. Cool. And so, from a financial standpoint, has it been worth it? Paul: Yeah, it's been really good. I might, my intention when I know that, you know, once I got into it, my intention was over the years, you know, retirement age, is at my incomes shift for my CPA business or to my investment business. So I could do that, say two hours a day and retirement versus, you know, doing tax seasons and all that. CPA visits. Allen: Okay. Is that still the plan? Yes. Still plan. Awesome. Cool. So yeah, I mean, handling managing millions of dollars of assets in two hours a day. That sounds pretty good to me. Paul: That might be a pipe dream. But that's what I had in mind.  Allen: I think you could do it your own way. You're on your way. Cool. Awesome. So is there anything that I haven't asked you that you think like, oh, yeah, people need to know this. Paul: I could probably sit here and think about a few things. Not on every call. No, no, no, no. I mean, one thing you have to like for instance, a you have to have a like an email account that you Gotta add to retain all your emails for at least like five years. That's one thing to keep in mind. And like I have to send a like a balance sheet and income statement to the state of Florida every year and get someone to notarize it. You have to upload information to the FINRA site at least once a year. And that's where you pay your like on license Louisiana along Florida and things like that. So I pay my fees for those licensing booth vendors website. Allen: And that you had told me that the fee that you charge for management that comes out Interactive Brokers basically pays you every quarter, your fixed asset if I had to build it, right, yeah. Paul: Okay. So, so they do it automatically. But when I got audited, the state wanted me to actually create invoices. So the answer your question is, I'm not sure what the real requirement is. So far, I guess I met that criteria then. So I'm not actually grading him. What's the reporter right now? Okay. Allen: Yeah, I mean, because like, I mentioned, those two consultants that I had talked to, they had told me that I would have to bill everybody invoice, everybody, every quarter. And those people would have to pay me directly. So it wouldn't be taken out of their account, it would be sent directly to me that they would have to write a check every quarter. And I'm like, that's a pain in the butt. You know, that's pretty cumbersome. Yeah, if a customer has to pay, you know, a big check every quarter for management fees. And then especially if you have a down year, he's like, What am I paying for it? I don't pay for this anymore. And you don't get paid. So I was like, Okay, that's a big red flag. But I'm glad that that's not true. Cool. Okay. Paul: One thing I have figured out there is, like, there's an account I was going to take from someone from one advisors to me, and they had all their fees, like totally hidden with all these mutual funds and things like that. And so like, you know, that account, I was gonna charge 3.3%. But we weren't able to ever get to the bottom of what the other advisor was charging. So, even though they have a lot of disclosures and things like that, I think we could have pressed the issue if we really wanted to. But, um, but you know, I ended up losing that account. Allen: So did that customer realize that, that he's being charged all these things? Paul: No, no, no clue. No, I mean, whenever I sort of parted ways, and I said, you guys at least need to figure out what they're charging you. You'd be surprised at the amount of inept that's out there and people who are actually hiring advisors, like, yeah, most people do not keep like their annual statements. They couldn't tell me how much they made last year. You know, because really, when I'm taking on an account, I want to know, what their track record has been sort of what I would need to beat to make them happy. You know, a lot of them are not that attuned to that. Allen: That's crazy. Yeah. I mean, people, they work their entire lives to save up money and invest it so they can retire. But then they don't pay any attention to the money. Oh, boy.. Paul: I think it's because they don't know that much about it. So they wouldn't know what to do if it was not what they wanted, you know? Allen: Yeah. I mean, you gotta you gotta take a little bit of time to at least read the statements and figure out where's the money going? And it could be better disclosed, you know, the statements could be easier to read that that's definitely sure. That's, yeah. But it is what it is for now. Paul: Like, I have this account right now, I'm probably going pick up another six to nine or 1000. And I asked them to get their annual statements ready. Because I wanted to see what they have been. have been doing, you know, so, you know, so they didn't know if there'll be they'll find those. So let me guess. It's like, it's weird. Allen: Okay, they just like asked her her advisor. Paul: Oh, that might be red flag fight flight to them. And they are looking so yeah. Wow. Okay. All right. seem bizarre. Allen: So if somebody was thinking about starting their own advisory firm, what would you say? They would need in terms of like, what are the minimums, okay, you should have been in the market for, you know, five years, you know, or you got to know XYZ, is there anything that you would say that, you know, if you don't, if you can't even do this, and this is not for you? Paul: Well, they're planning on doing what I'm doing, they probably need at least three to five years, you know, their own market experience. But, you know, that being said, like, I just met with someone the other day, and I could put all my funds through their strategies, and just sit and coast. You know, really, they charge an extra 1% or whatever, so I'll back off of my fee a little bit. You know, so you can you can play the game different ways. Wow. So you could do like I can see a new person and starting that and just have these other you know, because they have what's called sub managers or something like that. I don't know the exact term. Basically, you're hiring other money managers to manage the money you have for your clients. Right, like sub advisors, maybe is what it's called. Okay. So I'm not saying it will totally preclude them that they didn't have three to five years. But, you know, hopefully they're drawing on someone's experience to help hold their handle that Allen: Right. And do you know how much it costs to get it up and running? Paul: I would say three to five grand. Wow, that's not much. I mean, the hardware, these firms are brought in to charge you five times that? Allen: Yeah. Okay. So well, the sub accounts. Yeah, actually, I do remember those consultants talking to me about that. Paul: They they call it sub advisors? Allen: Yeah, I think that's what it is. And it's like, yeah, you know, if you don't want to do it yourself, you can put your money, you can put your your clients money into different buckets, and then they just do it for you, and they charge and then you split the fees or whatever, or something like that. So, and then each broker, each broker dealer has different ones. So like Fidelity or Schwab will have different sub accounts versus what you could put your stuff in. But interesting, I just Just curious the ones that you had talked to what what strategies were they were using, Paul: They're using free cash flow to is their criteria for who they're investing in. So they have like international, they call a cash cow c-o-w. So they've international domestic, and things like that. So they have a different definition of free cash flow. So they're they're fearing that's the best value, their way of determining value out there, like sort of like a value fund, but their own definition of what value is. Allen: Okay, so they're investing in stocks. Paul: Yes, international and domestic.   Allen: And they handle the ins and outs. And so you could put a portion of your client's money in there, you put it all in there. So it's like, it's like an ETF. So basically, you can say I want 20% of my money to go on this domestic one 20% International. And I might, I'm in talks with them. So I might end up doing some more money that way. But so they're coming up with different sample portfolios that I can use their funds for. Allen: Okay, interesting. And so that must be a much larger company. Paul: Yeah, I'm not sure how big they are. But they're, you know, big enough to where they had like a representative here in central Florida and some of their back office helping them out. Awesome. I'm not sure their size yet. Allen: Yeah. So I mean, this rabbit hole is pretty big. You can dive in there and spend a lot of time figuring all this stuff out. Paul: Yeah, yeah. So I can see a way I could sit and close more. But you're only doing it two hours a day anyway. Allen: Cool. All right. Paul: Well, maybe we're gonna get into my retirement years, a certain amount of years. I'll just put it there and just coast. The zero hours a day. Yep. Allen: Yeah, my, my neighbor in the office next door, he's a financial adviser. He's been doing it for, I think, 25 years now. So he's built up, you know, a sizable clientele. And so now he's at the point where he wants to retire. But he doesn't know what to do with the firm. He's like, you know, he makes probably a good 500,000 a year income from it. And he's like, I want one of my kids to take over. But the kids are not really willing, and not interested. He's like, I don't know what to do. So he's still there.  So there's been periods of times or, you know, like, I sit on the CPA world deal with other investment advisors, where it's been a quite a lucrative market to get bought your practice bought out by bigger, let's say Merrill Lynch or something like that, you know, they pay some pretty big bucks to buy those books of business. Yeah, yeah. Because I mean, one of the things that the consultants told me is that once you get you get a client, that turnover, meaning the fact that they're going to leave you is not very high, they're gonna stay with you for years and years. So you can count on that money coming in, you know, that fee money coming in for a long period of time, unless you unless you totally screw it up, and then they're gonna leave. Paul: If you play the play smart. You know, if you're dealing with someone 50 years old, right now, you know, another 10 or 20 years, you're gonna pick up their kids and things like that when they need investment advice and stuff. It's, it'd be a self perpetuating thing. Allen: Yeah, yeah. And I do like the fact that there's always going to be somebody there willing to buy you, your company. You know, because a lot of times in smaller companies if you're the only person or if you got one or two employees, nobody really wants to buy the company even if it's successful. Nobody wants to buy it because they would without you there they're basically buying a job for themselves, right? It's not running on its own you're the one doing all the work in this case. Yeah, you're the one doing all the work but they don't need you. They can just, you know, have their own advisors take over. So you still get a pretty decent multiple when you sell so that's really cool too. Right? Paul: Also, I met a.. in my travels on this world. I've met the company and actually finance you if you want to buy on someone else's practice in the financial visor word world. Allen: Hmm.. So have you looked into that? Paul: I had a conversation or two with them, but I haven't really pursued it further. Yeah. Because I didn't know if I wanted to buy a larger practice. Right? Yeah. Because generally, that is a seven year payout to do that. So, you know, seven years, you'd be free and clear. Allen: That'll be interesting. Yeah. So a lot of ways to skin this cat. So you would I mean, I'm assuming that if anybody asked you, Hey, should I do this? Probably the answer is yes. Paul: Yeah, I mean, just mean, talk to people who have done it, and sort of figure out if it's a good fit for you, you know? Yeah. It's definitely can be pretty lucrative. Allen: Right? And I like the fact that it's like, for you at least it's more localized, you know, so you're not competing with somebody in California or Canada, or whatever. It's like, yeah, you guys get your clients over there. I'll have my clients over here. You know, they love me, they trust me. We hang out maybe. And sometimes. So it's not like a competitive situation. So, right. Awesome. Are you in any? Are there any, like, associations or memberships for advisors?  Paul: No, I'm not. Allen: No, but obviously, they probably have them? Paul: Yeah, I'm just not familiar. Very familiar with that. I have another advisor to hang out with suddenly sort of share some ideas. That's, that's all I have right now. Allen: And they're also private. Like on their own? Paul: Now, one of the reasons I didn't cover this in the beginning, like when I started looking into this whole thing, I didn't want to get clients and then share my fees with other people. That's why I didn't latch on to a bigger firm and start building my clients from there. So that's why I started my own Ra. So they will be my clients. And I get all the fees for them. And no one else had had rights to him. So that's, that's one of the reasons I did the way I did it. Allen: Okay. Okay. So what would be the benefits of going with a larger firm just to name recognition? Paul: Well, they have, one of the biggest things is called compliance. So like, right now, I'm my own compliance officer for my firm, okay, and larger firm like that they have whole departments that take care of compliance, for you to make sure you don't get in trouble, the regulators and so forth. So, like this other advisor, I had, he joined another firm, just so you could have that compliance piece to it. But in his firm, he can't trade options. Right? Allen: Because they're very limited. Yeah, exactly.  Paul: It's taught me to join his is up, like can't trade options. Allen: Because compliance says no. Paul: It was on the client's officer. Allen: Right. So that's why when you said you were thinking about advertising, it's the risk is on you because you're the compliance officer. So you got to know exactly what can be done and what can't be done. Right. Right. Interesting, cool. Is there anything else because  I'm out of questions. Paul: One of the things, one of the things I tell you, I looked into going with other companies, other inactive brokers when I started, okay, and like Charles Schwab wanted you to have $7 million you're managing before you could go with them. Allen: Whoa, okay. And they're the biggest right right now, I think. Paul: I think so. Yeah. Yeah. So that's one reasons with Interactive Brokers, because they didn't have the minimums like that. I didn't really check too much rather than other people. Allen: So and how's your customer service at Interactive Brokers, because they for personal accounts, they don't have a good reputation. Paul: Yeah, they have a separate line, you can call as a professional advisor. So it's, I get pretty quick attention. Usually, you know, it's not it's not perfect, but you know, it's decent. Yeah, but you're happy. Yeah, I'm not saying that. I'm sure other companies have better customer service but you know, for right now, they, you know, I might need to call him a few times, but I get what I needed if I need need to.. Allen: And how are their margins and Commissions? Paul: Commission's are pretty low. I don't have the exact numbers I just know less than like $1 per 100 shares. Allen: And who comes out of the customers account? Obviously. Paul: Each person like when you do a trade display something all the counselee they pick up their own fees. Allen: Cool. All right. Well, thank you Paul. You know, Paul's website is again BusinessAdvisors.Pro. Paul said that he could reach out you know, you guys can reach out to him if you have any questions. And Paul is also in our other memberships are other programs as well past trading formula blank check and credit spread. So if you guys are members of those, you can reach out to him there. You'll find him in the group. And he's been very gracious with his time. So I do want to thank you and And he's very active in the group and you know you've been helping a lot of newer people as well they're so appreciate you there. Interesting place, interesting world and as I dive in I'm probably going to reach out to you more. Paul: Sounds great, I appreciate it.  Allen: Thank you thank you so much and we'll talk to you soon JOIN OUR FREE PRIVATE FACEBOOK GROUP: https://optiongenius.com/alliance  Like our show? Please leave us a review here - even one sentence helps. Thank you!

Question: Did you think about asking George to be in the film? Paul: No. But because Ringo's in it and I'm in it, it implies that maybe George ought to have been in it, too. The truth is, he's not a ham. I don't think he's got any ambitions in front of the camera. He was the least keen to be acting in A Hard Day's Night and Help. Before The Complete Beatles, we were going to put our own version together. The definitive story of the Beatles, and George was the least keen to even be involved. He's more interested in being behind the camera. And he happened to be out of the country anyway.

The Close Shave - (B&B Investigations, #3) The latest case involves one of Donna's old classmates - wed to a mysterious stranger, left destitute... now her life is in danger! Written and produced by Julie Hoverson  Cast List Paul Bette  - Joel Harvey Donna Bella  - Julie Hoverson Goldy Tailor  - Crystal Thomson Captain OftheGuard - Reynaud LeBoeuf Rumplestiltskin  - Philomen Vanderbeck Mrs. Edwina Beard - Rhys TM Mr. Beard - Benjamin Lind Mr. Rexmusson - H. Keith Lyons Mulva - Katharine D. Clark Frederick - Cary Ayers Thug - Danar Hoverson Music by  Somewhere off Jazz Street Editing and Sound:   Julie Hoverson Cover Design:  Brett Coulstock "What kind of a place is it? Why it's 1940s detective agency... with a twist, can't you tell?" *********************************************** The Close Shave Cast: [Opening credits - Olivia] Paul Bette Donna Bella Goldy Tailor Captain OftheGuard Mrs. Edwina Beard Mr. Beard Mr. Rexmusson, Edwina's father Rumplestiltskin thug Frederick, the butler Mulva, the new wife OLIVIA     Did you have any trouble finding it?  What do you mean, what kind of a place is it?  Why, it's the office of a private eye, can't you tell?  MUSIC SOUND     DOOR OPENS GOLDY    B&B Investigations, how may I --[cuts off in disgust]  Sorry.  We don't need no cleaning staff. EDWINA    [very posh sounding, correcting her]  Any cleaning staff. GOLDY    [puzzled] Any cleaning staff, what? EDWINA    [dismissive mutter] I'm surprised you don't rhyme.  [up] I am here to hire a private investigator.  I have heard that this firm is very.... discreet. SOUND    DOOR OPENS GOLDY    Discreet yes.  Cheap no.  You better have-- DONNA    Edwina?  Edwina Rexmusson? EDWINA    [cussing]  Oh, goblins.  [up, false gushy]  Donna!  It's been simply ages! DONNA    What are you doing here?  And what's with the getup? EDWINA    [trying to keep composure] Oh... Donna!  Are you ...here to hire an investigator as well?  DONNA    Um, no.  I... am the investigator. EDWINA    [snooty] Oh? DONNA    [sharp] Dressed like THAT, I wouldn't sneer, sweetheart.  [nicer]  Besides, whatever's wrong, I'm probably the only investigator in town who could truly understand.  Come along.  [to Goldy] Do we have any cocoa? EDWINA    [breaking into tears] Oh!  You remembered! DONNA    [stage whisper]  And a box of tissues.  [to Edwina]  My office is right over here. MUSIC    VOICEOVER DONNA    Edwina was one of those snooty girls I'd gone to school with, back before my family's fortunes fell.  [losing track] Funny.  Failed to figure on fff-- [thinks, sighs] alliteration.  [back]  From what I could recall, though I hadn't really paid attention, she'd dropped out of sight about a year back.  Her current state, dressed in - well let's face it - rags, haggard and undernourished, was shocking.  GOLDY    Flabbergasting, even. DONNA    Shh! PAUL    Do you need me? DONNA    Not yet.  You're still on that breach of contract, aren't you? PAUL    I've just about got it wrapped up.  Found three crickets and a snail that will swear to witnessing the ball retrieval.  [confident] He'll get what's coming to him.  I'll just listen in?  If you don't mind?  Nothing more boring than a stakeout. DONNA    Gotcha.  [clears throat] I waited for Edwina to calm down enough to talk. MUSIC    FADES OUT EDWINA    [blows nose excessively into handkerchief]  DONNA    Try some cocoa.  You'll feel better.  Now take your time and tell me what's wrong. EDWINA    [sips, sighs]  Oh... It's my husband. DONNA    Oh?  I guess I didn't know you were married.  Not that I've been much in society recently. EDWINA    Oh! yes.  Maybe you are the one person who can understand.  My father was absolutely set on my marrying, but I wanted... well... DONNA    A career? EDWINA    No. DONNA    Romance? EDWINA    No. DONNA    A Pony?  What? EDWINA    [painful admission] I just wanted... my own way.  More than anything else, I didn't want to give in and do what father wanted. DONNA    I take it he was not amused? EDWINA    [mirthless laugh]  He kept parading eligible bachelors around, and I... I kept shooting them down.  This one was too fat, that one too thin, that one too hairy-- DONNA    There's something cuddly about "hairy". EDWINA    Oh, don't even go there!!!  Why my husband-- DONNA    Sorry!  EDWINA    So father, exasperated, said I would be married before my birthday, like it or not.  And if I wouldn't take any of the suitable men, I would end up [sniffles] wed to the first man to come to the door.  [sobs, then wails]  Even if he was a pattycake!!! DONNA    What's wrong with--? EDWINA    [wails]  Waaahhhh! DONNA    Yowtch.  And this was last year? EDWINA    [sniffs, then tries to calm] Almost exactly a year ago.  How can I forget?  The day before my 21st birthday, my father tossed me at this.... "person", ran the paperwork through, and threw me out of the house.  Since then... Well, you see how I am. MUSIC FOR VOICEOVER DONNA    For all her suffering, Edwina was holding up pretty well.  She had gone from pampered princess to long-suffering housewife in one fell swoop.  Had to learn to cook, clean, and even run her husband's little china shop.  She'd been tempered in the fire.  And she used to be nothing BUT temper. GOLDY    There's plenty like that. DONNA    I am ignoring you.  MUSIC     CUTS OUT SUDDENLY EDWINA    Me? DONNA    Sorry.  Nothing.  So what exactly do you need help with?  EDWINA    Oh, that!  Someone is trying to kill me. DONNA    Really? MUSIC FOR VOICEOVER DONNA    Suddenly a simple domestic case had turned very interesting indeed.  DONNA    Edwina said that on two different occasions, there had been "accidents" that might have killed her, if not for this "strange man".  MUSIC FADES SOUND    IN CAR PAUL    Did she say what he looked like? DONNA    She said he looked vaguely familiar, but had a scarf covering the lower half his face.  PAUL    And these "accidents?" DONNA    Nothing she could take to the cops.  She felt a hand push her on a street corner, and would have gone right out into traffic.  Except... PAUL    Except for this stranger? DONNA    Yes.  He grabbed her and pulled her back.  That was the first time.  She wrote it off, figuring someone just lost their balance. PAUL    But... then? DONNA    Yeah.  She'd just shut up shop for the night, was heading home, and a piano fell on her. PAUL    You're kidding?!? DONNA    Nope.  It was being lifted to an upstairs apartment, and the ropes just... gave way.  PAUL    And the guy? DONNA    Swooped in on a motorcycle and pushed her out of the way. PAUL    At best, he's been following her everywhere.  DONNA    At worst, he's part of it. PAUL    So she wants us to-- DONNA    First, find out who might be trying to kill her.  Second find this guy.  And [sigh] If we find out anything about her husband along the way.... PAUL    [grr]  I hate matrimony cases.  [backpedaling] not that I hate matrimony, though!  [a moment, musing/hinting]  Cuddly? DONNA    What? PAUL    [too quick] Nothing. MUSIC FOR VOICEOVER PAUL    I figured I'd start with a trip to the delivery company, see who might have ordered that piano-- DONNA    Or who inquired about it.  PAUL    Yes.  Was this accident a spur of the moment crime, or something much more sinister? DONNA    I decided to look into who might want Edwina dead, and why.  I had a few contacts at the hall of records who liked nothing better than rooting out such juicy tidbits of gossip. PAUL    What are you thinking? DONNA    There's only a couple of possible motives for murder - money and passion being the best possibilities in this case.  DONNA    And since Edwina's father cut her off without a simolean to her name, there either had to be money she didn't know about-- PAUL    Long lost heirs?  That's a stretch. DONNA    [a bit annoyed] OR it had to do with her husband, the aptly named Mr. Beard. PAUL    First name? DONNA    Apparently they're not that familiar. PAUL    [flabbergasted!] What? MUSIC CUTS OUT SUDDENLY PAUL    Seriously?  She doesn't know his first name? DONNA    He doesn't talk to her much, except to give orders. PAUL    Even... um... when...? DONNA    [hinting] They sleep in separate rooms. PAUL    [stunned] Oh.  Who IS this guy? DONNA    That's what I plan to find out.  Ah!  Hall of records.  My stop. PAUL    Right.  Meet for dinner? DONNA    Of course. MUSIC    VOICEOVER PAUL    I watched her walk away, a red-haired slither of pure lusciousness.  [grr] At least until the car behind me started to honk. SOUND    HONK ENDS VOICEOVER MUSIC SOUND    CAR STARTS SOUND    PHONE RINGS, PICKS UP GOLDY    B&B Investigations, how may I direct-- EDWINA    [on filter] It happened again! GOLDY    What happened? EDWINA    Just tell Donna!  Get her to come to my place.  She has the address.  Quickly! Before my husband gets home! GOLDY    I'll see what I can do. EDWINA    It's a matter of life and death! SOUND    PHONE HANGS UP, IS SET DOWN GOLDY    Hmm.  Now let's see - How do they DO that? MUSIC    FOR VOICEOVER GOLDY    Well, that was easy.  [speaking loudly, as if trying to be noticed]  I was trying desperately to figure out how to get a message to my boss, Donna Bella. DONNA    You don't have to yell! GOLDY    [normal tone] The client called. DONNA    Edwina. GOLDY    We ain't been formally introduced.  Besides, I'm trying to be all professional here. DONNA    OK, just tell me what you got. GOLDY    She needs you over there lickety split. DONNA    Did she actually say--? GOLDY    I'm paraphrasing.  DONNA    Fine.  Now leave the voiceover to me.  [beat]  Ok.  I caught a cab and raced to Edwina's fifth floor walkup.  It was as old and careworn as her dress.  I really started to sympathize.  MUSIC    OUT SOUND    KNOCKING ON THE DOOR EDWINA    [shriek] Who is it? DONNA    It's me! SOUND    HEAVY FOOTSTEP, DOWN THE HALL DONNA    [gasp]  Hello? SOUND    LOTS OF LOCKS UNLOCKING DONNA    [whispered to the door] I'll be right back! EDWINA    No! DONNA    Shh! SOUND    QUIET STEPS MUSIC FOR VOICEOVER DONNA    I was pretty sure I'd seen movement down around the dimly lit corner.  I'm not usually the physical type - I leave all that to Paul-- PAUL    [distant] [laughing hysterically] DONNA    [grim and determined] --BUT I wanted to at least get a glimpse of whoever it was that was spying on Edwina's door.  MUSIC OUT SOUND    QUICK STEPS DONNA    Hah! SOUND    DOOR SHUTS QUICKLY MUSIC IN DONNA    I rushed up, but the series of locks - a strangely familiar series of locks - was already being thrown.  I waited a moment, then peered through the keyhole, straining for any glimpse of the perpetrator. GOLDY    What did you see? DONNA    Out! MUSIC OUT DONNA    Not you, her! MUSIC IN GOLDY    Fine.  PAUL    What did you see? DONNA    Let me talk to Edwina first. MUSIC OUT SOUND    TAP ON DOOR, DOOR WRENCHED OPEN EDWINA    What happened? DONNA    Nothing.  Thought I heard something. EDWINA    It was probably a mouse.  They're in half the apartments here. DONNA    Can't they get rid of them? EDWINA    [shrug] Not unless they get behind on the rent. MUSIC IN PAUL    Let me take this and give you ladies some privacy. DONNA    Sounds good.  I might be a little late. PAUL    No problem.  [voiceover]  I had had a frustrating day.  The moving company was paid in cash, and the apartment they were delivering to had been rented under a false name.  GOLDY    Back at the office, a pile of official looking papers that Donna had messengered, arrived.  If you're bored or anything. PAUL    I still have leads to follow up. GOLDY    I'm shutting up for the day.  You have fun. PAUL    [sigh]  Some days you wonder why you even need a secretary-- GOLDY    [distant] I heard that! PAUL    [thinking quick] And then you recall how much time you haveta spend away from the office, and it all becomes clear.  [waits a second]  Phew!  She does come in handy.  [narrating]  I walked into the bar where the lowest denizens of the city hung out, and lowest among them-- MUSIC OUT PAUL    Hey, Rump.  RUMPY    Not tonight, Bette.  I got lady trouble. PAUL    Really?  You? RUMPY    You don't have to sound so.... so... PAUL    Sorry. RUMPY    Take it from me, don't ever let one of them find out your real name.  [drinks deep]  So you here for a social call?  PAUL    You know better. SOUND    CLINK OF COINS ON COUNTER PAUL    But I can make it worth your while. RUMPY    I'll drink that in the next 10 minutes. PAUL    Give me something good, and you'll get another half hour's worth. RUMPY    What's the question? PAUL    Mr. Rexmussen and his daughter Edwina.  Anything you know. RUMPY    Off the top of my head?  And drunk?  Nothing.  SOUND    COINS BEING DRAGGED AWAY PAUL    Oh. RUMPY    Except-- SOUND    COINS STOP MOVING PAUL    Go on. RUMPY    I do know that just about a year ago, daddy dearest said he was gonna hitch her to the first dude to come to the door, and there was a virtual stampede to get there - but this mug Beard was already at the head of the line. PAUL    Like he... knew in advance? RUMPY    Could be...  or... [trails off suggestively, drinks] SOUND    TWO MORE COINS SET DOWN RUMPY    More like he kind of appeared out of nowhere.  No one knew him before.  No one knows when he came to town.  Nothing. PAUL    Hmm... SOUND    COUPLE MORE COINS RUMPY    That's all I got.  SOUND    SHOVES COINS RUMPY    Now leave me to my misery. PAUL    Nah.  Keep it.  MUSIC in PAUL    So a Beard with no roots.  But who could have known that Edwina's dad was going to go ballistic? GOLDY    Daddy probably set it all up with the mug.  To teach her a lesson.  Sounds like she was a holy terror. PAUL    I thought you went home. GOLDY     They ain't nothing good on the radio. PAUL    While I could consult an oracle or two about the mysterious Mr. Beard, the price would be a bit too high for a charity case-- GOLDY    What about who might want to kill her? PAUL    I had no leads as yet-- GOLDY    Oh, yes you do. PAUL    I do? GOLDY    These papers - I took em home, just in case someone might come looking. PAUL    Are you really worried about that? GOLDY    Nah.  But they ain't nothing good on the radio.  Anyway, you wanted to know about money motives, and there's some interesting stuff in here. PAUL    This should really be on the phone.  Voiceovers aren't made for conversations. GOLDY    You two do it all the time! PAUL    [abashed] We try not to. GOLDY    Fine.  [ahem] After going through the stack of papers - a thankless task, by the way - I realized that Edwina happened to have a birthday coming up. PAUL    [dismissive] She already mentioned that. GOLDY    AND that this would be her 22nd birthday.  When she would just happen to come into a huge trust fund.  UNLESS she weren't married yet, then she don't get her mitts on the cash til she's 30. PAUL    [interested] Really? GOLDY    UNLESS again - she was to happen to kick off before she made it to 22.  PAUL    Hmm...  Who-- GOLDY    IN WHICH CASE the money would revert to... ta-da!  her father. PAUL    Rexmussen?  But he's rich. GOLDY    Interesting, innit? DONNA    Whew.  I had just spent the longest evening of my life, and-- GOLDY    We're already on this line. DONNA    What? PAUL    But we're pretty much done. DONNA    What? GOLDY    Besides, I'm already clocked out for the evening. DONNA    [growl] what? PAUL    Goldy took the time to sort through all the paperwork we hadn't yet got around to... DONNA    [back to normal] Oh.  Anything? PAUL    Tell you at dinner. DONNA    About time! MUSIC OUT SOUND    RESTAURANT PAUL    --which doesn't make any sense, because he's rolling in dough. DONNA    Nothing in this case makes sense, and we've only got one more day before Edwina's birthday.  PAUL    We better stay with her.  DONNA    I had this little idea... PAUL    Yeah? DONNA    This mystery man appears every time she looks to be in danger, so... PAUL    ["getting it"] Mmm. DONNA    Let skip ahead. PAUL    Get some rest. DONNA    Mwa! PAUL    [appreciative growl] MUSIC IN DONNA    Morning came, and I was back with Edwina.  Her husband hadn't even come home, but had phoned to insist she still open the store as usual.  She was frantic. MUSIC OUT SOUND    STREET, FOOTSTEPS EDWINA    [controlled] Thank you so much for coming with me.  I'm simply frantic. DONNA    Don't worry about it.  We'll get to the bottom of all this. SOUND    RUSHING FEET PAUL    [roar] EDWINA    [scream!] SOUND    SCUFFLE BEARD    [oof!] DONNA    You got him?  Calm down, Eddie! EDWINA    [gasp] What?  Who is it?  Oh!  That's him!  That's the guy! PAUL    Let's get inside.  Come on.  EDWINA    [whisper] Who's that? DONNA    My partner.  He's good people. EDWINA    He's hardly "people", wouldn't you say? DONNA    Don't knock it, sister! SOUND    DOOR SHUTS PAUL    Okay, pal, you better start talking. EDWINA    Don't hurt him!  He's the one who's been saving me! PAUL    [tough sounding]  No one needs to get hurt - but someone DOES need to talk. BEARD    [mutters something] PAUL    What's that? BEARD    [low whisper] Just you.  I'll talk to you.  Not the ladies. PAUL    You all right with that?  We'll catch up. SOUND    SNAP FINGERS MUSIC In SUDDENLY DONNA    Edwina and I went on to the shop, careful to avoid any potentially life threatening situations. MUSIC OUT SOUND    SHOP DOOR, WITH BELL EDWINA    He's not going to hurt him, is he? DONNA    I don't think it will come to that. EDWINA    Good.  I-- I think I'm in love. DONNA    [stunned] What?  With that-- EDWINA    Handsome stranger who keeps saving my life? DONNA    You've got a point.  But what about your husband? EDWINA    I hardly ever see him.  He doesn't care. DONNA    And how do you know this guy is handsome?  His face was all covered in that scarf. EDWINA    [deep excited breath]  Oh!  His piercing eyes!  So mysterious.  T think--  [almost something]  I think he's shy. DONNA    While it's nice to see some color in your cheeks again, I think we need to shelve this until we solve the death-related part of the mystery. EDWINA    [sigh] All right. DONNA    Last night, I asked about the suitors you turned down.  Did you have a chance to make a list? EDWINA    Oh!  I forgot.  So sorry. DONNA    We've got some time now. EDWINA    Oh, all right. Um... There was Bob Porthos-- DONNA    The entrepreneur?  [whistles] EDWINA    He was really fat.  And Fred Crotchety, are you taking these down? DONNA    Mind like a steel trap.  Crotchety? EWINA    Old.  And don't even get me started on King Cole. DONNA    The Merry old - ah! "Old"? EDWINA    [duh!] Pattycake. DONNA    Hmm.  Let me guess, there was something wrong with every single one of them. EDWINA    Pretty much.  And if it wasn't something obvious, like being really short, or having terrible halitosis, I'd just pick on whatever was handy. DONNA    Bet you regret that now. EDWINA    You said it.  I might have spent the last year in the lap of luxury with my old, fat or smelly husband.  [thinks]  Hmm.  I guess I'm actually rather lucky. DONNA    Really? EDWINA    My husband is standoffish and emotionally unavailable, but at least he's not fat, old or smelly. DONNA    [slightly sarcastic] And doesn't talk in rhyme. EDWINA    [the horror!] Heaven forbid!!  SOUND    DOOR SLAMS OPEN DONNA    Paul? THUG    Both of you, hands up! EDWINA    [scream!] THUG    Shut up! EDWINA    [cuts out suddenly with a hiccup] DONNA    Let me guess - you're the next "accident"? THUG    Shut up! DONNA    Why should I listen to you? EDWINA    [hissed] Because he's got a gun! THUG    I see she's the smart one. DONNA    What? THUG    Though you got the looks, babe. DONNA    What? EDWINA    Don't anger the thug! DONNA    Just watch.  WHAT? THUG    Now, lets see...  [muses] an accident... SOUND    HEAVY TIPPING NOISE, CROCKERY GOES EVERYWHERE EDWINA    [quick shriek, muffled] THUG    [telling himself a story] So someone broke in, and-- [sudden surprised gasp of pain] MUSIC IN PAUL    The mystery man had only half satisfied my curiosity when we heard screams from the vicinity of Edwina's pottery shop. THUG    [screams like a girl] MUSIC OUT BEARD    Something's happening! PAUL    [chuckles] They'll be fine.  Finish what you were saying. BEARD    [melodramatic] I'll tell you whatever you want - AFTER we save her! PAUL    [sigh] All right. MUSIC IN PAUL    He had it so bad it was almost cute.  How could I refuse, being a fellow sufferer of that aeons-old disease called love? MUSIC OUT SOUND    DOOR CREAKS OPEN, CRASH OF PLATE DONNA    Hah! PAUL    See? BEARD    [surprised] Oh.  You're all right! EDWINA    Yes! DONNA    This guy-- SOUND    RUSTLE AS SHE KICKS HIM THUG    [groan] DONNA    Broke in.  He won't talk.  [sweetly] I told him my partner is the really scary one. PAUL    Don't worry about it.  I think I know where this is all leading. DONNA    Really? PAUL    Yes.  Shh. EDWINA    [melodramatic, to Beard] It can never be. BEARD    What? EDWINA    I'm... I'm married.  No matter that it wasn't my choice.  It-- BEARD    It's all right. EDWINA    No, it's not!  You keep saving me, and making me love - uh - like - uh - appreciate you.  It's not fair.  To you. BEARD    You wouldn't consider... running off with me? EDWINA    A year ago, I might have said yes.  In a heartbeat.  But I'm not that same shallow girl any more.  I simply can't break a solemn vow.  You should go. DONNA    [sad] Ohhh! PAUL    [reassuring] Shh. EDWINA    Just know this.  I love you! BEARD    I've waited so long to hear you say that. EDWINA    [confused] You ...have? PAUL    [whispered] Now for the big reveal. SOUND    RUSTLE OF FABRIC EDWINA    You! DONNA    Who? PAUL    Guess. DONNA    I don't know anyone with a beard that thick. BEARD    I'm so sorry I had to do it this way, but-- SOUND    THUMP, HISS PAUL    Really?  A grenade?  [grunt of effort] SOUND    HISSING FLIES OFF SOUND    DISTANT EXPLOSION, SHRIEK OF PAIN & SURPRISE PAUL    Now that that's sorted out, I think it's time. DONNA    Time? PAUL    For the big denouement.  And... I think a police presence is in order. DONNA    Where's a phone? EDWINA    What's going on?  BEARD    Don't worry, my darling.  I'll still always protect you. MUSIC IN PAUL    We did a quick gathering of the suspects and arrived at Mr. Rexmussen's sumptuous estates with only half an hour to spare. DONNA    Before what? PAUL    The birthday. GOLDY    I'm the one that caught that! DONNA AND PAUL    Shut up! GOLDY    Hmph.  Keep me posted. PAUL    Rexmussen's estate was a sprawling mass of putting green and ornamental garden, all surrounding a palatial sort of ... palace. DONNA    Evocative. PAUL    I've been studying Old Possum's word a day column in the Times. DONNA    [chuckles] GOLDY    uh-uh-uh!  Conversation! DONNA    Fine!  SOUND    MUSIC OUT SOUND    KNOCKING ON DOOR SOUND    TEENSY WINDOW OPENS BUTLER    Please good folks!  This is not right!  Banging on the door all night! PAUL    [grr] Pattycakes. EDWINA    [Imperious]  Rouse my father, Frederick. BUTLER    The master sleeps, he will not wake.  I beg you now, your leave to take. SOUND    WINDOW SHUTS DONNA    Blast.  If only-- SOUND    POLICE SIRENS BURP, THEN CUT OUT PAUL    [concerned] Ohhh boy. DONNA    Captain Oftheguard!  So glad you came!  Wait - I didn't - did you? PAUL    [grrrr]  No. OFTHEGUARD    Your secretary called, said you're having some kind of ...denouement... at this here address? PAUL    [muttered] She'll never let us live this one down. DONNA    [wheedling] We need to get inside, Bruce, and talk to Edwina's father!  Right now, before there's a murder! OFTHEGUARD    We'll see about that. SOUND    OFFICIAL POUNDING BEARD    No one's going to murder you! EDWINA    Oh, [falters] OH!  [whispers]  You never told me your first name. BEARD    Oh...  uh...  [horrible admission] Van dyke. EDWINA    Really?  I would have pegged you as a garibaldi, or maybe a franz-josef with a side order of Z-Z. BEARD    [surprised] So you know my brothers? SOUND    DOOR OPENS OFTHEGUARD    Hey!  Mother goose.  Get your boss out here.  This is the police. FREDERICK    You needn't speak in such a tone.  My job is to see he's left alone. OFTHEGUARD    hmph.  My job trumps your boss's orders - now let us through your fancy borders. DONNA    Oh, Bruce!  I never knew you were bilingual! PAUL    [growl] Enough!  I'll get us in. SOUND    MUSIC IN PAUL    It wasn't long before we were all sitting in Rexmussen's main sitting room. MUSIC OUT PAUL    So there. EDWINA    Not to be confused with the informal withdrawing room, or the salon. REXMUSSEN    [cold] So nice to have you home again dear. EDWINA    [cold] Papa.  [kiss kiss] OFTHEGUARD    I believe there was a denouement in the offing?  Or are we here for pinochle? REXMUSSUN    A Denouement?  Surely you don't mean--? SOUND    LIGHT FEET ENTER MULVA    [sexy little number] Rex, Honey?  I miss my bunny? EDWINA    [horrified] Papa! REXMUSSUN     [covering, stiff] Go back to bed, Mulva.  We'll talk in the morning. EDWINA    Papa!?  What is ... that?  [disgust] Her? DONNA    That's a whole nother denouement!  Quick, music! SOUND    MUSIC IN, SOUND OF EDWINA AND REXMUSSUN ARGUING UNDER REXMUSSUN    I knew you would never be able to accept-- EDWINA    A pattycake?  Father!  How could you! MULVA    Love is blind to age or youth.  We knew you wouldn't like the truth. REXMUSSUN    You don't need to be here, dearest, to take this abuse. EDWINA    I'm glad mother's dead!  This sort of ...perversion - it would have killed her to know. [now the voiceover] PAUL    Could this have been another motive?  Or part of the answer we already had? DONNA    We knew we had to sort it out quickly, or lose what might be our only chance to resolve this issue. PAUL    The money in the trust goes back to dear old dad if she dies in the next 15 minutes, right? DONNA    I think-- GOLDY    [snide] That's what the papers said.  DONNA    Fine.  Thanx.  What else did they say. GOLDY    Oh, so now you need me-- PAUL    Get on with it!  We're in the denouement! GOLDY    Dad's loaded.  The entire trust wouldn't make pocket change for him. DONNA    And his new wife? GOLDY    Oh, that took a couple of very tricky phone calls.  Seems they went out of state for a nice quiet little ceremony - the day AFTER dear daughter was whisked away to be wed. PAUL    So maybe this had nothing to do with the money at all? DONNA    What are we left with? EVERYONE     GASPS PAUL    That sounds like something.  Quick! SOUND    MUSIC OUT EDWINA    The lights! OFTHEGUARD    Everyone stay where you are.  BEARD    I'm here. SOUND    RUSTLE, THEN FOOTSTEPS PAUL    Was anyone near the lights when they went out? EDWINA    We were a bit...um... involved in a family ... discussion. DONNA    Where are the -- SOUND    GUNSHOT EDWINA    [QUICK scream] BEARD    Oh no! DONNA    Quick!  Paul! SOUND    HEAVY FOOTSTEPS PAUL    [growl] FREDERICK    Off, you beast!  Get off of me!  I'm no prey for such as thee! PAUL    Just for that! [unh!] SOUND    SMACK SOUND    CLICK OF LIGHTS BACK ON OFTHEGUARD    Him!? EDWINA    A servant? REXMUSSUN    Frederick? DONNA    [whispered] Paul?  But why?  Do you think he was paid? PAUL    [muttered] Hmm.  No.  [up]  Oftheguard, I'll hand him over.  OFTHEGUARD    What's the charge?  Or at least the motive? EDWINA    Yes!  What could he possibly get out of killing me?  He's not in any position to inherit. DONNA    No one is - now.  PAUL    Except your husband.  BEARD    I've got plenty of my own, thanks. DONNA    Your birthday came and went 8 minutes ago.  So this attempt ... [quizzical] must be unrelated? PAUL    But something else is.  DONNA    Is what? PAUL    Related.  [sharp] Rexmusson!  This young lady may be your second wife, but I wager she's not the first pattycake that you've... um... DONNA    Played pattycake with? PAUL    I was trying for something a bit more pithy, but yes. REXMUSSON    [warning] I'm a very wealthy and powerful man!  [shrug] And everyone needs a hobby. EDWINA    Papa! MULVA    But now I am your one and only?  You'll never have to be so lonely. REXMUSSON    [not quite convincing] Of course, dear. EDWINA    This is just disgusting.  I don't need to hear any more of this-- PAUL    Just a bit more.  Frederick?  How long have you worked here? EDWINA    He's been here his entire life.  Since we both [getting it] were children... DONNA    Ahhh.  And his mother?  She worked here, too? EDWINA    [revolted] Oh, now I am definitely leaving. BEARD    Hold on a bit longer.  EDWINA    Hold me! DONNA    So you think that he did it out of revenge?  For her being the pampered one and him getting.... a menial job? PAUL    Perhaps he felt that if there were no longer a legitimate heir to the Rexmusson estate, that his father would have to acknowledge him at last. DONNA    That's a huge bucket full of wishful thinking, you do realize that? REXMUSSON    Even if Edwina was killed, and that would never be my wish, dear, even if we don't see eye to eye on some things-- EDWINA    [conciliatory]  Oh, I should hope not. REXMUSSON    There's still going to be more legit heirs.  Right my little pumpkiny-wumpkiny? MULVA    You'll have a little sister soon.  We've counted down to the end of June. EDWINA    [no longer amused] We're leaving.  Now. BEARD    There's no more danger? OFTHEGUARD    Not from this guy, there ain't. BEARD    Good.  [leaving]  Edwina?  Darling? FREDERICK    Ouch!  Ouch!  Stop that, you!  You hurt my-- OFTHEGUARD    [cutting in] Everloving shoe.  I know, I know.  I've heard it all before.  Now - "Come along quiet, you epic fail.  You're taking a little trip to jail." MUSIC IN PAUL    [snort, then annoyed]  Progressive AND bilingual.  How do you compete with that? DONNA    Hmm? PAUL    Nothing.  [clears throat]  So the case was closed, and for once we could say-- DONNA    With a completely straight face-- PAUL    uh...  [whispered] You want to say it? DONNA    [sultry whisper] Let's do it together? PAUL    [grrrrow!]  Count of three, then.  One Two-- PAUL AND DONNA    The butler did it.  [both laugh] PAUL    You would never leave me, um, I mean the agency, I mean, detective work, for a ... a pattycake, wouldja? DONNA    Never fear, oh hairy one / the job, and you, are much more fun. PAUL    [growl!!]  I do love it when she talks foreign!    

Ross Levitan and Brandon Piller provide immediate reaction following a 3-1 Ottawa Senators win over the Philadelphia Flyers to close out a 5-game home stand.Join the POSTCAST tomorrow night following the Sens visit to Montreal! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ross Levitan and Brandon Piller provide immediate reaction following a 3-1 Ottawa Senators win over the Philadelphia Flyers to close out a 5-game home stand. Join the POSTCAST tomorrow night following the Sens visit to Montreal! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

00:58 - Paul's Superpower: Participating in Scary Things 02:19 - EventStorming (https://www.eventstorming.com/) * Optimized For Collaboration * Visualizing Processes * Working Together * Sticky (Post-it) Notes (https://www.post-it.com/3M/en_US/post-it/products/~/Post-it-Products/Notes/?N=4327+5927575+3294529207+3294857497&rt=r3) 08:35 - Regulation: Avoiding Overspecifics * “The Happy Path” * Timeboxing * Parking Lot (https://project-management.fandom.com/wiki/Parking_lot) * Inside Pixar (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13302848/#:~:text=This%20documentary%20series%20of%20personal,culture%20of%20Pixar%20Animation%20Studios.) * Democratization * Known Unknowns 15:32 - Facilitation and Knowledge Sharing * Iteration and Refinement * Knowledge Distillation / Knowledge Crunching * Clarifying Terminology: Semantics is Meaning * Embracing & Exposing Fuzziness (Complexities) 24:20 - Key Events * Narrative Shift * Domain-Driven Design (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-driven_design) * Shift in Metaphor 34:22 - Collaboration & Teamwork * Perspective * Mitigating Ambiguity 39:29 - Remote EventStorming and Facilitation * Miro (https://miro.com/) * MURAL (https://www.mural.co/) 47:38 - EventStorming vs Event Sourcing (https://martinfowler.com/eaaDev/EventSourcing.html) * Sacrificing Rigor For Collaboration 51:14 - Resources * The EventStorming Handbook (https://leanpub.com/eventstorming_handbook) * Paul's Upcoming Workshops (https://www.virtualgenius.com/events) * @thepaulrayner (https://twitter.com/thepaulrayner) Reflections: Mandy: Eventstorming and its adjacence to Technical Writing. Damien: You can do this on a small and iterative scale. Jess: Shared understanding. Paul: Being aware of the limitations of ideas you can hold in your head. With visualization, you can hold it in more easily and meaningfully. This episode was brought to you by @therubyrep (https://twitter.com/therubyrep) of DevReps, LLC (http://www.devreps.com/). To pledge your support and to join our awesome Slack community, visit patreon.com/greaterthancode (https://www.patreon.com/greaterthancode) To make a one-time donation so that we can continue to bring you more content and transcripts like this, please do so at paypal.me/devreps (https://www.paypal.me/devreps). You will also get an invitation to our Slack community this way as well. Transcript: MANDY: Welcome to Episode 271 of Greater Than Code. My name is Mandy Moore and I'm here today with a guest, but returning panelist. I'm happy to see Jessica Kerr. JESSICA: Thanks, Mandy. It's great to see you. I'm also excited to be here today with Damien Burke! DAMIEN: And I am excited to be here with both of you and our guest today, Paul Rayner. Paul Rayner is one of the leading practitioners of EventStorming and domain-driven design. He's the author of The EventStorming Handbook, co-author of Behavior-Driven Development with Cucumber, and the founder and chair of the Explore DDD conference. Welcome to the show, Paul. PAUL: Thanks, Damien. Great to be here. DAMIEN: Great to have you. And so you know, you are prepared, you are ready for our first and most famous question here on Greater Than Code? PAUL: I don't know if I'm ready, or prepared, but I can answer it, I think. [laughter] DAMIEN: I know you have prepared, so I don't know if you are prepared. PAUL: Right. DAMIEN: Either way, here it comes. [chuckles] What is your superpower and how did you acquire it? PAUL: Okay. So a couple of weeks ago, there's a lake near my house, and the neighbors organized a polar plunge. They cut a big hole in the ice and everyone lines up and you basically take turns jumping into the water and then swimming to the other side and climbing out the ladder. So my superpower is participating in a polar plunge and I acquired that by participating with my neighbors. There was barbecue, there was a hot tub, and stuff like that there, too. So it was very, very cool. It's maybe not a superpower, though because there were little kids doing this also. So it's not like it was only me doing it. JESSICA: I'll argue that your superpower is participating in scary things because you're also on this podcast today! PAUL: [chuckles] Yeah, there we go. DAMIEN: Yeah, that is very scary. Nobody had to be fished out of the water? No hospital, hypothermia, any of that? PAUL: No, there was none of that. It was actually a really good time. I mean, being in Denver, blue skies, it was actually quite a nice day to jump into frozen. MANDY: So Paul, you're here today to talk about EventStorming. I want to know what your definition of that is, what it is, and why it's a cool topic to be talking about on Greater Than Code. PAUL: Okay. Well, there's a few things there. So firstly, what is EventStorming? I've been consulting, working with teams for a long time, coaching them and a big part of what I try and do is to try and bridge the gap between what the engineers, the developers, the technical people are trying to build in terms of the software, and what the actual problem is they're trying to solve. EventStorming is a technique for just mapping out a process using sticky notes where you're trying to describe the story of what it is that you're building, how that fits into the business process, and use the sticky notes to layer in variety of information and do it in a collaborative kind of way. So it's really about trying to bridge that communication gap and uncover assumptions that people might have, expose complexity and risk through the process, and with the goal of the software that you write actually being something that solves the real problem that you're trying to solve. I think it's a good topic for Greater Than Code based on what I understand about the podcast, because it certainly impacts the code that you write, touches on that, and connects with the design. But it's really optimized for collaboration, it's optimized for people with different perspectives being able to work together and approach it as visualizing processes that people create, and then working together to be able to do that. So there's a lot of techniques out there that are very much optimized from a developer perspective—UML diagrams, flow charts, and things like that. But EventStorming really, it sacrifices some of that rigor to try and draw people in and provide a structured conversation. I think with the podcast where you're trying to move beyond just the code and dig into the people aspects of this a lot more, I think it really touches on that in a meaningful way. JESSICA: You mentioned that with a bunch of stickies, a bunch of different people, and their perspectives, EventStorming layers in different kinds of information. PAUL: Mm hm. JESSICA: Like what? PAUL: Yeah. So the way that usually approach it is, let's say, we're modeling, visualizing some kind of process like somebody registering for a certain thing, or even somebody, maybe a more common example, purchasing something online and let's say, that we have the development team that's responsible for implementing how somebody might return a product to a merchant, something like that. The way it would work is you describe that process as events where each sticky note represents something that happened in the story of returning a product and then you can layer on questions. So if people have questions, use a different colored sticky note for highlighting things that people might be unsure of, what assumptions they might be making, differences in terminology, exposing those types of unknowns and then once you've sort of laid out that timeline, you can then layer in things like key events, what you might call emergent structures. So as you look at that timeline, what might be some events that are more important than others? JESSICA: Can you make that concrete for me? Give me an example of some events in the return process and then…? PAUL: Yeah. So let's say, the customer receives a product that they want to return. You could have an event like customer receive product and then an event that is customer reported need for return. And then you would have a shift in actor, like a shift in the person doing the work where maybe the merchant has to then merchant sent return package to customer. So we're mapping out each one of these as an event in the process and then the customer receives, or maybe it's a shipping label. The customer receives the shipping label and then they put the items in the package with the shipping label and they return it. And then there would be a bunch of events that the merchant would have to take care of. So the merchant would have to receive that package and then probably have to update the system to record that it's been returned. And then, I imagine there would be processing another order, or something like that. A key event in there might be something like sending out the shipping label and the customer receiving the shipping label because that's a point where the responsibility transfers from the merchant, who is preparing the shipping label and dispatching that, to the customer that's actually receiving it and then having to do something. That's just one, I guess, small example of you can use that to divide that story up into what you might think of as chapters where there's different responsibilities and changes in the narrative. Part of that maybe layering in sticky notes that represent who's doing the work. Like who's the actor, whether it's the merchant, or the customer, and then layering in other information, like the systems that are involved in that such as maybe there's email as a system, maybe there's the actual e-commerce platform, a payment gateway, these kinds of things could be reflected and so on, like there's – [overtalk] JESSICA: Probably integration with the shipper. PAUL: Integration with the shipper, right. So potentially, if you're designing this, you would have some kind of event to go out to the shipper to then know to actually pick up the package and that type of thing. And then once the package is actually delivered back to the merchant, then there would be some kind of event letting the merchant know. It's very hard to describe because I'm trying to picture this in my mind, which is an inherently visual thing. It's probably not that interesting to hear me describing something that's usually done on some kind of either mirror board, like some kind of electronic space, or on a piece of butcher's paper, or – [overtalk] DAMIEN: Something with a lot of sticky notes. PAUL: Something with a lot of sticky notes, right. DAMIEN: Which, I believe for our American listeners, sticky notes are the little square pieces of brightly colored paper with self-adhesive strip on the back. PAUL: Yeah. The stickies. DAMIEN: Stickies. [chuckles] I have a question about this process. I've been involved in very similar processes and it sounds incredibly useful. But as you describe it, one of the concerns I have is how do you avoid getting over specific, or over described? Like you can describe systems until you're talking about the particles in the sun, how do you know when to stop? PAUL: So I think there's a couple of things. Number one is at the start of whatever kind of this activity, this EventStorming is laying out what's the goal? What are we trying to accomplish in terms of the process? With returns, for example, it would be maybe from this event to this event, we're trying to map out what that process looks like and you start with what you might call the happy path. What does it look like when everything goes well? And then you can use pink stickies to represent alternate paths, or things going wrong and capture those. If they're not tied back to this goal, then you can say, “Okay, I think we've got enough level of detail here.” The other thing is time boxing is saying, “Okay, well, we've only got half an hour, or we've only got an hour so let's see how much we can do in that time period,” and then at the end of that, if you still have a lot of questions, then you can – or you feel like, “Oh, we need to dig into some of these areas more.” Then you could schedule a follow up session to dig into that a little bit more. So it's a combination of the people that are participating in this deciding how much level of detail they want to go down to. What I find is it typically is something that as you're going through the activity, you start to see. “Oh, maybe this is too far down in the weeds versus this is the right level.” As a facilitator, I don't typically prescribe that ahead of time, because it's much easier to add sticky notes and then talk about them than it is to have a conversation when there's nothing visualized. I like to visualize it first and lay it out and then it's very easy to say, “Oh, well, this looks like too much detail. So we'll just put a placeholder for that and not worry about out it right now.” It's a little bit of the facilitation technique of having a parking lot where you can say, “Okay, this is a good topic, but maybe we don't need to get down in that right now. Maybe let's refocus back on what it is that we're trying to accomplish.” JESSICA: So there's some regulation that happens naturally during the meeting, during interactions and you can have that regulation in the context of the visual representation, which is the EventStorming, the long row of stickies from one event to the other. PAUL: Right, the timeline that you're building up. So it's a little bit in my mind, I watched last year, I think it was on Netflix. There was a documentary about Pixar and how they do their storyboarding process for their movies and it is exactly that. They storyboard out the movie and iterate over that again and again and again telling that story. What's powerful about that is it's a visual medium so you have someone that is sketching out the main beats of the story and then they're talking it through. Not to say that EventStorming is at that level of rigor, but it has that kind of feel to it of we're laying out these events to tell the story and then we're talking through the story and seeing what we've missed and where we need to add more detail, maybe where we've added too much detail. And then like you said, Jess, there's a certain amount of self-regulation in there in terms of, do we have enough time to go down into this? Is this important right now? JESSICA: And I imagine that when I have questions that go further into detail than we were able to go in the meeting, if I've been in that EventStorming session, I know who to ask. PAUL: That's the idea, yeah. So the pink stickies that we said represent questions, what I like about those is, well, several things. Number one, it democratizes the idea that it's okay to ask questions, which I think is a really powerful technique. I think there's a tendency in meetings for some people to hold back and other people to do all the talking. We've all experienced that. What this tries to do is to democratize that and actually make it not only okay and not only accepted, but encourage that you're expected to ask questions and you're expected to put these sticky notes on here when there's things that you don't understand. JESSICA: Putting the questions on a sticky note, along with the events, the actors, and the things that we do know go on sticky notes, the questions also go on sticky notes. All of these are contributions. PAUL: Exactly. They value contributions and what I love about that is that even people that are new to this process, it's a way for them to ask questions in a way that is kind of friendly to them. I've seen this work really well, for example, with onboarding new team members and also, it encourages the idea that we have different areas of expertise. So in any given process, or any business story, whatever you want to characterize it as, some people are going to know more about some parts of it than others. What typically happens is nobody knows the whole story, but when we work together, we can actually build up an approximation of that whole story and help each other fill in the gaps. So you may have the person that's more on the business, or the product side explaining some terminology. You can capture those explanations on sticky notes as a glossary that you're building up as you go. You can have engineers asking questions about the sequence of events in terms of well, does this one come before that one? And then the other thing that's nice about the questions is it actually as you're going, it's mapping out your ignorance and I see that as a positive thing. JESSICA: The known unknowns. PAUL: Known unknowns. It takes unknown unknowns, which the kind of elephant in the room, and at least gets them up as known unknowns that you can then have a conversation around. Because there's often this situation of a question that somebody's afraid to ask and maybe they're new to the team, or maybe they're just not comfortable asking that type of question. But it gives you actually a map of that ignorance so you can kind of see oh, there's this whole area here that just has a bunch of pink stickies. So that's probably not an area we're ready to work on and we should prioritize. Actually, if this is an area that we need to be working on soon, we should prioritize getting answers to these questions by maybe we need to do a proof of concept, or some UX work, or maybe some kind of prototyping around this area, or like you said, Jess, maybe the person that knows the answers to these questions is just not in this session right now and so, we need to follow up with them, get whatever answers we need, and then come back and revisit things. JESSICA: So you identify areas of risk. PAUL: Yes. Areas of risk, both from a product perspective and also from a technical perspective as well. DAMIEN: So what does it take to have one of these events, or to facilitate one of these events? How do you know when you're ready and you can do it? PAUL: So I've done EventStorming [chuckles] as a conference activity in a hallway with sticky notes and we say, “Okay, let's as a little bit of an icebreaker here –” I usually you do the story of Cinderella. “Let's pick the Disney story of Cinderella and we'll just EventStorm this out. Just everyone, here are some orange sticky notes and a Sharpie, just write down some things that you remember happening in that story,” and then everyone writes a few. We post it up on the hallway wall and then we sequence them as a timeline and then we can basically build up that story in about 5, or 10 minutes from scratch. With a business process, it's not that different. It's like, okay, we're going to do returns, or something like that and if people are already familiar with the technique, then just give them a minute, or so to think of some things that they know that would happen in that process. And then they do that individually and then we just post them up on the timeline and then sequence them as a group and it can happen really quickly. And then everything from there is refinement. Iteration and refinement over what you've put up as that initial skeleton. DAMIEN: Do you ever find that a team comes back a week, or a day, or a month later and goes, “Oh, there is this big gap in our narrative because nobody in this room understood the warehouse needed to be reordered in order to send this thing down”? PAUL: Oh, for sure. Sometimes it's big gaps. Sometimes it's a huge cluster of pink sticky notes that represents an area where there's just a lot of risk and unknowns that the team maybe hasn't thought about all that much. Like you said, it could be there's this third-party thing that it wasn't until everyone got in a room and kind of started to map it out, that they realized that there was this gap in their knowledge. JESSICA: Yeah. Although, you could completely miss it if there's nobody from the warehouse in the room and nobody has any idea that you need to tell the warehouse to expect this return. PAUL: Right and so, part of that is putting a little bit of thought into who would need to be part of this and in a certain way, playing devil's advocate in terms of what don't we know, what haven't we thought of. So it encourages that sense of curiosity with this and it's a little bit different from – Some of the listeners maybe have experienced user story mapping and other techniques like that. Those tend to be focused on understanding a process, but they're very much geared towards okay, how do we then figure out how we're going to code up this feature and how do we slice it up into stories and prioritize that. So it's similar in terms of sticky notes, but the emphasis in EventStorming is more on understanding together, the problem that we're trying to address from a business perspective. JESSICA: Knowledge pulling. PAUL: Yeah. Knowledge pulling, knowledge distillation, those types of idea years, and that kind of mindset. So not just jumping straight to code, but trying to get a little bit of a shared understanding of what all is the thing that we're trying to actually work on here. JESSICA: Eric Evans calls it knowledge crunching. PAUL: Yes, Eric called it knowledge crunching. DAMIEN: I love that phrase, that shared understanding. That's what we, as product teams, are generating is a shared understanding both, captured in our documentation, in our code, and before that, I guess on large sheets of butcher paper. [laughs] PAUL: Well, and it could be a quick exercise of okay, we're going to be working on some new feature and let's just spend 15 minutes just mapping it out to get a sense of, are we on the same page with this? JESSICA: Right, because sometimes it's not even about we think we need to know something, it's do we know enough? Let's find out. PAUL: Right. JESSICA: And is that knowledge shared among us? PAUL: Right, and maybe exposing, like it could be as simple as slightly different terminology, or slightly different understanding of terminology between people that can have a big impact in terms of that. I was teaching a workshop last night where we were talking about this, where somebody had written the event. So there was a repair process that a third-party repair company would handle and then the event that closed that process off, they called case closed. So then the question becomes well, what does case closed mean? Because the word case – [overtalk] JESSICA: [laughs] It's like what's the definition of done? PAUL: Right, exactly. [laughter] Because that word case didn't show up anywhere earlier in the process. So is this like a new concept? Because the thing that kicks off the process is repair purchase order created and at the end of the process, it's said case closed. So then the question becomes well, is case closed really, is that a new concept that we actually need to implement here? Or is this another way of saying that we are getting a copy of that repair purchase order back that and it's been updated with details about what the repair involved? Or maybe it's something like repair purchase order closed. So it's kind of forcing us to clarify terminology, which may seem a little bit pedantic, but that's what's going to end up in the code. If you can get some of those things exposed a little earlier before you actually jump to code and get people on the same page and surface any sort of differences in terminology and misunderstandings, I think that can be super helpful for everyone. JESSICA: Yeah. Some people say it's just semantics. Semantics' meaning, its only meaning, this is only about out what this step actually means because when you put it in the code, the code is crystal clear. It is going to do exactly what it does and whether that clarity matches the shared understanding that we think we have oh, that's the difference between a bug and a working system. DAMIEN: [laughs] That's beautiful. It's only meaning. [laughs] JESSICA: Right? Yeah. But this is what makes programming hard is that pedanticness. The computer is the ultimate pedant. DAMIEN: Pedant. You're going to be pedantic about it. [laughter] PAUL: I see what you did there. [laughter] DAMIEN: And that is the occupation, right? That is what we do is look at and create systems and then make them precise. JESSICA: Yeah. DAMIEN: In a way that actually well, is precise. [laughs] JESSICA: Right, and the power of our human language is that it's not precise, that it allows for ambiguity, and therefore, a much broader range of meaning. But as developers, it's our job to be precise. We have to be precise to the computers. It helps tremendously to be precise with each other. DAMIEN: Yeah, and I think that's actually the power of human cognition is that it's not precise. We are very, very fuzzy machines and anyone who tries to pretend otherwise will be greatly disappointed. Ask me how I know. [laughter] PAUL: Well, and I think what I'm trying to do with something like EventStorming is to embrace the fuzziness, is to say that that's actually an asset and we want to embrace that and expose that fuzziness, that messiness. Because the processes we have and work with are often inherently complex. We are trying to provide some visual representation of that so we can actually get our head around, or our minds around the language complexities, the meanings, and drive in a little bit to that meaning. JESSICA: So when the sticky notes pile on top of each other, that's a feature. PAUL: It is. Going back to that example I was just talking about, let's say, there's a bunch of, like we do the initial part of this for a minute, or so where people are creating sticky notes and let's say, we end up with four, or five sticky notes written by different people on top of each other that end up on the timeline that all say pretty much the same thing with slight variations. JESSICA: Let's say, case closed, request closed. PAUL: Case closed, repair purchase order closed, repair purchase order updated, repair purchase order sent. So from a meaning perspective, I look at that and I say, “That's gold in terms of information,” because that's showing us that there's a richness here. Firstly, that's a very memorable thing that's happening in the timeline – [overtalk] JESSICA: Oh and it has multiple things. PAUL: That maybe means it's a key event. Right, and then what is the meaning? Are these the same things? Are they different things? Maybe we don't have enough time in that session to dig into that, but if we're going to implement something around that, or work with something around that, then we're going to at some point need some clarity around the language, the terminology, and what these concepts mean. Also, the sequence as well, because it might be that there's actually multiple events being expressed there that need to be teased apart. DAMIEN: You used this phrase a couple times, “key event,” and since you've used it a couple times, I think it might be key. [laughter] Can you tell us a little bit about what a key event is? What makes something a key event? PAUL: Yeah, the example I like to use is from the Cinderella story. So if you think about the story of Cinderella, one of the things, when people are doing that as an icebreaker, they always end up being multiple copies of the event that usually is something like shoe lost, or slipper lost, or glass slipper lost. There's something about that event that makes it memorable, firstly and then there's something about that event that makes it pivotal in the story. For those that are not familiar with the story [chuckles]—I am because I've EventStormed this thing maybe a hundred times—but there's this part. Another key event is the fairy godmother showing up and doing the magic at the start and she actually describes a business policy. She says, “The magic is going to run out at midnight,” and like all business policies, it's vague [laughter] and it's unclear as to what it means because – [overtalk] JESSICA: The carriage disappears, the dress disappears, but not the slipper that fell off. PAUL: Exactly. There's this exception that for some bizarre reason, to move the plot forward, the slipper stays. But then the definition of midnight is very hazy because what she's actually describing, in software terms, is a long running process of the clock banging 12 times, which is what midnight means is the time between the first and the twelfth and during that time, the magic is slowly unraveling. JESSICA: So midnight is a duration, not an instant. PAUL: Exactly. Yes, it's a process, not an event. So coming back to the question that Damien asked about key events. That slipper being lost is a key event in that story, I think because it actually is a shift in narrative. Up until that point in the story, it's the story of Cinderella and then after that, once the slipper is lost, it becomes the story of the prince looking for Cinderella. And then at the end, you get the day tomorrow, the stuff that happens with that slipper at the end of the story. Another key event would be like the fairy godmother showing up and doing the magic. DAMIEN: [chuckles] It seems like these are necessary events, right? If the slipper is not lost, if the fairy godmother doesn't do magic, you don't have the story of Cinderella. PAUL: Right. These are narrative turns, right? DAMIEN: Yeah. PAUL: These are points of the story shifts and so, key events can sometimes be a narrative shift where it's driving the story forward in a business process. Something like, let's say, you're working on an e-commerce system, like order submitted is a key event because you are adding items to a shopping cart and then at some point, you make a decision to submit the order and then at that point, it transitions from order being a draft thing that is in a state of flux to it actually becomes essentially immutable and gets passed over to fulfilment. So there's a shift in responsibility and actor between these two as well just like between Cinderella and the prince. JESSICA: A shift in who is driving the story forward. PAUL: Right. Yeah. So it's who is driving the story forward. So these key events often function as a shift in actor, a shift in who's driving the story forward, or who has responsibility. They also often indicate a handoff because of that from one group to another in an organization. Something like a sales process that terminates in contract signed. That key event is also the goal of the sales process. The goal is to get to contract signed and then once that happens, there's usually a transition to say, an onboarding group that actually onboards the new customer in the case of a sales process for a new customer, or in e-commerce, it would be the fulfillment part, the warehousing part that Jess was talking about earlier. That's actually responsible for the fulfillment piece, which is they take that order, they create a package, they put all the items in the package, create the shipping label, and ship it out to the customer. JESSICA: And in domain-driven design, you talked about the shift from order being a fluid thing that's changing as people add stuff to their cart to order being immutable. The word order has different meanings for the web site where you're buying stuff and the fulfillment system, there's a shift in that term. PAUL: Right, and that often happens around a key event, or a pivotal event is that there's a shift from one, you might think of it as context, or language over to another. So preorder submission, it's functioning as a draft order, but what it's actually typically called is a shopping cart and a shopping cart is not the same as an order. It's a great metaphor because there is no physical cart, but we all know what that means as a metaphor. A shopping cart is a completely different metaphor from an order, but we're able to understand that thread of continuity between I have this interactive process of taking items, or products, putting them in the shopping cart, or out again. And then at some point that shopping cart, which is functioning as a draft order, actually it becomes an order that has been submitted and then it gets – [overtalk] DAMIEN: Yeah, the metaphor doesn't really work until that transition. You have a shopping cart and then you click purchase and now what? [laughs] You're not going to the register and ringing it up, that doesn't make any sense. [chuckles] The metaphor kind of has to end there. JESSICA: You're not leaving the cart in the corral in the parking lot. [laughter] PAUL: Well, I think what they're trying to do is when you think about going through the purchase process at a store, you take your items up in the shopping cart and then at that point, you transition into a financial transaction that has to occur that then if you were at a big box electronic store, or something, eventually, you would make the payment. You would submit payment. That would be the key events and that payment is accepted and then you receive a receipt, which is kind of the in-person version of a record of your order that you've made because you have to bring the receipt back. DAMIEN: It sort of works if the thing you're putting in the shopping cart are those little cards. When they don't want to put things on the shelf, they have a card, you pick it up, and you take it to register. They ring it up, they give you a receipt, and hopefully, the thing shows up in the mail someday, or someone goes to the warehouse and goes gets it. PAUL: We've all done that. [chuckles] Sometimes it shows up. Sometimes it doesn't. JESSICA: That's an interesting point that at key events, there can be a shift in metaphor. PAUL: Yes. Often, there is. So for example, I mentioned earlier, a sales process ending in a contract and then once the contract is signed, the team – let's say, you're signing on a new customer, for a SaaS service, or something like that. Once they've signed the contract, the conversation isn't really about the contract anymore. It's about what do we need to do to onboard this customer. Up until that point, the emphasis is maybe on payment, legal disclosures, and things like that. But then the focus shifts after the contract is signed to more of an operational focus of how do we get the data in, how do we set up their accounts correctly, that type of thing. JESSICA: The contract is an input to that process. PAUL: Yes. JESSICA: Whereas, it was the output, the big goal of the sales process. PAUL: Yes, exactly. So these key events also function from a systems perspective, when you think about moving this to code that event then becomes almost like a message potentially. Could be implemented as say, a message that's being passed from the sales system through to the onboarding system, or something like that. So it functions as the integration point between those two, where the language has to be translated from one context to another. JESSICA: And it's an integration point we can define carefully so that makes it a strong boundary and a good place to divide the system. DAMIEN: Nice. PAUL: Right. So that's where it starts to connect to some of the things that people really care about these days in terms of system decomposition and things like that. Because you can start thinking about based on a process view of this, based on a behavior view of this, if we treat these key events as potential emergent boundaries in a process, like we've been describing, that we discover through mapping out the process, then that can give us some clues as to hmm maybe these boundaries don't exist in the system right now, but they could. These could be places where we start to tease things apart. JESSICA: Right. Where you start breaking out separate services and then when you get down to the user story level, the user stories expect a consistent language within themselves. You're not going to go from cart to return purchase in a case. PAUL: [laughs] Right. JESSICA: In a single user story. User stories are smaller scope and work within a single language. PAUL: Right and so, I think the connection there in my mind is user stories have to be written in some kind of language, within some language context and mapping out the process can help you understand where you are in that context and then also understand, like if you think about a process that maybe has a sales part of the process and then an onboarding part, it'll often be the case that there's different development teams that are focusing on different parts of that process. So it provides a way of them seeing what their integration point is and what might need to happen across that integration point. If they were to either integrate to different systems, or if they're trying to tease apart an existing system. To use Michael Feathers' term, what might be a “scene” that we could put in here that would allow us to start teasing these things apart. And doing it with the knowledge of the product people that are part of the visualization, too is that this isn't something typically that engineers do exclusively from a technical perspective. The idea with EventStorming is you are also bringing in other perspectives like product, business, stakeholders, and anyone that might have more of that business perspective in terms of what the goals of the process are and what the steps are in the process. MID-ROLL: And now a quick word from our sponsor. I hear people say the VPNs have a reputation for slowing down your internet speed, but not with NordVPN, because it's the fastest VPN in the world. I don't have to sacrifice internet speed for better security. With NordVPN, my internet traffic is routed through a secure encrypted tunnel, which protects my data and privacy. I can also have it on up to six devices like my laptop, phone, TV, iPad—all my devices are protected. Grab your exclusive NordVPN deal by going to nordvpn.com/gtc, or use the code GTC to get a huge discount on your NordVPN plan plus one additional month for free. Plus, a bonus gift! It's completely risk-free with Nord's 30-day money back guarantee. JESSICA: As a developer, it's so important to understand what those goals are, because that lets us make good decisions when we're down in the weeds and getting super precise. PAUL: Right, I think so. I think often, I see teams that are implementing stories, but not really understanding the why behind that in terms of maybe they get here's the functionality on delivering and how that fits into the system. But like I talked about before, when you're driving a process towards a key event, that becomes the goal of that subprocess. So the question then becomes how does the functionality that I'm going to implement that's described in this user story actually move people towards that goal and maybe there's a better way of implementing it to actually get them there. DAMIEN: Yeah, it's always important to keep that in mind, because there's always going to be ambiguity until you have a running system, or ran system, honestly. JESSICA: Yeah! DAMIEN: There's always going to be ambiguity, which it is our job as people writing code to manage and we need to know. Nobody's going to tell us exactly what's going to happen because that's our job. PAUL: Right. JESSICA: It's like if the developer had a user story that Cinderella's slipper fell off, but they do didn't realize that the goal of that was that the prince picked it up, then they might be like, “Oh, slipper broke. That's fine.” PAUL: Yeah. JESSICA: It's off the foot. Check the box. PAUL: Let's create a glass slipper factory implementer object [laughter] so that we can just create more of those. JESSICA: Oh, yeah. What, you wanted a method slip off in one piece? You didn't say that. I've created crush! PAUL: Right. [laughter] Yeah. So I think sometimes there's this potential to get lost in the weeds of the everyday development work that is happening and I like to tie it back to what is the actual story that we're supporting. And then sometimes what people think of as exception cases, like an example might be going back to that merchant return example is what if they issue the shipper label, but the buyer never receives it. We may say, “Well, that's never going to happen,” or “That's unlikely.” But visualizing that case, you may say, “That's actually a strong possibility. How do we handle that case and bake that into the design so that it actually reflects what we're trying to do?” JESSICA: And then you make an event that just triggers two weeks later that says, “Check whether customer received label.” PAUL: Yes, exactly. One thing you can do as well is like – so that's one possibility of solving it. The idea what EventStorming can let you do is say, “Well, that's one way of doing it. Are there any other options in terms of how we could handle this, let's visualize.” With any exception case, or something, you could say, “Well, let's try solving this a few different ways. Just quickly come up with some different ideas and then we can pull the best of those ideas into that.” So the idea when you're modeling is to say, “Okay, well, there's probably more than one way to address this. So maybe let's get a few ideas on the table and then pick the best out of these.” JESSICA: Or address it at multiple levels. PAUL: Yes. JESSICA: A fallback for the entire process is customer contact support again. PAUL: Right, and that may be the simple answer in that kind of case. What we're trying to do, though is to visualize that case as an option and then talk about it, have a structured conversation around it, say, “Well, how would we handle that?” Which I think from a product management perspective is a key thing to do is to engage the engineers in saying, “Well, what are some different ways that we could handle this and solve this?” If you have people that are doing responsibility primarily for testing in that, then having them weigh in on, well, how would we test this? What kind of test cases might we need to handle for this? So it's getting – [overtalk] JESSICA: How will we know it worked? PAUL: Different perspectives and opinions on the table earlier rather than later. JESSICA: And it's cheap. It's cheap, people. It's a couple hours and a lot of post-its. You can even buy the generic post-its. We went to Office Depot yesterday, it's $10 for 5 little Post-it pads, [laughter] or 25 Office Depot brand post-it pads. They don't have to stay on the wall very long; the cheap ones will work. PAUL: [laughs] So those all work and then it depends if you have shares in 3M, I guess, with you. [laughter] Or Office Depot, depending which road you want to go down. [laughter] JESSICA: Or if you really care about that shade of pale purple, which I do. PAUL: Right. I mean, what's been fascinating to me is in the last 2 years with switching to remote work and that is so much of, 95% of the EventStorming I do these days is on a collaborative whiteboard tool like Miro, or MURAL, which I don't know why those two product names are almost exactly the same. But then it's even cheaper because you can sign up for a free account, invite a few people, and then just start adding sticky notes to some virtual whiteboard and do it from home. There's a bunch of things that you can do on tool like that with copy pasting, moving groups of sticky notes around, rearranging things, and ordering things much – [overtalk] JESSICA: And you never run out of wall. PAUL: Yeah. The idea with the butcher's paper in a physical workshop, in-person workshop is you're trying to create a sense of unending modeling space that you can use. That you get for free when you use online collaborative whiteboarding tool. It's just there out of – [overtalk] JESSICA: And you can zoom in. PAUL: And you zoom in and out. Yeah. There's a – [overtalk] JESSICA: Stickies on your stickies on your stickies. [laughter] I'm not necessarily recommending that, but you can do it. PAUL: Right. The group I was working with last night, they'd actually gone to town using Miro emojis. They had something bad happen in the project and they've got the horror emoji [laughter] and then they've got all kinds of and then copy pasting images off the internet for things. JESSICA: Nice. PAUL: So yeah, can make it even more fun. JESSICA: Okay. So it's less physical, but in a lot of ways it can be more expressive, PAUL: I think so. More expressive and just as engaging and it can break down the geographical barriers. I've done sessions where we've had people simultaneously spread in multiple occasions across the US and Europe in the same session, all participating in real-time. If you're doing it remote, I like to keep it short. So maybe we do like a 2-hour session with a 10- or 15-minute break in the middle, because you're trying to manage people's energy and keep them focused and it's hard to do that when you just keep going. MANDY: I kind of want to talk a little bit about facilitation and how you facilitate these kind of workshops and what you do, engage people and keep them interested. PAUL: Yeah. So I think that it depends a little bit on the level of detail we're working at. If it's at the level of a few team members trying to figure out a feature, then it can be very informal. Not a lot of facilitation required. Let's just write down what the goal is and then go through the process of brainstorming a few stickies, laying it out, and then sequencing it as a timeline, adding questions. It doesn't require a lot of facilitation hand. I think the key thing is just making sure that people are writing down their questions and that it's time boxed. So quitting while people are still interested and then [laughter] at the end, before you finish, having a little bit of a conversation around what might the next steps be. Like what did we learn? You could do a couple of minutes retrospective, add a sticky note for something you learned in this session, and then what do you see as our next steps and then move on from there with whatever action items come out of that. So that one doesn't require, I think a lot of facilitation and people can get up and running with that pretty quickly. I also facilitate workshops that are a lot more involved where it's at the other end of the spectrum, where it's a big picture workshop where we're mapping out maybe an entire value stream for an organization. We may have a dozen, 20 people involved in a session like that representing different departments, different organizational silos and in that case, it requires a lot more planning, a lot more thinking through what the goal of the workshop is, who would you need to invite? Because there's a lot more detail involved and a lot more people involved, that could be four, or five multi-hour sessions spread over multiple days to be able to map out an entire value stream from soup to nuts. And then usually the goal of something like that is some kind of system modernization effort, or maybe spinning up a new project, or decomposing a legacy system, or even understanding what a legacy system does, or process improvement that will result inevitably in some software development in certain places. I did a workshop like that, I think last August and out of that, we identified a major bottleneck in the process that everyone in the workshop, I think it was just a bunch of pink stickies in one area that it got called the hot mess. [laughter] It was one area and what was happening was there were several major business concerns that were all coupled together in this system. They actually ended up spinning up a development team to focus on teasing apart the hot mess to figure out how do we decompose that down? JESSICA: Yes. PAUL: As far as I know, that effort was still ongoing as of December. I'm assuming that's still running because it was prioritized as we need to be able to decompose this part of this system to be able to grow and scale to where we want to get to. JESSICA: Yeah. That's a major business risk that they've got. They at least got clarity about where it is. PAUL: Right. Yeah, and what we did from there is I coached the developers through that process over several months. So we actually EventStormed it out at a much lower level. Once we figured out what the hot mess was, let's map it out and then they combined that with some flow charting and a bunch of other more engineering, kind of oriented visualization techniques, state machines, things like that to try and get a handle on what was going on. DAMIEN: We'll get UML in there eventually, right? PAUL: Eventually. [laughter] You can't do software development without some kind of state machine, sequence diagram. JESSICA: And it's approximating UML. You can't do it. You can't do it. [laughter] You will either use it, or you will derive a pigeon form of it. PAUL: Right. Well, I still use it for state diagrams and sequence diagrams when I'm down at that technical level. What I find is that there's a certain level of rigor that UML requires for a sequence diagram, or something like that that seems to get in the way of collaboration. So EventStorming sacrifices some of that rigor to be able to draw in everyone and have a low bar of entry to having people participate. DAMIEN: That's a huge insight. Why do you think that is? Is it the inability to hold that much information at a high level of rigor, or just people not used to working at that sort of precision and rigor? PAUL: I think that when I'm working with people that are not hands-on coders, they are in the everyday, like say, product managers, or stakeholders, to use those terms. They're in the everyday details of how the business process works and they tend to think of that process more as a series of steps that they're going through in a very specific kind of way. Like, I'm shipping a certain product, or supporting the shipping. or returning of certain types of products, those kinds of things. Whereas, as developers, we tend to think of it more in terms of the abstractions of the system and what we're trying to implement in the code. So the idea of being able to tell the story of a process in terms of the events that happen is a very natural thing, I find for people from a business perspective to do because that's how they tend to think about it. Whereas, I think as programmers, we're often taught not so much to think about behavior as a sequence of things happening, but more as the structure we've been taught to design in terms of structures and relationships rather than flow. JESSICA: Yet that's changing with event sourcing. PAUL: I think so. EventStorming and event sourcing become a very natural complement for each other and even event-driven architecture, or any event-driven messaging, whatever it happens to be. The gap between modeling using EventStorming and then designing some kind of event-driven distributed system, or even not distributed, but still event-driven is much more natural than trying to do something like an entity relationship diagram and they'd get from that to some kind of meaningful understanding of what's the story of how these functions and features are going to work. JESSICA: On the topic of sacrificing rigor for collaboration, I think you have to sacrifice rigor to work across content texts because you will find contradictions between them. The language does have different meaning before and after the order is submitted and you have to allow for that in the collaboration. It's not that you're not going to have the rigor. It's more that you're postponing it, you're scoping it as separately. This meeting is about the higher level and you need completeness over consistency. DAMIEN: Yeah. I feel like almost you have to sacrifice rigor to be effective in most roles and in that way, sacrifice is even the wrong word. Most of the things that we do as human beings do not allow for the sort of rigor of the things that we do as software engineers and things that computers do. JESSICA: Yeah. DAMIEN: And it's just, the world doesn't work that way. PAUL: Right. Well, and it's the focus in EventStorming on exploration, discovery, and urgent ideas versus rigor is more about not so much exploring and discovery, but about converging on certain things. So when someone says pedant and the other person says pedant, or vice versa, that tends to shut down the conversation because now you are trying to converge on some agreed upon term versus saying, “Well, let's explore a bunch of different ways this could be expressed and temporarily defer trying converge on.” JESSICA: Later in Slack, we'll vote. PAUL: Yes. JESSICA: Okay. So standardize later. PAUL: Yes. Standardize, converge later, and for now, let's kind of hold that at arm's length so that we can uncover and discover different perspectives on this in terms of how the story works and then add regulator when we go to code and then you may discover things in code where there are implicit concepts that you then need to take back to the modeling to try and figure out well, how do we express this? Coming up with some kind of term in the code and being able to go from there. JESSICA: Right. Some sort of potential return because it hasn't happened yet. PAUL: Exactly. So maybe it's a potential, maybe it's some other kind of potential return, like pending return, maybe we don't call it a return at all. JESSICA: Or disliked item because we could – or unsatisfactory item because we could intercept that and try to like, “Hey, how about we send you the screws that we're missing?” PAUL: Right. Yeah, maybe the answer is not a return at all. JESSICA: Yeah. PAUL: But maybe the case is that the customer says they want to return it, but you actually find a way to get them to buy more stuff by sending them something else that they would be happy with. So the idea is we're trying to promote discovery thinking when we are talking about how to understand certain problems and how to solve them rather than closing off options too soon. MANDY: So, Paul, I know you do give these workshops. Is there anything? Where can people find you? How can people learn more? How can people hire you to facilitate a workshop and get in touch with you? PAUL: Okay. Well, in terms of resources, Damien had mentioned at the beginning, I have an eBook up on Leanpub, The EventStorming Handbook, so if people are interested in learning more, they can get that. And then I do workshop facilitation and training through my company, Virtual Genius. They can go to virtualgenius.com and look at what training is available. It's all online these days, so they can participate from anywhere. We have some public workshops coming up in the coming months. And then they can find me, I'm @ThePaulRayner on Twitter, just to differentiate me from all the indefinite articles that are out there. [laughter] MANDY: Sounds good. Well, let's head into reflections. I can start. I just was thinking while we were talking about this episode, about how closely this ties into my background in professional writing, technical writing to be exact, and just how you have this process to lay out exactly what steps need to be taken and to differentiate when people say the same things and thinking about, “Well, they're saying the same things, but the words matter,” and to get pedantic, that can be a good thing, especially when you are writing technical documents and how-tos. I remember still, my first job being a technical writer and looking at people in a machine shop who it was like, first, you do this, then you do this, then you do this and to me, I was like, “This is so boring.” But it makes sense and it matters. So this has been a really good way for me to think about it as a newbie just likening it to technical writing. JESSICA: Yeah. Technical writing has to tell that story. DAMIEN: I'm going to be reflecting on this has been such a great conversation and I feel like I have a lot of familiarity with at least a very similar process. I brought up all my fears that come from them, which is like, what if we don't have the right person in the room? What if there's something we didn't discover? And you said something about how you can do this in 5 minutes and how you can do this in 15 minutes and I realized, “Oh, this process doesn't have to be the 6-hour things that I've participated in and facilitated in. It can also be done more smaller and more iteratively and I can bring this sort of same process and thought process into more of the daily work.” So that's super helpful for me. JESSICA: I want to reflect on a phrase that Paul said and then Damien emphasized, which is shared understanding. It's what we're trying to get to in EventStorming across teams and across functions. I think it's also like what we're constantly trying to get to as humans. We value shared understanding so much because we're trapped in our heads and my experience in my head is never going to be the same as your experience in your head. But at some point, we share the same physical world. So if we can get that visual representation, if we can be talking together about something in that visual world, we can pass ideas back and forth more meaningfully. We can achieve this shared understanding. We can build something together. And that feels so good. I think that that constant building of shared understanding is a lot of what it means to be human and I get really excited when I get to do that at work. PAUL: I think I would just add to that as well is being human, I'm very much aware of limitations in terms of how many ideas I can hold in my head at any one time. I know the times where I've been in the experience that many describe where someone's giving me a list of steps to follow and things like that, inevitably I'm like, “Well, I remember like the first two, maybe three,” and then everything after that is kind of Charlie Brown. What, what, why? [laughter] I don't remember anything they said from that point on. But when I can visualize something, then I can take it in one go. I can see it and we're building it together. So for me, it's a little bit of a mind hack in terms of getting over the limitations of how many things I can keep in my mind at one time. Also, like you said, Jess, getting those things out of my mind and out of other people's minds into a shared space where we can actually collaborate on them together, I think that's really important to be able to do that in a meaningful way. MANDY: Well, thank you so much for coming on the show today, Paul. We really enjoyed this discussion. And if you, as listeners, would like to continue this conversation, please head over to Patreon.com/greaterthancode. We have a Slack channel. You can pledge and donate to sponsor us as little as a dollar and you can come in, hang out, talk with us about these episodes. If not, give me a DM on Twitter and let me know, and I'll let you in anyway because [laughter] that's what we do here at Greater Than Code. PAUL: Because Mandy's awesome. MANDY: [laughs] Thank you, Paul. With that, thank you everyone for listening and we'll see you again next week. Special Guest: Paul Rayner.

Paul Nation is one of the world's leading researchers on and writers on vocabulary, reading and fluency, has written dozens of books and been publishing research on these topics since 1970. Paul is Emeritus Professor in Applied Linguistics at the School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies (LALS) at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand and has taught in Indonesia, Thailand, the United States, Finland and Japan.For more podcasts, videos and blogs, visit our website Support the podcast – buy us a coffee!Develop yourself! Find more about our teacher training courses Watch as well as listen on our YouTube channelTracy: Hey everybody. Welcome to our podcast.Ross Thorburn: Hey everyone. On our podcasts, I think we spent a lot of time talking about speaking, but we haven't ever really directly tackled the idea of fluency.Tracy: That's true.Ross: Today we've got, once again, Paul Nation, emeritus professor at the School of Applied Linguistics and Applied Language at Victoria University, New Zealand, to talk to us about fluency and vocabulary and how those two things link together.Tracy: Paul is one of the world's leading researchers and writers on vocabulary and fluency. We are incredibly lucky to be able to have him on our podcast.Ross: As usual, we've got three areas that we'll cover in the podcast. Firstly, we will ask Paul why fluency is important. Then secondly...Tracy: ...how can teachers help students develop fluency, and the third one...Ross: ...what are some common mistakes that teachers make in teaching vocabulary and helping students become fluent?Why is fluency important?Tracy: Hello Paul.Paul Nation: Hello.Tracy: How are you doing?Paul: Good.Tracy: Before we go onto fluency, let's start off by talking about vocabulary.Paul: No problem.Tracy: Why have you dedicated so much of your career to vocabulary and vocabulary research?Paul: There's a couple of reasons why I focus on it. I guess being important is one of the reasons. The vocabulary knowledge underlies every language use skill, and without vocabulary, you can't do much in the way of listening, speaking, reading or writing.The other reason I'd probably focus on is that it's been a very poorly researched area in the past. In fact, some of the worst researched areas that I know of in applied linguistics are actually in vocabularies.Ross: Can you tell us a bit about fluency then? To start off, why is fluency so important?Paul: One of my favorite stories about that is when I was in Japan. We went on a train. We weren't quite sure whether we were going to the right place or not. I looked around the carriage, and there was a very studious looking young woman there wearing glasses, looking like a student.I asked her, "Is this the train to Osaka?" She looked at me, and a look of dismay came over her face. She buried her hands in the face. "Oh my goodness, what have I done?" If I caused her to lose face, what's going to happen as a result?Anyway, someone further down the carriage, a man said, "Yes, Osaka." As the train went along, this woman pulled out a book and started reading it. Being nosy, I dropped my pen on the floor and had a quick look at what the book was.She was reading a book called "The Macro Economics of Agriculture" in English. I couldn't read a book called The Macro Economics of Agriculture in English, even being a native speaker. When we got off the train, she came up to us and said, "Where are you going?" I bet that she'd been practicing that sentence for the last 20 or 30 minutes before we got to the station.I said the name. She said, "Follow me." We had a conversation. Here was someone with enormous knowledge of the language and yet not fluent in some of the basic things that she could have quite easily become fluent. It meant that these avenues of use of it were closed off to her.I think it's important that about a quarter of the time on a course to spend getting fluent in reading, getting fluent in writing, using just the little bit that you know even, but making sure that you can use it.Ross: Paul, with fluency, I think there's this concept that, for students, they only really become fluent or develop fluency at maybe intermediate or advanced levels. You wouldn't think of a beginner as being fluent. When do you think it's useful for students to start to develop fluency?Paul: I can't talk about anything nowadays it seems without having to get onto what I call the four strands. The four strands are simply learning through input, learning through output, deliberate learning, and developing fluency.Each one of those that I call a strand, which in the basic principle is that in a well‑balanced language course there should be roughly equal amount of time spent on each of these four strands at every single level of proficiency.If you're learning a language for survival, David Crab and I did some research to set up a survival vocabulary for foreign travel, which is about 120 words and phrases, that if you know those, you can do quite a lot in the language.You can travel around. You can get food. You can find accommodation. You can be polite to people and so on like that. The thing is, you could learn those, but the other thing is you've got to learn them fluently.That means that you can say them in a way that people will understand. When people reply, you need to be able to interpret what they say at a speed which will make it useful for you. Even then learning, a survival vocabulary, you've got to get fluent and that kind of fluency is quite easy to develop.You keep getting people to repeat it over and over again to you and get faster and faster and faster. You keep practicing and practicing and doing that. It's very important because a lot of students have quite a lot of knowledge of English, but they don't have the fluency to put it into practice.How can teachers help students develop fluency?Tracy: Paul, can you please share some practical activities which teachers can use in the classroom to help their students and develop those skills to be more fluent?Paul: I've written lots of books, but the one that I liked the most, one that gave me the greatest satisfaction having written it is called, "What Should Every EFL Teacher Know," because of near I sort of wanted after training teachers and teaching English and that for well over 50 years.I thought if I can sit down, reading all the research, and say in a simple, clear and direct way what do I think EFL teachers should be doing, then there's something wrong with...I haven't spent my life well.I wrote that book and then as, part of doing it, I sat, and I thought, "Well, what if I had to choose 20 teaching techniques and activities, what would they be? The top ones that people should know."I came up with a list of those which are in the book. The ones for speaking fluency, one is a very interesting technique called Four, Three, Two, where the students choose an easy topic, and then they sit down with a partner and teacher says, "Go."For four minutes, they have to talk about that familiar, easy topic. After exactly four minutes, the teacher says, "Stop. Change partners." Then everybody moves onto a new partner.Then for three minutes, the same people, half of the class have to talk again to their partner saying exactly what they said before to the new partner, but doing it in three minutes. After three minutes, they move onto another partner. Then they have to do it in two minutes. That's a very simple, easy but very effective technique for developing spoken fluency.Another one would be repeated delivery of a talk, which is a bit like Four, Three, Two because repetition is one of the ways of developing fluency. It's what I call the will beat a path to fluency, that is you keep doing the same thing over and over again until you get good at it.Another way of developing fluency is a rich and varied map where you do similar things but not exactly the same thing. You change it in some way so that you keep coming at the same stuff, but you're doing it in different ways.A very useful technique for that is called Linked Schools where people might read about something. Then they might write about the same topic, and they would have to get up and speak about that topic.Having now read about it, written about it, when they come to speak about it, they can do this speaking with a lot of knowledge and use that speaking as an opportunity to develop fluency in speaking, drawing on that knowledge.Common mistakes teachers make in teaching vocabulary and helping students become fluentRoss: I remember, Paul, a few years ago, in fact, I think we did a podcast about this, I remember reading a paper that you wrote that was warning teachers of the danger of teaching vocabulary in lexical or semantic sets.Can you tell us about some other examples maybe of where you think there's a gap between what research says works with teaching vocabulary and what teachers tend to do for teaching vocabulary?Paul: The lexical sets was interesting because once again, the research is starting to show that there are sort of niceties to that lexical set idea comparing immediate learning compared with a long‑term retention from it.There's interesting research which shows that the interference is greater with say, if you learn fruit together. It becomes harder with fruit, which in some ways resemble each other like apples or more like oranges. Then they are like bananas.You're more likely to get interference between apples and oranges than you are between apples and bananas in terms of the word form and its meaning. That's funny.I would say that the greatest mistake is one I've mentioned already, which was the idea of vocabulary needs to be taught. I would say another belief that's encouraged by people who haven't read the research is that vocabulary needs to be learned in context.They often express this negatively in the sense that it's not good to learn vocabulary out of context and the research is quite the opposite. Learning vocabulary out of context is highly effective and highly efficient.The idea, for example, of using bilingual word cards or bilingual flashcard programs is a very good idea. You'd have this often criticized because it says all the vocab isn't learned in context.If it's part of a well‑balanced program where there's opportunities for learning from input‑output in fluency development, which are all in context. Then some deliberate learning, using the first language translation, learning the word without any illustrative context around it is very effective and efficient.Tracy: That one is interesting. I think that's very different to what most teachers believe and what gets taught on most of the teacher training courses.Paul: Steve Crashing criticized this saying that this learning will not be learning which will be of use when you come to use the language normally. I tackled him on this at a conference one time, and I said, "Does this apply to vocabulary? The idea that deliberate learning doesn't result in the kind of knowledge you need for a normal language used."He said, "Yes, it applies to vocabulary." I said, "Good." We went away, and we got one of our PhD students working on it. She showed the deliberate decontextualized learning of vocabulary resulted in both implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge.Implicit knowledge is a kind of knowledge that you need for normal language use, this kind of flash card learning. You can learn enormous amounts in a very short time, but they out very important principles to follow when you do this learning.These are principles, which have been well‑established by psychological research or research in psychology over the last almost 100 years, or so, involving repetition, spacing of the repetitions, retrieval that means not looking at the word and the meaning together all the time, but having to try and retrieve or recall the meaning that went with the word.If you can't recall it, you have a look. The idea of spaced retrieval is very important. The idea of varying the order of the words being learned, so you're not learning them in the same serial order or anything like it.There are simple guidelines for that learning, but they're very important guidelines. If learners are trained in how to do that, training is not a big deal for that, they could learn large amounts in a very short time.This allows them to make good progress through extensive reading and extensive listening and things like that, because they bring all this background knowledge of decontextualized learning, which now becomes contextualized through their reading and listening.More from Paul NationRoss: Paul, I'll put a link to your University of Victoria web page. Is that a place for people to go if they want to find out more about your work?Paul: Yeah. The latest thing on the website is the updated vocabulary levels test, which is the most useful test for teachers of English as a foreign language to do, to measure the learners' vocabulary size. Then I wrote a book for learners called "What Do You Need to Know to Learn a Foreign Language?" That's free for download.Ross: Thanks so much again for taking the time to come and talk to us.Paul: No problem. Good luck with your work.Ross: Thanks, Paul.Paul: Bye everyone.Tracy: Bye.

What you'll learn in this episode: What charnel houses and ossuaries are, and why they were an important part of people's spiritual lives Why the Catholic Church decorated hundreds of Roman skeletons with jewels in the 17th century Why 17th century nuns were some of the most skilled yet unrecognized jewelers of their day How art and jewelry can help us explore death and other touchy subjects About Paul Koudounaris Paul Koudounaris is an author and photographer based in Los Angeles. He holds a PhD in Art History from the University of California, and he has traveled around the world to document charnel houses, ossuaries, pet cemeteries, and other macabre subjects for both academic and popular journals. His books include The Empire of Death, Memento Mori, and Heavenly Bodies, which features the little-known skeletons taken from the Roman Catacombs in the seventeenth century and decorated with jewels by teams of nuns. His most recent book is A Cat's Tale: A Journey Through Feline History. Additional Resources: Instagram Photos: Rorschach upper half, chest with skull  Hergiswil stomach full shot Weyarn head with problem here due to discoloration behind skull due to back lighting through stained glass window Sonntagsberg felic chest detail Bad Schussenried head and chest Peterskirche munditia in shrine three problems, top over curtain over rope and weird candle Transcript: Today, covering a skeleton with jewels seems odd or downright morbid. In the 17th century, it was par for the course for the Catholic Church, which covered the skeletons of martyrs with jewels and lavish accessories to highlight the Church's power. Author and photographer Paul Koudounaris has spent years researching and documenting these little-known historic treasures, which he detailed in his book Heavenly Bodies: Cult Treasures & Spectacular Saints from the Catacombs. He joined the Jewelry Journey Podcast to talk about how the skeletons (and human remains generally) were an important part of people's spiritual lives; why nuns were responsible for decorating the jeweled skeletons; and why the Catholic Church's efforts to honor martyrs didn't exactly go as it intended. Read the episode transcript here.  Sharon: Paul, I'm thinking: you have a PhD in art history, so you're a historian skilled in doing research. A lot of what you're talking about isn't just looking at something; it sounds like you had to do a lot of digging. Were the things you were talking about, the traditions and things, was this just passed down and the clergymen knew about it when you came to town, or did you have to go find original documents? Paul: I had to go back to a lot of original source material. Obviously, a lot of this stuff is forgotten about now. I did a lot of digging. It was a good couple of years of very solid research, mostly in Germany. This is very obscure information, but it was rewarding information. When you do research like this, it's like a jigsaw puzzle in getting all the pieces back into place. In the end, you never get all the pieces; you never wholly fill out the puzzle, but I feel like I did a good job of filling in about 98 percent of the puzzle of those skeletons. Sharon: I'm sure you know more than anybody else on earth about this. For all of your books, you've done the photography. Were you into photography before this? Paul: I had played around with photography a little bit before, but not professionally. When I did my first book, The Empire of Death, I actually didn't want to do the photos for the book. I wanted someone else to do them because I wanted to be able to concentrate on the research, and I didn't want to get too distracted by the photos. I wanted to walk into an old charnel house and be able to concentrate on understanding it as a space rather than immediately running in and looking it as a photographer. In the end, there was no one who could do the photos for me. There was no one who wanted to take that trip and get involved, so, I was forced into the position of doing it. In the end, by both doing the photos and researching them, I understood them all the better. It didn't distract me; I think it actually helped me focus on them.  After I had done that book, there was no question that I was going to do the photos for the rest of my books. I liked working that way. I did all the photos for Heavenly Bodies. Photographically it was a very hard task because a lot of them are in cases, so they can't be removed from these glass cases without destroying a lot. It was very difficult, but again very rewarding. I'd like to think by doing it myself and really understanding it, it allowed me to get pictures that, to me, looked more sympathetic than clinical. It might be hard to explain that without looking at other people's photos, but a lot of times, I felt that by taking the photos, I'd strive for a sense of personality because each of them had something to convey. I felt very close to them by the end of this work; maybe not close to them, but close to the people who once venerated them and those nuns who created them. Sharon: I could understand how that would be. In the beginning, you were talking about how you got your PhD in art history and you were looking for the niche. How did you stumble on this death niche?  Paul: I studied at UCLA. I was probably the Fox Mulder of the art history department. I was always the guy who, while everybody else was working on Rembrandt, I'd go off and do a seminar paper about wood cuts of werewolves or something like that. It was the things that were not considered high art and were not considered masterpieces. I was always into these things that were visual culture for common people and visual culture that had been pushed to the margins just because we consider it hokey or unseemly. I was always into that kind of stuff. I was not working on the death stuff while I was in grad school. That came later to me, when I was traveling around Europe and I understood this massive part of people's lives that we had pushed out of the history books just because we were uncomfortable with it, and when I understood the incredibly important role it played in people's spiritual lives to have these bones around. I do want to talk a little bit about the materials that went into the skeleton, if that's O.K. Sharon: Yes, please. Paul: I think that's important because people always ask me, “Are these real jewels or are these replicas?” They want to talk about the materials, and I think this can relate to your audience. In most cases, they are glass replicas rather than real rubies or things like that, but there's a reason for that. When I say they are replicas, a lot of them think, “O.K., it must be cheap,” and it's not. Nature provides what it provides, and it might not provide the materials we need in perfect shapes and sizes and patterns. So, if you were to decorate a skeleton just with real jewels found in nature, it would be very, very hard to match things up to get a perfect pattern and a perfect flow of material. That is a big part of the reason they were using glass replicas, but when I say glass replicas, I don't mean cheap. I don't mean going down to Hobby Lobby or Michael's and buying junk like people would today. There were very few glass-blowers in Europe who could make presentation-quality replicas of real jewels. They were located in the Czech Republic, in Bohemia and in Venice, and they were very, very expensive. When I say replicas, I don't mean cheap. If you look at the skeletons and you see these perfect patterns of similarly shaped jewels with a similar sheen to them, that's because they're replicas, but they would use replicas so they could complete a decorative pattern perfectly rather than relying on what nature could provide.  A lot of them you'll see are wearing what looked like wigs. Those wigs are super important. Those wigs are made of gold and silver wire. Talk about incredible expense. There was only one place in Europe that could make wire in the finest of hair, and it was in Lyon, France. They would have to get this wire made out of silver. The reason they would use this gold and silver wire, this metallic wire and precious metal, to make these wigs for them was because they wanted them to stand the test of time. Let's say I got a nice wig made out of horsehair or something. That would be pretty durable. It's still not going to last 300 years and hold its shape, is it? No way. But a wig made of coiled precious metal wire will stand the test of time, and it will maintain its shape for hundreds of years. That's why a lot of them still have these perfect curls, because they're made out of this incredibly expensive metal wire. These were really, really expensive productions to make. Even when they were made of replicas, they were incredibly expensive.  One question I constantly got asked when the book came out—whenever I did a talk, someone would ask, “How much would this cost to make in modern terms?” I never came up with a satisfactory answer for that because it's hard enough to say, “Well, today's dollar versus dollars in 1950,” and that can be kind of deceiving. Now, let's talk about today's dollars versus guilder in 1612. You're talking not just about converting currencies through a vast amount of time, you're also talking about a different economic system. You're talking about a system back then where you had incredibly rich people and everybody else was incredibly poor. Even if I said, “O.K., if you base it on such and such, maybe it costs $2 million to make,” that's still incredibly deceptive because nowadays, over the course of your lifetime, an average person might make $2 million. Back then, an average person who's out there picking carrots is going to make $2 million in a hundred lifetimes. So, these were extremely expensive even when they were replicas.   Sharon: I'm backtracking a little bit. Were they mixing real jewels with these glass jewels? Would the nuns send an order to the glassblower and say, “I need one this size”? Paul: It could be. Some of them are real jewels. A lot of times, they might use a real jewel for an accent. A lot of them have pearls. Even the pearls are fake, but the pearls are faked to be the exact same size, because nature doesn't provide pearls in equally identical sizes. But again, even the pearls that were fake were incredibly expensive to make because you had to start with a perfect, handmade glass jewel, then they had to make a covering for it to get the sheen of a pearl. They had to make the covering out of ground fish paste and paint over this ground fish paste to seal it so it would soak in. It was incredibly expensive.  One advantage was when these skeletons came to town, they were a big deal and they were going to be venerated, so a lot of wealthy people wanted to be a part of them. You might have a local duchess or duke or local count or baron donate things for the skeleton. They might donate authentic jewelry; they might donate authentic jewels, and they might donate clothing, too. You'll notice a lot of them aren't just jeweled. A lot of them are jeweled, but they also have what looks like outfits on them. Those outfits were donated by local nobility, and then the nuns would tailor them to perfectly fit the skeletons and make cutouts to show the bone. It's funny, because if you were into high fashion at the time, you would walk in and esteem these skeletons as wearing yesterday's clothes. It would be like, “That guy's a couple of years out of season,” because the nobility will donate fancy, expensive clothes for the skeleton's use, but they're not going to donate the clothes they just bought. They're not going to donate their own clothes. If you were a real nitpicker and you were into high fashion at the time, if you had an eye for it, “Yeah, that look on that skeleton is really last year.” That also would help to flesh out—pardon the pun—the decoration of the skeleton, giving them some extra materials. One other thing I think is very touching about these skeletons: a lot of them are wearing rings on their skeletal fingers. The rings often would be donated by the nuns when they were done. You mentioned the nuns, obviously, were very trustworthy and loved the skeletons. When they finished, before they put them on display, the nun had a special ring or a ring that was a family heirloom. She would donate it to the skeleton and put it on his finger. What the nuns donated, these rings, that became kind of their artist's signature, even though the meaning of it is kind of opaque to us. That became their signature, by donating something to the skeleton that would be there when it went on display.    Sharon: Could you tell there was a pattern? There are so many questions I can go through. When you talk about these rings as a signature, did you keep seeing the same ring over and over, or the did the ring have an initial? Paul: While the nuns were donating their rings, each ring was unique. Those rings were often things that had been passed down their families, like family heirlooms, so each ring would be unique. I became good enough in looking at these skeletons that I was able to tell you the same people worked on this skeleton too. I could tell you that; it's not that hard to tell. Your listeners who are really into jewelry, I'm sure they'll know. It's like, “O.K., when I see a wire bent that way and this done to fix it, I know who did that, because there are certain technical aspects that become signature moves.” There were certain convents in Europe that were particularly famous, that were well-known for doing handwork. They might work on several of them, so I was able to tell, “O.K., these people did this skeleton too,” or “Somebody from that convent worked on part of this one, but not all of it.” You could tell just by those signature, little things about the way they would wind the wire or the way they would set in the jewels. Sharon: Did the nuns make the silver and gold wigs? Paul: They would have to bend it. Not all of these were made by nuns. There were some. I should point that out in fairness to my gender. There were some that were done by men, but the vast majority was done by nuns. The most famous group that still exists is in Waldsassen Basilica in Germany. Waldsassen Basilica has 10 of these skeletons, and they are all on display in the church. It's like the Sistine Chapel of jeweled skeletons. The vast majority of those 10—I think it's eight of those 10—were all done by one guy who was a lay brother at the basilica who was also a professional jeweler and a smith. I mentioned some of them would also be in suits of armor instead of being jeweled. The ones that are armored, that armor was pretty much universally made for them by men. Smith work was men's work. Sharon: Wow! How many books have you written? Paul: Four. Sharon: Four books. I'm thinking about all the effort and research and photography that go into one book, let alone writing four of them. So, The Empire of Death, you finished it, and you had the photos you showed the commissioning editor. What more did you learn as you went along, besides the fact that there were skeletons, about the empire of death or the way we view death? Did you think, “I want to say more about this after The Empire of Death”? Paul: The Empire of Death is really a history book, and it's a history of charnel houses. It's not one of these guides to the history of death. It is an art historical tome, and the genre of art is just art in bone. I started on The Empire of Death and then I wrote Heavenly Bodies, and then I wrote a book called Memento Mori, which was a more global exploration because I had been traveling around the world photographing skeletons and bones in ritual contexts. I've got to say it took me about 10 years of work to even truly understand what I mean when I use the word death. When you ask this question about what I learned, I learned a lot, but it was a very slow process. Death is the hardest thing for any of us to contemplate, and oftentimes the most troubling thing for any of us to contemplate. It took me a really long time to understand what lay underneath all that material I was working on. I was working on all this death material, but in the end, I think I came out with a better appreciation of it and understanding. Sharon: Wow! Contemplating death, yes, that is a very difficult topic. We can imagine, but we can't really know. You're a member of the Order of the Good Death. What is that? Paul: The Order of the Good Death is not some kind of heretical, worrisome order. It's not some secret society. It's just a group of scholars and researchers and artists who work on death material. It was founded by a famous mortician, as famous as a mortician could be, I guess I should say, by the name of Caitlin Doughty, who has three New York Times-bestselling books about the way we deal with death in our society. She put this together as a think tank or a group to bring together people who were working within society to broaden our perspectives on death. None of us are out there wanting to die, and we are all hot and bothered by the idea of passing away, but at the same time, we need an acceptance of it, a more positive attitude towards nature as a natural process.  Sharon: Do you have to be invited? Can I get a membership card? How does that work? Paul: No, there's no membership card. There are no meetings. It's funny because of the name. It intrigues people. The term “good death” is an old term. It just means to pass well, to pass with grace and to pass in a meaningful and positive way. That's why she used that term. No, you can't. You don't fill out an application online, and there are no membership cards. There are no meetings. It's a very informal group. It's Caitlin's thing. If she feels that someone is doing work that she thinks fits in with her basic objective of broadening our western perspectives of death, she would like that person to join. Sharon: O.K., so she's the one I have to talk to. Now, let me ask you this. Maybe I have the order wrong, but it looks like your most recent book was A Cat's Tale. Is that correct? Do I have that right?  Paul: Yeah, that book came out this past November. That was my last book. I switched from death to writing about cats. Sharon: Why was that? That's what I wanted to ask. It's like, oh my gosh, is that the same person? Paul: It's the same person. Underlying all of it, there are some similarities. Cats also have been pushed to the margins of history. That's a much longer discussion, but when you ask people about feline history or famous cats who are not internet stars, like famous cats from history, they'll pretty much draw a blank. They'll tell you, “They were big in ancient Egypt, right?” That's about all they know. Of course, cats also have a great background in occult lore, so there are some similarities underlying the cat research and the death stuff. It's just something I wanted to do. I felt that cats, if you read the book—and the book is not technically written by me. The book is technically written by my cat. It says “By Baba the Cat as told to me,” so I'm the transcriber as she reinterprets human history from the cat point of view and puts the cat back into its place. It was just something I wanted to do.  If you or your audience find pictures from that book, they'll realize something: that it's also an illustrated book. My cat happens to be a supermodel. I had been messing around with those photo projects for a long time, making costumes for my cat because she'll wear them; she'll model and she's good. I was making a Marie Antoinette costume for her and things like that, and these were amazing pictures. So, it's like, “Well, I've got to do something with these pictures. Is there some way to put them into book form?” I thought at one point about doing a fashion guide for cats by my cat to show these looks, and then I was like, “No, wait a minute. Let's do a real book, something that will mean something to people.” So, I came up with this idea of a feline history from the perspective of a cat. It's really an emotional book, because cats have had a rough time. Yes, they were big in ancient Egypt. They were also a persecuted and hated animal at one time, and she pulls no punches. She tells you all the highs and all the lows and brings you up to the modern day and the place that cats hold in our lives. So, yes, that is by me. That was the last book. To be honest, from my perspective, being in collaboration with my cat, it's actually my favorite. Sharon: Say that again.  Paul: It's actually my favorite since it's a collaboration with my cat. It's basically a 200-page love letter to my cat. Sharon: Did she like jewelry? That's the most important question. Paul: Well, there's a lot of jewelry as you'll see. Sharon: O.K. What's your next book then? Paul: I would really like to write a history of pet cemeteries.  Sharon: Oh, interesting. Paul: That combines all of it, doesn't it? Death stuff and the cat's back into play. A history of pet cemeteries and famous animal memorials and the way we memorialize our animals. Pet cemeteries have a very interesting history. At this point, I probably know more about them than anyone in the world. I've photographed more of them than anyone in the world, too. I've gone all the way to New Zealand and Australia photographing animal graves. It's a book I had actually started. I had all the research done, and I was going make that my fourth book. Then the idea for the cat book came along, and it's like, “I'm going to sell a lot more copies of the cat book than I am a pet cemetery book in the end.” Think about this: if I mixed the order and did the cat book after, it would have a sticker on it that says, “New cat book by the guy who wrote the cemetery book that hardly anybody ever read,” or it can have a sticker on it that says, “A book about the history of pet cemeteries by this guy who wrote this famous cat book.” You know what I mean? I thought it might help to do the cat book first, so that was part of the thinking. Also I just really wanted to do this cat book at the time, because I love working with my cat.  Sharon: It sounds like you have a good partnership. Paul, thank you so much for being with us today. Do you have a favorite place to buy your books? Do you want them to go on Amazon? Does it matter to you, or is it just what people want? Paul: It doesn't matter to me. On a human level, I always tell people, “Hey, if you can support a local independent store, that's great. If you don't want to, it doesn't make any difference to me where people buy the books.” If they want to buy any of the books, I'm flattered. Thank you, but it doesn't make any difference. Sharon: Thank you so much for being with us today. Paul: Thank you. We will have images posted on the website. You can find us wherever you download your podcasts, and please rate us. Please join us next time, when our guest will be another jewelry industry professional who will share their experience and expertise. Thank you so much for listening. Thank you again for listening. Please leave us a rating and review so we can help others start their own jewelry journey.  

Umph, the comics we choose to read in September might not have been for us except for one bright spot, Marvel's "Dark Age" #1. Plus, did you know about all the names the Buffalo minor league baseball team's field has had? Well, let me tell you... what no one cares?We still talk about "Last Flight Out #1", "Batman Vs. Bigby: A Wolf In Gotham #1", and "Lost Falls #1" for the rest of the reviews, plus beer from Abita, Brew Dog, Open Gate, Community Beer Works and Butera's. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

SBTV spoke with Dr. Ron Paul, an author, physician, and retired politician, about why there is no perfect salvation in gold, silver, or crypto today in the face of big government and the erosion of freedom.

☎️Jake Paul NO KO

Gaydos and Chad discuss highlights from game one of the Western Conference final series between the Suns-Clippers.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! Los Phoenix Suns son un equipo de base, algo que no se estila nada en la actual NBA. Además, son un equipo de base siendo éste Chris Paul y, si está sano, eso son palabras tan mayores que vemos exhibiciones como la de ayer. Con Losilla lo hablo. Y con Fernando Murciego charlo sobre como Roland Garros ha llegado justo a donde sabíamos: Nadal-Djokovic.Escucha este episodio completo y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo de PepeDiario. Descubre antes que nadie los nuevos episodios, y participa en la comunidad exclusiva de oyentes en https://go.ivoox.com/sq/808594

Paul: “No tengo nada que perder contra Mayweather”¿Quién sale más beneficiado con este combate? Los numeritos para "Pegarle una patada a la pobreza" con Rafa Torres de UNANIMO BETS. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Holmberg's Morning Sickness - Wednesday December 16, 2020

US Sen. Rand Paul from Kentucky discusses Covid restrictions and the Trump Team's fight on election fraud on The Tom Roten Morning Show.

A primeira grande troca da temporada 2020-21 aconteceu: Chris Paul é do Phoenix Suns. Como dissemos no último podcast, o Suns tinha todos os ingredientes para ser um time que iria brigar por alguma estrela disponível, mesmo que fosse alguém mais caro ou mesmo um veteraníssimo, como Chris Paul. Dito e feito: nesta segunda-feira (16), primeiro dia de trocas permitidas na temporada 2020-21 da NBA, os invictos da Bolha mandaram Ricky Rubio, Kelly Oubre Jr, Ty Jerome, Jalen Lecque e uma escolha de draft futura para o OKC Thunder por CP3 e também Abdel Nader. Analisamos a troca em nosso canal do YouTube e colocamos aqui o áudio para quem é de áudio =)

Que tal, cómo están? Espero teniendo un excelente Domingo. Hoy la sección de Angélica continúa con el Ciclo del Terror/Horror, sólo que ahora Internacional, al mismo tiempo les platico de otra película que también fue directamente a Netflix, reciente y que es para toda la familia, con la temática del horror. En la literatura con la sección de Betty, nos trae una recomendación también con el ambiente de la época, muy interesante y que tiene un segundo argumento para completar la saga, y también hablamos de un libro sobre los Fab Four, pero en especial del Tío Paul McCartney, y su supuesta muerte. Y por último entramos a la historia de nuestro país con el tema de El Chamizal, en la sección de Fer, bastante completa. Redes sociales: Blackeagle Dreamer (Facebook), Blackeagle_Dreamer (Instagram), blackeagledream (Twitter). Saludos y que tengan un excelente inicio de semana. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/frank-black7/support

KY Senator Rand Paul on 94.3 WSC

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Amy: How about you? Have you ever been in an accident?Paul: Not a car accident. I was in a bicycle accident.Amy: Yeah?Paul: I laugh now but at the time, it was pretty bad.Amy: What happened?Paul: It was dark and it was Christmas day. And I was on my bicycle going down a quite steep slope and my telephone rang. And I looked at my mobile phone and I took it out of my pocket whilst riding my bike. And looked at it and noticed it was my dad and he was ringing to wish me a happy Christmas.So I felt sort of compelled to answer the phone. So answering the phone, still going down the hill, probably gathering speed. It's dark and I'm trying to get my dad off the phone as soon as I can. And before I knew it, I drove straight into the back of a parked black car.Amy: Oh no.Paul: I saw it at the very last minute. So I hit the back of it and my body slammed into the ground, and I broke a few bones, yeah. Yeah.Amy: Oh no.Paul: Yeah, yeah. It was a pretty miserable Christmas to be honest with you.Amy: I'd say it's terrible. That's the worst.Paul: Yeah.Amy: Did the owner of the car see what happened? Did you damage the car?Paul: I didn't stay long enough. I got out of there pretty quickly.Amy: And went to the hospital.Paul: No, I was a bit stubborn. I don't know why. I was the worst night sleep I've ever had but yeah, I didn't go to the hospital until the next day.Amy: What bones did you break?Paul: I broke my collarbone, the clavicle.Amy: Oh, a nightmare.Paul: And I broke a few ribs.Amy: Oh no, ribs. That's the worst because they can't do anything for it. They just send you on your way and you just have to cough in pain.Paul: Hmm.Amy: Oh no.Paul: Yeah. But it could have been a lot worse, you know.Amy: Hmm, that's true.Paul: Yeah. I could have broken my neck.Amy: So how long did it take you to recover?Paul: It took me about probably six weeks, I suppose.Amy: Hmm.Paul: Yeah, because then—actually, in the following —it happened on Christmas day, so three months later in the March, I was lucky enough to win a place in the Tokyo marathon. And I really wanted to do it because it's quite difficult to get. It's like a lottery now. There's so many people who apply to get a position.So I wasn't going to let this accident stop me from running the Tokyo marathon. So I was trying to rush it, really and I shouldn't have. But I did. I've run there.Amy: Did you?Paul: Yeah.Amy: Oh, my goodness.Paul: Yeah, I finished it but—Amy: Congratulations. But how were you? That must have really hindered your recovery.Paul: It hindered my training period for the marathon, yeah, so.Amy: But you finished it though.Paul: I finished it, yeah.Amy: Well done.Paul: I wouldn't do it again. Marathons are miserable things to be. Really. Why put yourselves through that pain? I still like running so maybe in the future, I'd do a half marathon or something, yeah. But a full marathon—my marathon days are over, I think. Yeah.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Amy: How about you? Have you ever been in an accident?Paul: Not a car accident. I was in a bicycle accident.Amy: Yeah?Paul: I laugh now but at the time, it was pretty bad.Amy: What happened?Paul: It was dark and it was Christmas day. And I was on my bicycle going down a quite steep slope and my telephone rang. And I looked at my mobile phone and I took it out of my pocket whilst riding my bike. And looked at it and noticed it was my dad and he was ringing to wish me a happy Christmas.So I felt sort of compelled to answer the phone. So answering the phone, still going down the hill, probably gathering speed. It's dark and I'm trying to get my dad off the phone as soon as I can. And before I knew it, I drove straight into the back of a parked black car.Amy: Oh no.Paul: I saw it at the very last minute. So I hit the back of it and my body slammed into the ground, and I broke a few bones, yeah. Yeah.Amy: Oh no.Paul: Yeah, yeah. It was a pretty miserable Christmas to be honest with you.Amy: I'd say it's terrible. That's the worst.Paul: Yeah.Amy: Did the owner of the car see what happened? Did you damage the car?Paul: I didn't stay long enough. I got out of there pretty quickly.Amy: And went to the hospital.Paul: No, I was a bit stubborn. I don't know why. I was the worst night sleep I've ever had but yeah, I didn't go to the hospital until the next day.Amy: What bones did you break?Paul: I broke my collarbone, the clavicle.Amy: Oh, a nightmare.Paul: And I broke a few ribs.Amy: Oh no, ribs. That's the worst because they can't do anything for it. They just send you on your way and you just have to cough in pain.Paul: Hmm.Amy: Oh no.Paul: Yeah. But it could have been a lot worse, you know.Amy: Hmm, that's true.Paul: Yeah. I could have broken my neck.Amy: So how long did it take you to recover?Paul: It took me about probably six weeks, I suppose.Amy: Hmm.Paul: Yeah, because then—actually, in the following —it happened on Christmas day, so three months later in the March, I was lucky enough to win a place in the Tokyo marathon. And I really wanted to do it because it's quite difficult to get. It's like a lottery now. There's so many people who apply to get a position.So I wasn't going to let this accident stop me from running the Tokyo marathon. So I was trying to rush it, really and I shouldn't have. But I did. I've run there.Amy: Did you?Paul: Yeah.Amy: Oh, my goodness.Paul: Yeah, I finished it but—Amy: Congratulations. But how were you? That must have really hindered your recovery.Paul: It hindered my training period for the marathon, yeah, so.Amy: But you finished it though.Paul: I finished it, yeah.Amy: Well done.Paul: I wouldn't do it again. Marathons are miserable things to be. Really. Why put yourselves through that pain? I still like running so maybe in the future, I'd do a half marathon or something, yeah. But a full marathon—my marathon days are over, I think. Yeah.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Amy: How about you? Have you ever been in an accident?Paul: Not a car accident. I was in a bicycle accident.Amy: Yeah?Paul: I laugh now but at the time, it was pretty bad.Amy: What happened?Paul: It was dark and it was Christmas day. And I was on my bicycle going down a quite steep slope and my telephone rang. And I looked at my mobile phone and I took it out of my pocket whilst riding my bike. And looked at it and noticed it was my dad and he was ringing to wish me a happy Christmas.So I felt sort of compelled to answer the phone. So answering the phone, still going down the hill, probably gathering speed. It's dark and I'm trying to get my dad off the phone as soon as I can. And before I knew it, I drove straight into the back of a parked black car.Amy: Oh no.Paul: I saw it at the very last minute. So I hit the back of it and my body slammed into the ground, and I broke a few bones, yeah. Yeah.Amy: Oh no.Paul: Yeah, yeah. It was a pretty miserable Christmas to be honest with you.Amy: I'd say it's terrible. That's the worst.Paul: Yeah.Amy: Did the owner of the car see what happened? Did you damage the car?Paul: I didn't stay long enough. I got out of there pretty quickly.Amy: And went to the hospital.Paul: No, I was a bit stubborn. I don't know why. I was the worst night sleep I've ever had but yeah, I didn't go to the hospital until the next day.Amy: What bones did you break?Paul: I broke my collarbone, the clavicle.Amy: Oh, a nightmare.Paul: And I broke a few ribs.Amy: Oh no, ribs. That's the worst because they can't do anything for it. They just send you on your way and you just have to cough in pain.Paul: Hmm.Amy: Oh no.Paul: Yeah. But it could have been a lot worse, you know.Amy: Hmm, that's true.Paul: Yeah. I could have broken my neck.Amy: So how long did it take you to recover?Paul: It took me about probably six weeks, I suppose.Amy: Hmm.Paul: Yeah, because then—actually, in the following —it happened on Christmas day, so three months later in the March, I was lucky enough to win a place in the Tokyo marathon. And I really wanted to do it because it's quite difficult to get. It's like a lottery now. There's so many people who apply to get a position.So I wasn't going to let this accident stop me from running the Tokyo marathon. So I was trying to rush it, really and I shouldn't have. But I did. I've run there.Amy: Did you?Paul: Yeah.Amy: Oh, my goodness.Paul: Yeah, I finished it but—Amy: Congratulations. But how were you? That must have really hindered your recovery.Paul: It hindered my training period for the marathon, yeah, so.Amy: But you finished it though.Paul: I finished it, yeah.Amy: Well done.Paul: I wouldn't do it again. Marathons are miserable things to be. Really. Why put yourselves through that pain? I still like running so maybe in the future, I'd do a half marathon or something, yeah. But a full marathon—my marathon days are over, I think. Yeah.

Track list in order of play Ava Max: kings and queens Little mix: HolidayTaio Cruz: DynamiteJustin Bieber: What do you mean Traffic and travel sean Paul: No one calling Toots: 54-46 thats my number Newsbeat with sky news @7:30 the mix 3 All night long dreamer stupit love Newsbeat with sky news @8pm the golden 5 Destiny's child: Bills,bills,bills Basement Jaxx: Red Alert Moloko: Sing it back Smash Mouth: All starthe year 1999 Newsbeat with sky news @8:30 BTS: DynamiteKygo: What Love got to do with it Jason Derulo: Savage loveNewsbeat with sky news @9pm Nea: Some sayjoe corry: head and heart KSI: Lighters Blackbear: me & ur ghostTones and i: Ur so cool Jody: I never knew love like this before end of show ]]

Paul and Allison try to decide to attempt to maybe review breakfast. This episode is not explicit. Performed by Coral Baxter-Ellis, Paul Ellis, and Allison Baxter. http://dcritpodcast.com TRANSCRIPT CORAL Mom, Dad, you ready? What's your review going to be on? PAUL We're reviewing breakfast! CORAL Oh you mean like IHOP or Jimmy Dean sausage? PAUL No, like having breakfast- ALLISON Yuck. PAUL It's the most important meal of the day, Allison. ALLISON Breakfast is gross. Who can eat that early? PAUL Well you've essentially starved your body for eight hours, so you're being cruel to your body. ALLISON Since when do you eat breakfast anyway, Paul? You don't get up until 11. Like a damn teenager. CORAL Hey, this damn teenager gets up at seven. PAUL You might be a bit more pleasant in the morning if you actually ate something. ALLISON Really, Paul? PAUL and ALLISON ad-lib, anything can be said as they are not listening to each other CORAL You can't blame a soul for trying. So there's your review of the importance of breakfast, if you can call it that. That was my parents Allison Baxter and Paul Ellis. I'm Coral Baxter-Ellis and you can catch our podcast Deconstructive Criticism starting this fall. Episode music "Coffee" by Cambo

Welcome to the Recruitment Hackers Podcast. A show about innovations, technology and leaders in the recruitment industry brought to you by Talkpush, the leading recruitment automation platform. Max: Good morning, everybody and welcome to the Recruitment Hackers Podcast with max  from Talkpush. Today I'm excited to be welcoming Paul Noone, who is CEO for HireIQ and someone who is in technology. And I've, we both focus a lot of our energy on the call center and the BPO market and service this industry, which is always hungry for automation and innovation. So we both love this industry and we can exchange our thoughts on this topic.Paul, thank you so much for joining me on my new podcast. Paul: Hey, thanks Max, I'm thrilled to be here actually. Max: So our audience, some of them will recognize HireIQ. And some of them will probably recognize you, but they probably don't know the history of how you ended up starting this business, or how you ended up with HireIQ.Perhaps you could walk us through that journey. Paul: Yeah, I'd love to. HireIQ is an interesting technology and we're very focused on the call center. And because the call center has this outsourcing process that's associated with business process outsourcers.Most of the organizations don't realize that, while Fortune 500 organizations, anybody with a product or service has a requirement to support through call centers or through service locations, they also do a lot of outsourcing. So they're organizations like BPOs, the large ones in call centers are Teleperformance and Alorica and Atento and Sutherland and 24[7].And those are the organizations that we help with  in the talent acquisition, part of this, you know, max, you and I probably talked about this before, but recruitment is the term that we use. But we're in sort of a special place in recruitment. We're in the engagement with the candidates, the acquisition of all the data that we aggregate as much data as we can in a shorter period of time.And then we provide it to the recruiters in such a way that they can quickly make a decision, because we're talking about maybe 10 interviews for every hire, we're really known for our efficiency. And then we're also known for the AI associated with how we do that. How do we tell whether a candidate it's going to be particularly good at this particular role in collections or in sales? Or in support?We do a whole lot with that. I actually got here about six years ago through the investors. So I had just, I was working with another technology company on disaster relief, and just sort of an interesting aside, Max, we had built a product around disaster resource management and that's where these large scales or, when you guys experienced the typhoons and we have the hurricane season from June through November and, being able, you know, the shift in technology, the shift to phones, being able to locate all of the things that you need when a disaster strikes is a really interesting use case.So we had gone pretty deep into that and acquired some large customers, the U.S Red Cross, but we were looking to move from the Red Cross division of emergency management and we were looking for additional investment. So I was on sort of a roadshow talking to investors and ultimately a lot of people made the decision that it, and it's a function of that market. But, without disasters, if you have a good year, meaning no disasters, you're getting no money into that particular part, the Red Cross every now and then they literally go almost to zero. So they actually need engineering, Max: Pure disasters once in a while. Paul: And oddly, when you're in that business, you start to hope for bad things to happen. So there was something wrong, but the investors didn't buy. Max: I think it's not just the disaster people. I have a feeling that a certain class of politicians also relying on a good disaster once in a while. Paul: Well, so there's politics in there, the weird thing about funding ,and how funding shifts, and things like that.I think that actually is what scared investors away, Max, and it's a shame in some ways. That what we were doing was, you know, enabling, with the Red Cross, for example, we found a billion dollars worth of resources that had been sort of lost, and it hadn't literally been lost. It was in firehouses and it was in other locations.And that sounds like an inventory management issue, but it's not when something bad happens in one part of the state. And then you realize that through a quick app, you can find it. Where everything is: shovels clubs, protective eyewear, and N95 masks, for example. Imagine that you put in an application, you find a billion dollars worth of resources, really through crowdsourcing your own people.Anyway, that app is lovely but the investors didn't think it was an investable market at the time. And so I just finished this and I had met with the investors here and I called them back and said, you know, so we'll probably shut this down. And they said, great, because we have something we'd love to share with you.And they brought me into HireIQ. I have a background in call centers. I was with Genesis as they were starting out on sort of the part of the first team. I want to say pre-revenue, but I want to say Genesis is a $2 billion organization right now, 20 years ago when I was with them we had less than $10 million in revenue. So building that to a public company and then moving on, but coming here was lovely in that the technology was solid. But it was  a function of focus. We were trying to do too much. By focusing on call centers and BPOs in particular, we ended up, turning into, from being a typical technology company where we might be losing money quarter after quarter to being one that was profitable, really understood what we were doing and then have been very zeroed in on that use case around language proficiency, around understanding our customer's needs and really, more than anything else, making sure that they're succeeding.So closing that loop and making sure that they succeed. Max: Your star product is the product called Audiolytics? Paul: Well, so Audiolytics is really the technology that underlies the audio processing that we do. So at the heart of what we're doing is, the origin story really comes around. While I submit my resume in a recruiting, in an interview process, what that does is it strips out my personality and my voice.It strips out the narrative. I moved from the disaster resource management effort into HireIQ, why did that happen? All of those things that you get to tell people in an interview process. So the origin story is really about how do we add a narrative to what's a two dimensional piece of paper that's supposed to represent me.And so with that, we started to create a platform that would say not only here's the resume and here's some qualifiers about me, but here's my voice. Max: It used to upset me so much when I started on my career and I would go and socialize, go to a bar anywhere and someone would ask me, so what do you do?And, you know, I didn't want to tell them my job title and the company I worked for, because I didn't feel like it represented anything about me. And it would always come up with some weird answer I would say, oh, what do I do? You know, I roller skate or, you know, or something, just so that I could come out and shine and that wasn't a social environment in a work and job search context.Also, what do you do? Should be the first question or rather who are you? rather than a resume. Paul: Tell me about your expense in this particular business is an open ended question that a lot of our customers ask, but asking open ended questions, which is an old interviewing technique and a valuable one really allows people to tell them more. To talk to the narrative. Tell me about your experience in this particular world. Tell me about your understanding of customer support. Tell me your understanding. Tell me about an experience that you had with your boss that may be positive or negative, but being able to do that and being able to do it asynchronously when, you know, we could collect lots and lots of those became really the most important thing.But Audiolytics is actually the parsing of that. The audio data in order to get a really good and different understanding. So Max, what it doesn't do, is it doesn't convert voice to text and then parse it that way. But, it literally is looking for tone. So it's in these frames of voice, it's saying that's a positive, that's a negative, that's a happy emotion, that's a sad emotion. We're looking for things that we know are important for a good employee, but are particularly important when you're dealing with call center agents. That they're engaged, they're alert. They're more active than passive. They're not expressing boredom. Which is really interesting when you can pick up boredom because when a recruiter gets this information, they're going to see an Audiolytics score that says, you know, this person is probably not someone you want to spend a lot of time with.And I would say more than anything else we're not dispositioning customers. What we're doing our best to do is to give them an idea of priority. Talk to Max. He's got a great score. He's good with language. He's got good scores with data entry and even chat. Max: I didn't know that your technology was able to detect boredom. That's remarkable. Would it be influenced by geography and how do you factor that in? Because you live in Atlanta, people are supposed to speak a little bit more slowly, perhaps have a drawl. You don't, but nonetheless, you know, would the software, not pick up on the intonation and think maybe somebody from the South is bored?Paul: So it's really interesting. What you're doing is, so engagement doesn't necessarily have anything to do with dialect. And in fact, the tool itself is just sort of mentioned there's no conversion. It's listening for something that would be appropriate for the cohort of folks who are taking it ,interestingly enough.It's actually self adapting, because the same tool is used for engineers and salespeople and support people — all should have a different dynamic in their voice. And so it actually has to adjust based on the people who are taking the interview. The people who are successful in expressing themselves in that interview, as well as the questions.The questions and the people are really the dynamic that you're looking for, but boredom might be expressed differently by an engineer, or by somebody from, a Latin expression. But, the cohort itself helps to define that. And so ultimately you have not only our recommendation, but you also have the answer.So what's interesting about it is how closely we track to what a good recruiter would do. In the initial testing, after we did the machine learning on it. So can we in fact pick these up at a high rate? So can we, in fact, identify that Max is more happy than sad? Can we identify that when he's taking this test he's more bored? When we do that, we match Max almost 97% against a recruiter who would be listening to those particular things. So imagine that the technology itself is so wildly accurate in a lot of ways. But you know, to that end, that's what Audiolytics does. We're really sort of the platform is HireIQ, and it's a whole series of ways to basically create a recipe of assessments to understand more about you more about whoever you're interviewing — at speed. So we're trying to get the recruiting experience to be three, three and a half minutes. So you don't spend a lot of time with these individuals unless you're really digging in on them. And then with the candidate experience should be less than 20 minutes.Max: So the questions are not picked from a standard list. Since you're working with open answers, you don't have to use the same questions with every customer. Paul: No, in fact, they're different in virtually every customer.  There are some that seem to be universal people do want, need, to understand what your experience has been with customer support.So, if you're going to be in that customer support role, you're going to have to have some experience in sales, right? That has come up. Max: Yes. For me, it's like a yes or no answer. Have you worked in this industry before? That's usually how they ask that question in a chatbot environment. Paul: So that would be a bad question for us.What we're always going to do is ask a question that asks you to elaborate on something because we do in fact, need enough content to understand the profile. We need to have enough of Max telling us about Max to understand where Max's orientation is in terms of sharing, communicating. For the question, is he too verbose? Meaning he may be struggling with answering a particular question and trying to overanswer a question, or is it too short, meaning maybe he doesn't have the skills to think through and is that enough for this particular customer? So there are all kinds of metrics, there are cohort determined, sort of thresholds. It's really fascinating. And now we've done about, you know, close to 5 million interviews with it. So we have a really good base of understanding of how effective it is when matched with outcome data.So it's really fun stuff. Max: Does it replace, let's say the first phone call? I mean, if you're going to look at the standard recruitment process to hire it replaces the first phone call. Paul: So really what it's designed to do is give you a complete understanding. So we have customers who might do it for the engaged at the front end.We have customers for who it represents the entire interview process. So  once they've engaged, they've completed it. They have the scores, they meet thresholds. Then it's appropriate literally for the recruiter when they engage with them to close them.  You've probably experienced this, particularly with BPOs is that there's a real machine, there's a supply chain and with the attrition rates that exist, what you're working your best to do is fill training classes. And what we're doing, of course, is trying to identify people who are going not only achieve the right goals, the metrics that they're looking for, but we're also looking for folks who have an orientation, which would suggest they're going to stay longer.So that's one thing that we're doing, but because there's such a speed element, to this we are really careful about, trying to do as much as we can in a shorter period of time, giving you a complete understanding so that that particular recruiter can sell when appropriate and be restrained also when appropriate.So somebody does, you know, in the U S we have to answer, we have to give everybody the same interview experience. So that means that if you answer the first question horribly, Max, I still have to give you an opportunity with the next 7 questions I'm supposed to ask in an interview. It's a fair interviewing process, even if you disqualief yourself right out of the gate.And so one of the things about being able to acquire this information, offline and, online, as opposed to in front of somebody, it gives that particular person, the ability to advance quickly through that particular candidate and prioritize who to sell and who to, again, disengage with.Max: I understand the benefit for the candidates to do a short interview and a short assessment and get through those things faster, but it sounds like it's more than just, you know, I mean are you doing it because you get dropouts when ,people are held up more than five minutes? Or is it at the request of your customers? What's the driving force behind keeping it just two or three minutes long?Paul: Oh, I'm sorry. So the interview itself for the candidate will be as much as 20 minutes, but we're trying to keep it under 20 minutes, really because there's a falloff Max. 20 is about the cutoff. If you've seen some of the older, you know, The 1950 based assessments that had a lot of triangulation, right.You're asked one question one way and then seven questions later, you're getting the same question phrased differently in order to validate that the first question was like the second question and your answer was consistent throughout. And if you know that that's going to be an hour and a half, you really start to wonder, is there an easier way to get a job? For this wage.. Max: But time is speeding up, right? People have a lot shorter attention spans. They have multiple conversations going on asynchronously with five friends at the time. And so I expect that the 20 minutes would already be beyond the comfort zone for some people who are remote.Paul: It's very, very close. And you see what we're trying to do. It answers that question: is it enough? What we're trying to do is the open ended questions seem very much like what a typical interview would be. So tell me about yourself. Tell me about an experience that you had. What would your last employer say about you?Those kinds of open ended questions are the things that seem conversational. And allow you to expand upon yourself, but in fact are dense with data for us to help make a decision. And so the tone, the tempo, and in fact, the content is even important, but only when you know that that petitioner has an alertness and an engagement that pleasantness that you're looking for now go back and listen to those questions.Is there even more data that we can mine there? And that's why on average, it's about three and a half minutes. Because some you're just going through they didn't meet any of my language proficiency thresholds or whatever. And now we can spend a little bit more time with the particular person that I want to hire.And that would extend, you know, that's when you advance candidates and things like that, but it really is. I agree with you. I think what you're asking in that question is how do you give the candidate an opportunity to advance themselves, to tell their story? And not be too efficient in the process, that would eliminate me being able to tell enough about me. And so I think this is sort of the best of both worlds. Max: Yeah. I get the sense that 20 minutes would be annoying if I'm sitting at home and I'm applying to 10 different jobs, but yeah. If I had a sense that this company could be a fit, they are interested in me, then, yeah. 20 minutes is no problem, easy. And certainly easier than traveling physically to sites. So, have you seen the same thing as we have at Talkpush over the last few months? We've seen an increase in the volume of job seekers, an increase in volume of candidates. And how has that played out for the rest of the recruitment funnel?Is it,  becoming a problem where it just means we have too many candidates and not enough jobs to offer? What kind of dynamics does that create for your business? Paul: Well, I think for both of us, what I would say is: volume is important because volume breaks process. The more, you know, we got to a point in the U.S, our unemployment rate was down to 3%, you know, at times probably lower than that in certain places.So it was in fact hard to get enough people to interview, you know, recruiters spent most of their time trying to pull people out of other companies. And then in a matter of weeks, as we all know, it went from, you know, less than 3% too, you know, a lot. And then we're talking about 52 million people at its height, out of work needing to quarantine and work from home. So all of a sudden the opportunity to interview was greater, but the importance of identifying somebody who was really looking for that job and really engaged and would do a good job with both the hard skills and the engagement that we're looking for.What everybody's looking for, to be committed to that particular role, over the long term that became even more important. So a 100%, I agree with you that the volumes changed. And I would say, you know, in the first, because of the way we're set up and because of the way people leverage boards, that we might've seen a doubling in the first month, which probably created some concern on our part. There was actually a cost every time somebody does an interview with HireIQ, rather than it being a, you know, we do a lot of processing…Max: and because we're doing processing servers, AWS, bills go off, Google bills, come up. I had all of that happen as well. Paul: Yeah. So, that sort of evened out a little bit. And while I would say we're up. We're also going into that season, which is a ramp, right? So we're looking for a lot of holiday seasonal workers right now. So I would say we're probably, closer to where we were maybe a little bit higher, but not as dramatically higher as we saw in the first quarter after the quarantining.And we're seeing some alleviation of that. I think we're seeing some go back to physical work, but, the other part, Max's you may have an opinion on this as well, is that I don't know that a lot of people were willing to let go of their jobs. So are people artificially staying where they were highly mobile in the first quarter? All of a sudden now they're thinking, you know, it may not be as easy to get a job in the next place. So, there may be a false sense of  retention taking place at the same time. Max: Well, yeah, I guess when things heat up again, we'll see whether all those new hires in the BPO sector from the last six months, are meant to stay in those industries.I guess it really depends whether they like working from home. If they like putting on a headset and getting in front of a camera, and working on Slack, maybe it'll work out and maybe they won't to go back into the field. Like, I do not have a crystal ball for that, but, I think that some companies are making a shift towards hire anywhere and opening the talent pool so much that they're going to be able to build a very unique group of people which have defining traits, which if you remove the geographical constraints and you say, now I can have such a broader group to choose from. Then you can create new constraints.You can say, I only want people that think that way, or that have this hobby or that are very meticulous or, you know, you can be very specific and that could create, you know, some very bizarre groups of people and  that could give the economy some lift perhaps.Paul: So Max, this is an interesting thing. I absolutely loved the whole train of thought. So I have  a couple of data points on this. I had a company at one point in which I did a lot. The company had lots and lots of training, and we started to do a model, which we were trained from anywhere this go to meeting in a WebEx type zoom.It was technology, but we were sharing screens. Let's configure it this way. Now this is how you do this. This is how you do that. And one of my employees came to me and said, do you mind if I do some work? So his passion, interestingly enough, was kimonos. So he did he sold, these beautiful kimonos. He invested in them. And what he wanted to do was be able to go to these shows in Asia where all of the best would be there, he'd be able to sell his kimonos. They'd also be commercial. I said, Sam, Do you think I care where you go to a meeting or a virtual training takes place, go do what you want to do.And by the way, then being skewed 13 hours is in your best interest. Now go spend a day there and carve out the two hours you need for that particular training. Just make sure that it doesn't affect your ability to do that particular piece of work, but I just so loved this and that whole concept of displacement.If we can, and  it's happening more and more in some of our customers. Assurion one of the groups that I heard speak recently, they're doing gig work now, Max, meaning you can opt in to when you're available, you know, you've got to schedule, but sometimes it's via social media, they'll say we've got surge paying.You've got a surge wage based on how much people, how much traffic we're going to have, you know, based on, on questions, we need to answer about the Assurion products. That to me, being able to opt in, to be able to do what you're passionate about and have that feed your work day is something that I think is really important.And I think that's where you get energy, you get energy by, you know, middle of the day being able to take, you know, take a swim in a pool. I get energy. I did something recently where I went out and I hit golf balls. First time since March, I used to play golf all the time. I'd say 10 years ago.I went out and, Max, doing something physical, like that, changed, I swear it changed my brain chemistry. So I think this whole concept of displacement is one of those things that's also going to enable people to do and maintain their passions. And because of that, we may be in, you know what we're doing with call centers and delivering work to location. I literally think that's the future. I don't think  the future  like I thought the future was cell phones. As soon as you don't physically have to go pick up those yellow slips, you don't have to answer a physical phone. You don't have an extension that's tied to a location. God, the world changes and in such a great way.Max: Yeah, you were telling me how you got to enjoy more time with your family in recent weeks. Somebody was telling me recently, an article about this reverse migration, which is happening, where people are leaving the cities, and going back to where they came from, to their hometown because of this pandemic and supported through the technologies of remote work. We are seeing basically these shifts happening everywhere and people spending more time with our family. So, on a bizarre way, family values, family traditions  we'll see a resurgence as a response to this crisis.Paul: Well, I don't want to be overly optimistic. Look, I think everybody's been through a trauma. And so, one of the things that I'm doing as a CEO, I'm sure you're doing it is giving people some room. Right? I want people to make sure that they... look, I have an employee who has three kids at home, all under the age of 10, who she's starting zoom meetings with, in three different rooms for children.There's a kindergarten class going on. There's a second grade craft class. There's a third grade class, all her room, she and her husband are working at the same time. It is insane what we're piling on people at the same time.Max: And the bandwidth. Paul: That's exactly right. So that's the other thing right? We didn't talk about this, but it's interesting. I read an article last night about why this is different. And this particular article was why New York city would never be the same. Because just as you said, there's an exit, maybe a million people have left New York city. The rates, the rental rates, the buildings that are empty relative to where they were.But, we saw something like this in 2001, with 911, we saw something, you know, we've had these, national crises in the U.S. 2008. And the contention was why this is different than those other times is because bandwidth exists right now. Bandwidth exists like it's never existed before.So now you have private equity guys that don't physically have to be in New York City, because it doesn't matter that you're physically there to run into somebody because that person may in fact not be there. So when people were telling me, and in fact, during this period, they said, they'd be traveling. I said, well, that's good that you're traveling. Are people willing to meet with you? Which is the other side of the equation, right? It's one thing for you to be willing. It's a second part altogether once you land in a city, are people willing  to meet with you? That will change. There's no question, but, I think some of the positive of that and believe me, I'm sure if you're a real estate magnet in New York city, you're super concerned about this. But, I think the freedoms that it provides for individuals is particularly engaging. It's an interesting thought. Let's put it that way. Max: Oh, if you're, if you're a real estate magnet in the suburbs, well, you're doing well. Anyway, we're going to a more realistic conversation because that will alienate my audience 100%. Paul: But the other part to that, but I would say, listen,  the thing that I get excited about is the options it provides. The reality is I think so you can follow those kinds of things in any direction.The reality is we need human interaction. You and I like to do what we do. I want to meet you. I want to run into you, I want to see you compete at a technology showcase. Those kinds of things stimulate me. So I don't think there's any chance that we don't go back to some more normalcy and sooner than later, more 2021.But I think taking a moment and understanding the lack of distraction. Which really is the way I described it early in this was, there was no sports. There were no, you know, the activities themselves that would typically take me off center or off of focus were gone. And so now I had family to focus on.Now I had what's next for the business. Now I had what's best. So I think the lack of distraction helps us to focus. Max: Yes. I see. I think that you were talking before we started the interview about the fact that, you're going to look for a different type of worker the call center worker working from home needs to be self motivated, autonomous and so on.If someone is now at home unemployed and is able to find, well, by force needs to find employment of that sort and then by force needs to build certain life habits around that. And then actually it gets through it and realizes, oh, this works. I can put in 5- 10 hours of uninterrupted work in a day if need be.And now you've unlocked something in him or her that they can carry for the rest of their lives, potentially that sense of autonomy and that ability to manage your day. That becomes something you can keep Paul: It's a freedom and it's magnificent. So rather than your work being dependent on your relationship with your employer or your boss in front of you, you're focused on becoming valuable, is your ticket to the next role that you have or greater responsibility or in frankly being as engaged in your passions and things outside of work could in fact, energize that in a way that we might not be able to today. I promise you, nobody's complaining about the lack of traffic.Max: Well, one thing, one thing I do complain... I still hear some people ask me, Max, you've got so much experience working with remote teams, distributed teams. How do you check on them? And like you just totally missed it. You don't. You're rethinking about what your job is as manager. But that question still comes up so often.Paul: Here's how I keep in touch with them. I engage with them on how do we make what you're working on better? How can I help? And then they'll tell me. Max: Yeah,  there are certainly a few ways.I'm sure some, some of my employees will listen in and think that's too engaging. But, it's great to see how your business has evolved over the years. I hope that we can be part of this bright future. And have more of these partnerships as we've had with some of our customers where they integrate your assessment platform with our, conversational chatbots and engagements to take care of the whole workflow.So if anybody's listening you want to match our two technologies. They work very well together and thank you very much, Paul, for joining me today. Paul: Maxm I love it. And I appreciate  your engaging in conversation with this. I love Talkpush, I always have, and I love in particular the fact that you're doing what many other people would be required to do.So being able to get out in front. Engage those people to make sure that they stay in touch and then keep that information about them. Just, you know, in a way that really becomes a system of record for employment. So, we're thrilled to be working with you. Thank you very much for your time today. And, we're partners, so anything that we can do to help you we're available.Max: Thanks. Paul, we'll both continue burning resumes and replacing them with conversation. Paul: There's a whole discussion about bias and all of the other things that we really should talk about it some time. But, I think the answer is engagement and we're both doing everything we can to enlighten people about who they're talking to and why they'd be a good fit.Okay. We've got the topic for our next interview, it will be about bias. Maybe we'll wait a few months for that one. Paul: And so we'll give people some time.Max: And the topic may be a little bit less dangerous in a few months time. Paul: Yeah. I think there'll be more light at that point.Max:  Great. Thanks Paul. TPaul: Thank you, max. That was Paul Noone from HireIQ, a company, which has figured out how to measure the empathy, warmth, and care of a voice and allows employers in the call center industry to evaluate those voices in a scalable way. If you liked the interview and you'd like to hear more about some of the movers and shakers from the high volume recruitment industry, please subscribe to our podcast and share with your friends.

No Filter Paul is a comedian from England that now lives in NJ. Freethinker.tv Support this podcast

This is my live recording from **No Stress Radio** it consists of all those feel good trance anthemz. Web: www.nostressradio.com Email: info@nostressradio.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/nostressradioofficial/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/nostressradio/ Chat: discord chat https://discord.gg/TNKFm3D

This is my live recording from **No Stress Radio** it consists of all those feel good trance anthemz. Web: www.nostressradio.com Email: info@nostressradio.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/nostressradioofficial/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/nostressradio/ Chat: discord chat https://discord.gg/TNKFm3D

This is my live recording from **No Stress Radio** it consists of all those feel good trance anthemz. Web: www.nostressradio.com Email: info@nostressradio.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/nostressradioofficial/ Facebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/nostressradio/ Chat: discord chat https://discord.gg/TNKFm3D

Paul is out of isolation (sort of) and the guys discuss ESPN's new documentary on Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls final championship season, lessons in greatness, mindset, giving your best effort every single time, speaking tips, and a little something called The Roulette Exercise.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Paul: Hey, Todd. I saw your pictures with you and some tigers. Where's that from?Todd: That was at a place in Southeast Asia. It was in Thailand, actually.Paul: All right.Todd: Yeah, it was pretty cool. I was a bit dubious of it. I mean, I saw the little advertisement of Tiger World and Tiger Zoo, or whatever it was. I went and took a tuk-tuk out there and checked it out, and it was pretty cool.Paul: How are the tigers treated within the zoo, the Tiger Land?Todd: Well, it's actually quite weird, in that it was like a zoo but you can go in and like touch the tigers -Paul: Oh, wow!Todd: --and be around the tigers. And so, they seem to have a pretty big area to roam around, and I guess they have a pretty good life. I guess the deal is that they were all raised in captivity, so they kind of give you a little spiel when you go in, and they explain that the tigers are raised in captivity, just like you would raise cows or pigs or horses or anything like that. So they're bred for the farm, and even though they're still really deadly, basically, you know, that's why they're there, because they were bred to be there.Paul: Bred to entertain.Todd: Yeah, kind of. It's a bit odd. You do feel a little strange, because you figure that they're tigers, and they should be out in the wild. But then again, you know, it's an opportunity for people to actually see these beautiful things.Paul: Yeah, it's an opportunity. I guess it's an opportunity also to learn about these creatures, which would are found in the wild.Todd: Right.Paul: Okay, wow, I mean, you're really close to those tigers, Todd. I mean, how did you feel? Were you scared?Todd: Actually, yeah. I mean, it's a little unsetting. Even with the little babies, you figure, - Wow! you know, or the young ones, that they are still quite big, you know. When they lie down on the ground, the full length of their body, even for a young tiger, is about the size of a human.Paul: Wow.Todd: And you realize that, you know, they could eat anything, so it's a bit scary.Paul: Yeah, you could have been eaten at any point.Todd: Well, it definitely crosses your mind. And you ask them about that, because naturally, everybody's worried about security, safety. And they say that, you know, their deal is that they know the tigers' behavior down cold, and that they know that as long as you feed the tigers early in the morning, and then they feed them again at night, then during the day, they just want to lay and sleep. They have no desire to go hunting or anything like that. So that's why they're actually safe to be around in the afternoon hours.Paul: Ah, they're very like placid by that point.Todd: Right. And they also say that because the tigers are born in captivity that they're used to being around humans from birth. So ever since they're little cubs, you know, they've had human handlers. They've had humans around them, so they're highly familiar and comfortable with humans touching them, being around them. So that's how they can, you know, allow people to be around them and keep it safe. But it still does cross your mind.Paul: Yeah, I'm sure it does, especially if you're a parent with a child, because obviously, you know, children will be a quite nice meal for a tiger.Todd: Actually, you know what? I think, looking back, you couldn't take children in the cage.Paul: Ah.Todd: I think it was almost like an amusement park; you had to be a certain height. So they didn't want you to be---they didn't want anything small that would just be too tempting for the tiger.Paul: Yeah.Todd: Although that seems kind of strange, because there were really small, petite women that were going in the cage.Paul: I see.Todd: So there's not that much of a difference there.Paul: No, I don't suppose so. I guess, if it's based on height.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Paul: Hey, Todd. I saw your pictures with you and some tigers. Where's that from?Todd: That was at a place in Southeast Asia. It was in Thailand, actually.Paul: All right.Todd: Yeah, it was pretty cool. I was a bit dubious of it. I mean, I saw the little advertisement of Tiger World and Tiger Zoo, or whatever it was. I went and took a tuk-tuk out there and checked it out, and it was pretty cool.Paul: How are the tigers treated within the zoo, the Tiger Land?Todd: Well, it's actually quite weird, in that it was like a zoo but you can go in and like touch the tigers -Paul: Oh, wow!Todd: --and be around the tigers. And so, they seem to have a pretty big area to roam around, and I guess they have a pretty good life. I guess the deal is that they were all raised in captivity, so they kind of give you a little spiel when you go in, and they explain that the tigers are raised in captivity, just like you would raise cows or pigs or horses or anything like that. So they're bred for the farm, and even though they're still really deadly, basically, you know, that's why they're there, because they were bred to be there.Paul: Bred to entertain.Todd: Yeah, kind of. It's a bit odd. You do feel a little strange, because you figure that they're tigers, and they should be out in the wild. But then again, you know, it's an opportunity for people to actually see these beautiful things.Paul: Yeah, it's an opportunity. I guess it's an opportunity also to learn about these creatures, which would are found in the wild.Todd: Right.Paul: Okay, wow, I mean, you're really close to those tigers, Todd. I mean, how did you feel? Were you scared?Todd: Actually, yeah. I mean, it's a little unsetting. Even with the little babies, you figure, - Wow! you know, or the young ones, that they are still quite big, you know. When they lie down on the ground, the full length of their body, even for a young tiger, is about the size of a human.Paul: Wow.Todd: And you realize that, you know, they could eat anything, so it's a bit scary.Paul: Yeah, you could have been eaten at any point.Todd: Well, it definitely crosses your mind. And you ask them about that, because naturally, everybody's worried about security, safety. And they say that, you know, their deal is that they know the tigers' behavior down cold, and that they know that as long as you feed the tigers early in the morning, and then they feed them again at night, then during the day, they just want to lay and sleep. They have no desire to go hunting or anything like that. So that's why they're actually safe to be around in the afternoon hours.Paul: Ah, they're very like placid by that point.Todd: Right. And they also say that because the tigers are born in captivity that they're used to being around humans from birth. So ever since they're little cubs, you know, they've had human handlers. They've had humans around them, so they're highly familiar and comfortable with humans touching them, being around them. So that's how they can, you know, allow people to be around them and keep it safe. But it still does cross your mind.Paul: Yeah, I'm sure it does, especially if you're a parent with a child, because obviously, you know, children will be a quite nice meal for a tiger.Todd: Actually, you know what? I think, looking back, you couldn't take children in the cage.Paul: Ah.Todd: I think it was almost like an amusement park; you had to be a certain height. So they didn't want you to be---they didn't want anything small that would just be too tempting for the tiger.Paul: Yeah.Todd: Although that seems kind of strange, because there were really small, petite women that were going in the cage.Paul: I see.Todd: So there's not that much of a difference there.Paul: No, I don't suppose so. I guess, if it's based on height.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听 Paul: Hey, Todd. I saw your pictures with you and some tigers. Where's that from?Todd: That was at a place in Southeast Asia. It was in Thailand, actually.Paul: All right.Todd: Yeah, it was pretty cool. I was a bit dubious of it. I mean, I saw the little advertisement of Tiger World and Tiger Zoo, or whatever it was. I went and took a tuk-tuk out there and checked it out, and it was pretty cool.Paul: How are the tigers treated within the zoo, the Tiger Land?Todd: Well, it's actually quite weird, in that it was like a zoo but you can go in and like touch the tigers -Paul: Oh, wow!Todd: --and be around the tigers. And so, they seem to have a pretty big area to roam around, and I guess they have a pretty good life. I guess the deal is that they were all raised in captivity, so they kind of give you a little spiel when you go in, and they explain that the tigers are raised in captivity, just like you would raise cows or pigs or horses or anything like that. So they're bred for the farm, and even though they're still really deadly, basically, you know, that's why they're there, because they were bred to be there.Paul: Bred to entertain.Todd: Yeah, kind of. It's a bit odd. You do feel a little strange, because you figure that they're tigers, and they should be out in the wild. But then again, you know, it's an opportunity for people to actually see these beautiful things.Paul: Yeah, it's an opportunity. I guess it's an opportunity also to learn about these creatures, which would are found in the wild.Todd: Right.Paul: Okay, wow, I mean, you're really close to those tigers, Todd. I mean, how did you feel? Were you scared?Todd: Actually, yeah. I mean, it's a little unsetting. Even with the little babies, you figure, - Wow! you know, or the young ones, that they are still quite big, you know. When they lie down on the ground, the full length of their body, even for a young tiger, is about the size of a human.Paul: Wow.Todd: And you realize that, you know, they could eat anything, so it's a bit scary.Paul: Yeah, you could have been eaten at any point.Todd: Well, it definitely crosses your mind. And you ask them about that, because naturally, everybody's worried about security, safety. And they say that, you know, their deal is that they know the tigers' behavior down cold, and that they know that as long as you feed the tigers early in the morning, and then they feed them again at night, then during the day, they just want to lay and sleep. They have no desire to go hunting or anything like that. So that's why they're actually safe to be around in the afternoon hours.Paul: Ah, they're very like placid by that point.Todd: Right. And they also say that because the tigers are born in captivity that they're used to being around humans from birth. So ever since they're little cubs, you know, they've had human handlers. They've had humans around them, so they're highly familiar and comfortable with humans touching them, being around them. So that's how they can, you know, allow people to be around them and keep it safe. But it still does cross your mind.Paul: Yeah, I'm sure it does, especially if you're a parent with a child, because obviously, you know, children will be a quite nice meal for a tiger.Todd: Actually, you know what? I think, looking back, you couldn't take children in the cage.Paul: Ah.Todd: I think it was almost like an amusement park; you had to be a certain height. So they didn't want you to be---they didn't want anything small that would just be too tempting for the tiger.Paul: Yeah.Todd: Although that seems kind of strange, because there were really small, petite women that were going in the cage.Paul: I see.Todd: So there's not that much of a difference there.Paul: No, I don't suppose so. I guess, if it's based on height.

Finance Alternatives with Paul Boyd-Skinner Josh: Everyone out there in podcast land, we've got a great guest for you today. We've got Paul here from NoBNK, and he is a bit of a wizard when it comes to looking at a different way that you can do finance. This is especially critical in today's financial climate. So Paul, tell me a bit about what it is that you do with NoBNK. Learn more about finance alternatives at dorksdelivered.com.au Paul: So NoBNK is predominantly a non-bank business and commercial finance solutionist. I've been involved in nonbank lending for around about 16 years. So I've done all sorts of finance. I've done everything from home loans to commercial development, construction equipment, finance, factoring, all that sort of thing. And I'm proud to say that I've never ever put anybody in a loan with the bank.  Josh: High five! Paul: Look, you know, my adversity towards banks. Back in the 80s, back in the day when I got my first home, which was in late 1988, 89. You know we will be excited about getting our first home and interest rates at that time were around about 12% when we went and got our loan. The way it sort of worked back then was you go to the bank. And you're begged for a loan and they'd say, ‘Yes, yes, we'll give you a loan.’ And it was usually, you know, like about 70% or something that they give you, but they will do on a bit of a special, at the time for first home buyers where they give you 100% at interest only. We were living in a caravan when we first got married, so that was a pretty good option to get our own homes.  Josh: Absolutely! And upgrading it’s pretty low friction option, I guess. Paul: The only thing was the in-laws had to go as guarantors. So I now know that today is like a parental guarantor. Really wasn't heard of back then. So it was a little bit of a product for first home buyers. So we did that. We jumped in and we got the house and everything was going along nicely. And then we had to have the recession that we had to have. And our interest rates went from 12% to a 7%, 8.5% in the space of about six months. And just to give you an idea, the loan was $105,000. My repayment was $1,560 a month. Yep. And I was on $33,000 a year. So when you take tax out, 80% of my income was going towards paying my mortgage.  Josh: Yeah. Far out.  Paul: And it wasn't knocking 1 cent off it. Josh: Yeah. Just sitting there as interest only. And that is a scary spot to be in, because you're not sure if it's going to go up or down or left or right, or what it's going to do. Somersaults.  Paul: That happened with a lot of first home buyers over the years. Eventually, you know, it just got too heavy. I had to do up to 30 hours a week overtime to make ends meet, I was a fitter-machiner at the time,and you know, we ended up losing it. It's just the way it was. There were a lot of people losing their properties.  Josh: You weren't the anomaly. I don't think so. Paul: I sort of didn't understand what happened to me. I didn't like the banks at all when I worked it out. I've done a lot of study on the banks since then, or the banking system, and, you know, my thoughts on the global financial system is, I believe it's a world's biggest Ponzi scam. I've been open and honest about this for quite a long time, about how I feel about the banking system and I'm a bit like the disruptor.. I'm all about wanting to make the change so that it's a benefit for us, not so much just for them.  Josh: Yeah, well, I guess like I've done a bit of research into things such as the fractional reserve system and how that works. Paul: Does it work?  Josh: Well, how it works doesn't mean it works. No, you're exactly right. It's not a very good system, which is based on, now, nothing really. It's just based on numbers in a computer. It's not weighted against any real thing of intrinsic value. Paul: Well, have a think about that. So what a lot of people don't understand is that when you deposit money into a bank, you're actually lending them that money. It's a loan. You become an unsecured creditor, yet there is no security for that loan to that bank.  Josh: Yep.  Paul: It's a promise that they give you. We'll promise that we'll give you your money back.  Josh: After changing you bank fees or having it in there. Paul: Well, what a great deal for them, isn't it? They say, ‘Joshua, can you lend me your $100,000?’ Josh: Yeah, no problem at all.  Paul: Now would you want to say, ‘Oh, I need a contract with that?’  Josh: Well, normally you would. Yeah. You hope so. Paul: No. So what's going to happen, Joshua, on the bank is you're going to lend me $100,000. You're the bank, though. Not as a contract, but I do promise that I'll give you your money back and I'll dictate the terms. Right? So you might want 10% interest, but I'm happy to give you 1 ½. And you'll say, ‘Yep, I'm happy to do that.’  That's really what you've done when you put money in the bank, and just remember that one critical part. You're an unsecured creditor. Meaning that secure creditors, in the event of the bank collapse or whatever, secured credit is paid first and then unsecured credits. Josh: Yup. So in the situation where shit hits the fan hypothetically, we can all feel the recession, we can all hear it being spoken about, we can also feel some pressures around the place. If shit hits the fan and everyone starts frantically pulling money out of the bank, they've already planned for that, and that's what's been going through at the moment. Am I right?  Paul: Yeah, correct.  Josh: Tell me a bit about that for our listeners. Paul: Well, long story short is that there's three generations of savers, so you've got you've got your builders, you've got your boomers, and then you've got generation X, which is me. We've all been bought up as a generation of ‘get yourself a good job, save for retirement.’ It was all about saving money. Okay. The other thing too is that we had our children quite young, so you know, I've been married 31 years and I've got married to my wife she was 19, and I was 23. And, we had our children when she was 21. So we had our kids young, and if you think about my father, he was one of 17 children, so they had big families. So they were called boomers, you know. Josh: Huge families, but small houses.  Paul: Can you imagine having 17 children? And the house, there were three bedrooms, one bathroom, right?  Josh: One bathroom, 17 people. 17 children! 19 people. Paul: It's 28 years from youngest to oldest. You know what I mean? Like it's just a constant flow of, you know, at least seven, eight, nine people in a 3-bedroom house.  Josh: Should have bought a TV, so that there's something else to do.  Paul: Didn’t have TV back in the day, so what they did was they went out into the world and started the businesses and all that sort of thing and created quite a lot of wealth. And they stored that wealth in the bank because that's what they were told to do, you know? And they'll get great returns. So when I had those interest rates of 18% of my home, you would get 16% return on money that you had sitting in the bank and you know that's a fantastic return. But look what's happened over the years. You know, that was 30 years ago. Now we're down to zero negative rates in other countries. Japan has been at negative rates for 20 years.  Josh: How much money have they reprinted over there? Paul: Does anyone know why? Does anyone really know why? Or is it just like it's a bad economy and all this sort of stuff? So what makes the bad economy? When people stopped spending! If you're not buying things at the shop, then retail starts to drop off. I want to spend the money. So they're trying to force you to get your money out to spend. Banks don't make money out of people saving and make money out of people borrowing. So they don't want you having money sitting in the bank anymore. Their fractional reserve system, that doesn't matter anymore because they're reprinting money off loans. They make more money out of loans than they do early use saving. So the idea is to try to get that money out of the system and into risky investments or to just get you out there spending.  But when you have the majority of the world's population over 45 years old, that's when our spending curve drops right off. We're not out there buying. We're not down to supermarkets every week, three times a week, or whatever at the big shops. I'd be lucky to go to near Robina. I'd be lucky to go there once a month.  Josh: Yup. For those listeners that didn't hear you. You were saying the GFC is a light rain comparative to what could be happening. And I always say if it's been 30 years since a major recession and it doesn't hit right now, all that means is we're going to be getting a slightly bigger downfall before we're getting absolutely torrential rain in 7 or 11 years time from now. Would that be fair to say?  Paul: It could be any time. When you think about in Australia, we've had 28, 29 years without a recession. What has stopped that recession from happening? So back in the 90s when it happened, like 1990, 91, we had the recession we had to have, but they didn't do anything to try to stop it. You know, and as I said, the interest rates are at 18% so what they've done to stave it off every year, you know, because the next government that comes in needs to be leaving it in a good place. They don't want to be the government that caused the recession. Right.  Josh: The inevitable recession. Paul: The inevitable recession. And when you look at what the US in particular, they've had about seven or eight in that amount of time. Australia have had none. So every time that you look at the interest rate table and you look at different things that's happened, like the 9/11, the GFC, they've dropped rates 3% to 6% in order to stave off that recession. Probably the other recession that we had to have. And now we're getting down to zero. We will be at zero. We're 100% going to zero. Where do they go? Where do they go if we had some major problem, like a GFC or whatever again or a reset? How do they fix that? Josh: I don't know. How do they reset that? They can’t.  Paul: They can't! There was a paper written 18 months ago by the IMF, and in that paper, they said that they are working on models to make -4% to -5% feasible. Josh: All right. Paul: So try to get your head around that.  Josh: I get paid to have a house. Is that right?  Paul: That's already happening overseas.  Josh: I have read up about that. So that would mean that the more debt you've got. Go and buy a house now, ladies and gentlemen.  Paul: Why would they want to do that? Why would they want to get down to -4% to -5%? Josh: Well, I always say if they're getting down to those numbers, it's going to mean that people are going to be more wanting to get loans and get things like that.  Paul: I think it's about getting rid of cash because if they could get rid of cash and move it into a digital world, get rid of the physical cash, then they've got complete control. Josh: Well, see, the problem that I, and this is something that's come about over the last 10, 12 years. When cryptocurrency started coming around, if you're comparing apples with apples, and I'm not going to say that they're both exactly the same, obviously. But when you have a digital currency being compared to a digital currency, which is, if they're getting rid of all paper and all money becomes more frictionless to be able to move from the AUD to a Bitcoin or any of the other cryptocurrencies that are out there without it being is in the power of the banks or anyone else. How do you think they are going to overcome?  Paul: Well, I believe cryptocurrency is a red herring. I believe that it's just been set up for you to play with while they build their real money system. And there's a little bit of a showing of that last week. So in this IMF paper, what they actually said is that they would introduce e-money. They call it e-money. And basically what that means is that that item there is $100. They say, ‘Joshua, you know, that's $100 if you pay cash or $95 if you use e-money.’ And you go, ‘Well, I'll use e-money.’ So that's how they destroy cash. So they make it worth less than what it is. That's how they get rid of it.  There's a bank in Sweden, and the currency in Sweden is krona. The central bank in Sweden has announced the e-krona and they're in the second phase of testing e-krona. Josh: The timing of it's great.  Paul: And of course, it runs on blockchain because blockchain is a great technology. But yeah, it's a decentralized system? I don't believe so. I think it'll be a very centralised system, but it'll definitely be electronic or digital.  Josh: Yeah. Okay. So I guess the recession at this stage, you're saying, is inevitable. It's going to happen. Got a beautiful way to at least have people that are struggling a little bit in their business, whether that be because they need to have more finances bought into it. Or maybe you've got people on the other side of the coin that have liquid assets or liquid cash where they want to be able to use that and invest into something that's going to be giving them a bit of a better return without having to put it into the big nasty banks. How do you go about? How does NoBNK work?  Paul: So the way that NoBNK came around is that many years ago, I looked at many of the managed funds and different places like that where they would collapse. There were quite a few here on the Gold Coast where a lot of those managed funds collapsed and the person who lost that was the investor every single time.  And it's only because the managed funds, number one, they think like a bank. And number two, they take their fees and everything out first. I'm not saying that all managed funds are like this. I'm just saying that when you get that real control freak at the helm, that's when there's a problem. So I designed a system where there is no control freak. So it's all about putting the control, the choices, the security back in the hands of the investor. And the number one thing is the trust. You know, because I think that we put a lot of trust in these organisations, in the corporate side, the banks and a lot of these managed funds. That's what we were told. You know, this is what you do. And I think they’ve broken our trust. I think they've broken our trust big time. You know?  The way that NoBNK is set up is that we make our number one product service. You know, everybody wants service. Well, the banking model can't give you service. It's impossible because of the way that their pecking order is designed. So their pecking order is profits first, shareholders second, then clients, then employees, that's the pecking order. They can't give you service. They don't make money out of service.  We're not about that. We're about, if we create that service for you, where you're having a great experience and you feel that you've got the trust and you will have to trust because what I say to people is, who's the one person that you trust more than anybody else in the world? To make the right finance decision for you. It's yourself, right? You trust yourself more than anybody else. So why are we giving that away? Why are we giving that trust away to the banks? So what we've done with this platform is that we're going to make you the bank.  Josh: Okay.  Paul: If I want to borrow money from you, why do I have to go to a bank to do that? You put your money in the bank and then I go and borrow the money from the bank. That's your money that's in the bank. That's not theirs. So why not just borrow directly from you? So the platform is set up where we facilitate accurate information between somebody who wants to borrow money and someone who wants to lend it. So the terms are all worked out, and if the borrower is happy to go, and the lender is happy to go, we just put those two together. That's all we do. And they've paid monthly returns in events on their investment. I don't know how many other investments you get paid monthly in advance, and it's direct in the security goes into the investor's name. Josh: Okay. So let's say I'm new to the idea and I'm going, ‘Okay. Yeah. Stuff the banks. They've stuffed me over too many times.’ Without saying the bank that I'm with, I can see the interest rates that I could be getting just changing to another bank, I could be saving $11,000 a year in mortgage repayments, and I had to look and I thought, ‘Ah, it's too hard.’ How hard is it? Or how would I go about moving a lot like a house?  Paul: The area that we're not going after at the moment is the consumer market. It's very regulated. There are a lot of rules around that market. We'll get to that. We'll get to that market. But the area that we want to look after, first of all, is the business and commercial arena. I think that if you look after the business side of things first and the business owner, they're gonna have to worry about their day-to-day things rather than worrying about when the next dollars, you know, how they're gonna pay their bills, if the bank's going to foreclose on them and the house is tied to that loan and all that sort of stuff.  So we look at things a lot more commercially and it won't always need to be property initially. There’s a lot of lending that happens out there that a lot of people don't know about, where you might have some text it or you need to, you want to jump on an opportunity pretty quickly and all this sort of stuff. So they use private, short-term lending and that short-term lending could be a loan that's anything from 3 months to 3 years. It’s not a 30-year loan and all that sort of stuff, and it's just about jumping onto an opportunity or it could be getting out of trouble. You know, ‘We're in a bit of trouble over here. We need to pay back the bank and get some cash flow into our business as well so that we can stay afloat.’ So really, we're more targeting that area there at first, which is perfect. Yeah. Well, I think it's an area that's very under-serviced.  And the other area that we're targeting, and this, as I said before, is those people all around the world, those high net worth investors all around the world that's got money sitting in the bank and it's getting them no return or very low returns. We want you to be able to negotiate the term between what sort of return you want. So really you get to choose the return you want. And the client gets to choose whether to accept it or not.  The way this platform is designed is that as an investor, we don't touch your money. So we never touch your money. We're not a managed fund. It's not a pooled investment. It's not a, you know, sort of property trust. It's not a contributory fund, none of that sort of stuff.  It's just one loan, one investor, one loan, one investor, one loan, one investor. So someone wants to borrow $1 million, the investor's gonna put up the whole $1 million, and we're just going to put those two directly. Josh: So it sounds like obviously it's a lot of advantages for both parties in regards to the returns that they're going to be getting, as well as the rates that they're going to be paying because you're cutting out the bank in the middle. What would be some of the, I guess, risks? Or does it take the same amount of time to process through if you wanted to get an equipment finance loan for $50,000 for a new digital printer or something like that. Paul: The process is quick, it all happens within 24 to 48 hours. You'll know how many people So as a borrower, you'll know how many people are interested in doing your loan and you'll get offered the lowest interest rate that they offer.  Josh: Is this a global thing or is this just Australia?  Paul: This will be a global thing. Initially, it's Australia, but we do want to take it globally because the problems that started in the world, the reason why I've talked a lot about Japan is because the reason why they've already experienced all this, what we're going through, is they’re the oldest population in the world, you know? So it all adds up to me. Their ages crossed over and over that 45-year mark, they're average age crossed over 15 or 20 years ago. So it comes in a lot sooner than what it has to us.  Josh: And their workforce is diminishing because of that. Paul: That's exactly right. And the wages aren't going up. All the problems that we're starting to have here in Australia, you know, property prices are going through the roof, but wages aren't going up. So the next step is how does somebody that's on 60 grand a year buy a million dollar property in Sydney? Well, I'll have to have a 70-year mortgage just like they have in Japan. You can see it. You're watching the pattern globally. It's happening all through Europe. You know, there are 30 countries in the Eurozone now that are on zero and negative rates and the lowest is -0.75.  Josh: All right. That's nuts. It's nuts when you think about it, and as you were saying, like it was only 30 years ago, we had the last recession, and so for Japan to be at the position...  Paul: 20% 30 years ago. Now the -0.5.  Josh: And that all comes down to the workforce and the economy, and that's where we're, as you said, we're heading towards the potential issue here.  If someone wants to jump in and jump onto NoBNK or hear any more information, how do they go about sort of doing that? Paul: The good thing about us is we can look after you no matter where you are in Australia and then as I said, that eventually, New Zealand will be pretty quick, but then we'll be going into places like the UK and America and things like that as well. This is something that can go global and that's the whole idea is that we're about like, you know, if you're going to disrupt your models and make it worthwhile.  Josh: Absolutely. If you’re going to kick the big in the head you may as well do it globally.  Paul: They had their place and as I said, we're not going to manage, we're not going to take your money and just go and do a hope and pray thing like many do. Your money stays in the bank under your control, so nothing changes, right? The only thing that changes is you get the opportunity to be able to have a crack at one of these deals and become the bank.  And your worst case scenario is you're sitting there with a security in your name and you're getting a return. Whereas what's your security in the bank? There isn't any, but if you don't win the deal, because it's going to be like an auction type system where you make a bid on what sort of return you want, then nothing's changed in your life. You still get your money sitting in the bank, you know? No one's touching it. No one's taking any fees off you or any of that sort of thing.  We're all about mitigating risks. We've got to mitigate the risk for the borrower, the lender, and for ourselves. So it's about everybody having this happy equilibrium, you know? That's how we're going to structure this thing.  We've got a whole website there. It’s NoBNK.com.au. And the reason why we got B N K is because ASIC won't let us use the word ‘bank’. It's a swear word. So we call ourselves NoBNK and we advertise as NoBNK does that, which has a double meaning. NoBNK does that. Josh: Perfect. As an investor and a borrower, what's the starting and ending amounts you can go for.  Paul: Because we're starting with the property component of it first of all, the minimum line would probably be around the $50,000 mark. This is why we're up to sophisticated investors. So this is some for your institutional versus, or you know, like your mum and dad's and things like that. You must be a high net worth. You know, I know people out there, they have tens of millions just sitting in the bank.  Josh: Yep.  Paul: Globally. So you might have somebody, you might have a deal here in Australia. There might be somebody in Japan that makes a bid on the deal and all of a sudden they're getting a return of 4%, 5%, 6%, 7%, whatever it is, whatever that agreed return is, where they're getting nothing over there, but they've actually got to pay to put their money in the bank over there. So it's a really good outcome because, you know, we just let the market set itself dynamically. There is no ‘ring Paul up and say, “Mate, what interest rate can I get?”’ There's none of that anymore. It's just like, well, it's whatever anyone's prepared to bid and whatever you're prepared to pay. Josh: Yep. So it's win-win. Paul: And look, there's rules for the investors. I've got a pretty good record. We're doing this sort of thing.  Josh: You've been doing it for more than 10 years?  Paul: Yeah, about 10, about 12 years now. I've been doing these sorts of loans for some high net worth. And in that amount of time, we've had no foreclosures and the investors haven’t lost money in the capital. And it's just about managing it.  Josh: That's a good run.  Paul: Yeah. It's just about managing. You don't smash people when they're down. You help them. You don't have to be all hard about it. You know, you're a day late or two days late with your payment. It's about managing it. Nobody gets hurt. You know what I mean?  Josh: So how do you guys come into it? Do they just clip the ticket on the way through?  Paul: You have a gross line amount. You have a net loan amount. You got to add that first month's interest. There's lawyers involved, there's all sorts of things, which for the investors, it's great for them. It's their lawyer. So it's a lawyer of their choice. And you know, usually there's brokers involved in all the research, so there's nothing under the table. So there's no hidden fees and charges and all that sort of stuff. In our letter of offer, it's like, say for example, you want half a million dollars and it might cost $520,000 you know, like when you add everything up. So you say, okay, so your gross loan amount is 520, that's what it is. You'll see all the costs that are involved, all the rest of it, and you get the choice to say, ‘Yeah. I'm happy with that.’ ‘Well, no, thank you.’  Josh: Fair enough. Cool. Cool, cool, cool. I think there's going to be a big help for a lot of people that are feeling a bit of pressure, whether that'd be as an investor or they're looking potentially down the barrel of a gun for a business. They might not be going as well as it was. Is there anything else you'd like to add? Paul: There's lots of businesses out there that need lots of help in different ways. It's not just about, you know, finance and properties and all that sort of stuff. It's just about knowing that there are people out there that, you know, we'll have a chat about it first. I mean, whether you've been rejected by a bank, don't want to go to their bank or can't go to a bank, that's why we're here. So pretty well covers everybody. When you do those things, we tell them, you don't go to the bank, come to NoBNK.  Josh: I guess back in the day, there was like no-doc loans and things like this. This is from a business owner's perspective. Paul: It's a very, very simple process. So you know, the information that we asked from you is not onerous. It's really quite simple. It's a very quick application process. This platform that we've built that we'll be releasing in the next couple of weeks, it'll be automated. It's just a quick, you know, fill in the application process type of thing and you'll get SMS and emails and all that sort of stuff, and then so will the investors and they'll be able to start bidding on your deals straight away.  Josh: Sweet.  Paul: It's a little bit of a game changer, come to the market.  Josh: Absolutely. Yeah.  Paul: That's what it's about, isn't it? It's about changing things up and seeing if we can do it better and make a change, you know, a different change for the better for once rather than just doing the same as everybody else.  Josh: Really enjoyed talking to you and is there anything else you'd like to add before we jump off? Paul: No, mate, I really appreciate it. Thank you very much. I'd like to wish everybody out there that, you know, there is hope. It costs you nothing to apply with us or to have a chat with us or anything like that. So, you know, your people wanting to, you know, they're welcome to have a chat anytime they like. Josh: Cool. Only advantages and as I said, a very welcome time for me to be talking to you about this sort of stuff for a lot of people out there.  Paul: Appreciate it, mate. Thank you very much.  Josh: If you have any questions and bits and pieces, we'll put a link down to NoBNK as well as Paul's details. If you've enjoyed this episode, jump across to iTunes, leave us a review, give us some love and stay good. 

First of all I'm sorry. It's been a long time since I posted an episode. This is awkward cause I wasn't sure if I should post more episodes here or if I should scratch this and just start fresh. A new podcast. A new Identity. A brand new me...but nah. That'd be too much work so ill just go ahead and live up to the fact that I let all you listeners down. (classic move) BUT I have more to share with you all so... I've known Paul for as long as I've been doing stand-up and the longer I know him the longer I realize I don't know this guy at all! He's a man who's lived a hundred life's and can tell a thousand tales. One time I was out drinking after a set and Paul was being a good wing man. To be honest he was being too good of a wing man (but I'm no looker so I cant complain). He ended up leading most the conversation that night with his tales of debauchery from his days of being a musician and a chef. This girl wanted Paul so bad and I could totally see why. I was like "I kinda wanna bang Paul too!" but I didn't. instead we recorded a podcast. ENJOY.

This week we have Paul the ENTIRE show. That's about all the description you need.....right? That's what I thought. Don't forget to like and subscribe!

One year ago we listed a business that created a massive amount of activity, garnering ten offers, many above asking price. As part of our incredible exit series, today we welcome a seller who has had some time to reflect on all the things he did right in his sale and share what he has been up to since. Paul Anderson started his career as an accountant, taking the safe path and spending ten years in corporate America. An increasing lack of passion led him to start to build his own lifeboat. He avidly studied Amazon FBA and learned by following experts in the e-commerce space. Although his first launch failed he carried on, honing his awareness of product opportunities out there and eventually he hit it big. Today Paul delves into the building of the business, the pillars of his success, and the components of his path to becoming an exitpreneur. Episode Highlights: Paul's first product's failure to launch and what he learned. How he sourced the second product and what happened in the last quarter of 2016. Funding subsequent stock and the challenges of inventory planning. How Paul stands on all four pillars of a successfully built business as well as that invisible fifth pillar. The scheduling and nitty gritty of the sale process. How the final buyer was chosen and the deciding factors for Paul. Why the highest bidder does not always win. The toughest challenges of running the business. Why Paul decided to sell. What he has been doing since the sale. Tips for building a successful content website. Transcription: Mark: So almost one year ago to the date of the recording of this episode of the podcast I was on a car ride with Joe; you Joe from where was it? It was from Dallas down to Houston and then Houston back up to Dallas. We were meeting with a good friend of ours that lived in Houston and while we were in that car ride you had launched a new listing that went absolutely berserk. And I've referenced this; I think we've actually talked about this on the podcast a few times, I've referenced this deal because it was one of these outlier deals that seem to check every single box and the result was just a massive amount of requests for phone calls and I believe 10 offers within a very short amount of time. And it's been a year since that launched and obviously, the deal closed which we're super happy about but now you finally get to have the seller on the podcast talking about all the things that he did right. Joe: Yeah it's a great time because it's a year out so he gets to look back. And over the years of doing this podcast the people listening have heard us talk about the four pillars; risk, growth, transferability, and documentation and someone might go yeah ok whatever, the reality is that they matter. Paul Anderson sold his business; 10 offers, he checked off every one of these pillars and the six little subtitles under each pillar and then the fifth one which I know Mark there's no fifth pillar, but the fifth one is the man or person or entrepreneur behind the business. Paul being a former CPA turned entrepreneur who outsourced his bookkeeping to a bookkeeper is just a super likable guy, stay at home dad, buttoned up in so many different ways. The end result is I had to clear his schedule; he basically had three conference calls with highly qualified buyers for five days in a row. He was exhausted from it because each one was… Joe: So you had 15 conference calls then. Paul: 15 conference calls. Joe: And I remember again we were in the car going back up to Dallas and you were on the phone pretty much constantly telling people okay let me see if I can arrange a time for you. So there was a lot more requests for conference calls on this deal. Paul: A lot more requests and we say we had 10 offers but finally a few people dropped out because they just didn't want to compete because they knew what it is going to be. And the funny thing is people get concerned about that and we always say right up front look don't get caught up in the hype of multiple offers, don't go beyond your comfort level, offer-wise. We want you to make an offer that works for you and hopefully will work for the seller as well because we want it to go all the way from letter of intent through to due diligence and that's exactly what we wound up with. And oddly enough Paul did not choose as we always say they don't necessarily choose the highest price. He didn't do that. He picked the offer that was best for him and I think it was somewhere $150,000 lower than the highest price. So we talked about a little bit of that process, what makes a good seller, a good buyer, and then we talked about what he's doing today which is really interesting as well so hopefully, everybody will enjoy this podcast. Joe: Absolutely. Paul: Let's go to it. Joe: Hey folks. Joe Valley here from the Quiet Light Podcast and today I have an Incredible Exits client on the phone with me. It's Paul Anderson. We sold Paul's business I think; when was it, Paul? Paul: March of last year, so a little under a year ago. Joe: Spring of 2019; so a little under a year ago. So we're going to talk about Paul's exit. We're going to talk about what Paul went through when he built the business, sold the business after he sold the business, and what he's doing now so we're going to get the full picture. Paul welcome to the Quiet Light Podcast. Paul: Thanks Joe, good to be here. Good to talk to you. Joe: So for the folks listening why don't you give a little bit of background on your professional pedigree and your entrepreneurial journey? Paul: Yeah, sure. So I actually studied accounting and followed that path. I was kind of one of those people that never really knew what I wanted to do. Like some people I think they're just like hey I want to be a TV news reporter or a journalist, I never really had that strong thing tapped me on the shoulder that said this is what you should do so I took a pretty safe practical path. I went into accounting and got my CPA. I spent about 10 years working in corporate America doing accounting and finance jobs and didn't really ever feel like that passion and eventually it started to kind of wear me down. I got to the point where I had to think of something else to do and try to build my own little lifeboat to escape from that because something inside me just didn't feel right anymore doing that. So that's kind of what led into starting a business. So that's in 2016. Somewhere; I don't even remember where I started to hear about Amazon FBA and I kind of consumed everything I could about it like podcasts, there's this guy Manny Coats inaudible[00:06:09.6] Helium10, he had a great podcast back then, Amazing Seller; there's all sorts of good stuff online about the model and that's kind of how it started and I started really small. We can get into it from there but that was kind of the first step, learning about it and seeing like oh I think I could do this. Joe: So you learned about it from podcasts; you didn't pay for a course or anything like that, you were absorbing free information from experts in the space. Paul: I never bought a single course it was all podcasts, Facebook groups, Reddit forums, and I was just… Joe: I love it. Paul: Yeah I can tell you about the first launch which was a total fail but that was like my training course like the very first launch because I learned. Joe: Failure is a great lesson. How much money did you pull together to launch the business and were you working at that point in the CPA business? Paul: Yeah I was still working. It was 2016, I put $5,000 in to do; most of it was an inventory buy so I was on Alibaba like at night trying to find my suppliers talking with China and I put in probably about 5,000 bucks to start on my first product. Joe: Okay. And you just mentioned Helium10; did you use Helium10 to help you find that first product? Paul: Yes. So it's funny like almost all the products I launched I've kind of like encountered in the real world somewhere and the product that turned out to be my big business was I kind of got onto it from a discussion with my parents. We're just having a casual discussion like you would have many times a day and they mentioned this particular thing and I would always in my iPhone put down; anything that seemed interesting I would just like log it in there and then I come back to it. So I had a list of 20 to 30 things going and I went back and started doing some research. I actually was using Jungle Scout back then and I switched over to Helium10 for everything now. Joe: Oh they're both great products; both of them. Manny and Greg have both been on the podcast; great guys. Paul: Yeah, for sure. So I kind of punched it in there and said like oh this looks like; the numbers look good and that's kind of how it started but it really was that conversation being like; I think if there's a lesson there it's being aware, we have so many kinds of filters and blinders on like if you really put yourself in the headspace of looking for opportunities you'd be surprised how many little things you read online or you hear about through friends like this is really popular; there's just all sorts of those little things that pop up that could turn out to be big businesses. Joe: So pay attention to your surroundings; the stuff that you use every day, emerging products in categories and niches and try to pay attention to and think is there an opportunity? Did you use any tools to see if a lot of people were selling in that particular category and that particular product? Paul: I mean Jungle Scout helps with that but mainly you can just go on and kind of assess like if page one everyone's got a thousand reviews and they're really well-known brands or something that's probably going to be a tough place to break into. Joe: Tough barrier; okay. So tell us about your first test, it was an epic fail? Paul: Yeah, so I was really pumped and thought like here it is, this is going to be like my ticket out of full-time work and it's going to be amazing and it was actually an accessory. Have you ever heard of pour-over coffee? Joe: Yeah. Paul: So that was kind of just bubbling up, seeming like oh this is really a trending product… Joe: Too much work; I never bought it because… Paul: Too much work, yeah, but there's a lot of people that are really into the craft obviously a coffee one and having some artisan experience. So I sourced these little wooden coffee stands that's basically used to make pour-over coffee. And it was kind of a cool thing but it turns out products made out of wood can crack and can break and have issues and I was not an expert at sourcing at that point in time so the long story short a lot of the products ended up cracking and breaking. And then once you start getting all these one-star reviews and returns; like my garage was full all around with carts of returned inventory and there wasn't that much demand I think. At the start, I was thinking oh you really got a niche down into this little tiny space and own that and there just wasn't quite enough demand in that space either. So I kind of learned to be a little smarter on sourcing and just to look for ways that things can go wrong inaudible[00:10:31.6] thing that's just so niche that like even if you execute and everything is great like you're going to be selling a couple of units a day. Joe: So how much money did you test and lose on that first product launch? Paul: So that was about 5,000 bucks in and I didn't take to bad a bee but I think I lost about a thousand dollars on it which isn't bad. Joe: Oh that's not bad. Paul: Yeah. Joe: Not enough to make you go away and say okay this didn't work I'm done; I'm going to go back to the corporate world. You got a taste for it and you said okay I just picked the wrong product. Paul: Exactly. And I mean I was still in the corporate world and like 5,000 bucks it's not like a lot of money at the time so it wasn't like I was; I'm like yeah whatever it doesn't matter. At that point, the stakes felt real and high. Joe: Yeah. Paul: Because it definitely was like I can see the power here on Amazon it's just like finding the right thing to really get this thing spinning. Joe: Okay. So you learned a lesson; you only lost 20% of your money but you get an excellent education from it better than any course you could have ever purchased. You went out there tried it, failed, learned, and didn't lose so much that you couldn't do it again. So you came up with another product niche and decided to go at it again? Paul: Exactly yes. So then I was actually going over to; are you familiar with the Canton Fair which is the big supplier…? Joe: Yeah. Paul: So I had a trip booked to go over there and kind of in-between going there… Joe: Just out of curiosity did you book it with a group or was it just you? Paul: Just me and my wife went over. Joe: Oh okay, because I was just talking to Athena from China Magic and they have a group of folks that go on a regular basis for those that are terrified to go alone. So you and your wife chose to book a flight to China and go to the Canton Fair alone. Paul: I loved it. It was really, really full out and I'm eager to go over there. Joe: Okay. Paul: I actually ended up finding my supplier on Alibaba before I went so I can't really say that the trip necessarily paid off in terms of like… Joe: Did you connect with him in person when you got to the Canton Fair? Paul: No because it was still too early and he was pretty far away from the Canton Fair. I think it helped me really see kind of like the culture of China and doing business with China and I think just a little savvier about how things work. So it was a great education for that and just like a lot of fun to check it out; I mean the place is just massive, like multiple football fields. Anything you want to ever source it would be out there so it was a super interesting spot. But anyway back to your second question so yes I stumbled upon this other product and started kind of the wheels turning in 2016 to source it. I got it on I think in the fall of 2016 and I remember that Q4 for Amazon or e-commerce is like the prime time and I remember just refreshing that seller app that Black Friday, Cyber Monday, like all through up until Christmas and it was just mind-blowing the sales that were coming in off this new product. Joe: What was it like your first day that you got a sale, how many sales did you have all together; do you remember? Paul: Oh I mean it started slow. The first thing was probably just two or three units. I mean it's really; it was in such a momentum game like when you have no momentum it's hard to keep momentum and then once you get this momentum going and the wheels start spinning it can blow your mind like the amount of sales that… Joe: And that actually blew our mind within the first month or in that first quarter like what did you wind up with on the biggest day within a couple of months of launching it in the Q4 of ‘16? Paul: I don't want to say maybe like $8,000 of sales there. Joe: Oh, wow. Paul: Something big like and then when you look at the profits from that it's like wow I made more money like on this one day than; and I had a pretty decent corporate job, I'm like this is crazy like the potential. So the hooks kind of got in me right there and then '16 was kind of just getting off the ground and then the next year is when the ball really started to roll. Joe: When you started to get revenue in the fourth quarter of 2016 and sales started to come in you had euphoria with the fact that you were getting that kind of revenue and making more money in one day than you made perhaps in a month in the corporate world but did you also have the fear of oh my God I'm going to run out of inventory? Paul: I did. Joe: Okay. Paul: Yeah, inventory is like not something glamorous to talk about and you don't really hear about it that much in podcasts or anything else but it's like running a physical products company doing an Amazon business like the inventory planning is so difficult because your sales can change on a dime. inaudible[00:15:20.7] your supplier 30 days early to make something and another 30 days to put them on a ship to get it over here. So you've got these difficult variables to manage that can leave you stocked out or even a little bit too much stuck so that's always a tough thing to manage. Joe: Awesome. I don't think I've ever met an Amazon seller or an e-commerce business person that's been growing rapidly that's not run out of inventory at one point or another. All right, so you started with $5,000, did a test, failed, how long between the first failed test and the second product that took off; how many months was it? Paul: That was about three months I think. Joe: Okay, and all the time you kept your day job which is fantastic. So you've got some revenue, you've got some money in the account that's transferred to your business account, at what point did you order more inventory with and did you just use that money or did you sit down and talk as a family and say okay this is a winner we need to take a home equity line of credit; how did you fund the rest of the inventory purchases? Paul: It was all really funded with profits. Joe: It was? Okay. Paul: Yeah, it was. Joe: And you didn't have to take any money out for living expenses because you had your day job so that's perfect. Paul: Yeah. If I wouldn't have my day job it would have made it much more difficult but luckily I had some steady income coming in on the day job and then I was able to just take the profits and reinvest them back in and just go from there. Joe: Fast forwarding you had an amazing 2017, an amazing 2018; strong year over year growth, like huge year over year growth. For those listening, Paul's business was listed again spring of 2019 and it's those perfect situation folks where we talk about the four pillars of a sellable business and that invisible fifth one which is the person behind the business and that's Paul. We have a 30-month-old Amazon business with an incredible brand that's growing rapidly year over year. The financials we're set up impeccably. Paul is a CPA but he did something incredible which was what? You outsourced the books to an e-commerce bookkeeper; brilliant by the way. So those of you that are out there saying oh I can do this I'm not going to pay a few hundred bucks to a bookkeeper we've got a CPA here that chose to outsource to an e-commerce bookkeeper because he can do better things than bookkeeping with his time like grow a multi-million dollar Amazon brand which is exactly what you did. Your business checks so many boxes. It was SBA eligible. You were the owner behind the business. You built trust. People believed in you. During the recorded video interview, you're the first person; and I keep asking people to do it now, you're the first person that ever sat in front of the camera, reached down picked up the product and demonstrated the product. You showed the new packaging that you had just done. It was beautiful and the end result was an overwhelming request to buy the business, conference calls where you had to clear your schedule for a week. I said Paul cancel everything, right? We had to clear it and we ended up with I think three calls with qualified buyers every day for five days. We wound up with 10 total offers. I think we were at; the top one was something like $150,000 over asking price. Paul: Yeah, I think that's right. Yeah. Joe: Yeah, and we say this all the time that it's not always the offer that comes in with the highest number, it's the right fit more than anything else. We had; of the 10 offers, I think we had maybe six that were SBA and four that were cash. You ended up choosing a cash buyer and not just because it was a cash buyer but also the person behind the business. We did video interviews between the buyer and seller. How much did that matter and how much of a difference did that make for you? Paul: The interviews mattered a ton. I mean that was the deciding factor because when I went into the process I just thought like well it's pretty simple, right? You take the highest number and the highest bidder wins but as you get into it and talk to different people it's like a huge diverse set of backgrounds that people are coming through Quiet Light looking to buy, right? Joe: Right. Paul: And some people I felt like wow I could just hand this to them and they could run with it immediately and do like as good or better a job with this than I ever could. And others are like hey I really like this person and their heart is in the right place but I feel like the transition might take a little bit longer and then what if somewhere they dropped the ball and things get sideways like I don't want that somehow to come back to me. I don't know if that's a rational way to think about it but if there was a lot of comfort like feeling this guy or these guys I feel like really got it, they get it, they know what to do, they will hit the ground running from day one so to me that mattered a whole lot. Joe: Yeah. And I think given the fact that we're in this remote world where your buyers and sellers are all over the world literally sometimes doing a video conference call for that initial call breaks the ice. You're not reading the client interview anymore, you're not just talking to somebody on the phone; you can see the whites of their eyes and anybody that wants to see Paul we're recording this both on Zoom with video and audio and it will be up on the YouTube page as well. He does not look like a buttoned-up CPA today and I was making fun of him when we first got on the call. You've always looked like that but today you know what you're a successful exitpreneur. You got the sweatshirt on, a little stubble, working from home; I love it. All right so I want to you ask a couple of things just for the audience purposes. Number one back to running the business what was the toughest challenge in running the business? Let's start with that. Go ahead. Paul: Yeah. I'd say even at the start this isn't even a tactical thing but the hardest thing was just getting the momentum going. Starting an Amazon business is not like hey I'm trying to create an electric car and beat Elon Musk but even me like I had a lot of doubts at the start like is this is going to work, am I going to lose all my money? All of these doubts kind of creep into your head so I remember really kind of struggling to pull the trigger in a way thinking like I just don't know is this supposed to be my pathway? So I think that was really hard to overcome and you just kind of keep going one foot in front of the other and once you get a little momentum it just like brings all this energy and life into you that you just feel so energized to just keep improving and add products and make your products better and make the packaging better. Getting that first momentum can feel elusive and challenging so I think that was like a big thing at the start. Joe: And you failed and then you stuck with it and then you succeeded. Paul: Yeah. And I was kind of at an inflection point like should I keep going or is this just not meant to be and then you know. Joe: This may be a dumb question but are you glad you kept going? Paul: I'm very glad. It changed my life that I kept going. I mean I'd still be sitting at a desk in corporate America right now I hadn't kept going and like we've got a three-year-old son at home like the physical time we will spend with him and then mentally my head is so much like the stress is away from me. So I was always stressed working in corporate America so it's been the biggest blessing ever to go out and do this. It's changed my whole family's life. Joe: Okay. So let me ask the question that all buyers ask, why did you sell the business? Paul: Yeah, it was a tough decision to sell because I was having so much fun running it. And I think the honest answer is the value of the business became such that it really could provide a lot of security for our family. And it felt like if I was 23 and single and didn't have kids I'll like alright instead of going for this I might have just keep on going and try to sell it for three times this or five times this or just keep going. But knowing Amazon can be volatile and like I had all my eggs in that basket so it just felt like the responsible thing is to take some chips off the table and let go of the business but it was really hard. Joe: The responsible thing; I like that, the responsible thing. Your CPA background is coming out now. That's good. Paul: Yeah. Joe: All right so what was the toughest part about going through the sales process and selling the business; what was the hardest part there? Paul: Picking a buyer was really tough. Joe: It's a good problem. That's a good problem to have. Paul: I mean just even knowing how to approach it and you really helped a ton Joe in that process. When it's your first time through and you already have kind of these emotions like you built this thing and now it's worth something that people want it, it's a weird feeling and like how to value it and how to find the right fit and thinking about SBA versus cash; there's just a lot of things that are spinning through your head at that time so I think just getting a clear head and trying to identify what the right fit was the toughest part. Joe: Okay. I think you again exception rather than really had 10 offers, I think maybe one or two might have come in slightly under asking price but the vast majority was above. I think 2019 the average offers that we had on any single listening was two and a half so you are five times that amount which is pretty exceptional. That goes to the brand that you built. It goes to the way that you set the business up with its own entity. You didn't come and go books. You're a CPA but you hired a professional bookkeeper. You instilled so much confidence in buyers. They clearly came out of the woodworks to buy your business. All right, the toughest part was choosing the buyer; that's amazing. It's not what I would've guessed you would have said. Sometimes it's due diligence but with you, it was choosing a buyer. All right so now there's life after the sale, you were in the corporate world working 40, 50 hours a week or sometimes more in tax season and then you're an entrepreneur working from home spending time with your son now what are you doing? You've sold the business nine months ago, what are you doing with your time? Paul: Yeah so it's been nice to have a little; in life usually you're just like chasing after the next thing and I've had just the time to step back and think really what I want to do and what I want my life to look like so it's been like a real luxury. So I'm going into; I'm building a website, it's called WealthFam.com. Joe: Fam like family? Okay. Paul: Yup like family. It's brand new but basically it sort of like combines my background and what I like to do. So it's all about building wealth; becoming financially independent, starting and running online businesses. Basically, it's how to be smarter with your money and use the money to help kind of enable the life that you want to live whether it's being with your kids or going on trips or whatever else. So it's a content site which is a super interesting thing. I thought a lot about going back and doing another Amazon business but I just didn't feel the same spark for like starting it and it takes a lot of energy and mental fortitude to take something from A to Z and you've got to really want it kind of every step of the way. So this just kind of really energized me and there's been some great stories like Ramon's story; you featured Ramon. It like blew my mind the… Joe: His content site, yeah. Paul: And that happened in the content space so that was really exciting to me. And on top of that I just like doing this stuff so it feels like the right sort of fit. Joe: So what kind of subjects are you going to cover on Wealth Fam? Paul: So it's broken down a couple of categories like making money, saving money, investing money, financial independence, and then some stuff like how money intersects with having a kid and being married or buying a house. So I'm trying to make it like a modern personal finance site that people in their teens, 20s, 30s, can find well like at least from my experience like education society; like our schools and in general, there's not a lot of like real training about… Joe: There's none of it. There's none of it, yeah. Paul: And there's even a lesson mode like starting an online business and like the potential kind of betting on yourself. Joe: It seems like a great idea because you're taking your educational experience along with your entrepreneurial experience and marrying them together with a content site which is great. I love content sites. We work with SaaS, content, and FBA and content is just fantastic. Scott Voelker is really, really focused on helping people go beyond FBA and build content sites and some of them have great success and its driving more traffic back to FBA and getting their business products sold. For those that aren't familiar with content site monetization, how do you plan to monetize the site? Paul: So there's a couple of traditional ways that people will do it. So, first of all, you have to have traffic. I mean if I have traffic inaudible[00:28:43.3] selling eyeballs like it's tough to; getting traffic is really hard and you're playing like this SEO game and it takes a long time to rank in Google. Then there's a couple of primary ways, the first is affiliate links like you could be selling a course or selling something on Amazon or selling; the Amazon FBA thing is a really interesting thing for Amazon sellers to marry their inaudible[00:29:04.9] business with content. I love that idea. I think that's really smart. There's brand sponsorships, other partnerships; but it's like advertising and affiliate income are kind of the two main plays for monetizing. Joe: I got you, okay. All right how's life at home; what do you do with your time? I mean you've you don't have a job. You're starting a content site which might take a little bit of your time. You've got a baby. Paul: It takes a lot of time. Joe: It takes a lot; the startup phase is always the hardest, isn't it? Paul: Inaudible[00:29:38.4] the thing I underestimated about content is that like writing is really hard. Joe: Yeah. Paul: I think oh I can write something about Amazon, that's easy, I know this. It takes a lot of time to really do a good job at clarifying your thoughts but overall I'm just trying to optimize my life for happiness and contentment and I get that right now being with my son and my wife. So I spend a lot of time with my family. We do a lot of cool stuff together. And I'm really liking; I do some Amazon consulting because I'm still at the Amazon blog and I like to be involved in it so I'm doing some of that for some local companies which I love doing.   Joe: Good. Paul: And then this content thing really is exciting and fun and I'm going to see where it can go and… Joe: So you didn't make enough on the sale of your business to never work again but enough to give you a pretty long runway and you're enjoying your expertise in the Amazon space and doing some consulting while you're building up another content or a content business? Paul: Yeah that's a fair way to… Joe: Does that sum it up? Paul: Yeah and I'd like to go up those kind of shift too, right? I'm not sure how in-tune you are with the financial independence world, all the people that want to retire early and be financially… Joe: Oh yeah, fire. Paul: So like if your burn rate or you can live on 40 grand a year once you stacked up a million bucks, in theory, you can quote-unquote retire. Joe: Sure. Paul: But as you think about education and college and healthcare and all these other things that number maybe gets a little bit… Joe: It gets blown out of the water. I have an 18-year-old and we're 14 days away from knowing what he's getting into which is schools and I'm rooting for the in-state schools; I'm not going to lie to you, I'm rooting for the in-state. Paul: Hey, I went to an in-state school and… Joe: Look at how it turned out; pretty damn good. Paul: Yeah. Joe: All right cool. Well, listen Paul I always tell the story about you and your brand and the fact that that fifth pillar makes a huge difference. It's the person behind the business that builds a great business with the next owner in mind. You kind of did that, I don't know if you did it intentionally or not but you said I'm going to build a great business. I want to put it all in a package that's going to help the new owner of the business do amazing things with it. And Matt the new owner of the business as you know is doing amazing things with it. And it pays off when you think about others exactly what you did that paid off for you, it paid off for your family, and now hopefully through Wealth Fam, it's going to pay off for a lot of other visitors to your website as well so people can start young and start smart and get on the right path financially. So listen man thanks for your time. I appreciate the business that you've built because it allows me to tell a story of how the person behind the business makes a tremendous difference so thank you and I appreciate you coming on the podcast today. Paul: You got it. Anytime. Thanks a lot, Joe. Links and Resources: Paul's Website Jungle Scout Helium 10

Nick Angstadt and Isaac Harris discuss the reasons the Mavs shouldn't trade for Chris Paul and the changes in the Pacific Division (Warriors, Clippers, Lakers, Kings, Suns).Watch Nick Angstadt's Videos On FreeDawkins | Read Isaac Harris' Articles on Mavs.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Nick Angstadt and Isaac Harris discuss the reasons the Mavs shouldn't trade for Chris Paul and the changes in the Pacific Division (Warriors, Clippers, Lakers, Kings, Suns). Watch Nick Angstadt’s Videos On FreeDawkins | Read Isaac Harris’ Articles on Mavs.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hemos mencionado que canciones son las que Paul no toca el bajo, una de ellas también es "Helter Skelter". En ésta canción John toca el bajo.

Hemos mencionado que canciones son las que Paul no toca el bajo, una de ellas también es "Helter Skelter". En ésta canción John toca el bajo.

La canción: "She Said She Said" fue grabada el martes 21 de junio de 1966. En dicha canción se hicieron 3 tomas de la pista básica. Una curiosidad es que John la voz principal y guitarra y órgano, Ringo la batería y las percusiones, George la guitarra principal y el BAJO... ¡Pual no tocó en esta canción!

La canción: "She Said She Said" fue grabada el martes 21 de junio de 1966. En dicha canción se hicieron 3 tomas de la pista básica. Una curiosidad es que John la voz principal y guitarra y órgano, Ringo la batería y las percusiones, George la guitarra principal y el BAJO... ¡Pual no tocó en esta canción!

After directing the Ephesians to be “filled with the Spirit” Paul goes on to say in Ephesians 5:19-21, “but be filled with the Spirit, addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.” And at first glance it may seem as though Paul is just adding to our already longer than we'd hoped "to do" list. Not only should you be filled with the Spirit but now you need to walk around singing and being thankful and submitting to everyone. Um, really Paul? No. Actually, he's simply elaborating on the benefits of being filled with the Spirit. The result of letting the Spirit lead. Aka. the believer's benefit package and it's amazing!Deeper Devos >>> https://deeperdevos.org

In episode 49 of Can Crushers, it seems everyone is out with "down with the sickness." Mark was worried about flying solo today, but no fear Ethan is here. The Martinez boys talk Elimination Chamber, Raw, and Smackdown, while Dad (Mark) recaps Ohio Valley Wrestling episode 1018. Ethan was saved by the bell, when John "The English Professor" chimes in about a tough "jagged little pill" to swallow. Also announced on the show are the First Round matches for the Bad Gimmick tournament. Make sure you head over to our Facebook page to vote. Finally tune in on Friday, as Mark sits down with OVW Women's Champ Cali to talk all things wrestling. Support the show (http://paypal.me/cancrushers)

The family finally makes it to a commune in Oregon, but bus-living in the winter is no fun, so they move to a house in the nearest town. Diana finds a new boyfriend; Paul leaves, but returns when Tina gets a hernia. Diana says goodbye to her boyfriend and the family heads to Sacramento, CA.

Punishing Christianity, Kachin Christians, China, UK St. Paul, No bible reading, Pakistan, War with Church, and more Prophecy news| www.warn-usa.com | WIBR WARN Radio Steel the Darkness, A Christian Mystery Thriller; this is book one in a four book series. Learn more here: Steel the Darkness paperback http://amzn.to/2z4Kcpe We cover the globe and find the war with the Church. Punishing Christianity we find China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Myanmar, and radical Islam. In addition we find in the UK bible reading on the street is illegal. Then we discuss Leah Sharibu a young woman who would not renounce Christ and is in custody still. Around the world the news of persecution of Christians not to mention others also facing the same thing. The lawlessness is sweeping the world led by nation states which despise Christianity and those who practice it. Pat Buchanan pushes the Trump thought process. Coverage of the governments Pig book. In addition shocking coverage of Globalism killing America. Is Europe becoming an Islamic state, we have the warning.

We celebrate our second anniversary episode by interviewing Emeritus Professor Paul Nation about reading. Paul tells us about research into the effectiveness of reading, why as teachers we tend to avoid including reading in our classes and how we can start doing more reading in class.Ross Thorburn: Hello everyone. Welcome to this second anniversary podcast. Today, we're going to talk about something that we've not talked about much before on the podcast which is reading. I know we always say we have a special guest but today, we really have a very, very, very special guest.Tracy: He's a true world expert on reading, Paul Nation. I'm sure a lot of you are familiar with Paul Nation. Paul is emeritus professor at the School of Applied Linguistics and Applied Language at Victoria University, New Zealand.Written dozens of books and been publishing research on these topics since 1970s. There are three areas that we're going to talk about. The first one is, how does reading help students learn vocabulary?Ross: Second, we'll ask, how can teachers include more reading in their lessons? Finally...Tracy: Why isn't there more reading in most language courses?How does reading help students learn vocabulary?Ross: Hi, Paul.Paul Nation: Hello.Ross: Thanks so much for coming on the podcast.Paul: No problem.Ross: Do you want to start off by telling us a bit about vocabulary teaching and how reading relates to vocabulary teaching?Paul: The problem with vocabulary is when it's framed as teaching vocabulary because most of vocabulary learning will occur not through the teacher teaching, but through the teacher planning well, organizing well and providing opportunities for the learners to develop strategies to take control of their own learning.There are just too many words for teachers to be able to teach them. Really, we have to see learning of vocabulary is really occurring through input which is very, very important. Learning through output and learning through fluency development, but also learning through some teaching and then through deliberate learning and so on like that.I think that's really important because otherwise, teachers feel that they're the only source of vocabulary for the learners in the classroom. That's a very wrong view indeed.Tracy: That's really interesting. Does that mean teachers aren't really that important then in language learning?Paul: I didn't say the teachers weren't important. I said teaching was not important. There's an important difference. That comes back to what you see as the role of the teacher or the roles of the teacher. I put planning as the number one role of the teacher.From a vocabulary perspective, planning involves working out what vocabulary your learners already know and making sure that they have plenty of opportunities to learn that vocabulary.It's deciding what vocabulary your learners need to learn and then making sure that they have plenty of opportunities to learn it. If we just take meaning‑focused input, teachers need to know and the learners need to know how many words they know. Then what level of graded readers they should be working on in order to help expand their vocabulary through input.The teachers' roles are very important because it's, first of all, making sure that learners were spending time reading at the right level for the students so that they have the opportunity to learn vocabulary through guessing from context and through some dictionary lookup and so on as they do reading in order for that to happen.If you had a really good extensive reading program that learners were spending anything from half an hour to an hour or two a week on and maybe more, they could be learning at a rate of around about a thousand words a year, which would be a native speaker rate of learning.The teacher has a good job to play there, a very important job to play but the teacher is not teaching. The teacher is making sure that the materials are available to the students.The students know why they're doing it. The students are, therefore, motivated and they're getting some feedback on their progress. The teacher needs to do all those things but it's not fronting up saying, "This word means X and that word means Y." It's getting the learning going.Ross: I'd heard before that the big problem with reading is that it's actually much harder to guess from context than most of us assume. Something like students need to know. Is it 95 percent of words in a text?Paul: Yeah.Ross: If you're getting that correctly.Paul: That's 98.Ross: Right, 98 percent. How do you reconcile those two areas, that guessing from context is really difficult, but reading is also extremely helpful and helping learners build up their vocabulary?Paul: It depends on the standard used for guessing. You have to view knowledge of words developing over time. If you meet a word in a reading and you have a guess at its meaning, and your guess is good enough for you to carry on reading, you might have added only a little bit of knowledge about that word to your knowledge of words.When you meet it again, the next time you'll add a little bit more knowledge. You can show...if you set your standard of knowledge for one meeting with a word is high, you can say, "Oh, people don't learn anything from context."It's just to have the guess the full meaning of a word from one meeting. That's absolutely true. All of research on learning from context used to have this problem of saying, "Well, actually, we know that people learn from context, especially native speakers, but it's very difficult to show it experimentally."You've got to see that when you guess from context, it's something which you're going to have to keep doing for the same word a dozen times at least. Each time you're building up knowledge, strengthening knowledge and enriching your knowledge of that word.How can teachers include more reading in their lessons?Tracy: I read about some other studies before. Students, they make some really, really good progress in using graded readers. The progress was even bigger than attending teacher lec classes.Have you ever seen any other examples of people applying these ideas? For example, they have a school and using these ideas, and then they provide the students an opportunity environment to read more.Paul: I always like giving the example of a language school in Tokyo that I heard about and couldn't believe. I went along to see it. This language school is...But I think they call it a Juku. Juku is where kids after the normal school day go and spend three hours, say from 6:00 to 9:00 in the evening doing study.It's a private language school. The parents have to pay money for them to go. They have to take time away from their lives to go to it. They might go to one three‑hour class a week or maybe two.This language school for at least half of that three hours simply gets the students to sit down and read. They can choose the book. They'll get a guidance and advice on what books to choose. Each classroom has lots and lots of books graded readers and text written for native speakers.Some of the students, if they wish, can actually spend the whole three hours doing extensive reading. Most choose not to do that. Most do one and a half hours and then they have one and a half hours session of conversation with a native speaker.The guy who owns these schools is making a fortune. He's really doing well. His results in the entry exams to universities are so good. That word of mouth just keeps them coming and the students love it.I couldn't believe that parents were paying a lot of money for their kids to go to a language school where for at least half of the time they sat down and read while the teacher sat in front of the classroom and just did other irrelevant work.I went along and sort, and oh boy, it was working well. The teacher said, "Here, you watch." This was the owner of the school, actually. He said to the students in this particular class I was observing, "Do you like coming to these classes and doing them?" Of course, being obedient students all the hands went up but I think they made it.He said, "Now, watch this." The next question was, "Would you do this at home?" Only about two or three hands came up. They said, "Well, at home, we're just too busy. There are too many other things to do at home. Even though we could sit at home for an hour and a half, or also each week and quietly read."There's so many other...We got homework to do, there is computer games to play and all of these things. We just never get around to it." Having to come to this class and sit down and do it. I was talking to some of them after the class and they were really proficient.Ross: It sounds a bit like going to the gym, doesn't it? That example of, if you pay for the gym, but a lot of the things that you're doing at the gym, you could just do a home. Actually, if you don't pay for the gym, probably none of those things you end up doing at home for whatever reason. Right?Paul: You don't. No, I know. You don't. That's right. Once you have a dedicated time where your money is being paid out and that sort...people ask about extensive reading, "Why don't we just get the students to do it at home?"There is a research which shows, in fact, you're much better starting off in the classroom at least. For the start at least of getting to do it because then you make sure that they do it. Then you make sure that they suddenly come to the realization that in fact, there are books that they can read, understand, enjoy, which are at the right level for them.That's quite a revelation. A lot of students have never read a book in English from the beginning to the end. Through well‑planned extensive reading program, they should be reaching the end of a book at least once or twice a week.Tracy: Paul, those students that you just mentioned, they're younger learners rather than adults?Paul: They were teenagers. I think that were getting off to university in a year or two.Tracy: Is it possible to use graded readers with younger learners?Paul: You can have meaning‑focused input right from the very beginning stages of learning English. The lowest level of graded readers assume knowledge of 100 different words. You could start from that and the second or third week of a course if you really was switched on.Why isn't there more reading in most language courses?Ross: Why is it then that all English schools don't actually have more reading in their curriculum? Pretty much everywhere I've ever worked there's been some reading in courses but it's been a very small one.Paul: That's right. The research on extensive reading is clear. We know how much extensive reading learners need to do. We know that very, very significant progress can be made through doing extensive reading. Every teacher should read the book "Flood Study" by Warwick Elley and Francis Mangubhai.It's only about a 20‑page or so report, but it's such a significant piece of research showing that by getting meaningful input and comprehensible input as a significant part of the program, learners can make almost double their learning compared to a teacher in front of a class.The researchers are clear on that but teachers are very reluctant to take up the option of extensive reading. One of the reasons is that if you have a really good extensive reading program, once it's running, once it's planned, organized and set up, the teacher has little to do. Teachers feel guilty about that.They feel, "How can learners learn without me teaching them?" That's one of the false beliefs. Then, "Here are the learners working away and I'm doing nothing. Am I earning my money?" You could say, "Well, the teachers are very conscientious and things like that." It worries them that they do that.Ross: I presume that you need pretty interesting and engaging books for the students for all this stuff to work then...Paul: I would think so. In the Elley and Mangubhai study, they found that actually there was quite a lot of agreement among students on the books that they liked. The books that they liked, the books that native speaking kids also liked. The material also has to be at the right level for the students.You need to get the good books. The good books part is really easy because every year the Extensive Reading Foundation runs a competition for the best graded readers. That's been going on for...I don't know, maybe 10, 15 years now. You can simply go to their website and find the best ones.More from Paul NationTracy: Thanks very much for coming to our podcast.Paul: No problem.Tracy: I'm sure our listeners would really appreciate all the valuable information you shared with us.Ross: Everyone, highly recommend that you go into Paul's University of Victoria web page. I'll put a link for that on our website. You can find lots of great resources from in there, vocabulary tests, free books, etc.Tracy: Thanks everybody for listening to our podcast for the last two years and then really appreciate your support.Ross: Bye.Tracy: Bye.

  Paul and Gina meet up with Christian Madsbjerg to discuss the ideas behind his new book, “Sensemaking: The Power of Humanities in the Age of the Algorithm” What happens when you take a philosopher out of their element and plunk them into management? How can the business and tech worlds benefit from the humanities? Are we putting too much trust into algorithms and the promise of artificial intelligence? Courtesy of ReD Associates Just because Google does it, doesn’t mean we should do it too: This week Paul Ford and Gina Trapani meet with Christian Madsbjerg, author of Sensemaking: The Power of Humanities in the Age of the Algorithm. Christian ruminates on the limits of the algorithm, bringing human insight into tech and business where artificial intelligence falls short, and the impact of Elon Musk (ed. note: unfortunaltey this interview was recorded before the Met Gala) 4:00 — Christian: “Philosophers are for critique and against suggesting anything. But if you want to make something, you’ve got to suggest something.” 4:55 — Christian: “[Philosophers] see there’s still a way to have integrity in what you’re doing, and still deal with the kinds of things and the way they want to deal with them but in a different world.” 7:15 — Christian: “I suppose philosophy is just making manifestos — what’s sort of underneath us all the time, and that we didn’t think about. What’s happening, at least in the technology space right now, it’s this big reckoning. There’s this big sort of realization that there’s more to this than we thought there was. That’s what a philosopher would do, they would ask, ‘based on what do you say that? What are the underlying assumptions?’” 8:15 — Paul: “A vast number of our conversations… are ultimately about ethics. It’s a constant refrain through the organization. It’s daily and it’s top-to-bottom. Everything we do — maybe also because we deal with so many abstractions and so many requirements from the client — it’s more about preventing unethical situations.” 10:40 — Christian: “It’s often a group of people that aren’t like you and trying to understand what their life is like. ‘What is it like to be them?’ is the basic idea. You can enter their world and you can enter it in a way that can inform that world with whatever you’re making. 13:45 — Christian: “There are things we humans can do that we don’t understand yet. The fact that the machine can beat us in chess doesn’t mean that it can beat us in every other aspect of life, including understanding each other.” 16:20 — Paul: “No one is going to buy a car that sacrifices your life to save another life… We’re about to hit a wall. This is where capitalism and ethics are about to have a very exciting moment around self driving cars.” 16:45 — Christian: “Another way to think about driverless cars is [asking] are they really so attractive? Some people enjoy driving cars […]and that’s worth something as well. Another way of seeing it is that you can look at the people that get slaughtered in traffic every day, but does that really mean that all cars have to be driverless? Isn’t it a magical thing if you think about all the people that step into a car every day and they somehow find their way through these streets and they don’t crash?” 20:50 — Christian: “I wish [Elon Musk] would represent a more interesting dream for eighteen-year-olds than going to Mars.” 21:05 — Christian: “The first process is that in any public institution or any company there is a language that is often native to that place… The first thing is to translate that business language, or the language of the institution, into a human language. So how would human beings think about this? What would be the human phenomenon at the heart of this?” 24:15 — Paul: “So sensemaking as a practice is observing and understanding an organization well enough that you now have a foundation for organizational change, for defining what needs to happen now.” 25:55 — Christian: “The humanities are the place where you can try to exercise the muscle of [understanding] others in the most advanced way… The world of literature and art is a place where you can see human worlds in a way that’s advanced and interesting and often beautiful. So, often, the people that are good at [sensemaking] have a level of sensitivity to it.” A full transcript of this episode is available. LINKS Sensemaking: The Power of the Humanities in the Age of the Algorithm by Christian Madsbjerg ReD Associates The Moment of Clarity: Using the Human Sciences to Solve Your Toughest Business Problems by Christian Madsbjerg Elon Musk wants to colonize Mars with SpaceX Track Changes is the weekly technology and culture podcast from Postlight, hosted by Paul Ford and Rich Ziade. Production, show notes and transcripts by EDITAUDIO. Podcast logo and design by Will Denton of Postlight. 

Description not available at this time, check back later

Did you know that many of the New Testament letters are actually dialogues between the author and a teacher he is trying to refute? This form of writing is called Epistolary Diatribe. I introduce this idea in this article, and give you several examples.

Sean Paul - No Lie 2K17 (#Coppola Banger) (Ft. Garmiani)

New post from The eCommerceFuel Blog: Running a brick and mortar store has its challenges. Today's guest has figured out how to create both an open and warm store environment with an innovative and successful online presence. For this episode, Andrew heads down the street from his office to sit down with Paul Decker of Musicvilla who's at the helm of a musical institution here in Bozeman, MT. He shares how he navigates the challenges of keeping a brick and mortar business running, his approach to managing an effective team, and how Musicvilla leverages an eCommerce site to generate additional income. Subscribe:  iTunes | Stitcher (With your host Andrew Youderian of eCommerceFuel.com and Paul Decker of Musicvilla.com) Andrew: Welcome to the eCommerceFuel podcast. I'm Andrew Youderian. Today on the show, I wanna bring you a company that's been on my radar for a long time. I live in Bozeman, Montana as you may know, and actually went to college here, and in college when I was playing a lot more guitar, I was a frequent visitor of the store called Music Villa right on Main Street. I spent way more than I probably should have on guitar equipment, and over the years, I've just kind of followed them and they've really impressed me, especially as I kinda get more into e-commerce, because they've built out, not just a great eCommerce presence online, which they have done well but, the way in which they've built the business. Paul specifically the owner, who I'll be chatting with, created such a interesting, fun, dynamic, open culture for his company. A lot of people talk about building company culture, but most of the time, it's just that, just talk. But what he's been able to do in Music Villa, both in the brick and mortar store, the feeling you get when you go in there, as well as the presence online with their videos that are funny, they're interesting, they've got a lot of uniqueness and character to them, it's just really...It's really impressive. So, I wanted to sit down with Paul, and understand how he was able to do that. So, left my office, walked down the street a block or two, and had a chance to sit down with Paul over a beer, and find out exactly how he did it. In our bed fast asleep. Andrew: Paul, thanks for coming on. Paul: Any time. No problem. Thank you. Andrew: We got the 87 mic, the beer that you graciously offered me. Paul: We're doing good. Paul's Background in Music Andrew: You've had the store since '97, right? Paul: Yes, '97 is when I came back. I was living out in Seattle, and I kind of moved back. My dad had the store, and so I kind of came back and started there. He was done and I walked in and took it from there. Andrew: Perfect. And so were you doing the music thing in Seattle or what were you doing there? Paul: I was, yes, I was playing in bands, and just left high school in '89. Right after high school, traveled with some bands for a while, ended up in Seattle. And one day, I'm like, "I think I'm ready to go home." So, I came back to Bozeman. Andrew: And what was the name of the band that you were playing at when you were in Seattle? Paul: Oh, gosh. Many bands, who knows. I got to play with the Jimi Hendrix cover band, and, you know, all kinds of stuff, but yeah. Andrew: And did you...You didn't have a business background coming in to run the store, did you? Paul: No, I didn't. I had... After high school and I never went to college and I didn't have any business background necessarily, but I did work for a corporate company, Musicland Group which was CD's and, you know, and that definitely taught me a lot about some business stuff. And then I just remember before I left Seattle, I went to a guitar center grand opening, and it was pretty eye opening too. I was like, "Wow." So, you know, I always kind of was in this marketing, you know, that... I enjoyed that aspect of it,

Better late than never, it's this week's episode of Front Row, with hosts Owen Hughes and Paul Rutland. Running slightly overtime on Tuesday's 5pm Bucks101 Radio broadcast, the podcast chunk of the show is also somewhat longer than usual - but still of the same quality. Whether that quality is "good" or "bad" is for you to decide. If you're leaning more towards the former than the latter, then we would really appreciate a quick vote in this years Best UK Podcast Award with New Media Europe over at facebook.com/newmediaeurope! A quick click is all it takes to help us get closer to our first proper award nomination. Thanks! On the show this week, Owen reviews the (soon-to-be-released but is-now-released) Green Room, whilst Paul runs through the week in sport including the top and the bottom of the Premier League, whether strikers should be judged on the goals they score or their performance, Andy Murray's coach troubles and the Sri Lanka test match. The dice roll this week gave the pair a chance to chat... See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I bring Kate Diete & Paul McCann on the line to discuss a fascinating project they're doing. Starting out as 1st-time entrepreneurs, they've taken on the challenge of starting 12 NEW businesses in 12 months! On the podcast we go deep into exactly why they're doing it, what strategies they're using to make sure each of their businesses is successful, and much more. There are a ton of applicable strategies here for all businesses, at all stages of growth. Tune in and enjoy! Make sure to SHARE this podcast/episode with your friends, then leave us a REVIEW and get my "101 Conversion Tips" Cheat Sheet... free! Send an email to support@jeremyreeves.com with the name on your review. Resources Mentioned * http://innerwanderlust.com/* http://teawitty.com/ Can I Help Grow Your Business? Visit http://www.JeremyReeves.com or email me at support@JeremyReeves.com and let's chat. Enjoy! Transcript Jeremy Reeves: Hey, this is Jeremy Reeves with another episode of the Sales Funnel Mastery podcast and I have some pretty cool guests in the line today. I actually have two guests today and they’re gonna be kind of teaming up as we talk about this. Their names are Kate Diete and Paul McCann and I am pretty sure I got -- you just told me and I already kind of forget. So they are from innerwanderlust.com and essentially I’m gonna let them say exactly what they’re doing but essentially what they are doing is they made a challenge for themselves to do 12 new start-ups in 12 months and be cash flow positive in all of them and they’re actually doing really well so far. I was kind of reading up on them and looking at their results they’re having so far and it’s pretty fascinating and I love the challenge, number one because I love challenges because I think they’re fun and number two because it’s just a really cool challenge. They’re also doing all that while traveling the world. So I will let them give you the details on everything. We’re gonna get in depth not only on what they’re doing, but how they’re doing it and the marketing strategies they’re using to, to be cash flow positive in all their various businesses and that kind of thing. So we will dive into some good stuff, but for now… Kate and Paul, how you guys doing? Paul: Yeah, really good. Thanks for having us. Kate: Great. Thank you. Jeremy Reeves: Nice, nice. I actually didn’t even know when I called them but they’re actually in Vietnam right now. So maybe they can tell us a little bit about their travels too but -- tell everybody -- give us kind of a quick summary of exactly what you are doing, just expand a little bit on what I brought up earlier. Paul: Yeah, cool. So this year, yeah I guess we christened it kind of like a year of learning for so and we haven’t started a business before this year but we always have a lot of ideas and we want to throw ourselves into things, but we also wanted a way of measuring it and so, because of the number of ideas, we thought okay we can do more than just one and then the measuring came in with one a month. So we wanted to get something not bad, test the market, see if there was any sort of traction and pivot measure it and then as it worked launch it and yeah so far it’s been going okay and definitely -- so we have been doing all this while traveling as well. So we visited 22 countries so far this year and we found that traveling has really, really helped with the inspiration for coming up with and you know, not only the ideas for certain strategies of how to pitch them at particular demographics that we were looking at as well. Jeremy Reeves: Nice, nice. So tell us about some of the businesses, you don’t have to go through all of them but maybe some of your favorite ones since you launched a whole bunch already. What are some of the businesses that you came up with so far? Kate: Yeah, sure. So there has been a real mix, so I think something we have done which probably wasn’t the smartest thing was to do something in a different industry every time. Paul: That definitely wasn’t planned. Kate: It wasn’t planned, but it has been great experience. So one of our favorites is a tea subscription service. It is a lose weight tea, focused on health and we traveled around and we visit tea plantations and we sourced the tea which is amazing to do whilst traveling. Another one is a TV documentary which we are really excited about. So we soar as we are traveling around but you know there is so much happening with start-up scenes around the world but we didn’t actually hear about a lot of it when were both living in London so we felt we really deserve to have spotlight put on it so we decided that we wanted to film around -- so far I think we are on the 11th country and it’s gonna be producing to a six-series episodes to show the emerging markets and what’s happening within the start-up ecosystem of each. Jeremy Reeves: Wow, nice. Paul: Also, yes, we just got a meeting with different people from different stages of their journey so everything from literally someone here would have an idea of two weeks previous to people who just got funded by a VC to a multi-million dollar start-ups even to people who have accessed their start-ups and speaking to angel investors and venture capitalists and literally you name it. We are just trying to paint a real picture of the ecosystem, so that’s has been really interesting. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah, yeah. I love it. It’s really cool. One of the reason that I want to talk to you guys because to me it’s fascinating and one of the things you mentioned -- so you never had a business before starting this challenge? Kate: Yeah, correct. We have never had any experience to this. We both work corporately, but we felt like it was our time and we always wanted to so. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah and that had to be kind of a scary thing. I think it’s hard enough for people just to leave the corporate world to start one business let alone a new business every single month for a year. How did you get over that kind of fear, anxiety in the beginning? How did you feel like the first week or when you quit your job or when you first started that first business? How was the mental process going through that? Paul: Wow. Well for both of us, I can speak for Kate on this one, I don’t often do that. There wasn’t really any fear. As Kate said, it was really our time and I for one practically skipped into work the day I handed them the notice and pure excitement of what was the come and before then I worked really, really hard. We both had to kind to get to the level where we were at and we just find really, really unfulfilling I mean what we have achieved in the last 10 months and we are more proud of and though we spent you know, I don’t know, I have spent over 10 years trying to get to where I got in the corporate world and at that point I was very happy with where I got but yeah the last 10 months completely and blows all out the way to be honest. Kate: I think you know something also we just, we also soar -- you know, if we created this 12 businesses and they all failed it’s not -- well it’s not a failure. We would deem it as a learning. We wouldn’t have like a big year of learning whereas you know, obviously the goal for us is to create successful businesses but, you know, that’s the full work. Paul: Yeah, and one thing what we have noticed is, we have actually gotten more time, the further into the project we got, because we have got a lot slicker with what we were doing and so the more and more we have been learning, the quicker we have been able to do a lot of the tasks that before it took us a lot of time, so it’s -- yeah, I mean, then we were wrong, it’s still a lot of work and there’s a lot of learning to be done and it’s a strange paradox as it were because you know, when we first started at the first couple of months we just seemed to be not sleeping and really burning the candle at both ends trying to make things happen, whereas now, we are okay but still probably not sleeping that much but it feels like we have more time. Jeremy Reeves: Okay, nice. I know you are kind of mixing this with traveling, so how do you -- when you wake up like any given day or given week maybe that might even be easier. How does your schedule look as you are building all these different businesses, because I know -- I know just as a business owner it’s hard enough running one business and keeping everything and keeping all your -- figuring out exactly what you have to do every day and how you are gonna keep growing and everything combined. I am interested to learn how you, number one I guess, the systems that you kind of figure it out since the beginning of the year and then also how you kind of, how you kind of scheduled your time when you are -- because you are starting a new one every month so -- for example, you are starting a new one in November, so what happens with some of your older ones like the one you started in February, March. How do you kind of keep up with everything and manage it all? Kate: It’s a good question. So essentially, the idea is we continue working in all the businesses because there is no point of just launching it -- you can tell a lot within a month, but I think you can tell more once you have launched it. So it’s right to give it more time to see how it goes, but we were really highly structured I would say without time so we used an app could Wunderlist and we put everything in. So we are always prioritizing on time. We are still working -- actually we always will work around 12 hours a day because we love what we do and I guess the traveling -- a lot of people asked us whether it’s a distraction but for us it really stimulates our creativity. So we just meet some of the amazing people and we get a lot of ideas from that as well. So we -- I think around like maybe 6 or 7 of our start-ups have been based around sights we’ve seen whilst traveling. Jeremy Reeves: Oh wow, okay. Paul: Yeah, because when we started the challenge we had around 10, 11 ideas for businesses and we were like, this will be fun which we only need to come up with 1 more and then as it happens we got rid of about 8 of them, well 7 sorry and so we’ve only actually launched, I think, it’s 2 or 3 as Kate said, that we actually originally had. So everything else has come from traveling but just to expound on what Kate said as well. With the traveling, it maybe keeps us out of our comfort zone because we’re not really ever getting, we are not in a place really long enough to be comfortable. You always see an opportunity everywhere and perhaps, well I say opportunity, but what I mean by that is, like problems and then problems that you can solve which ultimately become opportunity so... Jeremy Reeves: Nice. I love that and that -- that always inspires me, traveling. For some reason, it brings out so much creativity in you. Even if you bring it down to just a very kind of minimal scale, I know that I write a lot and I’m kind of like an idea generator for -- not for new businesses, but for my client projects, my own projects and things like that. You know learn and show them how to market better and make more sales and that kind of thing, and I know that when I’m stuck on an idea, the worst possible thing to do is sit in my chair. The best thing I’ve ever discovered in -- with coming up with new ideas and you know being creative and inspired is getting up out of my chair usually out of my house and going for a walk or going outside and spending 5 to 10 minutes playing with the dogs or going upstairs and seeing the kids and it’s just something about -- and just getting in that new experience and it’s -- when you travel it’s just that magnified like a thousand times. Do you guys do stuff like that like when you are coming up with new ideas and kind of planning your projects, do you do anything like that like make sure that you have that -- that you get refreshed by travel before you come up the ideas or do you do that only when you get stuck, any kind of thoughts on that? Kate: I think because we are traveling so much and we are seeing so many new things, we haven’t really being that stuck on ideas which is being quite nice but it sounds so more -- I guess we’ve kind of train our brains to be more entrepreneurial and look for the problems. So we’re often like jotting down things that we see every day and see if we noticed any patterns which we have noticed from like country to country and market to market just being quite interesting but yes I don’t think -- and I think it slows -- I don’t think it slowed down at all so, yeah. We always out and about. So you know even if we -- when we’re working, will be working in a different place everyday so sometimes we will go to a coffee store and other times, we will visit a co-working space. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah, so you’re constantly being refreshed every day. It’s awesome. Nice. So let’s move a little bit into more of like the marketing you are doing and how you’re being so successful because like I said, it’s hard enough -- when people start businesses. There is such a high failure rate with businesses. So tell me, first I can start with how you guys are doing, you don’t have to give like specific revenue or anything like that if you don’t want to but just in terms of like I guess cash-flow positive or negative, tell us and after that let’s talk a little bit about why you think you’ve done so well because I know you are doing really, really well. Let’s start getting into more of the actual like marketing and why you are being -- you’re so successful when so many other people are failing even within -- I know a lot of people who have a business and they launched a new product and it doesn’t work and you already have the momentum and you guys are going into all different markets where you don’t have a name or reputation or anything and your successful and pretty much everyone. Tell us a little bit about that and start I guess with how successful everything has been so far. Kate: Yeah, sure. So I mean -- I think a lot of the things that come from I guess decisions we have made, so one of them is that we decided to be very lean. So we want everything to be pretty much online. So our outlay cost has been very minimal so -- when we say that -- it took us 3 months to get cash positive in all the businesses. It was with a small outlay but it was by about month 5, I believe, that we were earning enough to be able to sustain our travels which we were very excited about because we thought it might have taken, we sort of saved up for the whole year just in case because obviously businesses are very hard to get traction and we do work a lot of marketing as well so we we’ve tried everything so we’re all about trying, failing, trying again but some of the things we do has been traveling around to give talks and we tried to get a lot of press so we have been talked about in various different light so that sometimes with our specific business, other times about our challenge, other times about things that we have tried and potentially failed on or not worked or -- we also use a lot of social media. Paul: Yeah and so -- and as we’ve been traveling around and it has been good in terms of -- I guess getting feedback from -- as we’ve been traveling around we got involved in much of the start-ups it seems we’ve been making a lot of contacts as well and from that -- we’ve got recently good network now so we can reach out to people who have been there, done that or are actually working in that industry as well where we can look what they’re doing and see if we can adapt it in any way for ourselves and we also go to a lot of meet-ups as well again so surrounding ourselves with like-minded people and trying to get again going back to the feedback on that one and I guess because now we’ve got a number of businesses, there is a lot of chance of cross promotion as well so, I mean, we have [inaudible 00:20:01] and which is Innerwanderlust and then we write about all, you know, learnings, pivots, how well we are doing and I guess tools we used and how we are doing it but then all the individual businesses will write a little bit about them as well but then that allows us to kind of get a bit of momentum behind it when we launch so people could check it out and also with some businesses, our complimentary to all this and so we can kind of overlap them and then double promote and hope that we, you know, we get some traction back from that as well so. Jeremy Reeves: So, one of the concepts in there that I kind of heard come out several times actually is a lot of your success actually has do with the relationships would that be -- would that be accurate? Kate: Yeah, I would say so. Paul: Yeah, definitely. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah and I think that is one thing that a lot of people they underestimate is your relationships because you can leverage relationships in so many different ways whether it’s, you know, you know somebody who knows somebody or they can give you like a new contact for example, if you knew somebody who, you know, you are starting a new business in the UK and they -- a reporter in the UK, you can get some press or going out and doing joint ventures with them or having them, you know, telling their own audience about your new business and that kind of thing. Do you have any with -- with that particularly, is there any kind of strategy you guys used or you just kind of like genuine and authentic and it’s kind of like you and you just get in touch with them and that kind of thing or is there anything like really specific that you do to build your relationship and that kind of thing or is it kind of just you go and you just start to meet as many people as you can and then just let some of the important relationships kind of float to the top and the other one is kind of fall away -- tell us a little bit about that. Paul: Yeah, I guess -- so before we visit any location as well we tend to do a lot of reading, a lot of research and largely most of our time is taken off by research to be honest. From that, we get a good picture of or we will try to get the best possible picture we can of where we are going and then that helps also with filming and then obviously to the documentary and then from that we reach out to key people who we believe will not only I guess help the documentary but also help the particular market and country where we’re in to give the best possible picture and then in doing so it enables us to form good relationships with these people and as you know, they want to promote what they’re promoting and it’s kind of -- Kate: Win-win. Paul: Yeah, it’s a win-win basically. So they get good exposure from that and then also we both form a relationship and yeah. Jeremy Reeves: Okay, nice, nice. I love that. Like I said it is something that a lot of people -- they’re so busy like kind of just doing the little minutiae that they forget about some of the bigger leverage points like the relationships and that kind of thing. So my next question is, in terms of -- one of the things that you mentioned before was that you focus and you kind of like trained your brain almost to find problems and then you figure out it’s like, number one, okay, where is the problem and you’ve trained your brain to find -- to see problems of people are having and then the second part of that is okay, what’s the solution, how can we bring something different to the market to solve that problem in a different way and when it comes down to a business that’s really all entrepreneurship. It’s just finding problems and giving solutions. So how about when you guys are -- when you’re in that process of your -- you find the problem what you seemed to be really good at, you seemed to find the problems everywhere and it’s almost like a thing that is not having new ideas but a problem of figuring out which idea to move forward with, and then you come to the phase where you are figuring out the solution. Do you have any kind of any specific strategy that you use for that or is it more of just like you find the problem and then you come to that, okay what’s the solution and you start researching how other competitors are already providing their solution or how does that go? Kate: Yeah, so essentially, I mean we used lots of different methods, it all boils probably back down to lean methodologies which we really love because it’s something that you know, you can get something out there very quickly and the whole build measure learn but I guess a lot of the things we do like -- I guess we talk to a lot of people so we’re always going to meet-ups as we mentioned before, we do a lot of surveys with our network. We talk to people online and to anyone we’ve met, basically anyone that would listen, but we also look at our competitors, I think that is a big thing that we need to always do because even if they are an indirect competitors there is someone that is may be looking at -- doing -- solving the same problem but in a complete different way. They’re competitors and maybe there is even someone you can work with potentially to continue to solve the problem with them. Yeah, but I think first and foremost let’s say people, like talking to people don’t be like -- we are not afraid to share our ideas. Paul: No, definitely. I mean getting feedback is probably one of the most valuable things you can do because you can come up with what do you think is the greatest idea but then if everybody else is like I don’t really understand what that is or perhaps having to see these other people who were doing it or even you know that idea isn’t very good. You kind of need to feel that as quick as possible so you can neither adapt it, pivot, or shelve it. Jeremy Reeves: Okay. Kate: Let’s try and make this quick as possible. Jeremy Reeves: Okay, yeah, yeah. So how long -- when you get an idea, say December 1st then it’s time to launch that new -- that new project. How long is it from when you say, okay, it’s time to start working on this until it’s actually live in the marketing place. Kate: It’s usually within the month but it could honestly be quicker because you can learn a lot free market very quickly like through the surveys. You talk into people if you know you put all your focus into it. We both believe that once you launch something you actually learned a lot more because that is when you know you are actually asking for people to potentially pay for something or you know to be a part of something that’s when you learn the actual truth. Paul: Yeah, definitely and also I think, not too sure who said this quote but it makes a lot of sense which is and “It is not to be perfect, it just has to be done.” I think you can spend so much time trying to get something to look absolutely pristine and perfect and you know, something that perhaps you want to take out for dinner but it doesn’t need to be that way initially and as long as, you know, everyone can understand what it is that you’re doing and you’re offering something that people want and then you can put all the nice trimmings afterwards. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah. So do you guys, you know, when you -- you say you have the kind of the process of launching it really quick which I love because I 100% agree on that. Do you then go back, so like it’s November now, are you now going back to some of your projects and starting to make some of those tweaks to improve it and maybe play around with the price or playing around with the offer or that kind of thing? Kate: Yeah for sure, all the time actually. So we have regular growth hacking sessions on but like just to give an example of one. So, our very first sort of tea, I think we pivoted like quite big pivots about 4 or 5 times now and so you can see the transformation through that and we have learned so much in it and also look back to our second start-up and just what it looked like when we first launch as opposed to how it is now, it’s a huge difference than -- it’s great to see it progressed and -- Jeremy Reeves: Okay, nice. I love that because it’s -- especially when you have -- so many, it’s probably challenging just to go back and look and you know see what needs to be changed and even have the kind of brain space to even think about it. What project are you working on this month? Paul: This month we are working on something that solves a problem and within the start-up industry. It is something that I’m quite excited about and it is something -- and it has taken a lot of effort and I mean all of us take a lot of effort but this one is kind of have been brewing for -- I mean we first came up with the idea and I would say in its first version would probably be and quite a few months to go now and then we have been looking for a way to position that idea and as we have experienced more, we have pivoted away from the original idea and got this will be better and then again we just kind of wiggled through with it I would say, for the lack of a better word, for quite a few months and now we’re really, really close to kind of ad leasing which we’re pretty excited about. Jeremy Reeves: Okay, nice. Yeah, I love it, I love it. Yeah, nice. So how about -- when this is over, do you have any plans for like what’s next for 2016, is there -- do you have anything in place now or are you gonna continue to do new business every month or you’re gonna, you know, maybe take your, maybe top couple that are making the most revenue, focus on that, do you have any plans for next year? Kate: Yes, I guess we won’t be continuing the one per month idea. We’re looking to -- we would like to see which one is -- I guess are going well. We will probably focus on the ones that actually got growth. I mean it’s hard to -- we might look soon as well at cutting or retiring some of the ideas that aren’t working as well or hiring because some it you know just obviously managing 12 businesses is quite a lot of work. Paul: Yeah, and we want to give them all the best possible chance to succeed and then understand the one or two that we feel could grow a lot faster if they have more focus, but not so much focus, but a dedicated person doing a particular task which is required for that business and to scale it quickly and as Kate said, you know, we are running sort of 9 or 10 businesses now. We just don’t have that sort of time, sadly. Jeremy Reeves: Okay, nice. So over the past, you know 10, 11 months, is there anything that really stood out? Bringing it back to like specific applicable kind of lessons that the people can implement in their businesses. I know I have gotten actually probably at least 8 or 10 ideas just from talking for at least half hour. Is there anything specifically so, you know, now that you guys are true entrepreneurs and you are going to be building businesses probably the rest of your life I would imagine. Is there -- what are some of like the biggest failures that you guys had, that you’re taking the lessons from them because I know you are huge into failing but failing to learn the lesson. So what are some of the like the big giant flops that you’ve had over the last 11 months or so, and how are you going to -- how are you going to use the lessons from them to, you know, number one, not make mistakes again obviously, but to kind of use that to -- I’m trying to think how I’m trying to say this like to leverage it into faster growth in the future? Kate: Yeah, I think one of the biggest ones was with our first start-up it was basically pitching the completely wrong demographic which it was quite funny because with tea, we thought that it was quite of an older demographic and we are getting involved with an old different things and we were wondering why there was no traction. Basically, we found out, I mean a couple months in that -- it was essentially the demographic was falling off, also demographic that that was young between 18 to 35 and more like health conscious. It was a complete surprise we merely learned that through the statistics that -- I guess one thing is to not be too attached to the idea. Paul: Yeah, I had to agree with that one. Jeremy Reeves: That’s a good one. I love that. Kate: You come and look it like as business and even though, you know, it’s quite different to the idea that we originally thought it’s much better and you got to be able to learn to let go of that, you know, that’s my baby, this is how I was meant to be, but if the market is not there for you, you need to got to move on. Paul: Yeah, I guess spending time on the things that truly matter as well so and I said earlier it didn’t have to be perfect, it has to be done. I guess you only have a certain amount of time each day and you need to be doing the tasks that matter in the right order whether you know one particular task isn’t something that you really don’t want to do. It doesn’t really matter. It just needs to get done and so yeah, not dodging some tasks until they have to get done and making sure you work for the correct priority and yeah. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah, and you know what, I would even take that a step further even and kind of put in a different context and there are -- I mean I talk to all kinds of people in all sorts of industries and different phases of the business and all kind of stuff like that and one of the things that I seemed that kind of reflects this whole kind of theme is being too attached and whether it is to the demographic or the product or whatever it is, I find a lot of people who think, even with sales funnels, I build sales funnels for my clients every day of my life that’s what I -- that’s what I do and I have, just for one example, I have someone come to me I think it was last week, maybe earlier this week I forgot but it was in the last the 7 days or so, and they came to me and they were under $100,000, I think they only made like $20,000 to that point and so we were talking and then I said “you know that is wouldn’t be really in my [inaudible 00:35:05]” just because of budget constraints and stuff like that and they were really, really, really focused that they had -- the first thing they had to do is build this big elaborate sales funnel and I told them and I’m like, “listen, you don’t have to do that right now”. They were adamant about that they have to had a sales funnel and that was gonna solve all their problems and I said, “No, I sell sales funnels all day, but you have to be in the right -- it has to be the right time for the business.” When you are under $100,000 or so, it should be -- you should basically be in hustle mode, like you should be going out boots to the ground just doing anything you have to, to get sales and usually that’s building relationships like we are talking about before. Sales funnel -- wouldn’t do -- a big elaborate one at least wouldn’t do as much for somebody in that kind of income range versus somebody who was already at a couple of $100,000. I come across that all the time of people who come and they say, “No, I need to do this next” and I have to kind of fight with them a little bit and say, “Yeah, we have to do that soon, but we have to do this and this and this first” and a lot of times it takes a lot of explaining to get them like past that point because they are just -- they are kind of like cling on to it. I see a lot of kind of similarities in what you guys are saying and just moving that into other areas of businesses as well, just don’t be too attached to really anything, whether it’s may be an employee or the next thing that you would think you need to do or like what you guys were talking about. I think that is an important point. Is there anything, I mean anything else that really has kind of like, hit you on the head? Paul: I guess to go away just having so slightly from the learning time I would say and one of the biggest things that surprised me is just the kind of pay it forward mentalities of the entrepreneurs and because literally, every single person that we have met pretty much, and is just willing to give you so much good advice, so much support, so much help, and literally what you got to do is ask for it and just something completely different than I’ve ever experienced previously so I would say yeah. There is another quote that I know, “If you don’t ask, the answer is always no.” That will be the learning for that one. Jeremy Reeves: Nice and that is -- you know, it’s true. Yeah, that’s basically just true -- period. That is funny. Actually, I was just looking and I know this is completely random, but what’s the URL for your tea website that you have? Kate: Oh, it’s Teawitty.com. Jeremy Reeves: Okay, oh my keyboard is actually dying on me, that’s not good. Yeah, I know that was completely random, but I’m actually -- I have been drinking tea as you are talking about. Yeah, I was kind of like laughing at it, but yeah, I drink tea all the time, so I’m actually going to look at it personally. So, I think that kind of about wraps it up. Do you guys have any -- like kind of final thoughts, anything that I should have asked that I didn’t asked that you think is really important for people to know whether -- regardless of the phase that there in. There is probably a lot of people listening to this that aren’t really in the start-up phase, but like I said, there is a lot of things that you guys talked about that are 100% relevant to anybody in any business stage. Especially, taking your failures and learning from them and not being attached and -- I mean there is a whole bunch of others. Is there anything that I should have asked or I didn’t or any kind of like -- any kind of insight that you guys had that you -- speaking of giving it back, anything that you, any kind of insight or, you know, just something that you’ve learned that you think would help other entrepreneurs, you know to further their business? Paul: Yeah, I mean going back to what you said previously, I guess it’s just not being afraid to hustle as well you know Kate and I for the tea business, you know, we took to the streets of London in the rain and London could be a pretty harsh place as it is to be on this than -- if you’re trying to hand someone a bit of paper, trying the flyer and to get someone to notice you, to get some feedback and then try doing it in the rain as well. It can be pretty damaging to your ego to be honest but we persevered with that and from that and we credit off our sale because from that [inaudible 00:39:54] idea because people weren’t too keen to take the bit of paper that we were giving them and we are like, what else can we do, what can we do to be in people’s homes, be in people’s workspaces so they will notice us and think of us, so we then came with the idea to put tea in sort of sample packs. So we were like, we will give the people free tea, everyone would want free tea. So we have a lot more success with that and then from that as well we were at an event and it was --- there was a journalist there who loves tea, so we gave him some of the samples and then the next day we woke up and we wrote about in Lifehacker and it just so happened that he was the journalist in Lifehacker and he actually coined the travel packs, sorry, the sample packs as travel packs as well and which we were like okay, we kind of only thought of them as samples. He was like, “Oh loose leaf travel packs, this is amazing” and we were like, “great” and then at the same time, we have been getting tweets back from our people who were took the samples as well, and we were like, “Oh really, love your travel packs and we were like, “amazing” okay and then from that we -- yeah, but that was another pivot and we were like okay we give you lose leaf travel packs as well. Jeremy Reeves: That’s funny. Yeah, a lot of times, a lot of times you’ll learn like -- as you come out, you think that your idea is like the idea and then someone says something like that and it just changes the whole dynamic of everything. That’s awesome, I love that. Paul: Definitely. Yeah, I guess just listening to feedback in what your customers say about you and -- if it’s something good or bad to be honest, just make sure you act on it. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah, absolutely. I really appreciate you guys coming on. Why don’t you tell everybody, because you guys -- I know you have a blog and you are kind of like journaling this whole year and all your insights that you are having and that kind of thing, I’m actually on it right now. So tell everybody where they can go to find out more about you and to find out where they can kind of follow your story that you’re doing and find -- kind of look at some of the websites that you have been building and that kind of thing. Kate: Yeah, sure. Everything is pulled altogether under www.innerwanderlust.com so we talk about like our journey, traveling our new experiences, the pivots, anything we have tried, so yeah, come over and try [inaudible 00:42:23]. We also have another thing to mention is that we love meeting people so please feel free to get in touch with us. Jeremy Reeves: Sounds good, sounds good. www.Innerwanderlust that will be in the show notes for everybody so if you’re on your phone there will be a link there, if you listen to your computer, it will be on the show notes so just go there and it will go right to their website. Thanks again for coming up. I really enjoyed this conversation, I think it’s, you know, everybody -- a lot of the stuff we talked about is so focused on sales funnels and I have been kind of lately, I have been getting a little bit out of that just to kind of bring some fresh insights and perspectives to everything. We talked about different things and you guys talked about stuff that a lot of people don’t really talked about all that much anymore in the marketing world, it’s so much about, you know, tactics and going outwards and do this thing and go on Facebook and here is how you could find new audiences and segmentation all that kind of stuff and it’s just refreshing to hear of someone who -- when everybody else is having such a hard time you guys are just completely flourishing and I can see why now. So kudos on that. Kate and Paul: Thank you so much for having us. Jeremy Reeves: Yeah, yeah. Thanks again and I will talk to you soon. Kate: Great. Paul: Definitely, thanks.    

Show number 60! Paul is off to Europe and guess what, we don't need him. We've assembled the best crew known to man to bring you the best show we have ever done, No Guarantees. We head off to the Hammered Lamb to have some amazing brunch and celebrate Piesenburg's birthday. We may have gotten a little crazy but that's why you listen to the show. We have guest appearances by none other than Big Rick and our #1 Fan Nick, who has the dick to prove it. Stick around because Paul is also gone next week, and the show will be even better, as always No Guarantees.

Michael DiMartini from Everest Bands come on the show to chat and share his success with us. He's gone from failed businesses to two successful Kickstarter campaigns and an amazing product line sold through Shopify. Michael doesn't just sell watch bands. He sells literally the best rubber watch strap made- and it's for a Rolex. We discuss: What Everest Bands is all about (it's more than just swiss rubber) What goes in to a successful Kickstarter The ROI of Facebook likes What it takes to be a luxury brand The Apple Watch Michael's favorite watch And his single best tip for Shopify store owners. Check out Everest Bands Shopify store or their Facebook campaign. PS: Be sure to subscribe to the podcast via iTunes and write a review. iTunes is all about reviews! Full transcript [opening music] Announcer: This is the Unofficial Shopify Podcast with Kurt Elster and Paul Reda, your resource for growing your Shopify business, sponsored by Ethercycle. Kurt Elster: Welcome to the inaugural episode of the Unofficial Shopify Podcast. I'm your host Kurt, and with me is my business partner and co-host Paul. Paul Reda: Welcome. Hello. Kurt: Joining us today is Michael DiMartini from Everest Bands. He is one of our favorite clients, a Kickstarter success, a manufacturer and a Shopify store owner. Michael, it's around 3:30 there in St Loius, what are you up to? Michael DiMartini: Well, if it was Friday, I'd be drinking a cold one. Kurt: There you go. Michael: Obviously, I am excited to do this first inaugural podcast with you guys and really appreciate it. Super excited to talk more about our company and Shopify and the great job that you guys have done for us. Kurt: Thank you. Tell us a little bit about Everest Band. What's an Everest Band? Michael: About two and a half years ago, my partners and I came up with an idea for a rubber Rolex replacement watch strap. Now, two years later, we had a successful Kickstarter with our first rubber strap. We are on our second version now, made in Switzerland. Just recently, last month, we had our second successful Kickstarter for a leather strap. It was a wonderful experience. Thank God for Kickstarter. Kurt: [laughs] This band is made in Switzerland, huh? Michael: Yeah. Our rubber strap is entirely made in Switzerland, rubber-wise. We actually have a steel oyster link that is attached to it and we coat that with a coating called DLC, diamond-like coating. That is actually from here on the US. Kurt: I think, I and a lot of people, we have ideas. We're like, "Oh, we got this great idea for a thing." Making a thing is hard. It's easy to have an idea. It's tough to actually get it manufactured. How did you go end up in Switzerland, asking a manufacturer to build your rubber? How does that happen? How do I get there? Michael: To be very honest, we actually had two previous versions. One was made, or tempted to be made, here in the St. Louis area. Honestly, it was a complete epic fail and we did not actually produce any straps for sale. We had a second version that was also made in the United States. That was a very good strap. We had some limitations with the manufacturer on, basically, material choices. We traveled the globe to find what we think would be the absolute best manufacturer. Honestly, the Swiss just blew us away with their technology at rubber molding. The company we use specializes in rubber watch strap molding. I can't list the names of the companies, but probably the top 10 watch manufacturers in the world use them to make their rubber straps. I actually had to pretty much beg them to take my business. Kurt: Did you pretty much beg them or did you literally beg them? Michael: Oh, no. I got on the proverbial hands and knees and literally said, "Please, please make my strap." They said, "Sure. We'll do it." How did I get there? A lot of research. Honestly, a tremendous amount of research and actually asking industry experts. I asked other watch companies who they used. Kurt: I think that's one of the things a lot of people should do or don't know how to do is, do I go out and ask people in my industry or even competitors, "What are you doing? How do you do it? Can I pick your brain?" Did you do that? How do you go about that? Michael: Yes, of course. There's a two-part answer to that. One of them does relate to Kickstarter. Whenever you're producing a product like we produce or really anything of a higher-end level, don't be embarrassed to ask others how they're doing it. For sure, other people are more than happy to help. We just started with other watchmakers, high-end watchmakers. They were very open with us. Some were, of course, tentative for giving us any information whatsoever. When they immediately found out that we weren't a competitor, a direct competitor in any way, they were more than happy to talk to us. Kurt: Really, the only barrier to entry is you psychologically just being willing to go out and ask. What's the worst that can happen, they say no? If you don't ask, you've guaranteed that you get nothing out of it. Michael: Honestly, let's call it, any entrepreneur has to have some balls. Kurt: [laughs] Right. It took me a long time to get there. Michael: You can't be fearful of being told to drop dead. Kurt: [laughs] That's a good line. That's a great quote. We should include that as a tweet. Tell me, what goes into...You got the seed money or got this off the ground using Kickstarter twice now, right? Michael: Yeah. Just a really quick back story, I had another business that was a failure, to be honest. I think that the best entrepreneur is the one that get kicked down at least once or twice and they then learn from those mistakes and take it from there. Our first business, completely unrelated in every single facet, local business, didn't deliver a product, delivered a service, et cetera, was a failure because of a lot of different things. One, we added too much debt to the business. When we were looking at the product itself, the product idea, we felt that Kickstarter was perfect for us. It gave us the ability to have a presale, so we knew if the product was worth doing. We did of course put a lot of money into it at the very beginning. The amount that we put in was a little bit more than what we got from Kickstarter, but really Kickstarter did finish line us on our first product. On the second one, we took a completely different direction. We were going not for what we did on our first one, where we were trying to get the seed money to finish the project. It was more of wanting to make sure the market place wanted the product. We, of course, used the funds to pay for the finish line of the second product. We also didn't go after retailers, for example. We just went after the general public. On our first Kickstarter, more than half of our Kickstarter proceeds were from retailers. If I was doing this all over again for a first time, I definitely would try and get retailers involved in my first product. Kurt: Now that you're a Kickstarter veteran, if you had one tip for someone who's about to launch their product on Kickstarter, what would it be? Michael: The first tip that I would give is you really have to have your crap together. I mean it. Kurt: It's a good tip. Get your shit together! Michael: Get your shit together! Don't start Kickstarter with questions, because you're going to get annihilated, number one. Number two, when I say that, I mean there are so many different levels to that. Starting with that, not only do you become an expert in your area through at least understanding the part that you're going to sell and manufacture, number one. Number two, you're going to want to have excellent pictures of a prototype. You want to have connected with the lowest level of purchasing. Usually, that's through forums and different items that are connected to some type of social media connection. Yes, get your sit together. Paul: You mentioned social media, and we think that social media advertising is sort of bullshit here. It's a lot of snake oil. It doesn't get the ROI that the social media people like to claim it does, at least in our experience. However, you have a ton of Facebook Likes and the majority of your traffic comes in via Facebook. Why do you think you were able to pull that off? Michael: That's a really good question. To be really honest with you, I think that each business has a different successful tool in some level of marketing. For example, we seem to have a product where people need to physically see it. With social media, we can present pictures constantly. When we have a Facebook Like, for example...and I'll be honest, it costs us very few cents per Facebook Like, whereas in other industries it's very expensive to acquire a Like because... Kurt: Actually, I didn't know that Likes are on like a bidding system where it varies by industry. How many Facebook Likes do you have, anyway? Michael: We have 128,000. We're probably going to achieve today 129,000. Kurt: How many did you have where you saw it really was paying off for you, in terms of sales? Michael: Probably after 5,000. Honestly, after about 5,000 Likes. Kurt: So, 5,000 is the baseline that people should be shooting for and 100,000 is ideal. Michael: Actually, to be very honest with you, our end goal for Facebook Likes for the end of 2015 is over a million. Kurt: Yes! There's no limit, so why not shoot for the ceiling? Michael: Exactly. To better answer your question, because that's a really good one especially for entrepreneurs, Facebook, Instagram, those things are free. There is no form of free marketing better that that. It costs you money to put a sign on the wall of your office or your storefront. It costs you money to have, honestly, Ethercycle do work for you. Facebook is free. Social media's free, but to make it successful, you need those tools behind you, like Ethercycle's work, like a sign maker for your outside, like a very good business card printer, so on and so forth. That is what gets you the end success. Paul: Social media marketing takes a lot of time too, which people just assume that it's a thing that just happens for free and you don't have to worry about it. There's a lot of time-suck there as well. Michael: Yeah. For my own self, as the marketing person for our company, I focus 50 percent of my day on social media. Development of it. Paul: Earlier, you mentioned forums and that really tickled something in my brain. Another one of our big clients that works in aftermarket auto parts and they do millions of dollars in revenue a year, a portion of their sale staff is just devoted to pumping up the product on forums and selling on forums. Because a forum dedicated to the kind of product that you're selling is essentially just a captured audience of people that are super interested in what you want to sell them. Michael: Yeah. A forum is a community of hobbyists, obviously. Some of them are not hobbyists. Some of those are people like, for example for us, a watch repair company. They might have access to a forum and they keep up to date on what's popular and what not. That's how a lot of our business has come from, especially on the retailer side. To be very honest with you, we involve ourselves enough to give a presentation of new products and ideas but not so much that we're going to get kicked off. Because it's a club. That's what it is. Paul: You think to swoop in and be, "Buy my stuff!" You can't spam them. Kurt: [laughs] Paul: Engaging is the word. You want to engage. Not just spam. Michael: Yeah. Exactly. At the end of the day, let's call that as it is, no one likes to be sold anything, everybody likes to buy stuff. Kurt: Speaking of buying, you're selling a luxury brand. You're selling a premium item for people who have already bought from a luxury brand. You only sell for Rolex, correct? Michael: On Everest Bands, yeah. We do have a secondary site, we don't need to get into that today but yeah. Our primary focus is Everest and Everest Horology products in general, just only focuses entirely on Rolex users, Rolex owners and wearers. Kurt: All right. I think luxury brands as an idea fascinate me. I know we've gone back and forth about it in the office. Sometimes you have to tease out, "Is this just a product with a very expensive price tag?" It's purely a status symbol. Rolex is extremely well made. It's a premium product. It's well made. At the same time, everyone knows it's expensive. Starting Rolex, brand new, is going to be eight grand. For a product like Everest Brands, it's a luxury product. How did you get to become a luxury product? What's the barrier to entry to be a premium luxury brand? Is it just a big price tag? What is it? Michael: A lot of people are trying to make things in different countries right now for a super low cost. The consumer today of course likes value but, if you're talking about a luxury product or becoming a luxury company, you have to remember that, what does the end user want? True end users. Luxury purchasers. Quality is a corner stone of whatever you're making. Second - longevity of life. Don't think that people with money have any interest in buying something over and over again every six to 12 months. They're just not interested in doing that. It's very uncommon that you see a destroyed Gucci bag or a pair Ferragamo shoes that are quite a few years old and still look excellent. Mercedes Benzes last a very long time. They're not a car that you drive for three years and throw away. At the end of the day, Everest makes a product that is the highest quality in the world. There is no better rubber strap or leather strap ever. The longevity and life of our product is very long. From a luxury standpoint, our service is extremely high. I have direct communication with almost with every single costumer at some level. Kurt: All right. A luxury brand obviously is more than just the premium price. You have to back it up. If you're going to talk the talk, you better walk the walk and have a product that's number one in its category, in terms of precision manufacturing. Then being able to back it up with customer support, so people don't even have to wonder. They know they'll be able to get a hold of you. Speaking of luxury products, premium brands, we can't ignore Apple. You're a watch guy. I'm into watches. I think partly you've got me into watches. The Apple watch was just announced yesterday. I'm dating this podcast a little bit. The Apple watch just came out. I love it. I think it looks great. For $350, I don't think you get a watch that's better. What do you think? Michael: First, obviously Everest has had its own level of getting kicked while it's down, we'll say, when we were first starting. I'm not going to kick the Apple watch while no one's even really seen it yet. Do I think it's going to hurt the hot horology world? Absolutely not. I don't think it's even going to get remotely dent Rolex, Omega, Bell & Ross's sales because, honestly, people buy those products because they love the watch. They could care less about time keeping. Paul: Yeah, I agree with you there. Hublot has nothing to worry about. But in my mind, judging by what I've read and what I've heard you and Kurt talk about about the low end of the watch industry, in terms of the low end of the luxury watches, the kind of things that are available at that price point, it's my impression that the Apple watch blows everything out of the water at that price point. Michael: Yeah. The other side of the spectrum is - not to try and compare entirely a Rolex to an Apple watch...I have a Rolex. It's seven years old. It looks brand new. I treat it well but I don't have a seven-year-old iPhone, gentlemen. Kurt: [laughs] Good point. Michael: Do I think it's going to be somewhat or something that you replace every three to four years at a maximum? Yeah. The Everest Band, for example, I am still wearing the original first single piece that came off the assembly line today and it still looks as if it's brand new. That was a year and a half ago. Again, it just goes back to the whole luxury idea. Is Apple producing a luxury product? No. They're just producing a great piece of technology that has a lot of advancements. It's not going to affect Hublot. It's not going to affect Omega. It's not going to affect Rolex. But on a low end line, say for example a Casio? Yeah. Casio, Seico, low ends, they're going to feel it. They're going to feel the heat pretty hard probably. Kurt: The sub-five hundred dollar people are in trouble. The heirloom, status symbol and $10,000 watches have nothing to worry about. Michael: Yeah. I don't particularly see that Southwest is affecting private jet sales. Kurt: [laughs] Good point I didn't figure it out that way. Michael: Lets call it as it is, but do I feel the Southwest is probably affecting American Airlines in sales? Hell yeah, gentlemen. Come on. It like $98. Give me a break. To go up to Chicago from St. Louis, I would pick that over $300 flight on American Airlines, for example. Also, there's a million of those, but I'm excited to see what happens with the Apple iWatch, especially because I watched kind of amazingly as the Pebble watch was coming down the pipeline. It was in its Kickstarter when I was doing my first Everest Band Kickstarter. We are brothers from another mother. I really feel that the Pebble hasn't really hit the marketplace the way they thought it would. Paul: I think that is true. Every smart watch that's come out. Kurt: Every smart watch, yeah. Michael: Oh yeah. Kurt: I had a Pebble watch, I thought it was an awful. I wore it like handful of times and I ended up selling it. I lost money on it. It's just not a good product. Michael: Then, on top of it, I really almost feel bad for Pebble, because they had such enormous phoenix rise at the very beginning with, I think it was $10 million in sales... Kurt: I know they broke a record for fundraising on Kickstarter. Michael: Oh yeah. Just recently the Coolest Cooler knocked them off the top. More importantly, they had countless issues. They couldn't get the damn thing out for a year. I can tell you right now, our customers were...we were late by three weeks and they were freaking out. I just feel that when it comes down to being successful, selling a product and what not, there are a lot of different parts that have to play in to it. The one great thing about Apple is that they are so well organized that this multiple-billion dollar company is going to probably hit it really well on their first version. The first iPhone was pretty sweet, but I am worried that, honestly, it could be the next Newton. I don't know if you guys remember that P.O.S. Kurt: Yeah. I love it. The only thing I can ever think of about the Newton, I think a lot of people our age too, is the Newton on the Simpsons. Paul: Yeah, "Eat up Martha." Kurt: "Eat up Martha." Paul: The main thing that is in my mind is that I don't wear watches. I don't understand why anyone would wear a watch, because I have an atomic clock that I carry around in my pocket at all times that also does things more than a watch. Kurt: It's jewelry really... Paul: No. and I don't... [crosstalk] Kurt: It's jewelry that happens to tell the time. Paul: I don't wear any jewelry, so it's kind of meaningless to me. I saw the smart watch and, because I'm stupid, I was kind of like, "All right, I kind of want it a little bit." Kurt: It's not stupid, it's geeky. It's another screen. I see the attraction. Michael: I totally see the attractions too, because honestly, you don't fit in to...like Kurt fits in to it but not everybody fits into that wanting of a high-end watch. Honestly, Rolex probably produces about a million high-end time pieces a year annually. Kurt: That blows my mind. A million people a year are spending $8,000 plus on a watch. Paul: I was doing research on how the watch might affect Apple's bottom line, because I am an Apple shareholder and... Kurt: That makes two of us. High five. Paul: ...the world watch market produces something like 1.2 billion watches a year. If 1.2 billion watches get made, Rolex makes 1 million of them. That's less than one percent. [laughs] Kurt: It's still crazy. Paul: I'm sure in terms of revenue, they're way higher, but not in terms of watches produced. Michael: Exactly. At the end of the day, you've got 1.2 billion watches being made annually. There's going to be a large percentage of them that are going to last a very short amount of time. They're $20, $15. They're $75. You know what? You're right. I think the Apple watch is a creative, brilliant idea that is well-designed. I'm simply not going to bang it, even though...I don't think I'll ever buy one. But it's just a different animal. Paul: It's a different thing. Kurt: It's a new market. Man 2: I think Jony Ive said during the video that, "You know, we are going to replace Rolex." He made some crack about replacing Rolex and a lot of those brands. That is kind of like, "All right. You are not right there." Because that's... Kurt: Don't be reaching for the stars. [crosstalk] Paul: This is a different thing they are selling. They both might be called watches, but they are different things. Michael: Rolex is not a buggy whip, gentlemen. Honestly, for him to say that shows, sadly, that even though he's a beautiful and wonderful designer, his complete and utter ignorance on the watch industry is completely...he overly showed it during that point. Paul: I'm really excited to listen to this in five years and then we're like, "Oh man, Apple controls everything. We were idiots." Kurt: [laughs] "I can't believe Apple bought Rolex." Tell me, you are a watch guy, what's your favorite watch? Michael: I hate to say that I'm a...Even though I love complex, beautiful watches, I have to still say that the Rolex Submariner, in it's simple form, it's absolutely the most beautiful watch I've ever seen. It is a timeless, gorgeous definition of what a watch should be. It's accuracy is absolutely impressive. It's an over a 60-year design that's slightly evolved to almost absolute perfection with their current version. I look at so many other watches, and you just don't ever see that. When you look at watches, in general, or really products in general, let's just start with the car or anything like that or the Internet for that matter, very seldomly do you see one company be able to take their vision from 60 years ago and still keep running with it perfectly. Kurt: Yeah, it's true. The Rolex Submariner shape is classic and timeless, like people will always recognize a bottle of Coke, I think number one, and number two, they'll know Rolex when they see it. Michael: Not to try and push Ethercycle in any way, but... [crosstalk] Kurt: Oh no, please do. Please do. Michael: I know, but I really feel like one thing that you guys did great was that...I said to you during our design meetings that I wanted a website that showed the essence of Rolex's website and Rolex's presence. I didn't want to be Rolex. That's not what my intension was, but you guys were able to take the essence of that. That's complex. Countless people try and make watches just like Rolex watches, and they are completely off the mark every single time. It's good to see you guys, actually, were able to both manufacture my idea of what our website should look like but also give it that same feeling that it's going to last. I'm not going to change my website six months from tomorrow. I actually think that we are only going to minorly evolve it over the next two or three years as technology develops better in Shopify. Kurt: That's the way to do it. I think the people who have the most success are not the ones who tear down their website every six months, but instead are doing just constant iterations. With you, it's really every two weeks, even sometimes weekly, we're making continuous changes that really add up to better conversion and more sales, et cetera. Speaking that, as a Shopify store owner, give me one tip for Shopify store owners. Michael: The one tip is I do believe you need to trust something as important as your website to professionals, because if you are going to run a website like Shopify's -- very well built technology -- you can download one of their templates. You can figure out how to put some images and things like that. At the end of the day, the consumer is very short lived in their decision-making online. I look at the amount of time that people are on our website, and they are only there for a minute or two really sometimes. Kurt: A minute and a half is good. That's extraordinary. Michael: That is such an integral important part. To spend 2, 3, 4 thousand dollars on something that you are going to have as an asset in your company for the next 12 to 24 to 36 months...it's kind of foolish to think that, "I will just download a fifty dollar template and just start going with it." You need professional guidance, especially, even at a base level when you first do Kickstarter, when you first do this things, when you're first coming up with the product idea or your first, you're even just starting up a retail store online, you need to have that guidance. Because without that, your conversion rate will be much lower. Even if you think it's looks great and your mom does too, it doesn't matter. What matters is the end consumer has complete confidence in buying the product and you need the company to really do that and develop your website. Kurt: Hell yeah. God, I'm going to have to embed that audio on the second website now. [laughs] Paul: Autoplay audio now on the website. Big conversion. People love that. Kurt: You are right. That is a conversion killer. [laughter] Kurt: I think that I learned a lot. I hope other people learned a lot. It was really good. It was great having you. Michael I looked forward to talking more with Everest Bands and really growing that brand. Thank you for joining us. Michael: Thank you guys. Again, I really feel, not to go back a couple of times to do something, but if you're going to do a Kickstarter, you really need to get things organized. One of the most important things in organizing it is the image that you put out there, because if you don't have that, you will fail. Kurt: Your number one tip is still, will always ring true in my mind and it's good to hear it, "get your shit together." Michael: Get your shit together. Don't start without your shit together boys, because it's going to fail. I had a great time... Paul: Advice for everyone. Michael: Yeah, honestly. Your mom told you when you were 18 years old, "Get your shit together." Kurt: All right, this is fantastic. Thank you, Michael. Michael: Thanks guys. Paul: Thank you. [closing music]

Esta semana trazemos um SUPER episódio! Conversamos com mais uma lenda do Metal, Vinnie Paul! O baterista do Hellyeah, do Damageplan e do histórico Pantera veio nos contar sobre sua carreira e o álbum "Blood For Blood" do Hellyeah. Vinnie Paul nos contou sobre suas principais influências para tocar Metal, como foi decidir entrar no Hellyeah após a morte de Dimebag Darrell, e o que ele aprendeu de suas bandas passadas. Vinnie ainda falou sobre os comentários de Anselmo e Wylde de uma possível reunião do Pantera, e as melhores bandas de Rock pesado atualmente na sua opinião. No Orgulho Nacional o vocalista do Fúria Louca Henrique Sugmyama nos falou sobre como será o primeiro show da banda em São Paulo, no dia 19 no Inferno Club! Na promoção da semana vamos presentear um WikiBrother com uma camiseta importada e um pôster do "Far Beyond Driven" do Pantera! Neste episódio: Hellyeah, Pantera, Van Halen e Fúria Louca

I would once again like to welcome from Buyers Meeting Point to share information of this week's events and news from the world of purchasing, Kelly Barner. NOTE: In this week's guest audio, we will hear Blaine Hurley, Senior Director of Sourcing Excellence for Whirlpool, discuss the challenge their organization faced in creating a global vendor master. This excerpt is from a recent webinar presented by Ivalua and Procurement Leaders, and can be viewed on demand using the following link: http://www.ivalua.com/webinar-procurement-leaders-replay You can access the link to my interview with Paul Noël, who is Ivalua’s SVP Procurement Solutions and Havi Global Solutions Brian Benjamin discussing  the “Food Chain” in the restaurant and hospitality industry @ Managing The Food Chain. Be sure to visit the Buyers Meeting Point website @ http://buyersmeetingpoint.com

I am not normally one to give much heed to press releases.  After all and as my regular listeners already know, I usually view press releases as being more about PR than about providing meaningful information.  However, when I received the release regarding the news pertaining to Applebee’s and IHOP, I was immediately transported back about 30 years to a time when “Industry Specific Applications” as they were called then, were a relatively new concept.  If you remember the MAI Basic Four you will know what I mean.  More to the point, I was reminded of Fisher Business Systems, which at the time was revolutionizing the hospitality industry my providing restaurants and hotels with what was then an unheard of capability to better manage their inventory and related costs.  We will talk about that later in the show. However and jumping ahead to the here and now, and specifically the Ivalua and HAVI news regarding their partnership’s work with chains such as Applebee's and IHOP, I welcome to the show Paul Noël, who is Ivalua’s SVP Procurement Solutions and Havi Global Solutions Brian Benjamin to discuss the “Food Chain” in the restaurant and hospitality industry.

Call in or in-quick Sherri your questions for great, Intuitive Readings during the second half of the show. Join us as Paul Quinn discusses Tarot and how he can make it easy for the beginner. Paul Quinn is a Chicago-based author, teacher and intuitive consultant who uses the Tarot as a tool to help others gain insights leading to positive changes and greater well-being. Listed as a “top talent” in Tarot by Chicago Magazine, he is author of the new book, Tarot for Life: Reading the Cards for Everyday Guidance and Growth – which the American Tarot Association has called “a must read.” When Paul picked up his first Tarot deck in 1998, the attraction for him was not just the cards, he says, but how their meanings corresponded with his lifetime studies in spirituality, mysticism, astrology, psychology, theatre, and human potential. Internationally-known psychic and New York Times best selling author Sonia Choquette says about Paul: “No one better shows you how to use Tarot as it was designed to be used – for conversation with your Higher Self.” Paul writes a blog on the Tarot, life lessons, and various spiritual subjects at his website, www.TarotForLife.net. Check out my websites at Intuitive Readings & Classes - www.IntuitiveEyes.com Toe Readings - www.GypsyYoeReadings.com Leather Items - www.ArkaynLeatherworks.com or www.PsyArk.com

Call in or in-quick Sherri your questions for great, Intuitive Readings during the second half of the show. Join us as Paul Quinn discusses Tarot and how he can make it easy for the beginner. Paul Quinn is a Chicago-based author, teacher and intuitive consultant who uses the Tarot as a tool to help others gain insights leading to positive changes and greater well-being. Listed as a “top talent” in Tarot by Chicago Magazine, he is author of the new book, Tarot for Life: Reading the Cards for Everyday Guidance and Growth – which the American Tarot Association has called “a must read.” When Paul picked up his first Tarot deck in 1998, the attraction for him was not just the cards, he says, but how their meanings corresponded with his lifetime studies in spirituality, mysticism, astrology, psychology, theatre, and human potential. Internationally-known psychic and New York Times best selling author Sonia Choquette says about Paul: “No one better shows you how to use Tarot as it was designed to be used – for conversation with your Higher Self.” Paul writes a blog on the Tarot, life lessons, and various spiritual subjects at his website, www.TarotForLife.net. Check out my websites at Intuitive Readings & Classes - www.IntuitiveEyes.com Toe Readings - www.GypsyYoeReadings.com Leather Items - www.ArkaynLeatherworks.com or www.PsyArk.com