Podcasts about PES

Hosťom epizódy je Martin Mojžiš Ondruš, známy ako Martin z Břečťanu. So svojím tímom pomáha ľuďom, ktorým sa psychické problémy, depresia, trauma alebo chorobné hromadenie premietli do priestoru, v ktorom žijú. Upratujú byty, kde bežná upratovačka nestačí, ale robia to citlivo, s rešpektom a vždy s dôrazom na človeka, ktorý v tom byte žije.Ak sa vám epizóda páči, necenzurovaná verzia s otázkami od patreonov (o 14 minút dlhšia) je na:

The Great Talent Redistribution: Where is Talent Actually Going in 2026 and beyond?  Is the start-up compensation model broken? How about big Big Tech? How about non-tech small & medium businesses? What is happening to talent, going forward? This and many other topics in this episode of Tech Deciphered. Navigation: Intro The Broken Contract? The Great Unbundling The Three (?) Destinations Alternative Cap Tables, Alternative Compensation Models Investor Landscape Fragmentation Operator Playbook and Predictions Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show: Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Nuno Goncalves Pedro Introduction Welcome to episode 77 of Tech Deciphered. This episode will focus on the great talent redistribution. Where’s talent actually going in 2026 and beyond? The Silicon Valley deal of the last 30 years, very low salary, stock options, you will either sell for a ton of money or IPO, and everyone gets rich, is seemingly broken. Or is it really? The dominant narrative says the tech middle class is dying. We disagree. There is obviously a lot of stuff going on whereby big tech is partially barbelling. There’s a superstar concentration on the top. There’s a bit of a seemingly allowing of the belly. We’ll come back to that. We don’t quite believe that is totally true. There’s a collapse at entry level. The belly is migrating into three, potentially even more, very different destinations: AI native startups, human-verified premium businesses, and the read the industrialized middle of the S&P 500 and SMB world. Each has its own cap table, each will have its own compensation model, and each will have its own investor profile. In some ways, this is the third episode in our Reset trilogy. We started with episode 75 on the SaaS-apocalypse. We talked about the great private capital reset in episode 76, and now we talk about talent redistributions. Bertrand, exciting times, not always positive times.   Bertrand Schmitt Yeah, it’s exciting times because it’s a time of change. Of course, we have the doomsayers. If you listen to Dario Amodei of Anthropic, every white-collar job on Earth is going to disappear. I think I strongly disagree, and I suppose you too as well, we strongly disagree. It’s going to be more of a redistribution. If you look at the history of technology, this is what always happened. We forget how many jobs have disappeared over the past 150 years. We move from a time of 150 years ago. People were mostly in agriculture. Then you had a lot of weird jobs that disappeared from people transporting water to people bringing ice from the pools to people doing the job of computers. People forget that computer was a title given to human beings. We’re doing calculations. Then, of course, secretory jobs in the ’80s, ’90s, where suddenly anyone can type using a word processor, the rise of Excel, that sort of stuff. Many things have changed. Some jobs have indeed disappeared. Some jobs have totally transformed. Where you do these jobs have changed. I think we are at a similar stage where, thanks to AI, and I would say for now, or at least the rise of AI coding, there is a dramatic change happening. I don’t think it means that people will be without a job. It just means, from my perspective, that jobs are changing. You are not just doing a lowly coding level task that actually indeed could be replaced, but you are going to have more of builder type of mindset, a product manager type of mindset going forward. We also expect that the distribution of jobs, depending on the type of business, will be quite different.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro The Broken Contract? Maybe let’s reset a little bit to the broken contract, or if it’s really a broken contract. There’s been this image in technology and tech that basically you get paid very little to work in tech. You get a bunch of stock options. The earlier you are in the company, the higher the level of stock option grants you get. Then you make a ton of money at some point because the company will either sell or IPO, and that’s heard of it. Obviously, there’s a lot of movements happening right now that are changing how these dynamics work. The first part is obviously AI, and in some ways, AI is shrinking companies. It’s not unheard of that companies with as little as four or five people reach 50 million in ARR. There’s companies with one person that have gotten bought for hundreds of millions of dollars or billion of dollars. Obviously, things are moving very, very fast, and therefore, there isn’t a large employee cap table. How would you share the upside? Would you actually give a couple of percentage points to an early employee rather than your 0.2-0.5% kind of thing for early employees? The second part is a little bit the other side of the table, which is the IPO market is seemingly in a drought. There’s not much happening in IPOs. Maybe 2026, at some point, there will be an unlock, but right now, it’s seemingly difficult to get your upside. Even if you’re an employee, you have to wait a long time. The median time of IPO has climbed over 10, 11 years, the longest in over a decade. Basically, not only you have to wait a long time as if there is an IPO drought, like we might be going through right now, when do I actually get my cash back? Unless the company gets bought, maybe there are secondary transactions along the way, maybe there’s something else. But obviously there’s a little bit of a reduction and lowering of the upside seemingly for this contract and for this place. The easy conclusion that I think many are taking is, because of all of this and all the layoffs that are happening, even in big tech, that serve the tech middle class is dying, that basically AI screwing the workers, et cetera, there’s also a lot of discussion that even it might be affecting the entry-level jobs as well. Everyone coming out of undergrad right now can’t get a job, et cetera. There’s this doomsday scenario that you’re alluding to that everything is changing. We have a slightly different perspective. We think there’s a realignment of market. In layoffs, there was a lot of layoffs that were warranted. Big tech, in particular, had actually hoarded a lot of engineering capacity over the last decade or so. There’s a little bit of a realignment that needed to happen in any case. When everyone’s saying, “Well, AI is compressing everything,” well, it’s compressing right now, but we don’t think actually it’s going to compress over time. You’ll still need engineering and science talent to come on board for you to be able to scale up. It’s not like AI is going to take care of everything and teams are going to be five people for companies that are worth a trillion dollars. That’s not happening. Today’s thesis, I think a little bit of this doomsday scenario needs to be seen with a more nuanced lens. I think that’s how we’re framing today’s episode, that there’s a bit of a nuance, there are some extremes happening. We’re going to talk about those extremes, but ultimately, it’s not quite as simple as saying that the tech middle class is disappearing in early jobs are going to be a thing of the past.   Bertrand Schmitt At the same time, what you started with is true. I mean, that 50 million ARR company, just five people. At a bigger scale, that’s exactly the matrix for Anthropic. They have reached a stage where they are at a range of 12 million ARR per staff per employee. It’s metrics that are definitely never seen before. I don’t think any company raised to this level. Best in class, best run companies, one, two million per employees. I mean, that was your target if you can make it. We are definitely in a different game. But I think what matters at the end of the day, and that’s what we’re arguing, is that you have to see the big pictures. Yes, some positions might disappear inside some companies, but some other positions will be created in other companies. Usually, what people do is keep talking about the jobs who disappear and not looking at the bigger picture of jobs that are being created as well. What is true, and I think you alluded to that, is that the big tech the past 10, 15 years had some strategy of hoarding talent in a war where having the best talented people will make the difference in numbers, will make the difference between winning or losing. The Google of the world, the Microsoft of the world, the Amazon of the world, they were hoarding talent. They would try to make sure that they might not have such needs in talented number of people. But if they have the talent, it means their competitors didn’t have the talent. It means that the startup trying to reach scale couldn’t pay the giant salaries that the Google of the world were paying. There was definitely some hoarding. But it went so far in the 2020, 2021, that I think since then there has been a coming back to normal. There is also now in 2026, the recognition that it’s not true anymore. Yes, talent can be very valuable, but there is now a bigger and bigger gap between the extremely talented versus the rest that are merely talented because of AI. AI is able to replace at scale your software engineers, your software managers. I would say it’s quite new. I don’t think it was true a year ago. We’re really talking about a recent dramatic change in what can be achieved thanks to AI. We can see most of the big AI companies are moving to coding. It was started by Anthropic as a trend, OpenAI has followed through. Obviously, the Cursor of the world existed before, but they were not as successful. All the Chinese open-source models are moving very fast to coding optimization the past few weeks. It’s quite an incredible change. I think there is that dramatic change, recognition that coding can be done differently. As a result, we are going to see change in the distribution of jobs. I think it will start from the top because we see the news of the big Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and others who used to hold talented software developers to a change in realization that no, we actually need to invest in AI. We need to invest in compute because compute is going to do the job of most of these people. Therefore, we can’t pay for both at the same time, even us with all our money, we cannot. Wall Street is not going to let us do that. They start by removing a lot of position. I think we see that accelerating, quite frankly. We have only seen the beginning, but in the next 2 years, we see a dramatic shift. But I think my position, I guess yours, and you know as well, is that there will be a lot more opportunities created as well, probably by also entities.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro The Great Unbundling Yeah, there will be more opportunities created. The hoarding is just taken also a little bit of a different view. To your point, there’s hoarding of resources, compute, et cetera. But there’s also hoarding of top talent. We are seeing people getting paid, packages all in that could run up to 100 million, in some cases even over 100 million over several years. This is unheard of. I mean, an officer of Meta would make, I don’t know, maybe 20, 25 million a year. It’s like now there are people that are on the top end of AI researchers that are getting paid around that amount just to join some of these companies. There’s a little bit of a different hoarding. It’s very selective hoarding of certain talent. We’ve seen some acqui-hires. We’ve talked about it in previous episodes that are just literally about getting one or two people specifically to come on board. Alexander Wang, again, going to Meta to lead their intelligence labs there. I feel, I don’t know what you feel, but I feel this is a transition moment where there is overpaying for certain talent on the top of the market. At some point, this will stabilize. You can’t keep paying people 100 million over 4 years or something like that across the board. To your point, a lot of this is actually going to scale up quickly also on the AI side. There’s a little bit of a different hoarding happening on the top end, not just the resources, but also of people, which seems to give further this notion of barbell, that there’s two extremes, the haves and have-nots, the super-duper talented people that get paid a ton of money, tens of millions of dollars a year at the very least. Then the emptying of the middle where there’s a ton of tech layoffs going on in some ways, the belly, as they would call it, is being expelled. The middle market, the managers are being fired because there’s nothing to manage. There’s a lot of positions going away. In some cases, you might keep some of the more junior talent, but with a little bit of experience. But even the talent coming out of colleges is not getting hired either. It’s a little bit of a weird thing where there’s hoarding at the top, there’s an emptying of the belly, the middle, and then the early, early, early is also not getting recruited. It’s like what gives? How is this going to look in the future? I agree fully with you, Bertrand, that there’s a migration of this talent, not only to other companies, but also to other jobs. There will be new jobs that will emerge out of this. The DevOps, dev tools market didn’t exist until maybe 20 years ago at scale, and it got created. In some ways, we’re seeing there will be new markets, there will be new roles and new jobs that will be created around engineering teams going forward. We can’t anticipate all of them. But basically, the emptying of the belly is true as it’s happening right now. The low hiring on the early and the top end, getting tons of money. We think this is a transition to something else. There’s the hoarding of engineering in general is coming to an end at momentum. Now it’s time to rightsize teams, to get the right at the table, et cetera, and start figuring out what works and what doesn’t work. We’ve already had some horror stories coming out even from Amazon where they were breaking systems with their use of AI tools, and I’m sure it’s happening across the board. I’m on a board of a company and been tremendously affected by Meta and its algorithms, where basically because of advertising, there have been people served with ads for this specific company where the ad doesn’t match the company, so basic stuff like that. It’s been actually very, very difficult because in some ways, the company goes back to Meta. It’s like, “Hey, dudes, you guys are serving ads that are not even our ads with our copyright and stuff. How does this work?” They’re like, “Oh, it’s AI.” It’s like, “Well, it’s AI but can you give me my money back?” They’re like, “No, we won’t give you money back.” This creates huge issues for companies, for example, that are very dependent on advertising, which obviously there’s a lot of industries that are. They’re actually in production systems at scale. Meta is, I think now, the largest digital advertising in the world. I think they outgrew Google in one of the last quarters. Basically, this has a tremendous effect that systems that are in production at scale are getting inputs and changes driven by AI tooling, and somehow nobody can say what the hell is happening. Again, there will be a reckoning, there will be a redistribution, there will be a rightsizing of teams and an adequacy of teams going forward. I personally think this is a transition period.   Bertrand Schmitt I think we are moving from hoarding or software engineering to hoarding the top of the top scientists in AI and hoarding of GPUs, GPUs/data center. For me, it was quite interesting to see the deal of Cursor with xAI, where basically they couldn’t get access to computing resources to run their model. But xAI had, I forgot the exact numbers, but close to half a million GPUs that no one, I mean, “no one was using” because their services are not so successful yet in terms of AI chatbot and the like. Basically, suddenly they are like, “You know what? We control access to resource.” But the new resource is, again, a mix of extremely talented AI engineering or AI scientists versus GPUs/data center. There is this race of controlling boss and everything else is going to be collateral damage. Some examples, I think, are quite interesting. You talk about some example of Amazon, even some production issues. I remember reading a quick post-mortem of one of the issues, and the conclusion was it was AI, definitely part of the issue. But the other part of the issue was AI used by junior engineers. For me, it’s interesting. It shows that actually junior plus AI is actually a danger zone. That’s why many companies are going to be way more careful. “Why do we need the junior people if they are just playing with fire?” I think we go back to that situation of barbell, as you call it. The top talents are extremely valuable because they know how a production system works. They are here to develop better AI systems. But the junior guys playing with fires, yeah, maybe it’s cute in startups, but in a big time production environment, a different story.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro There will be a barbell with top-end talent super-mega paid and then mid-level talent that is individual contributors still doing a lot of great work, et cetera. Along the way, a lot of emptying of entry, a lot of emptying of the middle. Where does the talent go? The Three (?) Destinations I think we could say there’s three destinations for this talent. Maybe there’s four, maybe there’s more. Three that we can immediately identify. One is the AI native startup piece, where we have smaller teams that potentially get to a lot of revenue or top line over time, and where the Series Seed is the primary round, where we’re seeing Series Seed being raised of tens of millions of dollars, actually even hundreds of millions of dollars in Series Seed. In some ways, the stars there can get incredible compensations in terms of stock. They will stay for private and selling in secondaries later down the road because there’s so much capital at the table. Actually, in some ways, salaries are very high as well in some of these companies. It’s not like you’re trading off anything. You can get paid a lot of money. If your company at Series Seed for 10 or 15 employees has raised 50-$100 million, you can pay great salaries. In some ways, this is the extreme destination. The AI native startups that can make it is the extreme destination. Now, there aren’t a ton of AI native startups that can raise 50-100 million to 400 million in Series Seed, just to be clear. There’s a handful of hot deals in that space, but that’s one clear destination for top-end talent going through that. In that market, I think that’s one of the destinations. The second one is more what we would call the human-verified premium. It’s more of a play of companies that has still the need of human in the loop, either in terms of development, also in terms of activity, either because go-to markets are very intensive, and so therefore you need to have sales forces, partnership teams, et cetera. Or on the engineering side, it needs to have a lot of customization, integration. Companies are not just going to the, “Oh, you can come in and just apply your AI tooling and somehow magically the systems all work.” there needs to be quite a lot of and work and high touch work in getting stuff done. A significant part of that market, I’m not sure, is super VC investible. Maybe it’s a hybrid of private equity in VC, more PE style in many cases. It’s a PE-hold, sell to someone else market. As we’ve discussed in a previous episode on the SaaS-apocalypse, that hasn’t quite worked out for PEs. Question marks on how that human-verified premium market is going to evolve. But obviously, there’s a lot of work still to be done there, even on the engineering and science side. That’s the second potential destination. Then the third more aggressive destination is the reindustrialized middle companies that have a lot of specificity in going after small and medium businesses, local or regional affectations like ERPs or CRMs for specific markets, et cetera. Those are the three natural destinations. I would add the fourth, which is big tech. I mean, big tech doesn’t magically disappear, and I don’t think it fits neatly into any of these three markets. In some ways, big tech is now looking at the extreme for top talent a little bit like the AI native startup because they can pay. They can pay the 100 million every four years, et cetera. I do think it will typify taxonomically into a fourth type emerging, where, as we discussed, you’ll have top-end individual contributor talent. You’ll have the absolute top-end of the market because they can get paid. Then you’ll start having the emergence of earlier talent that is highly capable, et cetera. That will go back to a bit of a normal distribution in terms of talent on big tech. For me, those are the four destinations that I would put at the table.   Bertrand Schmitt For me, big tech moving to big tech, I’m not sure if it’s really a destination. I mean, yes, in some ways it’s a reshuffle between the big tech companies. They are definitely all fighting in some ways for some of the same people. I can see that dramatic shift where big tech has to remove a lot of positions in order to replace by AI. Again, I think at this stage, it’s mostly driven by AI coding. We are still at the beginning because this is brand-new phenomenon that AI coding is so successful at its task. I don’t think it was true even 6 months ago. Some companies, take Anthropic, take OpenAI, are definitely there or close to be there in terms of no more writing of a single line of code by a human, zero. This is, again, 6, 12 months ago. Not true. But now it’s true in a few top companies. Take OpenClaw as well, most successful GitHub project of all time, not a single line written by its author. It would have been impossible. We’re talking about hundreds of thousands of line of code in a few months. It’s impossible to achieve that manually. If you look at the other big tech companies, the Google of the world, the Meta of the world, the Microsoft of the world, they are absolutely not there yet. They are going to be there because they have no choice. It’s you either go fast there or you die. You are not going to be able to survive competitors that are shipping 10, 50, 100 times faster than you are shipping. It’s a life and death situation. All the big tech companies are going to move, and mark my word, in the next 2 years from 10, 20% of AI-written code to 100%. During that transition, the next 2 years max, if you don’t do it in 2 years, you are going to die. Your stock price is going to crash. Then, of course, you will have to make changes. You will have to invest more in GPUs. You will have to invest less in your standard typical software engineer employees. Like you, I’m very optimistic that there are new buckets. AI-native startups definitely will be there. It will be transformational. Human-verified premium, very interesting category. In a way, it will be businesses that are inevitably less scalable through AI, and there is definitely a spot from there. I think the biggest would be the reindustrialized middle SMBs. Most of S&P 500 type of business are going to dramatically offer new software opportunities, new opportunity story to talented software employees because they will need to implement AI in everything they do. They will do it. They will need people who have software engineering knowledge in order to implement these systems. For them, what’s changing dramatically really is that thanks to much cheaper cost as thanks to AI coding, a lot of software projects that they couldn’t afford to do, that they couldn’t imagine doing by themselves, they are able to do it. They will invest in a lot more software capabilities than ever before. That will be a big game changer. And software, very tuned to their business model. There might be less buying of your traditional off-the-shelf SAF software and a lot more investment in a highly custom software by their own team, assisted with AI. I think that would be the part that is most transformed by all of this in a positive way.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Alternative Cap Tables, Alternative Compensation Models This will lead to a very fundamental shift, right back to the broken contract. What does the new contract look like? It looks like alternative cap tables depending on which bucket are you transitioning into. If you’re going into your AI-native bucket, and you’re a top-end talent, you’re like, “Dude, I’m worth 100 million over 4 years, so just compensate me accordingly with a mix of options in the company plus my salary.” If you’re top 1%, you can probably get away with salaries that you’d get anyway at mid-level from 300K, 400K and above, and you can get actually a lot of options already in the company. A lot of this is happening right now. There’s a premium for AI, we know that. There’s a premium for AI at the top end of AI researching, in particular on companies that are doing hardcore research on staff AI engineers, so companies that require actual AI engineering. There is a premium that is significant. It could be as high as 18% over non-AI peers, and it widens actually with seniority, shockingly enough. This is more of an average than anything else. Now, for me, and it’s for debate, but the perspective is this extreme comp will need to compress at some point. There will still be the haves and have-nots paid much better than the have-nots, so to speak, but there will be a compression. The variance can’t be the variance we’re seeing today for absolute top-end talent. That said, there will be variants. We know that big tech for over a decade, decade and a half, for example, in the Bay Area, has been paying a lot of money for director and above levels that used to be the VPs, so a million, a million and a half a year, all in compensations. It’s not unheard of that this will actually increase after this stage. That said, I do think that the compensation extreme that we’re in will get diluted down the middle. It will actually come down at some point. It’s part of where we are today. As we know, it is still a bubble.   Bertrand Schmitt Yeah, it’s an interesting point. I think it’s possible. At the same time, that compression coming 2, 3, 5 years. At the same time, we have examples where there is no such compression. Take the top sports players in the world, golfing, basketball, NBA players. There has not really been any compression at all. For me, it’s interesting. If you look at the big tech companies, each being one of this top NBA team, why would such compression happen? As long as they are competing against each other and generating plenty of cash, I think there will be some fair question. We will see. I don’t have a strong opinion, but for me, it’s not a total given.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro For me, the shocking thing is the faster AI becomes better, the more that compression will happen, because at some point, it’s like, why do you need the top talent as well? I don’t know. It feels like you’re trying to evolve a system that’s there to replace you. It’s like, “Okay, I’m getting paid 100 million over the next 4 years”, and then you develop something that’s so good that replaces you. Thank you. That’s cool.   Bertrand Schmitt That’s a total possibility, yes, because we are in that very unusual market where the game is to only replace yourself and people like yourself. At some point, it is a possibility, I guess this one. Right now, we’re talking about replacing your “average software talent”. In 2 years, could we absolutely replace the absolute best top experts in the world? Probably. I think it’s just that at some point we’ll be reaching the stage where we strictly have no control anymore on our AI systems because no human is able to challenge and understand what’s produced. It’s not just a question of scale anymore. We’re talking about a gap in IQ, basically.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Exactly. It will happen at some point in history. We don’t know exactly when. For the second bucket, the human-verified premium bucket, it’s difficult to see how an HVAC company or an HVAC roll-up of scale or a regional health care platform or high touch go-to-market, B2B, SaaS play, et cetera, for a vertical will compete. At the same end, they have to compete and they will compete. There will be more and more jobs, we believe, for engineering talent in these companies. They’ll have to be more and more AI-enabled themselves. The cash salaries will have to be competitive within the local markets, not necessarily with Silicon Valley. There will be potentially profit sharing and revenue sharing and actual dividends played at the table. The model there on the cap table needs to change a little bit, needs to be probably propped up more on salary and on some way of doing profit sharing or actually having dividends paid to employees and figuring out employee to equity in a more aggressive manner. This is the market that probably was already very attacked, so to speak, or let’s say, occupied by private equity firms. There are still obviously part of that model that would work well. There needs to be a fundamental shift, certainly on the quantum of salary compensation, dividend compensation, profit sharing, and all of that. Then last but not the least, obviously, we had the bucket around basically the reindustrialization of the middle, so everything else, which will take most of the belly that we were talking about. This is probably a poor analogy, the belly fat. It’s not belly fat, it’s people that were doing their jobs that now are getting disrupted. In some ways, that bucket will absorb a lot of that belly, will absorb a lot of talent. The small and medium businesses that Bertrand was saying will need to crucially become more AI, software-enabled by themselves, even with some core stuff and underpinnings that actually might not even require AI in terms of infrastructure platforms. There, you need to get properly paid. Again, how many people do you need in your engineering team if you’re a small business? Probably not a lot. It’s maybe you need one or two people and that’s it. They’ll need to be very nicely paid because they’re running the stuff in the rails. This is probably a market that over time, as AI gets more and more competent, will also be disrupted, but let’s not talk about the disruption to the disruption because otherwise, we’ll stay here the whole day, but certainly a market that has a lot of potential to shift and to absorb a lot of the moments that we’re seeing in terms of layoffs happening in the US in particular.   Bertrand Schmitt This category was a category that historically could not compete with Silicon Valley salaries, could not attract the most talented engineers. It’s not a category that didn’t want to bring these people on board. It’s a category that just couldn’t afford to bring this talent on board, typically. I think it would be a dramatic shift for them when suddenly there are opportunities to hire these people. There is an opportunity to hire them at maybe more reasonable prices from this company’s perspective. You talk about small companies, the great thing is that there are millions of small companies at some point. I think things could be truly transformational. Of course, some of these engineers, software engineers, might decide to become entrepreneurs on their own. Solo entrepreneurs, small businesses, build their own, easier to build their own product to market so to serve other companies. I think there will be quite dramatic changes because not all companies will be disrupted by AI as much, but not every company will benefit from improving processes, improving software through AI. At least early on, you will need this human touch to make it work inside a business. Interestingly enough, I was hearing that some companies like IBM were hiring more younger people to do the work of going to the client, understand their needs, propose implementation plans. That forward deployed engineer, those positions, I think there will be more and more available.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Investor Landscape Fragmentation What happens to investor into the landscape? We already had an episode, the previous one, Episode 76, where we talked quite a lot about the big capital reset on the private equity and private reset, including venture capital. Just maybe to summarize, how does it align with the buckets that we’ve just been discussing? I think the AI-native bucket clearly is going to be the key bucket. There, we’re going to see two movements. One movement, which is the mega funds, as we discussed in the last episode, are no longer just VC funds. They’re really mostly multi-asset private equity funds, maybe even private equity hedge funds in some cases. Those funds will be all over the high-growth AI-native companies and will be pouring money into companies that are scaling really, really quickly. The early stage, so to speak, VCs, the actual VCs that will stay in the market will be the guys probably identifying the next big wave of AI-native companies. We’ve discussed that as well in the last episode, some research that we did at Chamaeleon that I shared in episode 76. We’ll see that as emerging. What happens to the second bucket, the bucket around human premium, human in the loop? Likely we’ll have more and more private equity capital going into it and the large-scale VC guys, the Thrives of the world, they’ve just announced Thrive Holdings, and others going after those markets as well. It’s trying to converge into the private equity market, which aligns with the point we made in the previous episode that the VC mega funds are no longer VC, that they are private equity, multi-asset class. They’re going after a bunch of things. There’s a conversion happening from VC into private equity. It was going to happen anyway because the private equity guys were coming into VC as well and the hedge funds were coming to VC as well. There’s a convergence in the middle of very, very large funds and large assets under management happening to go after some of these opportunities, certainly in Bucket B. Then this Bucket C, so to speak, the bucket of reindustrialization, as Bertrand was saying, very well, likely will be self-funded for a significant period of time. Will self-fund with their own cash flow. Doesn’t need to have a ton of capital intensity. Maybe you need one or two engineers to do stuff, but that’s it. You don’t need tons of capital. You didn’t need in the past, you won’t need it today. Not sure there’s going to be a fundamental shift to that market.   Bertrand Schmitt Yes, I certainly, overall, agree with you. That last pocket, probably little change to the capital and capital structure. Again, I see that as the biggest opportunity for a lot of people who might be less needed by big tech and also top tech companies. What is sure for the first category, the high native startups? I would say more overall in the VC ecosystem, there is no space left for SaaS anymore. I think SaaS, as we used to know it, is dead in some ways in the sense that new pure SaaS software startup are definitely out. Existing ones that are critical to run your infrastructure, the Salesforce of the world, I think they’re in a decent spot. Actually, interestingly, they changed their pricing model to now sell to AI agents, not just per seat. There is a change in pricing there. But this day and age of funding a pure SaaS software startup through VC money, no way. VC money going to AI-native startups, AI-focused startups, to biotech, to deep tech, to defense tech, yes. SaaS as a fundable category early on, I think it’s over.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro I’m a bit more nuanced as we shared in The SaaS Apocalypse episode. We can call it whatever we call. It’s applied AI is the new SaaS thing. Horizontal applied AI is the new horizontal SaaS or vertical applied AI is the new vertical SaaS. I agree in common with your point that very specific point solutions around SaaS will be disrupted by nature with all the easy stuff you can do today with AI. It will take a while. This is not something that’s going to happen this year. It’s going to happen over the next years. Maybe interesting to also talk about the exit markets. I think the IPO market, as we’ve also discussed in the past, there is, in my view, going to be a reopening of the IPO market, I think this year, probably later in the year, third or fourth quarter. The median time to IPO actually is going to be really weird because there’s going to be potentially some companies in the current landscape, bubble or no bubble, that are going to IPO, the OpenAIs of the world, Anthropics of the world, et cetera. There will be more and more aggression, I think, on M&A. Big tech has already shown it, that they want to buy into markets. Large non-tech companies have also started doing acquisitions in space. To prop up their IT teams, their engineering teams with this world that we’ve also discussed in previous episodes that I’m going to own my own engineering stack for now. As we see, that normally doesn’t withstand the test of time. At some point it will get unbundled and served by someone else. Then finally, the secondary market is very hot right now. Obviously, there’s heavy discounting on some areas, high premiums on others. The exit market, strangely enough, is going to be propped up, in my opinion, over the next year to 2 years, dramatically. Then we’ll see if there’s a big reckoning around the bubble that we are clearly in or not, if it’s a soft landing or hard landing. Definitely, there’s going to be a lot of exit paths over the next year to 2 years.   Bertrand Schmitt Concerning the “bubble”, I have two perspectives on this. One is it’s a bubble in the sense that money is going to a lot of players and some players are going to blow it up. There will be a concentration of players at the end, like it usually happens. If you look at, for instance, long time ago, the railway revolution, there was that intense influx of capital. At the end of the day, there was a dramatic change in transportation in the US and a complete railway system put in place. Yes, some investors lost money, some companies went bankrupt, but the transformation was fully real. There were a lot of top leaders at the end of this revolution. The change after that only happened, we guess, post-World War II, with the construction of the highway system and the rise of airlines and plane transportation overall. Here I feel it’s similar in the sense that, yes, there is a lot of money going in. Some players are going to blow it. They will misuse the money in different ways, but that’s part of dynamic allocation of capital. Of course, you make mistakes. That’s what happens. At the same time, I feel it’s a similar level in the sense of this is a dramatic change in the US infrastructure. This buildup of AI data centers filled with GPUs, integrated at scale with some of the best software in the world and running it, supported by a dramatic shift in energy infrastructure. This is for me similar to the Railroad Revolution. Some players might not own the data center they build because they didn’t manage well their debt, they didn’t manage to run proper software. You know what? They will get acquired by somebody else. I think we are at this level of fundamental transformation. The fact that in a matter of maybe 2 years, the move from 0% of code written by AI to 100 % written by AI is an insane dramatic shift. Just to be clear, when you move from manually coded to AI coded, we’re talking about a 100X difference in terms of speed at similar, if not better level of quality. The shift is dramatic, and on top of it, you don’t pay salaries anymore to achieve that. You pay CapEx, and with GPUs and OpEx with electricity. It’s a very big shift, positive shift in business model. New unions, no management over it, AI working 24/7. Personally, I think for me, bubble has a bad connotation in the sense of it was all for a waste. I don’t think it’s all for a waste. I think we are witnessing a dramatic revolution of our lifetimes, quite frankly, bigger than SaaS, bigger than mobile. From my perspective, it’s exciting times.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Operator Playbook and Predictions Let’s move to if you are this person, what would you do in the future? Let’s start with two extremes and go from there. One is you’re non-tech, so you’re not an engineer, et cetera. You’re trying to figure out, how do I scale my activity? Maybe physical labor is where I want to go. It’s not, “Go west” anymore. Definitely not necessarily go west. You should go to, I guess, the states that have no sales tax with very cheap energy because that’s where the data centers are being built if you want to be in that market. Obviously, there’s a lot of stuff that needs to be done: HVAC, electricity work, et cetera. Don’t go west. Go low sales taxes, low cost of energy. That’s likely where the data centers are being built. You probably can just follow. There’s, I’m sure, some way for you to follow where the data centers are being built, but that’s next, I think on that extreme of the table. The other extreme of the table, let’s say you are super ambitious, maybe you’re no longer an engineer, but you’re a product manager in your prompt engineering. You could do prompt engineering all day long. You’re 28, 29-year-old superstar. What do you go and do? Likely either you start your own thing, start your own company because you’re so good at prompt engineering, you probably can do a lot of the code yourself, particularly if you have an engineering background, or you go and join very early an AI-native startup that you think has the chance of going through the roof, and you take a pretty good salary early on, a ton of upside on the company because guess what? Companies like that need product managers. They need people to figure out UX, UI. It’s not going to be, at least for now, yet AI figuring that out for you. Those are two extremes, just to give two of the extremes, like engineering, product management persona, and physical labor at the other extreme, non-tech, et cetera.   Bertrand Schmitt In some ways, every software engineering job is going to become the equivalent of a software engineering manager or a product manager, because suddenly you don’t have to do the coding anymore. You’re managing AI that is coding for you. Either you start to have some manager hat, but we saw the humans, so it’s a very different type of manager, obviously, or you are going to be really an empowered product manager. You’re skipping the middleman. You’re skipping the traditional engineering organization because your engineering organization is AI running and doing the work for you. I still believe that it requires some serious skills. I don’t believe in the vibe coder type of value proposition. I don’t believe in the prompt engineer becoming suddenly super incredible, able to manage that. I still think it requires some serious chops to do the best from all of this and to do it in a safe and sane way. It’s very easy to have poor taste, make mistakes. I don’t know you, but keep reading these stories on the heads of companies who lost everything because of the AI agents. That deleted stuff in production, and they had no backups or the backups weren’t deleted as well. Crazy situation. You cannot run companies like this if you let your agents running wild. You could argue it’s the early days. I would argue it that that issues would be there for a while. You need to have some engineering discipline at core in the company running the business to make sure things don’t go sideways because it would be easy for things to go sideways.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro I totally agree. If you’re thinking, Oh, should my kid go into science and engineering and computer science, et cetera? Absolutely, still, because of everything that Bertrand just said. You need to understand actually what code does and what technology does and what all of that does. That’s still a skill of the future. It’s not a skill of the past. In some ways, it’s still a skill of the future very much. Maybe let’s try two more extremes. Around the same level, the person that decided to do an AI native company bootstrapped initially, having difficulty raising a mega round, but could probably get away with raising a 2-3 million seed round, et cetera. Is that still viable? The answer is yes. There’s tremendous capital efficiency right now happening in the market still, 10 plus higher than if you were doing a SaaS company, and you were a founder in 2019 or something like that. That capital efficiency is going to reverberate. You can run a tighter team, smaller team. Actually, you don’t need that many salaries. If you’re a decent engineer as a founder or if you understand enough as a product manager to just generate that code, you can do a lot of stuff yourself, can bring in maybe one or two technical elements to the team early on as you would have done if you were bootstrapped anyway. There’s obviously a path for that. The other extreme is you’re in big tech, you’re level five, individual contributor, making a ton of money, or you were a manager, and you’re now out of a job, where do you go? You can go to a big company that is non-tech, S&P 500 company that’s non-tech, something like that. You join the company, you’ll probably get paid pretty well, maybe not as high as you were paid in big tech. There’s some stock at the table, but guess what? You’ll have probably more work-life balance than you ever did. That’s the trade-off. You’ll have a better job. On the upside, you can transform the company. You can help and be part of transforming a company from non-AI to AI-first or AI-enabled in the future, whatever BS that will look like in terms of the argumentation to the board. You can actually create tremendous productivity enhancements in a big non-tech company if you come with that background. Again, you’ll have certainly a better work-life balance, so not a bad deal, to be honest.   Bertrand Schmitt Also, to be clear, I talk a lot about AI coding because it’s truly transformational. You could argue that it’s going to be self-improving. We are in the situation of a self-improving AI that keeps improving itself thanks to automated coding. It’s a dramatic, virtuous loop. Obviously, AI is also going to improve everything else. It’s going to improve your marketing, it’s going to improve your search process, it’s going to improve your DNA. Improvements will be everywhere. It’s just that right now we are at a point in the quote-unquote revolution where there is one clear piece of the puzzle that is moving faster than the rest.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Bertrand, the senior executives at non-tech don’t know anything about that. It could be just a great prompt engineer. That’s the only job you do. “I’m the chief marketing officer. I have someone below me that’s doing the whole work.” Nobody knows. Nobody’s the wiser, I guess. I’m being facetious, but not fully.   Bertrand Schmitt Yeah. There would be a transition period where what you described happen. I want to say, going back to AI coding, I think that the part of AI that as of today has reached a stage of limited AGI. We have reached, from my perspective, a limited type of AGI for coding. If you take coding as a discipline today, I think we reach AGI. If you go beyond coding, that’s true. If we are talking about coding, leveraging the latest LLMs: OPUS 4.7, ChatGPT 5.5, combined with Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode for harness, I think we’ve reached AGI in the context of coding. I’m not sure everyone fully realize that and the consequence of that. I think the rest is going to come as well. We are going to see that category by category, usually categories that are more scientific in nature, where you can replicate, where you can test easily, where you can create clear success. Metrics will be the “easiest” to follow in that direction of self-improvement. I just want to highlight that this part is truly transformational, the root cause of everything we’re talking about today. At the same time, it’s coming beyond coding.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro I think it is true. There are a couple of markets where that might not hold true, which is maybe the final path. If you’re thinking of starting your own business in plumbing and in HVAC maintenance and installation, this is a pretty good time for the reasons we already said before. There’s a lot of buildup of data centers and all that stuff, but also for other reasons, because it’s an activity that won’t be disrupted by AI yet. You need them embodied AI. You need physicality to AI to do stuff like actually fixing pipes.   Bertrand Schmitt Until Optimus replace you.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Yeah, but if we’re 3, 4 years out in terms of a lot of these optimizations that we’re talking about at the software layer, we’re 10 years plus out on embodied AI, right?   Bertrand Schmitt Oh, yeah, it’s 10 years.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro We’ll probably be optimistic as we speak. That’s a nice business. I’m thinking of starting to go into that market. If you guys are interested in listening to this, just reach out to me. What’s the angle? I think there’s a lot of stuff you can do in the buildup of some of these businesses, plumbing, HVAC, all sorts of maintenance. There are markets that are just totally messed up. Handyman market in the US is totally messed up. There’s a bunch of companies out there that try to go after it with marketplaces and stuff. I honestly just start something from scratch, a small business, and go from there.   Bertrand Schmitt Yes. They’re an interesting middle. Think about accounting firms, consulting firms. I think they are not as easy to replace, but at the same time, there is no way on what they do is not going to be dramatically changed with AI. I don’t know if it’s 50, 80, 90% of the job, but this is changing quite dramatically, would be my expectation in the coming few years. Conclusion Thanks for listening episode 77 of Tech Deciphered about that great talent redistribution. As you heard it from us, we believe there is a dramatic change in play, enabled by AI coding, and that ultimately a lot of the big tech companies are changing their employee distribution, way more focused on the top talents and bringing more GPUs. As a result, we will see a change in their staffing. Some of this change will benefit AI-focused startups, but probably more likely will benefit the bigger SMBs, the S&P 500 companies of the world that will finally be able to bring inside and afford some of the talent that were in some ways trapped by the top 5, 10, 20 software companies of the world. Thank you, Nuno.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Thank you, Bertrand

George Noble, CIO of Noble Capital Advisors, returns to review his February predictions on bonds, energy, and the AI trade, warning that the margin of safety is particularly small right now as there's no room for error with stocks highly valued, companies over-earning, and policymakers unable to ease on either fiscal or monetary fronts. He explains bond vigilantes are awakening as yields hit 30-year highs in Japan and 20-year highs in Europe, predicts the Fed cutting rates against surging inflation will backfire spectacularly, and reveals forward oil contracts are finally rising as the market believes this situation won't pass quickly. Noble declares we're in the "golden age for stock picking" after active managers got killed by ETFs for years, warns the consumer is already in recession with stocks like Home Depot, Lowe's, McDonald's, and Lululemon making multi-year relative lows, and explains his long resources/short consumer-tech spread has generated 10% returns in six weeks. He argues many stocks are in a bubble not because of high PEs but because of unsustainable margins (using shipping stocks as an analogy), reveals consumer ETFs are actually 40% Mag 7, confirms his "death of financialization" thesis as bond markets discipline politicians, and explains why Kevin Warsh is stuck between a rock and hard place with limited policy tools as the buy-the-dip mentality dies.Links: George Noble's Best Income Ideas Online Summit: https://noble-capevents.com/X: https://x.com/gnoble79Substack: https://substack.com/@georgenobleTimestamps: 0:00 Introduction - Big picture macro update since February0:40 Reviewing previous predictions - Energy, bonds, AI trade3:32 Margin of safety particularly small right now5:30 Forward curve moving up - Market believing oil situation won't pass quickly6:02 Rising oil prices and bond yields - Not positive for risk assets8:40 Tech leadership unsustainable - Tremendous blow off top11:00 Buying semis on 8x book historically not a good idea12:26 Equal weight S&P underperforming - Broader market not doing well14:21 Long resources, short consumer and tech - 10% return spread17:03 Bond market move confirming death of financialization thesis19:52 Fed cutting rates against surging inflation and exploding deficits will backfire21:15 Bond market vigilantes being awakened23:38 Japan as canary in coal mine on debt problem25:33 Gold miners outstanding right now - Out of favor27:04 Regime shift happening - 60-40 model is dead29:36 Fed is not in control - They follow the market32:16 This is the golden age for stock picking34:21 AI trade - Biggest misallocation of capital in history of the world36:44 Many stocks in a bubble - Margins are the problem, not PEs38:37 Shipping stocks example - Bubble in earnings, not valuation40:20 Consumer is in recession42:06 Inflation permeating - Gold to energy to food43:28 Rates won't matter until they matter - Temperature analogy45:51 Kevin Warsh stuck between rock and hard place46:38 Margin of safety explained - Seth Klarman's wisdom50:11 Death of buy the dip mentality51:27 ETFs are not the answer - Do you know what's in your ETF?52:53 Golden age of stock picking - Active managers killing it now54:41 Shorting is a bad business - Just avoid garbage stocks56:50 Best Income Ideas Conference - May 20th59:05 Closing thoughts

The big things you need to know:First, the investors we met with this past week, in our trip to London and Switzerland, were keen to explore other opportunities in US equities beyond Semis/Tech/AI, but had difficulty envisioning what those were.Second, we highlight continued outperformance of high price momentum in our factor work and what we're seeing in our valuation work for this part of the market, a pick up in the rate of upward EPS estimate revisions for the S&P 500 as reporting season slows down, and the signal we're currently getting from S&P 500 and Russell 2000 forward P/Es – things are moving up but aren't universally back to their 2025 and early 2026 highs.

From dreaming of the Air Force to finding his calling in civil engineering and becoming a PE, today's guest is a testament to the twists life throws at us…and some of them can be a blessing!

A hazai musicaljátszás két népszerű, fiatal művésze, Gubik Petra és Pesák Ádám voltak a Háttér Story podcast legutóbbi adásának vendégei. A beszélgetés pillérét a karrier és a magánélet kényes egyensúlya adta, mellyel Petra egyedülállóként, Ádám pedig kisgyermekes, családos édesapaként küzd. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Hosť: Katarína Kubišová (cvičiteľka vodiacich psov z občianskeho združenia Psi na život). | Nahrávky: Lea Rollová (docentka, Ústav architektúry občianskych budov) a Juraj Oláh (špecialistka na bariéry v architektúre a nevidiaci, Zvolen). | Vycvičiť vodiaceho psa nie je žiadna psina. Pes musí byť ľahko ovládateľný a zároveň samostatný, nebojácny a pritom pokojný. Pre úrady je kompenzačnou pomôckou, pre nevidiacich a slabozrakých je anjelom strážnym. Je ich dosť pre všetkých záujemcov? Kedy stratí nervy aj dobre vycvičený jedinec? A prečo nevidiaci človek so stabilným zamestnaním má menšiu šancu dostať sa k vodiacemu psovi? O radostiach a strastiach vodiacich a asistenčných psov v tomto vydaní Kontaktov s Petrou Strižkovou. | Vodiace a asistenčné psy. | Moderuje: Petra Strižková; | Kontakty pripravuje Slovenský rozhlas, Rádio Slovensko, SRo1. V premiére v pondelok až štvrtok po 20. hodine v Rádiu Slovensko.

Peter Walker brings Carta's proprietary private market data from 60,000 startups and 85% of US unicorns to expose the brutal realities of today's tech landscape. While Q1 saw record capital raised, the money is highly concentrated among foundation models. We review the harsh truth behind the 530,000 open tech jobs in the US and the widening talent divide separating top 10% performers from the rest of the market. The conversation covers why venture capital is squeezing operators, how private equity is no longer a guaranteed exit strategy, and the urgent need to optimize your GTM strategy for AI-native workflows. We also debate the death of long-term product roadmaps, the impact of AI on enterprise pipeline generation, and evaluate whether middle management will survive the next 24 months. Key Takeaways The traditional safety net for slow-growth SaaS companies has disappeared, with Peter Walker noting that "A lot of companies held out this PE route as like, this is my escape hatch if I don't grow that fast. And now they're finding it's like, actually, the PEs don't care about you either." Securing venture capital has never been harder for founders outside of the AI bubble, as Peter Walker states "it's definitely not the easiest time to raise money unless you are already in the legible cohort. And if you're in the legible cohort, you know who you are." Rapid execution is replacing traditional product planning, with Peter Walker emphasizing that "the companies that are moving fast… don't know what they're doing in three weeks... we have no idea what's going to happen in October." Artificial intelligence is fundamentally threatening traditional communication hierarchies, and Sam Jacobs is bearish on the future of people managers because "if the purpose of management is to facilitate decision making at certain executive levels, that is something that AI can do." Connect with the Hosts & Guests  Host: Sam Jacobs - https://www.linkedin.com/in/samfjacobs/  Host: AJ Bruno - https://www.linkedin.com/in/ajbruno3/  Host: Asad Zaman - https://www.linkedin.com/in/azaman1/  Guest: Peter Walker - https://www.linkedin.com/in/peterjameswalker/   Topline is more than a YouTube Channel! Subscribe to Topline Newsletter: https://toplinemedia.substack.com/ Tune into Topline Podcast, the #1 podcast for founders, operators, and investors in B2B tech: https://www.joinpavilion.com/topline-podcast  Join the free Topline Slack channel to connect with 600+ revenue leaders to keep the conversation going beyond the podcast: https://www.joinpavilion.com/topline-slack Chapters:  00:00 The AI Funding Divide  02:36 Is It Harder to Raise Capital  04:37 VCs Only Care About Growth  06:44 The Death of the PE Exit  10:48 Transitioning to AI Native  14:50 Why Product Roadmaps Are (Kinda) Dead  19:19 Stop Defaulting to VC  29:11 Historic Tech Funding Rounds  31:59 Over 530K Open Tech Jobs  36:55 Hiring Market Concentration  46:29 The Growing Tech Talent Divide  49:11 VC Fund Performance Realities  54:28 Future of Foundation Models  58:29 The End of Middle Management  

Send us Fan MailIn this episode of NATA-Cast, hosts Mollie Pillman, MS, MBA, CAE and Katie Scott, MS, ATC, CAE are joined by Tyler Lesher, DHSc, ATC, CSCS, a private practice performance therapist, Adam Annaccone, EdD, LAT, ATC, CES, PES, a Clinical Associate Professor in the Department of Kinesiology at The University of Texas at Arlington, and Murphy Grant, LAT, ATC, NASM-PES, chair of the NATA AT Compensation Task Force, for a candid conversation on athletic trainer compensation and professional value.Sparked by concerns around pay, workload and responsibility, the discussion explores why compensation continues to lag and what can be done to address it. The group examines factors such as cost of living, workload demands and the need to better demonstrate the value athletic trainers bring through clearer documentation and communication of ROI.They also take on broader structural questions, including autonomy, reimbursement, employer education, potential title changes and the role of associations versus unions. Throughout the episode, the conversation stays candid and solutions-focused, emphasizing the importance of continued dialogue and engagement across the profession.NATA-Cast is produced by Association Briefings. Follow The National Athletic Trainers' Association on social media!FacebookXInstagramLinkedInHave an idea for an episode or series? Send us an email! thenatacast@nata.org

Singapore is replacing the Physical Employment Standard also known as PES with a new medical classification framework for National Service. The goal: more precise assessments and more roles for servicemen. Around 1,200 more servicemen each year could be deployed to vocations they were previously ineligible for. But even in the current system, many pre-enlistees who appeal their PES grading are actually seeking to be assessed as more fit, not less. On Viewpoint, Lynlee Foo speaks to Samuel Devaraj, Correspondent from The Straits Times to find out whether removing the PES labels changes how people value and pursue certain roles.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Does the PE equal a 6-figure salary?!

Prezident Petr Pavel v pátek podepíše zákon o státním rozpočtu na rok 2026, i když má k němu výhrady. Podle Národní rozpočtové rady je výše schodku v rozporu se zákonem. „Podle standardních pouček by teď rozpočtová politika měla spíše brzdit,“ soudí ekonom a bývalý ministr financí Ivan Pilip. „Pes je zakopaný v tom, že ekonomika nerostla po covidu,“ míní ředitel think-tanku IDEA, předseda Výkonného a dozorčího výboru CERGE-EI a profesor na Kolumbijské univerzitě Jan Švejnar.

Most licensed civil engineers don't think about the legal risks in their career…until something goes wrong. But according to attorney Matthew Fornaro, when it does go sideways, it's usually too late.

Prezident Petr Pavel v pátek podepíše zákon o státním rozpočtu na rok 2026, i když má k němu výhrady. Podle Národní rozpočtové rady je výše schodku v rozporu se zákonem. „Podle standardních pouček by teď rozpočtová politika měla spíše brzdit,“ soudí ekonom a bývalý ministr financí Ivan Pilip. „Pes je zakopaný v tom, že ekonomika nerostla po covidu,“ míní ředitel think-tanku IDEA, předseda Výkonného a dozorčího výboru CERGE-EI a profesor na Kolumbijské univerzitě Jan Švejnar.Všechny díly podcastu Pro a proti můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

Premiérova rádkyně. Kdo je Natálie Vachatová? Má, nebo nemá proruské postoje? Proč se návrhy zákonů píšou na jejím počítači? A nemá premiér právo se radit s kýmkoli se mu zachce? Téma pro Vojtěcha Bergera, redaktora serveru HlídacíPes.org. Ptá se Matěj Skalický.

Premiérova rádkyně. Kdo je Natálie Vachatová? Má, nebo nemá proruské postoje? Proč se návrhy zákonů píšou na jejím počítači? A nemá premiér právo se radit s kýmkoli se mu zachce? Téma pro Vojtěcha Bergera, redaktora serveru HlídacíPes.org. Ptá se Matěj Skalický. Všechny díly podcastu Vinohradská 12 můžete pohodlně poslouchat v mobilní aplikaci mujRozhlas pro Android a iOS nebo na webu mujRozhlas.cz.

Premiérova rádkyně. Kdo je Natálie Vachatová? Má, nebo nemá proruské postoje? Proč se návrhy zákonů píšou na jejím počítači? A nemá premiér právo se radit s kýmkoli se mu zachce? Téma pro Vojtěcha Bergera, redaktora serveru HlídacíPes.org. Ptá se Matěj Skalický.

Premiérova rádkyně. Kdo je Natálie Vachatová? Má, nebo nemá proruské postoje? Proč se návrhy zákonů píšou na jejím počítači? A nemá premiér právo se radit s kýmkoli se mu zachce? Téma pro Vojtěcha Bergera, redaktora serveru HlídacíPes.org. Ptá se Matěj Skalický.

Episode Overview: In this practical episode of the Long Term Care RD podcast, Michelle breaks down a real-world sample nutrition care plan for a resident with a stage 3 pressure injury. Drawing from over a decade in SNFs, we cover the Nutrition Care Process step-by-step, MDS requirements, and tips to make your documentation survey-ready while supporting better healing for your older adults. Whether you're juggling MDS deadlines or looking for quick interventions to boost protein intake, this episode is designed to save you time and build your confidence in geriatric wound care.Key Takeaways:How to craft a specific Nutrition Diagnosis (PES statement) for increased protein/energy needs tied to wounds.Setting measurable goals for healing, weight maintenance, and intake — with geriatric nuances like potential weight gain.Multi-layered interventions: From fortified foods and ONS to interdisciplinary referrals (e.g., OT for positioning).Monitoring strategies to stay proactive on quality measures and prevent burnout.A ready-to-adapt sample chart note in SOAP format for your own residents.Resources Mentioned:Downloadable Your FREE RD Starter Kit!: Grab the full example we discussed, including the resident briefing, NCP details, MDS section, and chart note. Available as a free teaser on https://fantastic-frost-95925.myflodesk.com/ggnskwevs8 — perfect for quick reference in your facility.Full Wound Healing Toolkit in Clinical Nutrition Central: For even more depth, join the membership to access downloadable templates for all wound stages, PES statement guides, charting libraries, monthly updates on CMS regs/PDPM, and a community forum for LTC RDs. Designed by someone who's been in your shoes, for RDs working with older adults. Check it out at https://clinicalnutritioncentral.comRelated Blog Post: "Wound Care Dietitian - Step by Step Practical Advice" — Read it free at https://longtermcarerd.com/wound-care-the-dietitians-role2/.Thanks for Listening! If this episode helped you feel a bit more equipped for those wound care challenges, share it with a fellow RD and subscribe for more practical geriatric nutrition tips. Got questions or episode ideas? Drop a comment on the blog or join us in Clinical Nutrition Central. You've got this — let's keep supporting our seniors together.Hosted by Michelle Saari, MS, RD LongTermCareRD.com | ClinicalNutritionCentral.com

“In adoration, I could hear the Lord saying, ‘You're giving me a little bit. I appreciate that. What if you give me everything?'” Fr. Joe Barron, PES, who currently serves at St. Isaac Jogues in St. Clair Shores, joins the Men of the Heart podcast to share his vocation story. Raised in a large family in Minnesota, Fr. Barron studied biochemistry at the University of St. Thomas, where daily prayer, confession, and authentic Catholic brotherhood drew him closer to his faith. He eventually entered the Pro Ecclesia Sancta religious order, discerning from within the community before beginning formation in Peru and fully entrusting his life to Christ and the Church.

Feeling financially successful on paper but trapped in real life can change everything. In this episode, C-suite executive and board director, Leilani Latimer, shares how unintentionally becoming house poor while living in Italy as a young adult forced her to confront anxiety, control and independence. When she sold the house, those lessons ultimately set the foundation for her to achieve a healthier, more balanced relationship with money. Leilani is a global C-suite executive and NACD Certified Board Director who leads companies through critical inflection points. She drives growth, connects strategy to execution and builds operating models designed for scale and resilience. Her track record spans B2B, SaaS, Marketplace, AI/ML and Enterprise Technology companies across public, PE-backed and venture-backed organizations. She has held executive roles in sales, marketing, commercial operations, product and customer success, bringing a comprehensive understanding of how these functions integrate to drive performance. She is currently a strategic advisor to growth-stage technology companies, partnering with Founders, CEOs, VCs and PEs to shape business models, strengthen go-to-market execution and design the teams and structures required to scale. She has led early-stage companies in supply chain, retail and medtech through transformational growth, building commercial and marketing engines from startup through acquisition, delivering significant revenue growth and improved forecasting. Leilani’s deep technology expertise includes 25 years with Sabre Inc. (NASDAQ: SABR), a global leader in travel, hospitality and transportation technology. In leadership roles spanning sales, product, marketing, strategy and sustainability across North America and Europe, key achievements include repositioning the hospitality business for IPO, developing award-winning enterprise sustainability systems and products, restructuring global product investment plans and helping build the Southern European division from inception to 15% market share. Leilani currently serves as an Independent Board Director at Black Diamond Group (TSE: BDI), Sedex and Narratize, and as an Advisory Board Member at Fiutur and FoodMesh. Her board contributions span governance, strategic capital allocation, compensation and risk oversight. Her unique perspective on corporate risk and reputation is shaped by her expertise in sustainability, over 15 years of leadership in European markets and extensive experience across multiple industries. Based in San Francisco, she is a dual US and Italian citizen. Independence, Investing and Intentional Choice Leilani's story reminds us that financial independence is not a fixed destination but an evolution. From navigating cross-border careers and complex benefits systems to rethinking what fairness means in partnership, she shows how money can either create anxiety or expand possibility. Today, her focus on teaching her children to invest early, supporting female founders and building values-aligned portfolios reflects a deeper truth: wealth is a tool for choice. The freedom to decide where you live, what you support and how you show up in the world is the ultimate return on investment. If you are considering board service, navigating career transitions or thinking more intentionally about how and where you invest, an Aspiriant advisor can help you align your wealth with your values and design a strategy that supports both independence and impact. Follow Money Tales on Spotify, Apple Podcasts or YouTube Music for more real stories that inspire smarter, more intentional decisions with your money.

What if chronic pain isn't a tissue problem—but a brain map problem?If you've ever thought, “My pain must be structural,” today's episode flips that script. On the Crackin' Backs Podcast we dive into why pain persists, how the nervous system and brain maps shape sensation, and how skilled manual therapy can update the body's map instead of masking symptoms.We're joined by Dr. Steven Capobianco, co-founder of RockTape and one of the sharpest minds redefining pain, movement, and human performance through neuroscience-informed approaches to chronic pain and sensory-driven movement therapy.In this episode, you'll learn:• Why pain isn't always a tissue injury and what “back being out” really means• How manual therapy becomes sensory input to update the nervous system• What most people misunderstand about nervous system regulation• The difference between outer maps and inner body maps• How chronic pain makes the body feel unsafe—and what truly restores safety• Why patients shouldn't be passive on the table but active participants in their recovery• When manual therapy empowers vs when it creates dependencyThis episode is essential listening if you're struggling with lingering pain, movement limitations, or feel like you've tried everything without getting answers. By the end, you'll understand pain through a neuro-sensory lens, not just a structural one.About Dr. Steven CapobiancoDr. Steven “Capo” Capobianco, DC, MA, DACRB, CSCS, PES is a movement expert, sports chiropractor, and co-founder of RockTape—a globally recognized company blending neuroscience, movement education, and therapeutic techniques to enhance performance and reduce pain. He holds advanced degrees in kinesiology and chiropractic medicine, a Diplomate in Rehabilitation, and performance certifications from the NSCA and NASM. Dr. Capo lectures internationally, authored the Fascial Movement Taping manual, and teaches clinicians worldwide how to move clients out of pain and into performance.Learn more about Dr. Capobianco and movement science:RockTape official site: https://rocktape.comWe are two sports chiropractors, seeking knowledge from some of the best resources in the world of health. From our perspective, health is more than just “Crackin Backs” but a deep dive into physical, mental, and nutritional well-being philosophies. Join us as we talk to some of the greatest minds and discover some of the most incredible gems you can use to maintain a higher level of health. Crackin Backs Podcast

Pes s vámi do práce?! Dnes to začíná být postupně realitou! A dokonce to prý může mít i vliv na zlepšení nálady.

In this episode I speak with Leah Mack, a project manager at Allison Smith, about the implementation of AI in the construction industry. We discuss the challenges and successes Leah has experienced while integrating AI into her daily work, the role of the Innovation Institute in her journey, and the importance of company culture in fostering innovation. Leah shares insights on developing AI training for her company, best practices for using AI, and recommendations for contractors looking to adopt AI technologies.Here's where I ask a huge favor from you, I'm creating a newsletter as a way for you to share your thoughts on the episodes, share guest ideas and for me to give your insight into future episodes, and of course share great restaurants with you, please subscribe here on Graybar.com. Leah is a project manager at Allison-Smith Company.  She works in the Charleston, SC office and has been there for 8 years.  Most of her work in project management has been for hyperscale data center construction, both greenfield and renovation work.  Prior to that, she was in consulting engineering for 6 years and is currently 1 of only 2 licensed PEs in South Carolina with the NCQLP lighting certification.  She is a member of the Franklin Cohort of the NECA Innovation Institute, in addition to serving on the Women In NECA task force.Thank you for listening and please take a moment to subscribe, rate, and review our show on your favorite app.Learn more about Allison-Smith: https://allisonsmith.com/Momo's in the Park: https://momocharleston.com/Electri International Report on AI Implementation Roadmap: AI Implementation Roadmap for EC – Video introduction: https://vimeo.com/1097929862?fl=pl&fe=sh  Research Report: https://www.electri.org/product/artificial-intelligence-implementation-roadmap-for-electrical-contractors/YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/75F3I1kPVU0

Libsyn Description: In this episode, Jason tackles a modern construction epidemic: email overload. For the sender, it feels productive. You fire it off, get a dopamine hit, and move on. But for the receiver especially project managers and project engineers it becomes an endless queue of stress, batching, and overwhelm. Jason explains why email as a primary internal communication tool slows projects down, increases stress, and hides capacity issues. He challenges leaders to rethink how they delegate and to use better systems like Scrum, Kanban boards, and task management platforms to create flow instead of chaos. What you'll learn in this episode: Why email multiplies communication time by 4x. How batching and queueing create hidden work-in-progress. Why email culture overwhelms PMs and PEs. The leadership responsibility behind delegation overloa. Better alternatives for managing internal work and communication. If your team is drowning in inboxes… Is it because of workload or because of how you're assigning it? If you like the Elevate Construction podcast, please subscribe for free and you'll never miss an episode.  And if you really like the Elevate Construction podcast, I'd appreciate you telling a friend (Maybe even two

Struggling with PES statements for unintentional weight loss, malnutrition, or geriatric challenges in LTC/SNF? In this episode, Michelle Saari, MS, RD breaks down common pitfalls, shares a simple step-by-step framework, provides 15 real-world examples tailored to seniors, and offers mindset tips to stop overthinking. Discover practical goals, interventions (like fortification, adaptive feeding, and between-meal supplements), and monitoring plans used daily in long-term care.Get started with the free PES guide at https://longtermcarerd.com/Ready for more time-saving tools? Join Clinical Nutrition Central NOW for exclusive PES templates, cheat sheets, sample chart notes, webinars, and a private community—before prices increase on March 1, 2026! Current rates: $19.95/month or $199.95/year (2 months free on annual). Sign up at https://clinicalnutritioncentral.comSubscribe for more evidence-based LTC nutrition tips! Hosted by Michelle Saari, MS, RD—your go-to expert for senior nutrition.

Episode 412 of PS This Is Awesome is packed with PlayStation news, hands-on impressions, and plenty of speculation as Fred and Jake catch up on what they've been playing — including ARC Raiders, Unicorn Overlord, and Kingdom Come Deliverance 2. We break down a massive, hour-long State of Play announcement, Sony officially unveiling the co-op focused Horizon: Hunters Gathering, Capcom dropping a playable Pragmata demo, and Ubisoft's low-key release of The Division: Definitive Edition without a true PS5 upgrade. There's also discussion around Capcom's live-action Resident Evil Requiem short film and what it signals for the franchise's future. Plus, we run through a stacked slate of new releases hitting PS5 this week — from horror and RPGs to racers and roguelites — before wrapping things up the only way we know how… Like Persona 5, Pentiment, PES 2021.Visit www.patreon.com/psthisisawesome to support the show and help us continue producing the content you love!Please, if you enjoyed the content — or even if you didn't quite enjoy this one — come back. We try to offer something for everybody. Share with your friends and help us grow our awesome PlayStation community!As always you can support our show at our Patreon Page. Thanks for listening.http://www.patreon.com/psthisisawesome Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

"Just continue praying, God will approach. He wants you to know him, so continue praying and continue opening your heart." Fr. Craig and Fr. Drew welcome Fr. Marco Kiyan, PES, parish priest at Corpus Christ Parish, Presentation-Our Lady of Victory Parish, and St. Scholastic Parish, all in Detroit. Fr. Kiyan reflects on a powerful experience of God while preparing for his confirmation and how, before entering seminary, living a materially successful life still left a feeling of emptiness in his heart.(0:26) Fr. Craig welcomes this episodes guest, Fr. Marco Kiyan, a member of the Pro Ecclesia Sancta religious community. The three talk about the upcoming Christmas season and Fr. Marco's getting to know the community at Corpus Christ Parish, where he was recently assigned.(7:26) Fr. Marco talks about the history and charisma of of his religious community and about growing up in Peru. He shares that while he studied religion in elementary and high school, faith was an academic exercise for him until he had a profound experience during a confirmation retreat in tenth grade.(20:38) Fr. Marco's first thoughts about a vocation to the priesthood came to him when he was a senior in high school. While studying electrical engineering in university, he was involved with a lay Catholic group. After graduation, he got his dream job and was earning a large salary, traveling the world, but still felt an emptiness inside.(31:18) While reaping the benefits of this material success, Fr. Marco began questioning whether this was the path that God wanted for him. He began praying every day, “God, help me love you.” Months later, after coming home from a friend's birthday party, he clearly heard God speak to him and invite him to the priesthood.(38:41) It's after this profound experience that he hears of friends and family who had always thought he had a vocation to the priesthood.(42:21) Fr. Marco talks about why he entered the Pro Ecclesia Sanctia religious community versus another community or the diocesan priesthood and of the blessings of being part of a larger community. He was a professed brother for 10 years prior to his ordination as a priest.

Feeling overwhelmed as a new Registered Dietitian —or just tired of chaotic days even after years on the job? In this practical survival guide, Michelle Saari, MS, RD (with over 10+ years optimizing senior nutrition in skilled nursing and nursing homes), shares a realistic daily routine, mindset shifts, and proven hacks to prioritize residents, streamline charting, boost interdisciplinary teamwork, and prevent burnout.Whether you're fresh out of internship navigating your first facility or a veteran RD ready to reclaim your schedule, you'll walk away with actionable steps to run your day smarter: from morning stand-up triage to batching PES statements, quick NFPE rounds, protected lunch breaks, and boundary-setting tips.Episode Briefing + Links MentionedIntro & Why This Matters for LTC RDs Mindset Shift: Compassion + BoundariesFlexible Daily Routine FrameworkTop Time-Saving Hacks (Charting, Prioritization, Teamwork) Burnout PreventionQuick Wins Encouragement & Next StepsLink: Top 16 Time Saving Charting TipsReady to save hours weekly with ready-made tools? Join Clinical Nutrition Central at clinicalnutritioncentral.com ($19.95/month or $199.95/year—2 months free annually) for instant access to PES cheat sheets, resident trackers, evidence summaries, webinars, sample care plans, and a private community of fellow LTC RDs for fast peer support.Subscribe now, leave a review if this helps, and elevate your practice—one efficient day at a time!

The big things you need to know:First, the various earnings stats we track point to a sleepy start to reporting season, suggesting to us that geopolitics hasn't been the only thing contributing to the US equity market's recent gyrations. These stats also highlight how the mega cap growth trade has seen its dominance on the earnings front erode in some ways, helping fuel the rotation trade to Value and Small Caps.Second, our review of this past week's earnings call commentary suggests that views of the macro have been mixed, with geopolitical concerns and consumer pressures noted, but tariffs described as manageable.Third, things that jump out from our other updates include the rise in the Russell 2000's P/Es which are approaching 2024 highs

Welcome back to the EUVC Podcast where we connect and champion the people building European venture.In this episode, Andreas Munk Holm sits down with two pillars of Italy's modern tech ecosystem:Giovanni Daprà, CEO & co-founder of Moneyfarm, one of Europe's leading digital wealth management platformsPaolo Gesess, co-founder & GP at United Ventures, one of Italy's premier early-stage VC firmsTogether, they unpack how Moneyfarm went from a Milan-founded startup to a pan-European fintech player; how Italy's ecosystem has evolved; how United Ventures backed Giovanni through multiple strategic inflection points; why the shift from Blitzscaling to Default Alive made Moneyfarm stronger; and how European fintech is entering an era of consolidation and acquisition-led expansion.This is an episode full of concrete frameworks, real founder–VC dynamics, and hard-earned lessons from building across Italy, the UK, and Europe.Here's what's covered:04:00 | Moneyfarm as a digital wealth manager built to make investing simple, guided + discretionary, now managing £6.5B across Italy & the UK04:54 | Why United Ventures backed them: early conviction in a massive savings problem, founder clarity from day one, and a mission that remained unchanged for 13 years06:31 | Building from Italy first: leveraging local regulatory fluency + talent cost advantages while keeping a pan-European vision from day zero08:59 | Italy today vs. 2012 — more capital, more repeat founders, more international operators returning, and a dramatically deeper talent pool13:21 | The “tipping point” moments — moments where the board must choose: buy back shares, bring in global investors, widen the model (e.g., B2B2C)17:45 | Where Moneyfarm is now — strong in Italy + UK, product expansion complete (brokerage + pensions), and preparing for the next geographic phase18:37 | Surviving the capital cycle: seeing interest rates spike in real-time, shifting from burn to profitability in 24 months, and reshaping the framework for Europe19:50 | The Europe playbook: “default alive” — why blitzscaling never fit most of Europe, and how disciplined scaling becomes a competitive advantage22:25 | Founders vs. VCs on growth vs. profit — debunking the myth: alignment, capital structure, and long-term value trump forcing hypergrowth23:09 | Managing founder stress & incentives — secondaries, refreshed equity plans, changing founder roles, and adapting governance over a 10-year journey25:41 | The cap table reality — Moneyfarm with VCs, PEs, and industrials: why no one could force a “burn it all” strategy even if they wanted to27:41 | Building European-style VC — United Ventures' thesis: European standards, European ambition, and preparing founders for international Series B/C investors30:09 | The next frontier: pan-European expansion, from product expansion → to commercial optimization → to cross-border consolidation34:13 | Growing into M&A as a founder — Moneyfarm's three acquisitions, building the muscle, and using M&A as a growth lever when organic slows36:11 | The M&A playbook — when to build vs. buy, why scale matters, and the founder's job in orchestrating product-led acquisitions37:40 | What founders often underestimate — M&A is expensive, cognitively draining, and requires dedicated people so you don't destroy core execution39:47 | The board's role — independent perspectives, long-term value thinking, and helping the CEO avoid deal fever or tunnel vision41:00 | The hard question: exits & fund cycles — how VCs manage tail-end holdings, DPI realities, continuation funds, and why selling is not betrayal43:48 | DPI explained simply — why some funds need liquidity earlier, and why United didn't (strong DPI → more patience → no forced exit)

Brethren, this Short Talk Bulletin Podcast episode was written by MW Bro Conrad Hahn, PES of the MSANA, and is brought to us by Bro Matt Bowers, host of the Scottish Rite Journal Podcast. Rudyard Kipling is one of the giants of modern English literary history. He towered over the closing years of the Victorian era, and lived well into the twentieth century. Enjoy, and do share this and all of these Podcast episodes with your brothers and your Lodge.

Allen, Joel, and Yolanda recap the UK Offshore Wind Supply Chain Spotlight in Edinburgh and Great British Energy’s £1 billion manufacturing push. Plus Ørsted’s European onshore wind sale, Xocean’s unmanned survey tech at Moray West, and why small suppliers must scale or risk being left behind. Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly email update on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary Barnes’ YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! You are listening to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast brought to you by build turbines.com. Learn, train, and be a part of the Clean Energy Revolution. Visit build turbines.com today. Now, here’s your host. Allen Hall, Joel Saxon, Phil Totaro, and Rosemary Barnes. Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host Allen Hall in Charlotte, North Carolina, the Queen City. I have Yolanda Pone and Joel Saxon back in Austin, Texas. Rosemary Barnes is taking the week off. We just got back from Scotland, Joel and I did, and we had a really great experience at the UK offshore wind supply chain spotlight 2025 in Edinburgh, where we met with a number of wind energy suppliers and technology advocates. A Joel Saxum: lot going on there, Joel. Yeah. One of the really cool things I enjoyed about that, um, get together the innovation spotlight. [00:01:00] One, the way they had it set up kind of an exhibition space, but not really an exhibition. It was like just a place to gather and everybody kind of had their own stand, but it was more how can we facilitate this conversation And then in the same spot, kind of like we’ve seen in other conferences, the speaking slots. So you could be kind of one in ear, oh one in year here, listening to all the great things that they’re doing. But having those technical conversations. And I guess the second thing I wanted to share was. Thank you to all of the, the UK companies, right? So the, all the Scottish people that we met over there, all the people from, from England and, and around, uh, the whole island there, everybody was very, very open and wanting to have conversations and wanting to share their technology, their solutions. Um, how they’re helping the industry or, or what other people can do to collaborate with them to help the industry. That’s what a lot of this, uh, spotlight was about. So from our, our seat, um, that’s something that we, you know, of course with the podcast, we’re always trying to share collaboration, kind of breed success for everybody. So kudos to the ORE [00:02:00] Catapult for putting that event on. Allen Hall: Yeah, a big thing. So, or Catapult, it was a great event. I’ve met a lot of people that I’ve only known through LinkedIn, so it’s good to see them face to face and. Something that we’ve had on the podcast. So we did a number of podcast recordings while we’re there. They’ll be coming out over the next several weeks, so stay tuned for it. You know, one of the main topics at that event in Edinburg was the great British Energy announcement. This is huge, Joel. Uh, so, you know, you know, the United Kingdoms has been really pushing offshore wind ambitions for years, but they don’t have a lot of manufacturing in country. Well, that’s all about the change. Uh, great British energy. Which is a government backed energy company just unveiled a 1 billion pound program called Energy Engineered in the uk, and their mission is pretty straightforward. Build it in the uk, employ people in the uk, and keep the economic benefits of the clean energy transition on British soil. 300 million pounds of that is really [00:03:00] going to be focused on supply chain immediately. That can happen in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and England. It’s a big promotion for the UK on the wind energy side. I see good things coming out of this. What were your thoughts when you heard that Joel Saxum: announcement, Joel? The offshore wind play. Right. It’s like something like this doesn’t happen to economies very often. Right. It’s not very often that we have like this just new industry that pops outta nowhere. Right. We’re, we’re not making, you know, it’s like when, when. Automotive industry popped up in the, you know, the early 19 hundreds. Like that was this crazy new thing. It’s an industrial revolution. It’s all this new opportunity. So offshore wind in, in my idea, same kind of play, right? It’s this new thing or newer thing. Um, and as a government, um, coming together to say, Hey, this is happening. We have the resources here. We’re gonna be deploying these things here. Why would we not take advantage of building this here? I mean. Any politician that says I’m bringing jobs or I’m bringing in, you [00:04:00] know, um, bringing in funds to be able to prop up an industry or to, uh, you know, start a manufacturing facility here or support an engineering department here, um, to be able to take advantage of something like this. Absolutely right. Why offshore this stuff when you can do it Here, you’ve got the people, you have the engineering expertise. It’s your coastline. You’ve operated offshore. You know how to build them, operate ’em, all of these different things. Keep as much of that in-house as you can. I, I mean, we’ve, we’ve watched it in the US over the last few years. Kind of try to prop up a supply chain here as well. But, you know, with regulations and everything changing, it’s too risky to invest. What the, it looks like what the UK has seen over there is, well, we might as well invest here. We’ll throw the money at it. Let’s, let’s make it happen on our shores. The Allen Hall: comparison’s obvious to the IRA Bill Yolanda and the IRA bill came out, what, A little over two years ago, three years ago, roughly. We didn’t see a lot of activity [00:05:00] on the manufacturing side of building new factories to do wind. In fact, there was a lot of talk about it initially and then it. It really died down within probably a year or so. Uh, you know, obviously it’s not a universal statement. There were some industries model piles and some steelworks and that kind of thing that would would happen. But sometimes these exercises are a little treacherous and hard to walk down. What’s your thoughts on the UK government stepping in and really. Putting their money where the mouth is. Yolanda Padron: I think it’s, I mean, it’s, it’s great, right? It’s great for the industry. It’ll, it’ll be a great case, I think, for us to look at just moving forward and to, like you said, government’s putting their money where their mouth is and what exactly that means. You know, not something where it’s a short term promise and then things get stalled, or corporations start looking [00:06:00] elsewhere. If every player works the way that they’re, it’s looking like they’re going to play right now, then it, it could be a really good thing for the industry. Allen Hall: Well, the, the United States always did it in a complicated way through tax policy, which means it runs through the IRS. So any bill that passes Congress and gets signed by the president, they like to run through the IRS, and then they make the tax regulations, which takes six months to 12 months, and then when they come out, need a tax attorney to tell you what is actually written and what it means. Joel, when we went through the IRA bill, we went through it a couple of times actually, and we were looking for those great investments in new technology companies. I just remember seeing it. That isn’t part of the issue, the complexity, and maybe that’s where GB Energy is trying to do something different where there’s trying to simplify the process. Joel Saxum: Yeah. The complexity of the problem over here is like that. With any. Business type stuff, right? Even when you get to the stage of, um, oh, this is a write off, this is this [00:07:00] for small businesses and those things, so it’s like a delayed benefit. You gotta plan for this thing. Or there’s a tax credit here, there. Even when we had the, um, the electric vehicle tax credits for, uh, individuals, right? That wasn’t not something you got right away. It was something you had to apply for and that was like later on and like could be. 15 months from now before you see anything of it. And so it’s all kind of like a difficult muddy water thing in the i a bill. You’re a hundred percent correct. Right. Then we passed that thing. We didn’t have the, the rules locked down for like two years. Right. And I remember we had, we had a couple experts on the podcast talking about that, and it was like, oh, the 45 x and the 45 y and the, the C this and the be that, and it was like. You needed to have a degree in this thing to figure it out, whereas the, what it sounds like to me, right, and I’m not on the inside of this policy, I dunno exactly how it’s getting executed. What it sounds like to me is this is more grant based or, and or loan program based. So it’s kinda like, hey, apply and we’ll give you the money, or we’ll fund a loan that supports some money of with low interest, zero [00:08:00] interest, whatever that may be. Um, that seems like a more direct way, one to measure ROI. Right, and or to get things done. Just just to get things done. Right. If someone said, Hey, hey, weather guard, lightning Tech. We have a grant here. We’d like to give you a hundred grand to do this. Or it was like, yeah, if you put this much effort in and then next year tax season you might see this and this and this. It’s like, I don’t have time to deal with that. Yolanda Padron: Yeah. We might also just change the rules on you a little bit, and then maybe down the line we’ll see where we go. Yeah. It does seem like they’re, they’re setting up the dominoes to fall in place a bit better. This way. Yeah, absolutely. Joel Saxum: That’s a, that’s a great way to put it, Yolanda. Let’s setting up the dominoes to fall in place. So it’s kinda like, Hey. These are the things we want to get done. This is what we wanna do as an industry. Here’s a pool of money for it, and here’s how you get access to it. Allen Hall: A lot’s gonna change. I remember, was it a couple of months ago, maybe, maybe a year ago, time flies guys. Uh, we were just talking about. That on the way home from [00:09:00]Scotland, like how many people have had in the podcast? It’s a lot over 60 have been on the podcast as guests. Uh, one of the people we want to have on is, uh, Dan McGrail, who’s the CEO of Great British Energy because, uh, we had talked about with Rosemary the possibility of building turbines all in. The uk, they have blade factories. All this stuff is doable, right? They have technology. This is not complicated work. It just needs to be set up and run. And maybe this is the goal is to just run, it may maybe not be OEM focused. I I, that’s what I’m trying to sort through right now as, is it vestas focused? Is it GE focused? Is it Siemens Keesa focused? Is there a focus or will these turbines have GB energy? Stamped on the side of them. I would Joel Saxum: see love to see support for sub-component suppliers. Yeah, I would too. Yeah. The reason being is, is like that’s, that’s more near and dear to my heart. That’s what [00:10:00] I’ve done in my career, is been a part of a lot of different, smaller businesses that are really making a difference by putting in, you know, great engineering comes from small businesses. That’s one of my, my things that I’ve always seen. It seems to be easier to get things done. In a different way with a small business than it does to engineering by committee with 50 people on a team faster, sometimes better. Uh, that’s just my experience, right? So I would like to see these smaller businesses propped up, because again, we need the OEMs. Yes, absolutely. But also spread it around, right? Spread the wealth a little bit. Uh, you know, a, a factory here, a factory there, a engineering facility here. The, uh, you know, an execution plant here. Some things like that. I would love to see more of these kind of, uh, spread around like the, like GB energy’s money spreads around, like fairy dust. Just kind of plant a little here, plant a little in this city, make a little here, instead of just lumping it to one or lumping it into one big, um, OEM. And that doesn’t necessarily [00:11:00] have to be an OEM, right? It could be a blade manufacturer that I’m talking about, or. Or a big, big gearbox thing or something like that. We need those things, and I, I’m all for support for them, but I just don’t think that all of its support should go to them. Speaker 7: Australia’s wind farms are growing fast, but are your operations keeping up? Join us February 17th and 18th at Melbourne’s Poolman on the park for Wind Energy o and M Australia 2026, where you’ll connect with the experts solving real problems in maintenance asset management. And OEM relations. Walk away with practical strategies to cut costs and boost uptime that you can use the moment you’re back on site. Register now at W OM a 2020 six.com. Wind Energy o and m Australia is created by Wind Professionals for wind professionals because this industry needs solutions, not speeches. Allen Hall: If you haven’t booked your tickets to Wind Energy o and m Australia 2026, you need to be doing [00:12:00] that. Today, uh, the event is on February 17th and 18th in Melbourne, Australia. Uh, we’ll have experts from around the world talking everything o and m, and there’s so many good people are gonna be on the agenda, Joel, and a lot of big companies sponsoring this Joel Saxum: year. Allen Hall: You want to give us a highlight? Joel Saxum: Yeah, so like you said, Alan, we have a ton of sponsors going to be there and, and I’d like to say the sponsors. Thank you ahead of time. Of course. Right. We’re, we’re, we’re super excited for them to get involved because as we’ve put this event together. We’re trying to do this no sales pitches, right? So we wanna do this, not pay to play. We want people here that are going to actually share and learn from each other. And the sponsors have been kind enough to get on board with that message and follow through with it. So, like our lead industry sponsor Tilt, uh, Brandon, the team over there, fantastic. Um, they have, they’re, they’re the, their key sponsor here and they’re supporting a lot of this. So the money’s going to applying in experts from all over the [00:13:00] world, putting this thing together. Uh, so we have an, uh. A forum to be able to talk at, uh, C-I-C-N-D-T. From here in the States, uh, we’ve got Palisades, who’s another operator in the, uh, Australian market, uh, rig com. ISP over there doing blade work and it just keeps rolling down. We’ve got squadron on board, squadron’s gonna do one of the coffee carts. Um, so I know that we’ve got a limited bit of tickets left. I think we are 250 in the venue and that’s what the plan is. I think we’re sitting at about half of that leftover. Allen Hall: Yeah, it’s getting close to running out. And I know in Australia everybody likes to purchase their tickets at the last minute. That’s great. And but you don’t wanna miss out because there is limited seating to this event. And you wanna go to WMA w om a 2020 six.com. Look at all the activities. Book some tickets. Plan to book your travel if you’re traveling from the United States or elsewhere. You need a couple of weeks [00:14:00]hopefully to do that ’cause that’s when the airline prices are lower. If you can book a a couple of weeks ahead of time. So now’s the time to go on Woma 2020 six.com. Check out the conference, get your tickets purchased, start buying your airline tickets, and get in your hotel arranged. Now’s the time to do that. Well, as you know, war has been selling off pieces of itself after setbacks in the America market. Uh, sounds like two heavyweight bidders are looking for one of those pieces. Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners and ENG G are allegedly competing for Seds European. Onshore Wind business, a portfolio valued at roughly 1 billion euros. Supposedly the bids are gonna be due this week, although nothing is certain in a billion dollar deals. This is a little bit odd. I understand why Stead is doing it, because they’re, they’re trying to fundraise, but if they do this. They will be essentially European offshore wind only [00:15:00] with some American onshore and a little bit American offshore. Not much. Uh, that will be their future. Are they gonna stay with America one onshore or, and American offshore? Is that a thing? Or they just could, could be all European offshore wind. Is that where Osted is headed? It’s a complicated mix because, you know, they’re, they’re, they’ve negotiated a couple of other deals. Most recently to raise cash. They’re supposedly selling, uh, another set of wind farms. I dunno how official that is, but it’s, it seems like there’s some news stories percolating up out there trying to raise more cash by selling large percentages of offshore wind farms. Where does Joel Saxum: this all end? I don’t know. The interesting thing is like if you looked at Ted, uh, man, two years ago, like if you Googled anything or used a jet, GPT or whatever it was like, gimme the. Three largest wind operators in the world. They were the top three all the time. Right. And, and most valuable. At one point in time, they were worth like, [00:16:00] uh, I don’t wanna say the wrong number, but I, I thought, I thought 25 billion or something like that. They were worth. ATS at one point in time. Market share. Allen Hall: Yeah, Joel Saxum: I think that seems right. So like they, they were huge and it just seems like, yeah, they’re trying to survive, but in survival mode, they’ve just kind, they’re just dwindling themselves down to being just o just a small offshore company. And, or not small, but a small, just a, just a siloed offshore company. A large offshore company. Yeah. Yeah. But I mean, like, even just, there was, there’s another article, um. Today we’re, we’re talking here, CIP and Engie looking to buy their European onshore business. They’ve also are putting up like, uh, was it greater Ang of four in Taiwan for, for sale as well. So, I mean, like you said, where does it stop? I don’t know. Um, CIP is an interesting play. Uh, an Eng, CIP and Engie kind of battling this one out ’cause the CIP management team is a bunch of ex or said people, so they know that play very well. Um, ENGIE of course, being a big French [00:17:00] utility. So that one will sell, right? They’re, their European offshore or onshore assets will be gone shortly. Uh, they’ll be sitting with a bunch of offshore assets that they own and partially own around the world. Uh, and of course their, their, I think their US onshore fleet is about a gigawatt, maybe a and a half. Um, that could be the next domino to fall. You don’t, I, sorry, Yolanda, I used your, your, your, uh, euphemism from before, but, um. That they’re actively parting ways with some stuff. I don’t know when it stops. Allen Hall: It is odd, right? EOR has basically stopped a lot of renewables. Stat Craft has pulled back quite a bit. Another Norwegian company. A lot of the nor Northern European companies are slowing down in wind altogether, trying to stick to onshore for the most part. Offshore will still be developed, but just not at the pace that it needed to be developed. There is a lot of money moving around. Billions [00:18:00] and billions of, of euros and dollars moving. And I guess my, my thought is, I’m not sure from a market standpoint where Orid is headed, or even Ecuador for that matter, besides maybe moving back into oil and gas. They never really left it. The direction of the company is a little unknown because these, uh, news articles about sales. Are not really prefaced, right? It’s just like, all right, Taiwan, we’re selling more than 50% of the projects in Taiwan. We’re out, we’re selling European onshore pow, which there’d been some rumors about that, that I had heard, but nothing was really locked in, obviously, until you really start seeing some reliable news sources. Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners is an interesting play just because it kind of keeps it. Up in Denmark and not in France with Engie. That’s what I’m, in my [00:19:00] head. I’m thinking Sted is not likely to sell it to Engie just because they’re French. This is a national, uh, security issue for Denmark Sted. Is it, I I how Engie is involved in this maybe to help set a, a baseline of what the valuation is so that CIP can then purchase it. Do you see CIP losing this, Joel? Joel Saxum: No, I don’t think so. I think, yeah, I think CCIP has to land with this one and, and CI P’s been building a portfolio quietly, building a, not, I guess not quietly, they’ve been building a portfolio for the last few years. It’s pretty stout, uh, pretty fairly sizable. Right? And it, it’s an interesting play watching this for me because you, you see all these people kind of rotating out. And it, and it has to do with the, the, in my opinion, it has to do with the macroeconomics of things, right? Once, when you develop something and you get through, like in, into the teething pain cycle and all that kind of stuff. [00:20:00] The asset is not designed to have a 50, 70%, you know, margin, right? That’s not how wind works. Wind, wind operates of small margins and a lot of times in the early, a early stages of a project, you end up running into issues that eat those margins away. So when you’re talking about small margins, they’re six to 10% is what you kind of see. Um, and it’s pretty easy to eat away a 6% or a 10% margin. If you have some kind of serial defect you have to deal with, uh, or that, that the OEM’s fighting you on and, and you know, whether or not they take responsibility for it or you have to pay for it. A lot of times those processes can drag out for 12, 24, 36 months until you get made whole. So the early state, the first, you know, five years of a lot of these projects, five to eight years, are very expensive. And then once you get through kind of those things and the thing starts just chugging. Then you actually are starting to make money, and that’s where CIP P’S buying these assets is in that years after it’s gone through its teething pains and the company that developed it is like, man, [00:21:00] we need to get outta this thing. We’ve just been burning through cash. Then CI P’s kinda swooping in and grabbing ’em. And I think that this is another one of those plays. Allen Hall: So they’re gonna live with a smaller margin or they’re gonna operate the assets differently. Joel Saxum: The assets may be being operated better now than they were when they started, just in that, in, they exist, the starting company simply because the, some of the issues have been solved. They’ve been sorted through the things where you have early, early failures of bearings or some stuff like the early fairings of gearboxes. Those things have been sorted out, so then CIP swoops in and grabs them after the, the teething issues that have been gone. Allen Hall: Does evaluation change greatly because of the way horse did, manages their assets? Up or down? Joel Saxum: I would say generally it would go up. Yeah. I don’t necessarily think it’s dependent on o and m right now. I think it’s just a, it’s a time to buy cheap assets, right? Like you see, you see over here in the States, you see a lot of acquisitions going on. People divesting, they’re not divesting because they’re like, oh, we’re gonna make a ton of money off this. They may need the cash. They’re [00:22:00] divesting in, in, um, what’s the term, like under duress? A lot of them, it may not look like it from the outside in a big way, but that’s kind of what’s happening. Yolanda Padron: Yeah, I think it’ll be really interesting to see, uh, you know, there were a lot of layoffs in Ted and Europe as well, so seeing if maybe some of the people who can make those assets perform better. Come back just with a different t-shirt on. Allen Hall: As wind energy professionals staying informed is crucial, and let’s face it difficult. That’s why the Uptime podcast recommends PES Wind Magazine. PES Wind offers a diverse range of in-depth articles and expert insights that dive into the most pressing issues facing our energy future. Whether you’re an industry veteran or new to wind, PES wind has the high quality content you need. Don’t miss out. Visit PES wind.com today in this quarter’s, PES Wind Magazine, which you can download a copy at PES [00:23:00] wind.com. There’s an article by Xan and they were, uh, contracted by Ocean Winds to evaluate the sea floor from. The sea floor at Moray West, which is way, way, way up north on the northern end of Scotland. A pretty rough area, Joel. And, but what ex Ocean did was they used unmanned survey equipment to monitor the ocean floor where the mono piles were gonna replace for the Moey West Wind Farm. That is a really difficult area to operate any sort of boat, but. Uh, the reason we’re doing this remotely unmanned was that it, it gave them sort of a, a less costly way to get high resolution images of the sea bottom. This is interesting because ocean wind was developing more a West apparently hadn’t used anything like this before, but the results, at [00:24:00] least from what I can see in PS win, look Joel Saxum: great. Yeah. This is a technology that’s been, um. Man, it’s been under development by a lot of companies in the last six, eight years. And now it’s starting to get to the point where it is, I mean, we’re, we’re TRL nine plus, right? There’s a lot of these solutions out there that are commercially ready. Xans been a top of this list since, man, since I was playing in that oil and gas world, to be honest with you. Like 20 18, 20 17, uh, really cool looking boats. That’s besides the point. Uh, but when they show up at trade shows and stuff with ’em, you’re like, ah, oh, that thing’s neat looking. Um, but it, it, it, it solves all kinds of problems, right? So when you go offshore and you’re just gonna do, say you’re just gonna go out there and do multibeam, so you’re just gonna do echo sound where you’re just looking to see depths and what’s on the sea floor. The minimum kind of vessel you need for that is 10 to 15 meters long. You need probably two to six people on that vessel. And that’s just, if you’re going out doing shift work, if you’re staying out there [00:25:00] and working 24 7, that vessel grows to. 30 meters instantly, right? So now you’re burning thousands and thousands of dollars in fuel. You’ve got food on board. You got all, it’s just a pain to put this vessel out there. You take all of those people out of harm’s way. You take all the costs away and they, and you put two of them, or one or two of them on shore in a facility, and then you put this three meter vessel out there that’s fully autonomous. No people, but collects the same style of data. I mean, it’s a no brainer, right? So you’re getting the same style of data and if, and the thing’s working 24 7, there is no need to have someone sleep. There’s a not a technician issue. There’s not, none of this is, is a problem anymore. Nobody’s getting seasick, right? So you’re sitting, you’re, you’re sitting back on shore, uh, going to work, uh, with no PPE on, um, having a, having a coffee from Starbucks down the street. And you’re running this thing 24 7, you’re collecting all [00:26:00] that fantastic data. Uh, it is just, like I said, it’s a no brainer. Now, now they’re getting to the stage where they’re putting ’em out as swarms, so you can cover whole fields. You’re doing live cable inspections. It’s, it’s pretty fantastic. So Exo ocean’s really making the next generation of robotics o offshore. Allen Hall: Yeah. And that’s gonna drive down the cost of energy. These kind of developments make huge strides in lowering costs, and this is why you need to read PES Win Magazine. So there’s a. Great articles all throughout the magazine. This quarter’s issue is, is Heavy with articles. Get your free copy@pswin.com today. As you know, in the wind industry, survival has always belonged to those who can keep up, uh, and Sorn freeze. Nuon knows better than most with his decades of experience at LM Wind Power and Uzon. He now chairs two Danish subcontractors, Polytech and Jupiter. Bach. Uh, his message to smaller suppliers in, in a recent article is. Pretty blunt. It [00:27:00]says the manufacturers, big OEMs want fewer partners and larger partners who can take on more responsibility. And if you cannot invest and grow with those manufacturers, you’ll be left behind the winners. It says it will be those who stay close to the turbine makers and adapt as the industry evolves. Joel, this is a really interesting discussion that, uh, Soren put out there. Obviously he’s invested in Polytech and Jupiter, Bach, uh, to great suppliers obviously, but small businesses are where a lot of the key technologies have been driven over the last five, six years. In wind, or more broadly the last 20 years in wind, a lot of great technology has come out of places that you wouldn’t have thought of. The OEMs have not been the bastion of innovation. I would say it [00:28:00] is necessary. You have both, wouldn’t you think? You have to have the small business innovation to prove out ideas and to show that they work, but you also have to have the large manufacturers to implement those ideas more broadly without either one of them, nobody wins. Joel Saxum: I fully agree and I think that one of the things that’s a little bit, uh, more of a granular comment there is. I think sometimes you need the OEMs and the other suppliers within the supply chain to open their doors a little bit, right? So this is, this is me wearing my, my small business, small innovative business, uh, in the wind industry cap. And that is, man, sometimes it is hard to get a conversation with a large subsupplier or with an OEM when you have something that can help them. And they just don’t want to communicate, don’t want to help. It’s just our way or the highway kind of thing. And if you watch, like we, so the podcast gives us an kind of, or not [00:29:00] gives us, it forces us to have kind of an op, an opportunity to look at, you know, what are the, what are the financial statements of some of these OEMs? What are the financial statements of some of their large sub-suppliers? You know? ’cause if they’re located in countries where that stuff is public knowledge, you can see how and what they’re doing. And if you, if you look at business in a general way where you rely on one customer or two customers to, for your whole business, you’re gonna be hurting. Um, especially in the way we look at things or what we’re seeing in the wind industry right now is if you’re, if you are a large company to say you do a hundred million in revenue and your customers are ge Vestas. Depending on what happens regulatory wise, in some random country somewhere your a hundred million dollars could shrink to 50 real quick. Um, so I don’t think that that’s a great way to do business. I think, you know, having a bit of diversification probably helps you a little bit. The OEMs Allen Hall: have a particular job to do. They need to deliver turbines onsite on time and create power for their customer. That’s our main [00:30:00] focus. They are a generator. Driven company, they make generators on steel towers with a propeller system basically. Right. Just simplify it way, way down. There’s not a lot of technology in that itself. Obviously there’s control systems, obviously there’s electronics involved, but the concept from this basic fundamentals is not difficult to to grasp. The difficulty is in execution. Showing that that product can last for 20 years, and that product can last in different environments. Australia, United States, up in Scandinavia, Canada, way down south and Brazil. There’s some really rough environments there and the OEMs are relying upon in industry, uh, guidance from like the IECs and then the dvs, uh, uls Tube. Nord. Uh. Bvs where they’re trying to make these turbines comply to a [00:31:00] set of essentially regulations, which just simplify it. You can do that. But as we have seen historically in the wind industry, if you make a turbine that just meets those requirements, you do not necessarily have a successful product. You have a product that is marginal, and as Yolanda has pointed out to me numerous times, there’s a lot of real issues in wind turbines. That probably could have been solved five years ago by small mobile companies with outside of the box ideas that could have given the OEMs a huge advantage, especially in blades. Yolanda Padron: Yeah, and I think a lot of these companies are, they’re looking at things from a different point of view, right? They’re smaller companies. You have people who could know the product, they know the real issue that’s going on on the ground. They know. Kind of what they need to do, what the next step is to move forward in their solution.[00:32:00] Right? But it’s not like it’s a, a company where you need 30 people to sign off before you can go onto the next stage, and then you need 30 more people to sign off before you can get funding to do something else. And so yes, the OEMs are doing a good job in their scope. If they’re meeting their scope, they are doing a good job. You know, if I, if I take like bread and cheese, then yes, I have a sandwich, right? Like, it might not be the best sandwich in the world, but I have a sandwich. So like, they’re making the sandwich and that’s great. But if you want something to, to actually work and to last and to, to give everybody else the, the idea that. You know, wind is profitable and we can all benefit from it. You have to get all those different layers in there, right? You have to make [00:33:00] sure that you know, if you have a big lightning issue, then you get the right people in the room to get that retrofit in there to solve your lightning issue. If you have a big leading edge erosion issue, then you get those right people in the room to solve everything, and it’s not always going to be a one size fits all. Right, but you do need those smaller companies to, to be in the room with you. Joel Saxum: I’m a hundred percent agreeing with you, Yolanda, and I think that this is the issue here is that at some level then an OEM, an OEM engineering head would have to admit that they’re not the end all be all, and that they may have got a couple of things wrong. And what, what I would love to see and who, and maybe maybe ask you this question, who of the major four Western OEMs. Do you think would be open to like an industry advisory board? Nordex, you think it’s Nordex? I think Yolanda Padron: that’s the closest one so far that we’ve seen. Right? Joel Saxum: Yeah. I, I, I agree with you, and I’m saying that because I don’t think any of the other ones would ever admit that they have an [00:34:00] issue, right? They have attorneys and they have problems, Allen Hall: so they really can’t, but I, I think internally they know that they haven’t optimized their production, they haven’t optimized their performance out in the field. They’re trying to improve availability, that’s for sure. Estes has spent a great deal of time over the last year or two improving availability so that the money is being spent. The question is, do they have all the right answers or the overspending to get to the availability that they want to deliver to their customers? That’s a great question because I do think that we we’re just in Scotland and there’s a number of technology companies in the UK that I think, wow, they should be implementing some of these. Ideas and these products that have been proven, especially the ones that have been out for a couple of years, they should be implemented tomorrow, but they’re not yet because they can’t get through the door of an OEM because the OEM doesn’t want to hear it. Joel Saxum: Yeah, agreed. Agreed. Right. Well, well, like I, the, the, the example that keeps popping into my mind is Pete Andrews and the team over [00:35:00] at Echo Bolt, simply because they have a solution that works. It’s simple. They’ve done the legwork to make sure that this thing can be optimized and utilized by technicians in the field around the world. But they, it just like, they haven’t gotten the buy-in from, from whoever, uh, that it seems to be, you know, there’s a hurdle here. Uh, and that hurdle may be the Atlantic Ocean. I don’t know. Uh, but I would love to see, I would love to see their, uh, solution for bolted connections, uh, and monitoring bolted connections kicked around the world because I think you could save. Uh, the wind industry a ton, a ton, a ton of money. And that is an example of a small business full of subject matter experts that made a solution that can solve a problem, whether you’re an OEM or you’re an operator or whatever. There’s there that’s there, utilize them, right? Those are the kind of things that we need in this industry. Yolanda Padron: And it’s also those smaller companies too that will look at your feedback and then they’ll say, oh. Okay, do I need to adjust here? [00:36:00] Did I not focus on this one parameter that your specific site has? Right. And you don’t see that from the OEMs ’cause they have so, uh, they have so many problems that they’re trying to tackle at once that it gets really difficult to, not just to hone in on one, but to, to tell everybody, oh, I, I have this perfect solution for everything. Here you go. Allen Hall: Right. I think there’s an internal conflict in the engineering departments and manufacturing departments of any OEM, regardless if it’s in wind or in any other industry, is that they have a system to make this product and they’re pretty confident in it, otherwise they wouldn’t be doing it. They don’t want to hear outside noise is I, I would describe it as noise. Like, uh, if you have a great solution that would help out their manufacturing process. But I work here, I know how, I know the ins and outs that that new idea by a small company won’t work here. Those [00:37:00] barriers have to be knocked down internally in the OEMs. The OEM management should be going through and saying, Hey, look, if I find me the manager of this operation, if I find a company that could help us and save us money, and you’re being a roadblock, guess what? See ya. Hit the road because there is no way you can let those opportunities pass you by. In today’s marketplace, you need to be grabbing hold of every opportunity to lower your cost, to improve your product availability, to improve your relationship with your customers. How do you do that? Quickly, you look at the companies that are providing solutions and you grab them, grab them, and hold on for your life and listen to what they have to say because they have probably done more research into your product than your people have. That wraps up another episode of the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. If today’s discussion sparked any questions or ideas, we’d love to hear from you. Reach out to us on LinkedIn and don’t forget to subscribe so you never miss an episode. If you [00:38:00] found value in today’s discussion, please leave us a review. It really helps other wind energy professionals discover the show and we’ll catch you here next week on the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast.

https://youtu.be/ivElg53993A Ian Leaman, Summit OS® Guide, former investment banker, senior finance executive, and investor, is driven by a mission to help entrepreneurs build, scale, and successfully exit their businesses by applying the hard-won lessons he's learned from more than 100 exit journeys. We learn about Ian's path from growing up around small family businesses in the UK, to training with Deloitte, advising entrepreneurs through hundreds of M&A processes, co-founding a SPAC, and ultimately relocating to the United States to embrace a more optimistic and opportunity-driven business culture. Ian explains his Can-Do Framework, a mindset blueprint inspired by the contrast between European “can't-do” thinking and America's bold, frontier-style optimism. He also breaks down how Summit OS® empowers owners to achieve “private equity–level growth without giving up private equity,” and why the 45-Day Execution Momentum plan creates faster change than a typical 100-day private equity program. Ian closes with a gripping case study illustrating how leadership blind spots and misaligned incentives can devastate exit outcomes. — How to Break Ceilings in America with Ian Leaman Good day, listeners. Steve Preda here, the Founder of the Summit OS® Group and host of the Management Blueprint Podcast. And my guest today here is Ian Leaman, who is a Summit OS® Guide, a former investment banker with over 100 exits under his belt. He’s also a senior finance executive and an investor. So Ian, welcome to the show. Hi, Steve. It’s great to see you, and thank you for having me on.  Absolutely. And we go way back, and one of your international board positions I think I’m sharing with you, but I’m not going to go into that because it’s long in the past. What I like to explore is what you’re doing now, why you’re doing it, and some things about why you moved to the States. I mean, both of us moved to the States since we were on this particular board for different reasons. And I’d like to explore your framework, which is very intriguing. So let’s start with your ‘Why’. So what is your personal ‘Why’, and how are you manifesting it in your business life?  What I’m doing right now, Steve actually squares the circle. It brings us back together as working colleagues. You mentioned that we worked previously on an international board. Today we’re working together as Summit OS Guides. How did I get here, and how does this relate to my ‘Why’? Well, my business journey started really in my youth, where my parents had small businesses. And so the conversations over the evening dinner table were all about the trials and tribulations, the successes, failures, challenges, et cetera, of running a small business. So that got into my blood very early. That translated through a career in finance, where I qualified originally as an accountant with Deloitte in the UK, and then progressed into the transaction side of finance, helping entrepreneurs grow and exit their businesses. As you said, having come through more than a hundred successful exits, but many  more which didn’t cross that finish line.  I really became interested in the differences between those who succeeded and those who didn't, what they were doing in their businesses, which made them attractive prospects from an M&A point of view and made their processes successful ones.Share on X And eventually, I came to reunite with you when you’d started your Summit OS® Initiative and understand that we can bring our respective experience, whether it’s as a CEO of a previously exited business or as an advisor to many which have done that, we can bring that experience to there. And how that translates into my personal ‘Why’ is I get huge satisfaction out of being involved in and assisting the process of entrepreneurs building and exiting their business. And I find huge satisfaction in a successful outcome there. So my personal ‘Why’ is to work with entrepreneurs who are building their businesses to help them do so better, faster, more successfully, and, if relevant — which isn’t in all cases — take them across that exit finish line to a conclusion of that particular part of their business journey. Yeah. I totally relate to this, and I often felt guilty even when we sold the company, and I felt like we could have gotten more for it if the company was improved, and there were some low-hanging fruits that we could have helped fix in a short order. And then we can do it now, and that’s very fulfilling. That’s right. I mean, there are many war stories, if you like, from that phase of my working life that illustrate very well the point you just made. For example, on the positive side, I can recall a conversation with an entrepreneur. I met him for the first time at his place of work. It was a distributor of electronic components, so they bought in bulk, stocked, broke into small pieces, and sold and distributed at a good margin, electronic components. They had a big warehouse. He and I had an initial discussion and he was quite an impressive guy. I remember in his very austere functional office, and he said, would you like to look around? I said, yeah, of course. I’d love to. So we walked together from the upper level where his office was down a stairway into the warehouse. And just as we got to the foot of the stairway, we encountered one of the warehousemen. His name was Jim, and he said, the owner said, Hey, good morning Jim. How’s it going today? And Jim said, 81%. Why did Jim say 81%? I asked myself, I left it at that moment, but they were both very satisfied with Jim’s answer. When we returned from the visit to the office, I said, so what’s 81%? He said, well, that’s Jim’s metric. Jim has to measure a certain number of things he’s doing and relate them to that day, and he was well within his range of target, and that’s how this guy ran his business. All that translated into a very successful exit at a multiple one or two points above the regular for a distributor in that sector. Because he was growing fast, he was doing it really well, and he built a business which was somewhat independent of him. That’s great. And just a quick reference to the LinkedIn post that you put up yesterday, where you mentioned that a lot of people who are trading time for money and working 55 or more hours is basically a leading indicator that they’re not going to build a self-managing business, they’re not going to scale, they’re going to burn out. So it’s great if someone has good KPIs to make sure that they know where they are and where they’re moving towards where they want to be. Okay, so let’s switch gears here. And you have a really intriguing story of how you made it to America and particularly to LA. So what was your calculus, and how did you end up there? I’d been working successfully as an M&A advisor — as you had, Steve — working with entrepreneurs on that journey. And a lot of that was about the growth of their companies, about building them somewhat before they actually made the exit, often through acquisition or financing. And one day I got a phone call from a friend who was a headhunter who joked with me when he got on the call: “Ian, don’t put the call down. I’m going to talk to you about a new role, which is not doing what you’re doing.” I guess his call landed at a particular moment when I was restless for a change, and he described a role as the third co-founder of a startup to be newly listed on the London Stock Exchange as blank check company, often known as a SPAC in the US. Long story short, I was a good fit for the team of two entrepreneurs who had built previous businesses, financed, acquired, IPO'd, and then sold. We got together and set out on a path of acquiring businesses in the US, even though the listing was in the UK, in the oil and gas services sector. That experience was amazing. It put me on the front line as a principal, doing many of the things I'd seen done secondhand and getting my hands into the weeds of operations much more than I had previously. And these were great learning experiencesShare on X but what became most valuable over time was the experience I got working in the US and finally appreciating the fundamental contrast in business ethos between a European starting point — can’t do — and a US starting point — can do. And that framework, that basic business framework of can-do US against can’t-do Europe, really set me on the path that I then pursued. When that job came to an end and my wife and I were deciding what next, we decided to vote with our feet, relocate to the US — now 12 years ago — with three teenagers and a dog in tow, and rebuild our careers over here. That’s awesome. And that’s very similar to what we did in many ways. So tell me about this Can-Do framework. So how do you break it down? How do you make it more tangible? What differentiates an American entrepreneur or American businessperson — or just a general person — and European or UK in terms of their outlook on business or life? Okay, so it’s all about positivity. And that manifests itself with just really at the start of any conversation about anything within business, whether it’s a small change to an existing business or perhaps something at the opposite end of the scale, a big new opportunity that hasn’t previously presented itself. It’s all about the positivity. Americans will enthusiastically embrace change, generally — in my experience — without the cynicism overtaking them. Americans have just as much valid experience of what can go wrong as you build and change businesses as Europeans, but instead they choose to parlay that experience and those learnings into positive aspects of change rather than cynical aspects of resistance to change. So, for example, in America, if as a businessperson you hit some failures and those failures result in a failed business or a personal bankruptcy, those things are not regarded as necessarily negatives, which can impede your progress in the future. Quite the opposite — they can be seen as great learning experiences, which leave their battle scars in a positive way. Yeah, that is indeed amazing. I mean, you can even become president in America after failing several businesses, right? The sky’s the limit.  The sky’s the limit. That’s the point.  Yeah.  And there’s no one else’s negativity, which is going to constrain the optimistic American entrepreneur from striving to achieve their goals. All right. Okay, so there’s the positivity. I get it. So interpreting changes as looking at the positive aspect of it rather than the negative aspect. It’s more of a bold, fearless attitude rather than a conservative, resistant attitude. What else would you say characterizes this ethos? I’d say another facet of it would be the confidence to challenge the status quo. So much of European culture and business is based on history, and that history is a kind of anchor to the past, whereas America still has this frontier feeling — a sense that it’s a new country, a new world. And the status quo, such as it is, isn't an anchor to the past. It’s actually something to be critically praised and challenged with confidence if relevant. I think that very much resonates with me personally. I recall when I was choosing my firm to join and to become an accountancy trainee, leading through a qualification to becoming a chartered accountant, and at the quality end of the range were the Big Eight in those days. I interviewed with three of the Big Eight, and interestingly, it was number eight of eight, which was the newcomer on the block, the one that resonated most with me. They were confident, they were challenging, and ambitious, and somewhat fearless in the face of challenging the establishments in the UK.Share on XAnd those things really resonated with me. I joined Touche Ross. Touche Ross became Deloitte. Deloitte became the number one in the world.  Yeah, that’s right.  Touche Ross was the number seven or eight, I remember, when I applied, because I went through actual same training as you did. And when I applied it was the Big Eight, and by the time I got accepted it was the Big Six — they merged — and now it’s the Big Four. So anyhow, that’s less interesting for listeners, but you’re talking about describing this underdog mentality or underdog attitude. I resonated with that as well, because when we started the investment banking business in Hungary, actually our number one competitor was Deloitte in Hungary. They were the big 500-pound gorilla, and we were the underdog. I hired some of the people who had been passed over by Deloitte, and they had a stone in their shoe about it. And we made it a kind of quest that we were going to show these snooty, self-important people that we were actually better because we’re scrappier, more innovative, and so on. That was a big driver for us — this underdog attitude. So would you say that this is something that also resonates with Americans?  I think very much so. I think that there isn’t that respect for the status quo, and the 500-pound gorilla on the block is not necessarily there to be feared, revered, or left alone. Quite the opposite. In American business, they're the incumbent to be challenged. Challenger businesses grow to huge success in America. And actually, that links really nicely with the topic we're here to discuss — Summit OS® — and how it provides a framework for entrepreneurs to build their businesses using many of the tools and techniques which the big successful businesses have adopted. And using that to their advantage, to creep up on them from behind and sometimes take market leadership.  Yeah, that's a big objective, obviously, and we would be happy to talk about this, but then we would overrun our time for sure. But what is a specific concept that you enjoy about or which you are intrigued about with Summit OS® that resonates with you? One of the things that really resonated with me, Steve, having a background in investment banking as you have, is the notion that private equity doesn’t have a monopoly on expecting and delivering high growth from businesses. That principle, that objective, that achievement can be something which the entrepreneur, owner, manager can adopt just as validly. So one of the potentials of Summit OS® is private equity without private equity. You can set yourself the objective of, let's say, 3x value in three years.Share on X You can set yourself the objective of creating a self-managing business that has a valuation way in excess of its peers because of the way you run it, because of the rate of growth you achieve, because of the differentiators it has from its competitors. And in so doing, you create something of high value, high desire, and a high level of marketability if you’re in the market to exit. That’s a really powerful and resonant aspect of  Summit OS® for me.  Yeah, I’ve often seen business owners who sold a large minority or a small majority stake to private equity. And then someone came in with an MBA but with a lot less experience, and they would start telling the business owner what they knew that they had to work on to begin with. Maybe they were not disciplined enough or not focused enough, but a coach — a good coach, a guide like you and I — could have helped them to do that without giving away a big piece of their business. Now granted, putting capital to use can be a very effective way of achieving high levels of growth. And the scale of capital that’s available from private equity may not be available to an independent owner-managed business. But having said that, I was with an entrepreneur last week, one of a group of partners who’d sold his business initially to PE, that PE had been refinanced to an even larger one. And he described his experience with those PEs as being managed by spreadsheet. It sounds like a bit of a cliché, Steve, but it's real — that’s his actual experience. And another negative experience, from a negative point of view, that a lot of entrepreneurs have shared with me is this notion of inappropriate interference. The young MBAs just don’t get where appropriate boundaries are between them as investors and the leadership team in the businesses, and so the areas they interfere in are often not value-adding. I’ve experienced that myself, actually. I was engaged once by a private equity firm to be a consultant on a transition period. The business in question had been an orphaned subsidiary within a very large multinational corporation. When people talk about orphan subsidiaries, what they essentially mean is this businesses that don’t particularly fit within where the big corporation had moved to, and are kind of left adrift — but within. So they’d sold this business to a private equity, and the private equity engaged me to help with a transition. A transition of the business from this orphan state into an independent business. And the private equity really was clueless. The people there were absolutely clueless as to how best to manage the transition of the team, particularly the team and the way they interrelated to their ownership from how it used to be to how it was now. It’s a very good example of poor management, and I suspect it wasn’t one of one. It was one of a big pattern. Yeah. I mean, experience is really hard to replicate in the classroom. And some of these MBAs, they come out from great business schools, and they do excellent case studies, but they just don’t have the reps to develop the pattern recognition that some of these business owners who have been in the trenches for 20 or 30 years have, right?  Yeah, you can’t put a high enough value on less experience. Yeah. And if you then harness that experience into a framework which enables people with that experience to share it really effectively with clients, that's a really powerful combination.Share on X  Yeah, I love it. Yeah. By the way, we all know that private equity groups, they often have their 100-day plan. They come into a company and then they want to make a string of changes, like a new prime minister or president would do as well. So is there an equivalent process in Summit OS® to do that? Can you speak to that?  There is, actually. And there’s a big premium today on speed of change. And the private equity guys think that a hundred days is rapid. Well, it’s not. Summit OS® has got a 45-day Execution Momentum plan, which takes the business through some very actionable processes, which result in very rapid and noticeable change. So that the 45-day Execution Momentum takes the business leaders through 2 one full-day meetings in which very heavy agenda is filled with things that really interesting and opposite ends of the scale. What do I mean by that? At the very macro, high end, there will be an examination — possibly for the very first time — of why the business exists, what it’s on the earth for, how is, how’s it going to create a dent in the universe over a 30-year period? What really big changes can an ambitious management team make in the business? And this at the opposite end of the scale, a whole bunch of very day-to-day actionable skills like how to run a really good business meeting that’s super effective and results in measurable change. And then things in between those two, which join the very high macro level to the very daily micro level. Putting these things into action over the 30-day separation period between these two days, and then a 15-day follow-on, gives you your 45 days. And that results in these really measurable, perceivable changes, which catapult the start of a company’s journey with Summit OS® — very quickly, double the speed of PE. Yeah, that’s definitely. I do believe that there’s no reason why every company should not adopt all the good management practices that already exist and widely known. And the faster we get them to adapt it, the faster they’re going to get a big push, a big momentum, and then it’s going to open them up for other changes. And suddenly this whole change management is not going to be that difficult because people will say that it actually works. So why not do more of it? Before we wrap this conversation up, can you share from your experience as an investment banker or senior CFO a story that really you feel relates to the work that we’re doing here? I can, and I’m going to illustrate this with a something negative, not something positive to learn from the negative, as I suggested. It was really valid for me to do learning from all the reasons businesses failed to get across the exit line and what we can do to help build businesses better. So, I was engaged to sell a business — owner-managed, a very successful call center business based in the UK, but with an American client base. And the vertical in which the call center business work was technology sales. So they were being engaged by large American technology houses to generate leads for selling their products into European customers. The entrepreneur who started it was an experienced businessman, but from the moment I met him, what I recognized was a brutish personality. A very tough taskmaster, very unforgiving, and actually very cold and lacking in emotion. He built this business to quite some success with a very high growth rate, and soon I got to meet his management team. These were young, thrusting, ambitious people who had been early enough in their careers for him to mold them into a likeness of his own. So what he’d created was a team of very similar-behaving, similar-acting people who were aggressive, over-assertive, cold, non-emotional in the business context and actually quite a scary team. Well, that could have been okay were it not for the fact that early on in the process, I had a word with him and I said, “Look, Chris, you're going to need to motivate these guys in the exit. They're well paid, but you need to give them a little bit of a taste of the proceeds you're going to receive as the founder and 100% owner of this business. Otherwise, you might see some trouble brewing.” Nope — he wasn't having any of it. This was his business. He was going to do this his way. Guess what happens, Steve? At the 59th minute of the 11th hour, as we came towards closing the transaction with a great buyer, the animals turned on their master. And they turned with a viciousness that was similar to his own character, and they basically held him to ransom. It cost him 30% of the business. He had to give 30% of the equity in order for them to come along and be supportive in the discussions they were at this stage, having with the buyer around satisfaction with the working there, continuing to work post-transaction and all those things that were super important for the buyer. So there’s an example, a real case study. We did actually get the business closed. It cost him millions more than it could have done had he done this deal with them early on when they didn’t have the whip hand. And here’s a great example of how adapting the way you work, respecting the senior people, and nurturing them into positions of ownership of their parts of the business, not just in terms of being mini CEOs, but actually sharing some of the equity of the business could have made a huge difference, both to the risk in the process and to the dollar outcome for him. Yeah. I think this is a common failing that the entrepreneur, they take under their wings, these young people, and they feel like that they owe everything to them for raising them. But they forget that those people stuck around because they actually had internal drive and they had ambition. It wasn’t the entrepreneur who create these people. These people were there to begin with. They just took advantage of the opportunity to have bigger responsibility, and as they rose in capability, if the entrepreneur or business owner didn't recognize that and reward it, they’re going to go somewhere else and they’re going to get rewarded another way, or they’re going to turn on their master. Yeah. So this is a very tricky thing and you need a degree of self-awareness to realize that it’s not all you and you have to reward them. Even if you help them get there, you still have to pay them more because they did get there.  That’s right. It’s all part of respecting the people you work with and rewarding them appropriately. Yeah that’s a great way to finish this up. Okay. So, Ian, if the listeners would like to learn more about you, maybe connect with you, learn what you could do for them, where would you advise them to go? Well, it’s very simple.  They can contact me at https://ianleaman.com. There you’ll find some very comprehensive and interesting material all about coaching and about Summit OS® in particular, and how we work with businesses to help elevate them.  Awesome. So do check Ian out at https://ianleaman.com, not hard to remember. He is also has a great LinkedIn profile. And if you enjoyed this conversation, stay tuned, because every week I bring an exciting entrepreneur or business operator, or thought leader in some cases, who come and share their frameworks with us. And if you’d like to learn more about what Summit OS® can do for you, then visit SummitOS.co, and check out all the downloadable tools, videos, process maps, and everything, and client stories to learn more. So Ian, thank you very much for coming and sharing your war stories and experiences, and thank you for listening. Important Links: Ian's LinkedIn Ian's website

If your schedules keep slipping, handoffs fall apart, and crews always seem to be waiting on someone, this episode will show you why. Jason Schroeder breaks down the missing link most projects never address: syncing the overall project plan with the personal daily schedules of field leaders.  You'll learn: Why stops and restarts, not worker productivity, kill flow. How next day planning and afternoon huddles set up perfect handoffs. Why field engineers, PEs, and assistant supers need time blocked calendars. How coordinating personal schedules creates predictable production and calmer teams. This episode isn't about micromanaging, it's about enabling. Because if you want flow, you must plan your people as intentionally as you plan your work. Listen now and start building projects where the schedule finally makes sense for everyone.   If you like the Elevate Construction podcast, please subscribe for free and you'll never miss an episode.  And if you really like the Elevate Construction podcast, I'd appreciate you telling a friend (Maybe even two

In this episode Dr. Perry has a chat with Chris DaPrato DPT, SCS, CSCS, PES, MFDc the lead instructor and innovator of Integrative Movement Health We discuss the science and applications of cupping in helping pain. There are a lot of myths out there about cupping and Dr. DaPrato sets the record straight. If you have ever wondered if cupping is a theraputic option for you, this is the episode you do not want to miss. Some of the highlights.   Movement matters — it's not just passive suction Dr. DaPrato emphasises that MFD is distinct from traditional passive cupping because it combines negative-pressure suction with active movement or loading.   Fascial shear, glide and viscoelasticity are key targets Chris explains improving the sliding/ gliding surfaces of fascia, increasing viscoelastic properties and thereby enhancing mobility and tissue responsiveness   Cups can be used as neurosensory tools not just mechanical tools One of his points: the cups provide sensory input — mechanoreceptor stimulation, nervous system modulation, proprioceptive feedback — which can influence movement patterns and motor control. Dr. DaPrato currently treats professional and NCAA athletes at UC San Francisco and UC Berkeley, while teaching in the Orthopedic Residency for their School of Medicine. He is a strong proponent and educator for manual therapy in sports and has presented evidence informed practices at conferences both nationally and internationally.  After receiving his BS in Human Physiology, his Masters in Physical Therapy from Long Beach, and his Doctorate from Temple University, he went on to become Board Certified in Sports through the APTA. Learn more on his website at CUPTHERAPY    

Zdaj, ko smo zakonsko odzaščitili Rome, je čas, da se posvetimo zakonski zaščiti živali. Živali so zakonsko izjemno regulirane … Najbolj so regulirane tiste, ki jih imamo za kosilo, potem medvedi, na tretjem mestu pa morajo biti psi. O pasjih zakonih torej in o zmedi, ki jo prinašajo. Najprej smo dobili zakonsko regulacijo psov na povodcih. Oziroma je ta obstajala že od nekdaj, a globe so se dramatično zvišale. Pes brez povodca bo lastnika poslej stal premoženje. Te dni pa dobivamo še zakonsko regulativo znotraj zakonodaje proti mučenju živali, ki z globo kaznuje lastnike, ki pse privezujejo za verige in ostale vrvice. Najprej in na začetku. Jasno, da je vsak razumni proti prosto tekajočim psom in proti psom na verigah: ampak na načelni ravni je za vse tiste, ki se v pasji svet ne poglabljajo preveč, kar nekaj zmede. Torej na povodec da, na verigo ne? A zmeda traja le tako dolgo, dokler ne prebijemo prvega aksioma pasje sodobnosti. Psi so namreč dvojni. Tisti podeželski in tisti urbani. Zakon pa, kot vsi zakoni, useka počez. Hočemo povedati, da pes, ki na deželi teka za traktorjem, ni enako, kot zverina, ki prosto teka po Čopovi; kot tudi nikomur ne pade na pamet, da bi pred Schellenburškimi dvori razpel jeklenico, nanjo pa zavezal psa, kot to počnejo na kmetijah slovenskega podeželja. Se pravi; kar je za psa na deželi dokaj normalno, se pravi, da se giblje prosto, kot od matere rojen, je za psa v mestu prekršek, ki bo lastnika stal plačo. In obratno. Kar je za psa na deželi normalno pasje življenje, namreč da je čez dan odvezan, ponoči pa privezan čuva kmetijo pred lopovi, je za psa v mestu nezaslišan eksces. Ampak to je le načelni del zgodbe. Potem moramo h globam. Te so namreč prav drakonske in če k odvezanim in privezanim globam prištejemo še globe za pasje kakanje, oziroma za nepobiranje pasjih iztrebkov, kar je nujno v mestu in butasto na deželi, pridemo do spoznanja, da vas pobalinski pes lahko stane celo premoženje, saj smo za pse odgovorni lastniki. Kot smo starši odgovorni za otroke, ampak težko, da bi nas oblasti kaznovale s toliko globami, če bi od časa do časa pretirano razigranega najstnika privezali na verigo. Zdaj pa k resni analizi. Težava je seveda v tem, da so kapitalisti takoj našli nevralgično točko človekovega odnosa do psa, ki je seveda sodobna praksa, po kateri je posedovati psa bolj praktično kot vzgajati pamža. Je pa postalo oboje približno enako drago. Kakovostna pasja hrana stane več kot človeška hrana, ker psi za zdaj še nimajo zdravstvenega zavarovanja, obisk pri veterinarju velja enako kot bela plomba, pasje trgovine se le po anatomsko različnih krojih ločijo od človeške konfekcije. Šolanje psa velja podobno kot šolanje prvošolčka, prav tako pasja nega, pasja vzreja, pasji kriminal, pasji hoteli in pasja potovanja. Skratka; pes ni več človekov najboljši prijatelj, počasi postaja edini prijatelj in ob kapitalistih so to pogruntali tudi zakonodajalci. Zato so začeli pisati pasje zakone, kjer pa so zakoni, so tudi globe. Psi, sploh tisti preveč privezani in tisti povsem odvezani, sploh pa tisti, ki kakajo, so nevarni … Čeprav za zdravje Slovencev mnogo manj nevarni kot čebele, ose in sršeni, katerih zakonska regulacija pa močno šepa. Kot tudi kaznovalna politika. Gremo k morebitnim rešitvam … Najprej na urbana področja. V Ljubljani, kjer se pišejo pasji zakoni, imajo 26 tisoč psov, ki se statistično brezčutno ponečedijo vsaj enkrat dnevno. Tako dobimo ogromno število pasjih odpadkov, kar postaja problem, ker so pasji iztrebki, za razliko od recimo govejih, precej toksični. Ne predlagamo sicer, da bi po mestu hodile krave, ampak če nemudoma ne odstranite pasjega iztrebka, kar je za zunanjega opazovalca še vedno eden najbolj bizarnih postopkov, v katerega se je prostovoljno zapletla civilizacija, vas to lahko stane do 100 evrov. Ob tem pa boste tudi ogrozili javno zdravje, saj se lahko bakterije v pasjem iztrebku razširijo po okolju. To pa še ni vse. Če se psič ponečedi na zasebnem zemljišču – še vedno smo v Ljubljani – in kot lastnik ne poberete iztrebka, ima lastnik parcele pravico poklicati policijo, ki sproži postopek zaradi nedostojnega, oziroma žaljivega vedenja. Načelno gledano, se je žaljivo vedel pes, nasrkali boste pa vi … Misel, da greste na sprehod, ob tem pa potencialno užalite polovico zasebno razparceliranega mesta, je nekoliko komična, če v sebi ne bi nosila zrna soli … Zakonodajalec od vas zahteva popoln nadzor nad psom. Od povodcev, do pobiranja kakcev, do preprečitev žaljenja, do preprečitve privezovanja … Lastništvo psa zahteva po črki zakona nad živaljo absoluten nadzor in našo absolutno odgovornost, kadar tega ni. Vendar … Kaj je potemtakem ostalo od prijateljstva? Najboljšemu prijatelju ne dovolimo niti sekunde svobode, niti trohice svobodne volje, ne dovolimo mu niti deset odstotkov tega, za kar ga je naredila evolucija, ali pa čemu ga je Noe vzel na barko. Odvisno, na kateri strani pasjega stvarjenja pač stojite. Vzeli smo mu pasjo naravo, prijateljstvo pa spremenili v praktično suženjstvo. In da se razumemo; pes, ki se onečedi na zasebno parcelo, je resničen problem, ker je zasebna parcela majhna, ker je mesto majhno, ker je zelenih površin malo, potencialnih iztrebkov pa 9,5 milijona komadov letno. Kar bi zakonodaja morala narediti – seveda pa ga ni junaka, ki bi si kaj takšnega upal niti predlagati ne – je, da bi po vzoru socialne službe komisije preverile, ali lastnik izpolnjuje pogoje za imeti psa. Najprej psihološke; ker za zapiranje psov v kletke in za vse življenje na verige, kot so primeri, proti katerim se poskuša boriti zakonodaja, moraš biti primerno ubrisan … Nato pa tudi, ali je zadoščeno bivalnim pogojem za lastništvo psa, kar, po zdravi presoji, odpiše vse pse v stanovanjskih blokih. Ker pa so psi v dvigalih in na poročnih fotografijah postali nova normalnost, ki jo živi tudi oziroma predvsem slovenska politično-ekonomska-družbena elita, je normalizacija odnosa med psom in človekom v bližnji prihodnosti nemogoča.

The big things you need to know:First, 3Q25 reporting season has gotten off to a strong start on beat rates for the major indices, but we are continuing to see deterioration in the rate of upward EPS estimate revisions for the S&P 500, the Russell 2000, the biggest market cap names in those indices, and the rest of both indices when their top weights are excluded – something we continue to see as a challenge for performance if it persists.Second, we run through the main macro takeaways we found in our review of last week's S&P 500 earnings calls. The tone on the overall macro, consumer and tariffs came across as mixed, with a number of companies expressing optimism about improvements / stabilization underway or potentially coming into view.Third, other things that jump out in our updates this week include a new study we've published on the relationship between ROEs and P/Es in the major Small, Mid and Large Cap indices.

If you're in your 30s or more and think it's “too late” to become PE, I'd like you to meet Jimmy Draughty. He passed the most brutal PE exam on the first try…and he did it at 58 years old!

On this episode of Simply Money presented by Allworth Financial, Bob and Brian unpack the “smart-sounding” money advice that can quietly sabotage your future—from skipping Roth conversions and “going broke safely” in cash, to one-fund DIY investing without a plan, estate-planning myths that lead to probate messes, and being sold permanent life insurance instead of building a tax-smart strategy. They also dig into FINRA's move to loosen the Pattern Day Trader rule, what record-setting stock buybacks really signal (and what to watch beyond P/Es), and career expert Julie Bauke joins to help you decide whether to retire, go part-time, or test-drive your next chapter. In Ask the Advisor, they tackle oversized RMDs, executor pitfalls with business interests, smarter stock-option exercises, and whether to migrate from mutual funds to ETFs or direct indexing.

Durex'in katkılarıyla hazırlanan Socrates FC'nin yeni bölümünde İlhan Özgen, Atahan Altınordu ve İnan Özdemir; yapay zekâ ile hemhâl oldu, futbola yeni kurallar getirdi, çirkef futbolculara değindi ve en sevdikleri futbol oyunları olan Haxball, Championship Manager 2, PES, Winning Eleven ve FIFA 98'i masaya yatırdı.

Durex'in katkılarıyla hazırlanan Socrates FC'nin yeni bölümünde İlhan Özgen, Atahan Altınordu ve İnan Özdemir; yapay zekâ ile hemhâl oldu, futbola yeni kurallar getirdi, çirkef futbolculara değindi ve en sevdikleri futbol oyunları olan Haxball, Championship Manager 2, PES, Winning Eleven ve FIFA 98'i masaya yatırdı.

In this episode of Excess Returns, we welcome back Tobias Carlisle — author, host of Value After Hours, and manager of the Acquirers Funds. Toby shares his candid perspective on market valuations, value investing's long struggle, and why he still believes mean reversion will eventually swing back in favor of small caps and value stocks. We also dive into AI, global markets, the Fed, housing, and where investors might find opportunity outside today's expensive U.S. mega-caps.Market valuations: why today's market may be more expensive than 1929, 2000, or 2020The pitfalls of relying on single-year P/E ratios and better long-term valuation measuresThe divergence between the “Magnificent 10” and the rest of the marketSmall caps, mid caps, and value: where Toby sees opportunity despite an earnings recessionAI as both a transformative force and a potential bubble-like capital cycleU.S. vs. international markets: structural advantages of American capitalism and where China is catching upThe Fed, interest rates, inflation, and how they really matter for value investorsHousing affordability and demographics as headwinds for the U.S. economyWhy Toby believes the “value vs. growth jaws” will eventually close00:00 – Are markets more expensive than 1929 and 2000?04:00 – Breaking down valuation charts: S&P, Russell, and mid/small caps10:00 – Why single-year P/Es mislead investors14:00 – Lessons from past bubbles: Nifty 50, dot-com era, and now19:00 – Large vs. small: the longest run for growth in history24:00 – AI's impact: transformative technology or capital cycle trap?32:00 – Toby's personal experience with AI (and why it disappoints him so far)33:00 – U.S. advantages vs. international markets and China's rise41:00 – Are today's U.S. valuations justified?45:00 – The Fed, interest rates, and speculation46:00 – Housing affordability and demographics as headwinds55:00 – Should value investors care about macro?59:00 – Closing question: Toby's contrarian belief on value vs. growth

木曜日は、ライムスター宇多丸 ＆ TBS熊崎風斗アナ。 「今週の感謝ですッ！」コーナーで紹介した小林香菜さんに熊崎アナがインタビュー！体育会系の部活ではなく、マラソンサークル出身の異色の経歴を持つランナー小林選手とは！？ そして、岸社長のお願いシリーズ！ Funky Grammar Unitのメンバーとして、90年代からファミリー付き合いをしてきたPESとMummy-Dが初共作！意外にも二人では初の共演となった一曲を宇宙初解禁！！   ・イケイケ・ア・ゴーゴー / PES,Mummy-D Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this “NASM CPT Podcast,” host, and NASM Master Instructor, Rick Richey, welcomes featured guest, Joe Drake, CEO and founder of Axiom Fitness Academy, for an essential deep dive into one of the biggest questions new personal trainers face: “How do I actually build a program for my first client?” Rick and Joe pull back the curtain on this universal struggle, sharing real experiences from their own journeys both in training and educating fitness professionals. You'll learn practical, confidence-building steps for taking your knowledge from NASM's OPT model and applying it in the gym—without overcomplicating things or falling into the trap of trying to impress with flashy exercises. Instead, Rick and Joe stress the importance of mastering the basics, focusing on major movement patterns (squatting, lunging, pushing, pulling, and hinging), and building repeatable templates tailored to each client's frequency and needs. The discussion is packed with actionable tips, including how to keep programming simple, when and how to individualize, and why tracking progress (like keeping a PR chart) matters more than constant variety. Rick and Joe also discuss finding the balance between what clients want and what they need and highlight resources inside NASM's new Membership platform—NASM1—for trainers seeking further step-by-step programming guidance. If you're a new or aspiring trainer feeling stuck between theory and practice, this conversation is for you. Tune in and take the guesswork out of your programming journey—one authentic trainer story at a time. Joe Drake, MS, NASM-CPT, CES, PES is a veteran personal trainer, educator, and the founder of Axiom Fitness Academy—a leading certification prep and mentorship platform for aspiring and certified fitness professionals. With nearly 20 years in the industry and over a decade training trainers, Joe helps coaches build confidence in programming, master client relationships, and turn their passion into a sustainable business. He is also the author of The Complete Guide to Landmine Training and a trusted voice on strength training for longevity, continuing education, and bridging the gap between certification and real-world success. Whether you're a new trainer or scaling your career, Joe offers powerful frameworks that simplify programming, elevate your coaching, and help you stand out in a crowded fitness industry. If you like what you just consumed, leave us a 5-star review, and share this episode with a friend to help grow our NASM health and wellness community! The content shared in this podcast is solely for educational and entertainment purposes. It is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek out the guidance of your healthcare provider or other qualified professional. Any opinions expressed by guests and hosts are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of NASM. Introducing NASM One, the membership for trainers and coaches. For just $35/mo., get unlimited access to over 300 continuing education courses, 50% off additional certifications and specializations, EDGE Trainer Pro all-in-one coaching app to grow your business, unlimited exam attempts and select waived fees. Stay on top of your game and ahead of the curve as a fitness professional with NASM One. Click here to learn more.: https://bit.ly/4ddsgrm

Send us a textIn this episode, I explore whether the famed Blue Zones offer genuine insights for longevity or if they're more marketing myth than science, while highlighting what the evidence truly shows about living to 100.We begin by considering how many people actually reach 100. Currently, just 0.03% of Americans are centenarians, though this is expected to quadruple by 2054, with women comprising about 78% of that group (Pew Research). Globally, regions like Hong Kong show higher longevity, where 12.8% of females and 4.4% of males are projected to reach 100 (Nature). This brings us to the question: what might we learn from regions like the Blue Zones?I break down how the Blue Zones concept originated, starting with Sardinia where researchers Pes and Poulain mapped centenarians with blue dots, hence the term Blue Zones. Their 2004 study highlighted clusters of longevity (ScienceDirect). Dan Buettner later popularized these findings through his National Geographic article (Blue Zones PDF) and subsequent books, documentaries, and programs. The Blue Zones promote nine lifestyle habits: daily activity, minimal meat and processed foods, moderate red wine intake, calorie reduction, life purpose, stress reduction, spiritual community involvement, prioritizing friendships, and surrounding oneself with like-minded people.While these recommendations align in part with my six pillars of health—exercise, nutrition, mind-body harmony, sleep, exposure to heat/cold, and social relationships—the Blue Zones overlook critical factors like sleep and heat/cold exposure. Their encouragement of moderate alcohol use also contrasts with emerging evidence on alcohol's risks.I examine critiques of Blue Zone science, including flawed birth records that may inflate longevity claims, as seen historically in the U.S. and Greece  (bioRxiv, UCL). Some regions, like Okinawa and Sardinia, no longer display exceptional longevity, possibly due to regression to the mean or changes in lifestyle (PubMed).I also share a rigorous epidemiologic study tracking 80-year-olds to 100, identifying key predictors like non-smoking, low alcohol use, regular exercise, healthy BMI, and dietary diversity (fruits, vegetables, fish, beans, tea). Those with high lifestyle scores had a 60% greater chance of reaching 100 (JAMA).Ultimately, while Blue Zones have helped popularize valuable lifestyle habits, the science behind their claims is mixed. My six pillars remain grounded in evidence that applies to real-world aging.Takeaways: Focus on proven factors—exercise, balanced nutrition, sleep, mind-body practices, social connections, and thoughtful heat/cold exposure—to enhance both lifespan and healthspan. Be cautious about adopting longevity claims without strong evidence. Remember, while genetics play a larger role at extreme ages, your daily choices still profoundly influence your journey toward living long and well.

Naoko Saito, Jim Garrison, and Vincent Colapietro sit down with Cara and Derek to talk through Dr. Saito's General Session paper at PES 2025. The paper itself will appear in an upcoming issue of Philosophy of Education, but for more of Dr. Saito's related work (mentioned in the episode), see her recent American Philosophy in Translation. For Garrison's very important essay (also mentioned in the episode), see "A Deweyan Theory of Democratic Listening."And for Colapietro's recent work on relationality, see his "Relations, Ruptures, and Rituals," as well as his "Quotidian Tasks."Use this form to recommend future topics and guests!

Our second and final recording of a PES session, this episode features Paul Geis, Brad Rowe, Natasha Levinson, Christina Donaldson, and Cara Furman reflecting on mentorship in our field and in academia more broadly. This PES panel discussion was sponsored by the Committee on Mentoring.To recommend future guests and topics, use this link!

Dr. Allison Greco, pulmonary and critical care specialist at Bellevue Hospital, sits down with Dr. Emily Gutowski and discusses the initial presentation, workup, and management of a patient with a pulmonary embolism. They go through diagnostic modalities, scoring systems, and the various treatment options for patients depending on their risk profile. They discuss provoked vs. unprovoked PEs, and recommendations for longer term anticoagulation.