Business RadioX ®

  • Home
  • Business RadioX ® Communities
    • Southeast
      • Alabama
        • Birmingham
      • Florida
        • Orlando
        • Pensacola
        • South Florida
        • Tampa
        • Tallahassee
      • Georgia
        • Atlanta
        • Cherokee
        • Forsyth
        • Greater Perimeter
        • Gwinnett
        • North Fulton
        • North Georgia
        • Northeast Georgia
        • Rome
        • Savannah
      • Louisiana
        • New Orleans
      • North Carolina
        • Charlotte
        • Raleigh
      • Tennessee
        • Chattanooga
        • Nashville
      • Virginia
        • Richmond
    • South Central
      • Arkansas
        • Northwest Arkansas
    • Midwest
      • Illinois
        • Chicago
      • Michigan
        • Detroit
      • Minnesota
        • Minneapolis St. Paul
      • Missouri
        • St. Louis
      • Ohio
        • Cleveland
        • Columbus
        • Dayton
    • Southwest
      • Arizona
        • Phoenix
        • Tucson
        • Valley
      • Texas
        • Austin
        • Dallas
        • Houston
    • West
      • California
        • Bay Area
        • LA
        • Pasadena
      • Colorado
        • Denver
      • Hawaii
        • Oahu
  • FAQs
  • About Us
    • Our Mission
    • Our Audience
    • Why It Works
    • What People Are Saying
    • BRX in the News
  • Resources
    • BRX Pro Tips
    • B2B Marketing: The 4Rs
    • High Velocity Selling Habits
    • Why Most B2B Media Strategies Fail
    • 9 Reasons To Sponsor A Business RadioX ® Show
  • Partner With Us
  • Veteran Business RadioX ®

Decision Vision Episode 170: Should I Integrate Cryptocurrency into My Business? – An Interview with Daren Hebold, LUX Companies

May 26, 2022 by John Ray

cryptocurrency
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 170: Should I Integrate Cryptocurrency into My Business? - An Interview with Daren Hebold, LUX Companies
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

cryptocurrency

Decision Vision Episode 170: Should I Integrate Cryptocurrency into My Business? – An Interview with Daren Hebold, LUX Companies

Daren Hebold, CEO of LUX Companies, was Mike Blake’s guest on this episode of Decision Vision. He explained the basics of cryptocurrency and how it works, its history, apps for businesses to use cryptocurrency, use cases for crypto, the risks, and much more.

Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

LUXOLO Financial, a division of LUX Companies

LUXOLO is your best-in-class concierge cryptocurrency service, located on the beautiful coastline of Portland, Maine. Their team believes in “own your keys, own your coins”. At LUXOLO they advocate self-custody of your digital assets. They will guide you through the process of securely storing your private keys, granting you direct and sovereign control over your wealth.

Company website | LinkedIn

Daren Hebold, Founder and CEO, LUX Companies

Daren Hebold, Founder and CEO, LUX Companies

Mr. Hebold is the Founder and CEO of the LUX Companies, a regional commercial real estate asset management company as well as LUXOLO Financial, the innovative in-person cryptocurrency exchange and digital asset wealth management firm.

He has cultivated a broad reputation of trust within the industry and community given his command of confidentiality, fiduciary duty and financial skills in the handling of high value commercial real estate and digital assets. After getting financially thrashed by the Great Recession in 2008-09 and closely studying the US central bank and government responses, he began seriously questioning the composition, integrity and sustainability of our financial system which at its core includes a central bank that is privately owned, centralized and granted the outrageous right to unlimited emission of new currency at their sole discretion.

Needless to say, after critical analysis, research and discussions with friends, he stumbled upon bitcoin, blockchain and cryptocurrency. Seeing and participating in the extraordinary, freedom enabling benefits of this new parallel financial system together with its technological superiority, he founded LUXOLO Financial to broadly deliver cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology benefits to individuals and small businesses alike for everyday use in commerce.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

 

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:02] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:21] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, a clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision making on a different topic from the business owners or executives perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:43] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m the Managing Partner of Brady Ware Arpeggio, a data-driven management consultancy which brings clarity to owners and managers of unique businesses facing unique strategic decisions. Our parent, Brady Ware & Company, is sponsoring this podcast. Brady Ware is a public accounting firm with offices in Dayton, Ohio; Alpharetta, Georgia; Columbus, Ohio; and Richmond, Indiana.

Mike Blake: [00:01:07] If you would like to engage with me on my social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also host a LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck, so please join that as well if you would like to engage. Today’s topic is, should I integrate cryptocurrency into my business? And this is a topic I’ve wanted to do for a while.

Mike Blake: [00:01:35] Haven’t really been able to sync up with the right guest who, I just thought, would give us a great and in-depth perspective on it, and we can sort of make schedules sync up. And I feel almost apologetic about that, because this is a topic that’s long overdue, but that having been said, I think the timing is actually propitious. Cryptocurrency has always, of course, been a little bit of a roller coaster ride, and right now, as of late, cryptocurrencies, I think in a way that’s surprising to me anyway, have been retrenching quite a bit over the last several weeks, which frankly I find surprising, which probably reflects my own ignorance of the dynamics of cryptocurrency.

Mike Blake: [00:02:24] I would have bet a couple of months’ mortgage that cryptocurrencies would have become stronger after the Russian attack on Ukraine and suing financial sanctions that I think would have motivated a lot more activity to circumvent conventional and national banking systems. And maybe that is happening, but not enough to overcome other forces that are at play here. So, because of what’s going on in the crypto markets, I think this really, really as well timed a topic as any to talk about this, and I hope that you’ll agree.

Mike Blake: [00:03:00] I think it’s also important because I think everybody by now has heard the word or term, cryptocurrency, they have heard of Bitcoin, but it really is remarkable how few people actually know what it is. As it happens, I happen to do a lot of work in the cryptocurrency e-wallet exchange space, some work with crypto miners and valuing or appraising their businesses.

Mike Blake: [00:03:27] But many of my peers really still don’t have any idea how cryptocurrency works, what the value proposition is, et cetera. And I think that—I don’t think they’re an outlier. I think there are a lot of people that still need to be educated. And if you’re one of those people, I think you’re going to find this a very good use of your next 45 minutes or so.

Mike Blake: [00:03:49] And so, joining us today to help us out with this topic, who is an expert, because I’m not, is Daren Hebold, who is Founder and CEO of the LUX companies, which offer specialized asset management services for commercial real estate, together with financial asset management of cryptocurrency. He has cultivated a broad reputation of trust within the industry and community given his command of confidentiality, fiduciary duty and financial skills, and the handling of high value commercial real estate and digital assets.

Mike Blake: [00:04:20] After getting financially thrashed, his words, by the Great Recession of 2008 and ’09, and closely studying the US Central Bank and government responses, he began seriously questioning the composition, integrity, and sustainability of our financial system, which, at its core, includes a Central Bank that is privately owned, centralized and granted the right to unlimited admission of new currency at their sole discretion.

Mike Blake: [00:04:43] After critical analysis, research, and discussions with friends, he stumbled upon Bitcoin, blockchain, and cryptocurrency, seeing and participating in the extraordinary freedom-enabling benefits of this new parallel financial system together with its technological superiority. He founded LUXOLO Financial to broadly deliver cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology benefits to individuals and small businesses alike for everyday use in commerce. Daren, welcome to the Decision Vision podcast.

Daren Hebold: [00:05:12] Thank you, Mike, and great intro. I appreciate that.

Mike Blake: [00:05:16] So, as I said in my opening, a lot of people listening to this, I think, at this point ,don’t want to admit it, so what we’re going to do is we’re not going to crypto shame people and we’re going to let people address their lack of knowledge in a safe space, the privacy of their own headphones, their own car, whatever it is they’re listening to. What is cryptocurrency, and how does cryptocurrency come about?

Daren Hebold: [00:05:45] Great. Yeah, and we’ll keep it real simple to begin with, and then we’ll branch out. So, a Bitcoin, what is a Bitcoin? It’s electronic money. It is a peer-to-peer payment system. It’s a store of value. It’s a new financial system. It’s many things and it ticks many boxes. And this is something that we saw come out of the ashes of the last financial collapse after ’08. I think it was January 2009, the group, Satoshi Nakamoto, officially released Bitcoin and it’s just been branching out since then. I just wonder where we start, maybe, Mike, to keep it simple. I think-

Mike Blake: [00:06:45] Well, I think what people—I mean, the question I’m asked a lot, and I probably give a barely adequate answer, is how is cryptocurrency created? Right? We know about crypto miners. Most people have never seen a crypto mining rig. They don’t understand why people are buying PC gamer hardware to create this virtual or cyber currency. So, maybe talk a little about that. How does cryptocurrency get created, and why does that translate into a fungible value?

Daren Hebold: [00:07:15] Yes. Yeah. And yes, how is that valuable, and why do people recognize that great place? Okay. So, not all cryptocurrencies are created equal. So, Bitcoin was the very first one. And since then, I think, literally, there are over 17,000 cryptos out there.

Mike Blake: [00:07:34] Wow. I didn’t know that.

Daren Hebold: [00:07:34] Yeah, it’s just insane. And frankly, it’s a little bit of a junkyard out there. And I think we, in the industry, would probably agree that you could probably count literally on maybe one hand how many of those 17,000 cryptos could be reasonably considered money. The balance of them have other uses and utilities for smart contracts, and for programming, and for other functions, but probably aren’t considered money.

Daren Hebold: [00:08:06] Bitcoin is clearly the winner as far as recognition and global adoption, where people say, Yeah, that’s money and I’m going to use it as such and treat it as such. So, it’s unique because it requires a great expenditure of electricity to print or mint or mine, I guess we would call it, a Bitcoin. So, if you or I wanted to do it, we could do it tomorrow. You pop online, and for several thousand dollars, there’s an entry-level mining machine, and you don’t need any real skills, it’s a plug-and-play device.

Daren Hebold: [00:08:45] You plug it into your electricity and it juices it. Your bill goes through the roof and you start printing or mining Bitcoin rewards right away. So, anybody can do it. It just costs a lot of money. And we can talk about it later. We’ll unpack it. But the cost to mine one Bitcoin sort of sets the floor for the price, because it’s many thousands of dollars to mine one Bitcoin. Whereas, some of these other cryptocurrencies involve what’s called pre-mining or really just pressing a button and 10 billion units of some certain token appear.

Daren Hebold: [00:09:30] And so, there’s not a lot of intrinsic value in those projects, and the market determines that. No one person points and decrees which cryptos have value. The market decides, which I love. I love Mr. Market. And the market says [making sounds] that coin was pre-mined and it’s proof of stake, and I could create another one of those tomorrow morning, and that doesn’t have much value to me. That’s why that’s trading for a penny. Whereas, a Bitcoin is trading for $30,000 these days.

Mike Blake: [00:10:05] And what is the guts of how mining happens? Is it solving equations? Is it random number generator? Is it something else? I mean, how does that—and I understand we’re limited to Bitcoin, but I think Ethereum kind of works the same way. You can still mine Ethereum, and maybe Dogecoin, and others. How does that work that it proves that there’s an algorithm that effectively proves that you have produced somehow a piece of cryptocurrency?

Daren Hebold: [00:10:39] Sure, sure. I’ll keep it simple. So, Bitcoin was the first birth of a blockchain. And a blockchain simply means that there is a public ledger that everybody can pop online and view, and it just shows that I gave today here on May 18th, I gave Mike one Bitcoin from this wallet to that wallet, and that gets codified into a ledger. And what the mining does is it proves that. The mining network of all the global miners performs calculations and proves cryptographically that, yeah, Daren’s wallet gave Mike’s wallet one bitcoin on said date and time. It’s indisputable, it’s immutable, meaning nobody can go back in time and change it. It’s auditable. And everybody agrees that it happened.

Daren Hebold: [00:11:38] So, it’s a very crucial—it sounds trivial just to prove that I gave you money, but how else does a financial system work without a ledger that everybody can agree on? And mining is the way to secure that. And so, the people that have these rigs and spend not just thousands, but I mean, there are industrial scale mining facilities where people have invested $300 million, as you probably know, and they get paid to run those machines in the form of Bitcoin rewards. So, they run these machines. And then periodically over time, every 10 minutes, actually, the Bitcoin network kicks out some Bitcoin rewards to the miner who successfully hashed that particular transaction. And there’s an even distribution. So everybody gets their fair share of the Bitcoin rewards, everybody who is mining.

Mike Blake: [00:12:34] Okay. Now, I have to admit, and I’m supposed to know this, but I didn’t. 17,000 different cryptocurrencies, right? And most people do well if they can name one or more than one. How do they differ? We think of currencies, of course, national currency, the euro, the dollar, the yen, et cetera, but how do 17,000 different cryptocurrencies differentiate and how do you decide which one or ones is a business you want to trade in or deal in?

Daren Hebold: [00:13:05] Yeah, it’s a great question. Okay. I would say just broadly, I would call them coins and tokens, is kind of what the industry has settled upon. Coins generally refer to if something can be identified as money. And again, I think there’s probably five, maybe 10 tops that people would agree are coins/money. All the other ones are considered tokens and they each have their own separate blockchain.

Daren Hebold: [00:13:36] Again, they’re usually all free to use. Nobody owns them. Anybody can use them for the most part, and they just have different utilities, Mike. So, for example, Ethereum is a smart contract platform. It kind of straddles the fence. It’s the one unique one where Ethereum is kind of considered money right now and it’s trading for $2,000 per coin. But then, simultaneously, it’s a smart contract platform where you can program your Ethereum or your other tokens to do things that you want them to do.

Daren Hebold: [00:14:11] So, you can mirror legal contracts with a smart contract on a blockchain. So, that’s a huge, huge use case out there for crypto, is programmable money. And so, imagine every legal contract where a tenant has to pay a landlord, a supplier gets paid by a corporation, an employee gets paid by an employer, all these can get codified into a smart contract, and really, greatly simplify accounting, bookkeeping, auditing, payroll. Any number of industries are going to be certainly disintermediated by this.

Mike Blake: [00:14:57] So. We talked a little bit about this in your intro, but I’d really like to get your in-depth take on this, because I think it’s really important. And that is, why has cryptocurrency a currency that was invented, now, less than 15 years ago? Why has cryptocurrency found the market and the traction that it has? We’ve never seen anything like this in our lifetimes, have we?

Daren Hebold: [00:15:22] It’s a great point. Yeah. We have not seen new money, God, in centuries, right? I mean, way back there were several forms of money, coffee beans, large stones, wampum, parcels of real estate. You could probably name more. But no, we have not seen new money in a while. We’ve just been kind of going along with gold and silver up until it was made illegal by governments of the world, who, that did not fit their narrative, and they wanted to introduce central bank fiat debt currencies, and they have successfully run with that for quite some time now.

Daren Hebold: [00:16:09] But look what’s happening. Maybe they didn’t do such a great job. We had a great run with fiat currencies, but if you pop on the imf.org right now, it’s nothing short of a death procession of every single fiat currency out there that are experiencing hyperinflation as we speak. So, Central Banks invented these currencies, and then they got themselves into a pickle when they started printing more, and more, and more, almost without discretion. And in the last two years alone, the US dollar has printed—40% of the dollars in circulation were printed, meaning the Central Bank in the US pressed the button, and dollars, electronic dollars came out, and that comes with consequences.

Daren Hebold: [00:17:00] So, even our beloved dollar is now eight-and-a-half-plus percent inflation. And so, circling back to your question, the reason that we need to consider new forms of money is people are getting eaten alive with the fiat currencies that are tanking in value. Turkey, 54% inflation. If you have $1,000 in your bank account, by Christmas, it’ll be half of that. I mean, that’s catastrophic. I mean, can you imagine that? So, we, citizens in different countries in the world, that have been forced to use fiat currencies are being forced to come up with alternatives, and I think Bitcoin ticks a lot of boxes there.

Mike Blake: [00:17:47] Earlier in my life, I actually did live in a hyperinflationary environment. I lived in Belarus and Ukraine shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and they were struggling to launch their own currencies as their currency just died, right? The Soviet ruble was just gone overnight. And the last time that I was over there for any length of time, the exchange rate was 200,000 Belarusian rubles to the dollar. And about 80,000—the currency that was existing, where it’s used to be called the karbovanets, 80,000 of them to the dollar.

Mike Blake: [00:18:21] And I remember paying for lunch with bags of money and the server would have to come over with one of those banknote counters to make sure that I paid the correct amount. And it was just so chaotic, because the prices couldn’t even keep up. You see a Snickers bar that would be for sale in the morning for 3,000 rubles, you come down at the end of the day, be 7,000. It was crazy, and I wonder if cryptocurrency could have helped those economies achieve some stability back then.

Daren Hebold: [00:18:56] Interesting. Well, I’ll tell you, another thing that’s important is just governance. So, I think part of the reason Bitcoin has floated to the top is just that. There’s only ever going to be 21 million Bitcoins. That is huge. So, we’re controlling. We, collectively, all the miners, have signaled that we want a cap on Bitcoin, and that tends to preserve its value, whereas governments have unlimited emission. So, we’ve got to have governance in place to govern emission, use, just kind of equity and the fact that it cannot be censored, or revised, or reversed.

Daren Hebold: [00:19:42] All these are important things. And and if we can keep those favorable attributes in place, which they are, for Bitcoin specifically, then absolutely. It’s a great use case. You touched on Belarus and Russia. Let me just read you something here. Granted, this statement’s a couple of weeks old, but with the advent of Russia being internationally sanctioned, where people cannot bank with any Russian. Not just the prime minister of Russia or the 2,000 oligarchs who have been tagged as being criminals, but everybody in Russia is being equally penalized. Here’s a statement here from CryptoSlate magazine.

Daren Hebold: [00:20:25] “Russian citizens are justifiably fearing the seizure of their retail deposits and naturally want to protect their capital. Purchasing digital assets is an effective means by which ordinary citizens can move savings out of the financial system in order to preserve capital.” What a powerful statement. I mean, that is quite a use case if I’ve ever heard one. Another one was the Canadian truckers who did not break any law, were never convicted of a crime, but their banks froze their accounts, just politically. They just didn’t appreciate truckers driving around talking about freedom. That’s a threat.

Daren Hebold: [00:21:09] So, they froze bank accounts left and right, and citizens were left without legal recourse other than accepting donations via cryptocurrency, so another use case. I guess more and more, we’re seeing that it’s become cool for governments to become tyrannical and sort of take matters into their own hands, including their Central Bank money policies. And it’s really not funny to the average person who has worked their whole life to establish some savings and is starting to see it just melt away via inflation and such.

Mike Blake: [00:21:47] So, a key feature of cryptocurrency, I think, and correct me if I’m wrong, please, is that there is no king or queen of Bitcoin. There is no Bitcoin chairperson, There is no czar. It’s just out there, right? And it’s self-regulating, self-trading, and that’s it.

Daren Hebold: [00:22:08] That’s it. No one owns it. Everyone can use it. Exactly. And it is literally free. You can be a dirt farmer in a foreign country, and you can download a wallet, and begin using it immediately. And no one can stop you, or ask you what you’re doing or why, and that’s just fantastic. There’s no intermediaries, too, or it’s direct peer-to-peer payments.

Mike Blake: [00:22:37] Are you familiar with FATCA, the relatively new regulation about disclosing international payments? It’s an acronym for something. I forget what it’s called, but you probably would know it.

Daren Hebold: [00:22:48] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:22:50] Is that driving cryptocurrency, too? Because, man, what a pain. What a pain that regulation is not. Not that it costs that much, but the burden of complying with that paperwork, I’ve ridden shotgun with people that are doing it when they’re buying or selling businesses, transferring assets. It is a monster.

Daren Hebold: [00:23:10] The notion of borders literally becomes foolish when you start working in cryptocurrency. You say, why? Why do I have to stop, get frisked, hassled, taxed, chipped, and tracked, just because I want to give Mike some money, because he’s over that border over there, be it a federal state or international border? It’s silly. And there are very few instances when I think it’s a legitimate hassle, to be honest with you. So, there are people that are going to violate laws, and no matter what type of money is in use at the contemporary time, yeah, certain number of people are going to violate laws. But just the fact that I’m sending money over a border, I’m not sure how that entitles all manner of authorities to hassle me, and possibly censor and resist my transaction.

Mike Blake: [00:24:12] Yeah. And for those of you scoring at home, FATCA, F-A-T-C-A, stands for Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. Sorry, I didn’t have that prepared. That was an off-the-cuff question I thought of. But take a look at it. It is burdensome. Whether you agree with it or not, I don’t think anybody disagrees that it’s burdensome. So, Daren, this is a business podcast, what is the killer app for a business person to start using or expand the use of cryptocurrency in their business?

Daren Hebold: [00:24:49] Great. Awesome question. Let’s get right to it. So, okay, so here we are, we’re 12 years into Bitcoin. There are two killer apps right now for business, and I’m using them both. First one is hold bitcoin specifically on your balance sheet of your business. Okay. That serves several purposes. First of all, it’s balanced on your balance sheet. It’s owner’s equity that you can carry short, medium, or long term as just additional equity within your company that tends to grow over time.

Daren Hebold: [00:25:30] I mean, if you look at the long haul, it generally is going to appreciate over time passively, without doing anything. The second thing you can do with that Bitcoin on your balance sheet is it’s lending collateral. So, we and your listeners out there can become your own bank. So, you can post—for every bitcoin you post—well, let me back up. Okay. So, you’re holding a tranche of Bitcoins on your corporate balance sheet.

Daren Hebold: [00:26:03] Those are Bitcoins. You say, okay, great, but I need USD to operate my business, I need some working capital, I need a revolving line of credit. You usually go to the bank to get that. Now, crypto banks have emerged, where they say, Hey, Mike, post your bitcoins with us as collateral and we’ll give you up to a 50% loan in US dollars that you can use for whatever purpose you want, you don’t need underwriting, it’s just simply a balance sheet loan, and we can offer you a very competitive interest rate of about 4.95%.

Daren Hebold: [00:26:41] How’s that sound to you? Well, it sounds fantastic to me, and I use it all the time. So, we’ve taken a portion of our corporate treasury and post it as collateral in some of these trusted crypto banks who have lent us US dollars that we can use for working capital. It’s a fantastic instrument. And what happens is as time goes on, the value of my collateral goes up, and we say to ourselves, I look at my partner, and we say, alright, you know what, let’s retire that loan and go get a new 50% loan based on an increased value of our Bitcoins that we own.

Daren Hebold: [00:27:19] So, that’s the first killer use for businesses, Mike. The second one, we haven’t mentioned this phrase yet, but one cryptocurrency that we believe in is USDC. USDC is issued by Circle Financial in Boston. It is a digital version of a dollar. It’s pegged 1 to 1 with the dollar with audited reserves. And what you can do with that digital dollar is go to the same crypto banks that I was describing and earn a meaningful interest rate. So, the savings account is back. I mean, when’s the last time we were getting 4, 5, 6, 7% interest rate in a bank account, perhaps the early ’90s.

Mike Blake: [00:28:09] Ages ago.

Daren Hebold: [00:28:10] Ages ago. And now, it’s gone. Now, it’s a fraction of 1%, and with inflation, you lose. So, now, you can take your US dollars, convert them to USDC which we believe is the forerunner of stable coins, and post them on deposit with these crypto banks, and earn something in that range that I just said, 4 to 7% is kind of the prevailing rate, and you say, wow, how can they afford to pay depositors that much? That’s fantastic.

Daren Hebold: [00:28:46] I mean, how can they do that? They’re a lender. So, they turn around and lend that money out with about a 2% spread. And then, you say, well, how does that interest rate compute? Because a minute ago, you said you’re a borrower at about 5%, and then on the other hand, you’re a lender at about 6 or 7%. Well, the way they work it is small LTVs, so internal to their banks.

Daren Hebold: [00:29:15] They’re only lending out a very small percentage of their assets that they’re holding as collateral. And additionally, when you post collateral, you’re no longer earning interest. So, they’re only paying interest on a very small percentage of the assets they’re holding in custody. That’s how the math works out for them. But those are the two killer apps that I can bring to you guys today. There are going to be many more, and we can unpack those if you’d like.

Mike Blake: [00:29:49] One I’ve thought about, you tell me if I’m wrong, but I wonder if international payment settlement would also be a killer app, because moving money in between countries is still, amazingly enough, a 7 to 10-day exercise, and that’s just too long.

Daren Hebold: [00:30:08] Agreed. And I’m almost out of school in saying this, but I think this probably addresses your question. I believe BRICS, the BRICS consortium of Brazil, Russia, India, China, I believe when they conduct their international trade, they’re settling in gold, I believe, right? I don’t know if it’s physical or if it’s promissory notes of gold, but yeah, think about that. If they could settle in Bitcoin, you can send $20 billion and it cost you a mining fee of just over a dollar right now. So, it’s just a fantastic medium of exchange in that regard. And again, yes, borderless, to your point, and you don’t have to gain permission.

Daren Hebold: [00:31:02] It’s entirely up to the sender and the recipient to conduct their business as they will. So, I think that’s a great use case. You’re also going to see Bitcoin—perhaps, before you see it as an international settlement device, you’re going to see it—right now, it’s an individual settlement. You gave me a car, I gave you a Bitcoin. Then, you’re going to see it as an intercorporate settlement. I owe you $5 million, I’m going to settle in Bitcoin. Then, you’re going to see it governmental, and then international. So, it’s scaling up. It’s no longer a tool for geeks to trade on the web with and nobody else cares about it.

Mike Blake: [00:31:49] Now, I know you have a background in real estate as well, so I’m curious about your view on this question, is that, I wonder if cryptocurrency, in general, and Bitcoin, in particular, has a role to play for real estate, especially given the velocity of transactions, right? And my own personal story, we’re considering property in Portugal for retirement, but properties are going as fast, they’re just as fast as they are here, right? Telling somebody, hey, I want to buy the house, but you’ve got to wait 7 to 10 days before the money shows up, you’re going to lose real estate opportunities if you have to wait that long for the money to show up.

Daren Hebold: [00:32:27] Yeah, you got it. So, boy, there’s a lot of boxes that crypto ticks as far as real estate transactions. So, where do we start? Let’s see. I guess I would start by saying, yeah, it’s very fluid and liquid. If you find a property you like, you can escrow your deposit with a title company in 30 seconds. It’s done. Boom. And in the future I think you’re going to see, associated with that deposit, Mike, you’re going to see a smart contract replace title agencies.

Daren Hebold: [00:33:08] Like here’s a transaction, you log into a web-based console, and there are 14 steps required. And step one is sign a purchase agreement. Step two is here’s the Bitcoin address for your deposit. Step three is attorneys conduct title work and upload their results, et cetera, et cetera. So, there will be essentially an algorithmic title closing agency of the future. I’d love to do it. It’s another startup I don’t have time for right now. Maybe somebody else can do that.

Mike Blake: [00:33:40] Yeah, that’s plenty of room. So, we’ve talked about all the positives about cryptocurrency. What are the pitfalls or the risks? What is somebody somebody thinking about deepening their relationship with crypto in their business? What do they need to be aware of? What are the potential gotchas if you’re not careful?

Daren Hebold: [00:34:00] Sure, sure. Yeah. Okay. First of all, I would start with just like selection of coin. There’s just all too few cryptocurrencies that will be around five or 10 years from now. So, at our exchange, when we’re advising desk clients, we say, listen, just stick with this short list of five potential coins to put into your portfolio. So, number 1 would be selection and longevity. Number 2, everybody’s very focused on the price, and right now, it’s kind of a buzz saw.

Daren Hebold: [00:34:42] The prices of all cryptos, and frankly, even Wall Street and commodity assets are just all over the map, and there’s been a big drawdown in the last six months. It’s like a 35% drawdown across like all commodities, and securities, and cryptos in the last six months. And there’s a lot of forces at play and not everybody wants to see Bitcoin succeed. There’s just a lot of vested interests who would much rather that it be uninvented and go back where it came from, because they like earning 3% transaction fees.

Daren Hebold: [00:35:15] They like having unlimited Central Bank fiat emissions. They like having total control over everybody’s movements. And there are instruments to bring cryptos down, like derivatives and shorting. And so, there’s that. And then, thirdly, I would say storage. So, the beauty of cryptocurrency, one piece we haven’t touched on, is just custody. You no longer have to place your money in custody with someone else. You can engage in 100% self-custody, meaning you hold your wallet, or you can do what we have chosen after four years of careful planning, which is collaborative custody, which is Mike holds a key, and our firm, LUXOLO Financial holds the other key, and then we send you home with a backup key.

Daren Hebold: [00:36:07] So, you hold two of three keys to your crypto wallet and we hold one. And unless there’s unanimous consent across the key holders, no money can leave the wallet. So, it’s a fantastic method of enjoying the beauty of self-custody, but also having someone holding your hand, so you don’t lose your shirt when you forget your passcode or your private key. So, not having a custodian is a very, very large advantage, particularly, today, when we’re seeing banks and governments, again, go tyrannical and just decide that we’re going to seize your assets.

Daren Hebold: [00:36:47] If I’ve got time, I’ll read you one other thing. There’s a very large online exchange that I’m sure we’ve all heard of, and they just released in their latest 10-Q SEC filing the following statement. “Because custodially held crypto assets may be considered to be the property of a bankruptcy estate, in the event of bankruptcy, the crypto assets we hold in custody on behalf of you, our customer, could be subject to bankruptcy proceedings, and such customers could be treated as general unsecured creditors.” Wow. Think about that.

Daren Hebold: [00:37:26] That is called a bail-in, if you guys aren’t familiar with it. That’s when a bank or company becomes insolvent due to a run on withdrawals, and they say, well, we got to take 40% of your Bitcoins and you can probably have the rest. So, unbelievable, that that’s a statement made by a publicly traded cryptocurrency exchange. We might take your Bitcoins if we run into trouble. So, that’s why you don’t want custody. That is exactly why. So, consider holding your crypto in your own wallets or in a collaborative custody environment. You can set up your attorney, or your accountant, or your trustee with a key. There are many ways to mirror legal frameworks with the signatories on a wallet.

Mike Blake: [00:38:15] That custody question brings an idea that’s half-baked and maybe it’s totally stupid, so you can feel free to tell me that, it’s just the internet, and that is this, that for good or ill, I do a lot of work with partnerships that are not working out, and one partner’s going to buy the other out, and they just couldn’t agree on stuff. And one of the issues that comes up often is simple governance, right? Who has the right to sign that check? Who has the right to make a distribution? Who has the right to take out that loan or repay a loan? That sort of thing.

Mike Blake: [00:38:57] And historically, companies, just for expediency, have had to give one shareholder kind of the keys to the kingdom, and hope that obey the rules and do the right thing, because trying to put two or three signatures in the same check, and get everybody in the same room, and the technology is not there to do that in a very real way. But it occurs to me, of cryptocurrency, where, literally, all you have to do is everybody just kind of put their thumbprints on the phone to authorize a transaction or not authorize a transaction, could actually be a fantastic governance tool.

Daren Hebold: [00:39:34] Absolutely. You nailed it. So, you’re able to take what was an informal governance plan, like the two dudes have to both sign all checks over five grand, well, that’s not enforceable and it’s impossible to-

Mike Blake: [00:39:49] Hard to implement in practice, for sure.

Daren Hebold: [00:39:50] Yeah. Whereas, with cryptocurrency, you can strictly enforce all this with software. And that’s how I run my company. My partner and I require unanimous consent for all withdrawals, both fiat and crypto, and it’s just a fantastic advent. And yeah, and it applies not just to businesses, Mike, but I mean, I’m just thinking of, yeah, real estate transactions, with these lawyers, title agents, trustees, various adverse parties, just things where you need an absolutely objective and bulletproof governance, you can implement that without trouble. It’s built right in to the Bitcoin blockchain functionality. You don’t need to be a software programmer. That functionality is built in.

Mike Blake: [00:40:40] Can you think of a kind of business that shouldn’t be fooling with cryptocurrency? Is there somebody that, yeah, this isn’t for you?

Daren Hebold: [00:40:48] Yeah, it’s interesting. I mean, both individually and corporately, you probably have to have some risk tolerance. You probably have to have a longer view on your treasury assets. And you probably—yeah, I’d say those are the two major factors. And so, for a very, very conservative person or company, it might not tick the boxes. It might not work. I’d say that, and as I’m saying that, though, like mass mutual insurance, one of the most conservative companies I can think of, bought $100 million of Bitcoin to put on their balance sheet.

Daren Hebold: [00:41:31] And that news came out maybe a year-and-a-half ago, and you can see the transaction on bitcointreasuries.org. And so, I said, why would a hyper conservative insurance company do something like that? And it turns out they did it to buttress some of their negative yielding bonds, actually, so they saw it as a partial solution to bolster their profitability over time.

Mike Blake: [00:41:59] So, I’m going to ask you to put on your fortune teller costume for a minute, because I think the future of cryptocurrency is really interesting, and I would argue it’s sort of an inflection point. And one of the things I’d like you to opine on is, do you see cryptocurrency ultimately replacing conventional national currencies, or do they find a way to co-exist?

Daren Hebold: [00:42:26] Wow. That’s a fantastic question. Look no further than Central America, which is becoming the cradle of governments adopting Bitcoin as national legal tender, and look at the reasons for that. They are forced to either use the dollar, which is experiencing significant inflation, but they’re not experiencing any of the benefits of like the Joe Biden airdrop monies, the cheap debt, the COVID rent relief checks, the PPP, they don’t get any of those benefits, but they have to suffer the indignity of the high inflation of the dollar, and they say, no more.

Daren Hebold: [00:43:12] We’re adopting Bitcoin in El Salvador, and Panama, in Mexico. This is the roster of countries moving forward for that reason, and that train didn’t stop at any time soon. And I think absolutely, you’re going to see them coexist, much to the chagrin of the IMF, who comes out with heavy-handed penalizing statements each time a country decides to do this. And so, that tells you it’s good. It tells you that the country did the right thing by increasing their options for their citizens, which, that makes the IMF mad when citizens have options.

Mike Blake: [00:43:52] Well, Reggie Jackson is famous for saying, they don’t boo nobodies.

Daren Hebold: [00:43:57] Yeah, you got it. Yeah. So, crystal ball, yeah, you’re going to see it being a permissible legal tender in increasingly more countries. In so doing that, it’s no longer subject to capital gains tax in whatever country does that. You’re going to see retailers accepting cryptos. You’re going to see hybrid neobanks and financial service firms, such as mine, appearing. Legacy banks are just, in no way, going to adapt and build infrastructure for this.

Daren Hebold: [00:44:37] It’s just not happening and I don’t think it is going to happen. They will make desperate attempts to pay consultants to bolt things on, but I think you’re going to see a whole new industry of neobanks, cryptobanks, and crypto financial service providers, such as us, providing all financial services in the future, including allowing you to become your own bank, your own lender. You’ll be able to deposit your paycheck, invest in cryptos, take out a loan against those cryptos, convert back, all seamlessly within one app.

Mike Blake: [00:45:15] Some countries have said that they’re exploring launching digital currencies. The US has talked about it. I think Sweden, to my recollection, is probably the most advanced in their thinking on this. I think they’re beta-testing an e-krona at this point. I don’t know if you’re familiar with them, but if you are, are those in the cryptocurrency family, or are they kind of something different?

Daren Hebold: [00:45:44] Stay away from Central Bank digital currencies, yeah. They’re a tool of control and manipulation. They’re most popular among communist governments, namely People’s Republic of China has started the digital one program. And I can get into all of the very unfortunate attributes that the users of that currency suffer, but I will say this, it’s not a cryptocurrency. It’s a centralized database, and it is not a public ledger. It is not a consensus-based protocol, where people can democratically vote and get involved. Absolutely not. It’s an enhanced layer of control for central banks to administer their debt-based fiat currencies. So, that’s my stern warning against these, yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:46:47] Okay. I’m talking with Daren Hebold, and the topic is, should I integrate cryptocurrency into my business? Keeping you in your fortuneteller’s costume, what is it—and you may or may not agree with the premise, I don’t think cryptocurrency is quite mainstream yet. I think it’s close, but I’m not sure I would characterize it as mainstream yet, simply because I can’t go to Kroger yet and pay for groceries with cryptocurrency. So, that would be kind of cool. So, what do you think it’s going to take? Is it just gradual adoption? Is there a day of reckoning or an inflection point? What is it going to take when we’re going to recognize cryptocurrency as a mainstream medium of exchange and storage of wealth?

Daren Hebold: [00:47:34] Yeah, you got it. We’re not far. Money requires adoption, use, portability over time and space, durability, yeah, store of value, medium of exchange. And we are moving up that adoption curve rapidly as almost a one—I think it’s just over a $1 trillion market cap of all cryptos, the vast majority of that value being Bitcoin, specifically. More to the heart of your question, we, in the industry, believe that there could be a seminal moment coming, where as traditional assets classes continue to burn down in value, we strongly believe there’s a likelihood Bitcoin can serve as an ultimate hedge.

Daren Hebold: [00:48:30] Now, that’s yet to be proven, because everybody’s saying that’s correlated with the stock market, et cetera, but we see a seminal moment when there is the next Lehman Brothers moment of this era. We think Bitcoin is going to play a crucial role in preserving, enhancing value during said crisis, and that might not be that far away. We’ve got a lot of people out there talking about Lehman Brother-type analogies with modern day companies these days.

Mike Blake: [00:49:02] So, if someone listening to this podcast is on board, they believe the thesis that like, yeah, cryptocurrency got to start doing it, how does someone get started? How do you dip your toe? How do you open the door?

Daren Hebold: [00:49:16] You got it. Alright. Good question. So, we recommend starting small. So, anybody considering investing in Bitcoin, I would start with that coin. It’s probably the most reliable over time. Buy small amounts weekly, monthly, over time, recurring basis, you’ll be able to dollar cost average in that way. You can come to an exchange either online, but you’ll have to help yourself and figure it all out yourself in that regard, or you can come to an in-person, over-the-counter concierge exchange like my firm, for example.

Daren Hebold: [00:49:50] I’m one of just a handful in the country that does this, where you can walk or phone in LUXOLO Financial here in Portland, Maine, right on Marginal Way, or phone in, and we will walk you through the process of setting up a wallet, and funding your exchange transaction, either on a one-time or a recurring basis. And one of the wealthiest persons I know, you’re going to like this, in 2016, he started buying $21 a day of Bitcoin, and he hasn’t let up, and he’s a millionaire right now.

Daren Hebold: [00:50:28] So, I think that’s a pretty reasonable investment, and there are people who can afford to sink a lot more than that into it. So, give it a try. I think you’ll be thrilled with how it functions and how it can be used as collateral for lending, and money, for purchases. And there’s quite a lot of good people working in the industry. It’s a lot of fun.

Mike Blake: [00:50:54] Daren, it’s been a great conversation, but unfortunately, we’re running out of time. There are probably topics that our listeners would have wanted me to cover, but we didn’t or wish we would have spent more time on. If somebody wants to contact you for more information about how to integrate cryptocurrency into their business, can they contact you to follow up with questions, and if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Daren Hebold: [00:51:15] Thank you. Yes. Whether it’s me or one of my skillful team members, yeah, please do reach out to us with no obligation here at LUXOLO Financial. The website’s luxolo, L-U-X-O-L-O, .io, and you can either telephone us, email us, or chat with us on a little chat on our screen website there, and we’ll be happy to lay out some options, and see if it’s a match for you.

Mike Blake: [00:51:47] And that’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. I’d like to thank Daren Hebold so much for sharing his expertise with us. We’ll be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in, so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it.

Mike Blake: [00:52:00] If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us so that we can help them. If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake, our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company, and this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Bitcoin, Brady Ware & Company, Crypto, cryptocurrency, Daren Hebold, Decision Vision, Lux Companies, LUXOLO Financial, Mike Blake, mining bitcoin

Decision Vision Episode 169: Should I Have My Business Valued Every Year? – An Interview with Doug Marshall, Marshall+Viliesis, LLC

May 19, 2022 by John Ray

Doug Marshall
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 169: Should I Have My Business Valued Every Year? - An Interview with Doug Marshall, Marshall+Viliesis, LLC
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Doug Marshall

Decision Vision Episode 169: Should I Have My Business Valued Every Year? – An Interview with Doug Marshall, Marshall+Viliesis, LLC

Doug Marshall, Partner at Marshall+Viliesis, LLC, joined host Mike Blake to cover the process of having a business valuation done, and whether doing a valuation every year is advisable. They discussed the factors which impact a business’s value, ways it can be valued, reasons to do it annually, whether it should be done in-house or independently, and much more.

Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Marshall+Viliesis, LLC

Marshall+Viliesis, LLC is a firm dedicated to helping owners Value & Protect their largest and most important asset.

Business Value Protection Planning™ is a proprietary system developed by Marshall+Viliesis to help owners through the planning process with speed and accuracy. It guides them through the four critical areas of Succession, Retirement, Estate and Key Stakeholder. Planning.

Starting with a valuation Business Value Protection Planning™ has the ultimate goal of planning which is Current, Complete and Coordinated. Business owners think differently than the wealthy affluent and deserve a better planning experience designed for them.

Company website | LinkedIn

Doug Marshall, Founding Partner, Marshall+Viliesis, LLC

Doug Marshall, Founding Partner, Marshall+Viliesis, LLC

Doug Marshall is a founding partner at Marshall+Viliesis, LLC. He is focused on helping owners get the planning they deserve to protect the wealth, income, and legacy of their business.

Along with his partner Peter Viliesis he created Business Value Protection Planning™, a system designed to deliver planning that starts with a valuation of the business. Knowing the current value of a business helps an owner make better decisions for the business. It helps the owner make better decisions for growth, decisions for protecting the business value, and decisions to help unlock business value.

Previously Doug has worked with Nationwide, Manulife/John Hancock in the Corporate Products division where he developed and marketed Corporate-Owned and Bank-Owned Life Products. He has been associated with Penn Mutual on the brokerage side as well.

He is located in Seattle Washington where the state is home to over 400 Craft Breweries. Much of his focus is working with Brewery Owners, a fascinating manufacturing industry. If you are ever in Seattle he will be more than happy to take you on a tour!

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:02] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:21] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision making on a different topic from the business owners or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:42] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m the Managing Partner of Brady Ware Arpeggio, a data-driven management consultancy, which brings clarity to owners and managers of unique businesses facing unique strategic decisions. Our parent, Brady Ware & Company is sponsoring this podcast. Brady Ware is a public accounting firm with offices in Dayton, Ohio; Alpharetta, Georgia; Columbus, Ohio; and Richmond, Indiana.

Mike Blake: [00:01:07] If you’d like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck, so please join that as well if you would like to engage.

Mike Blake: [00:01:25] Today’s topic is should I have my business valued every year? And this is a topic that I have avoided. It has been suggested to me that I really should be doing more valuation stuff, because at least nominally, that’s the field that I’m in. But to be perfectly candid, I’ve been reluctant to do it, because I didn’t know how to do it in a way that just wasn’t completely self-serving. And those of you who know this podcast, who have hung around and listened to a few of these, you know that I have no interest in turning this thing into an infomercial.

Mike Blake: [00:02:04] We put information out there that we hope and believe is useful to our audience. We bring experts on that can talk about the topic and just sort of let it go at that. But the fact of the matter is that valuation of a business is important, and it’s important for a lot of reasons, whether you’re thinking of selling your business, you’re positioning it to be transferred to a family member or somebody else, there are tax planning implications, all kinds of reasons why you ought to know or at least have some idea as to the value of your business should you decide to sell it or another business should you decide to buy it.

Mike Blake: [00:02:49] But I didn’t want to get on here and basically just do a monologue, and again, be sort of Ron Popeil selling the Ronco Rotisserie Showtime grill, which, by the way, as an aside, is fantastic. I’ve had one for like 15 years. I got one as a Christmas present for my mother, and I thought, for sure, this is going to be one of these things that goes into the attic with like 25 years of fruitcake, but I’ll tell you, the damn thing works. It actually does make the best tasting chicken and turkey we’ve ever had. So, they’re not a sponsor of the show, and as far as I know, Mr. Popeil, I actually think, passed away about 10 years ago. But anyway, that’s a sort of an aside there. If you’re thinking of getting one, go ahead and get one, because I think they’re pretty neat.

Mike Blake: [00:03:34] So, helping me out here to make sure that this isn’t an infomercial, and frankly, just to sort of keep me in line is my friend joining us from Washington State, Doug Marshall, who is a founding partner in Marshall|Viliesis, LLC. He’s focused on helping owners get the planning they deserve to protect the wealth, income, and legacy of their business. Along with his partner, Peter Viliesis, he created Business Value Protection Planning, a system designed to deliver planning that starts the valuation of a business.

Mike Blake: [00:04:03] Knowing the current value of a business helps an owner make better decisions for the business and helps the owner make better decisions for growth, for protecting the business value and decisions to help unlock business value. And I think that second part is very important and is very overlooked, especially when times are good, but protecting value is so important, and I think that it’s not as sexy as growth or profit, but, boy, building resilience into your business, or as Nicholas Taleb would say, antifragility into your business, I think that it is an incredibly important concept that maybe we’ll dive more deeply in another show.

Mike Blake: [00:04:48] Previously, Doug has worked with Nationwide Manulife John Hancock in the Corporate Products Division, where he developed and marketed corporate-owned and bank-owned life products. He has been associated with Penn Mutual on the brokerage side as well. He’s located in Seattle, Washington, with a status home to over 400 craft breweries. Much of his focus is working with brewery owners, a fascinating manufacturing industry. That’s something that we have a guy in our practice who owns Sizemore, does a bunch of as well. If you’re ever in Seattle, he’ll be more than happy to take you on a tour. So, with that, I’d like to welcome Doug Marshall to the Decision Vision podcast.

Doug Marshall: [00:05:25] Thank you, Michael. It’s a pleasure to be here. Really appreciate the opportunity.

Mike Blake: [00:05:30] So, explain to our list, and of course, I know the answer to this question, but most of our listeners don’t, what is a business valuation?

Doug Marshall: [00:05:41] Well, it doesn’t come with a set of steak knives, so we definitely are not doing an infomercial here. But I think that most business owners have a notional value of what their business is worth, because they talk to other business owners, right? Yet, at the same time, very few go through the formal process of getting a valuation, of having somebody take all of their financial data, look at what the business is expected to do over the next few years, and come up with a number that says, this is what your business is worth, and having that knowledge is rather important.

Doug Marshall: [00:06:23] So, in your practice, in my practice, what we will do when we’re working with the business owner is we’ll collect three, maybe five years of historical financial data. We’ll do an interview and we’ll find out what the business owner is about and what’s going on with the business, and we’ll do a projection of what the expected cash flows are to be, and we’ll come up with a number.

Doug Marshall: [00:06:46] And there are a number of different valuation numbers. There’s equity value, and I don’t expect that we’ll go into all of this detail now, but there’s equity value, asset sale value, enterprise value, liquidation value, book value. So, there are a number of different measures and a number of different ways to look at the value of a business, but it’s important for an owner to know. Did I answer the question alright for what we wanted to do?

Mike Blake: [00:07:10] Well, I think so. So, at the end of the day, evaluation, it sounds like, is a third-party, and I think importantly, an independent view as to what the business is, at least, ostensibly worth. Let me ask this. I’m very curious to get your view on this. In your experience, do you think that more business owners are likely to think their business is more than it’s actually worth, what it would likely sell for, or less than what it would likely sell for? In other words, are business owners too optimistic or too pessimistic?

Doug Marshall: [00:07:50] I think it’s 50-50, and I think it also depends on their mood. They could have come off a crappy week, and they could say, well, I’m not that optimistic that anybody’s interested in my business, I don’t know how to transfer it, my kids aren’t interested in it. So, they don’t really know. And then, they’ll be with their buddies. I mean, business owners tend to hang with business owners, and I know this is true in the brewery business, but they’ll say, my business is worth a certain multiple of earnings or EBITDA and there will be this rule of thumb in there, but it’s not necessarily what their business is worth, and I also want to make sure that everybody understands that I can value a business for $10 million and it sells for $13 million, but that was kind of a strategic purchase, possibly.

Doug Marshall: [00:08:42] So, just because I come up with a range of value, you come up with a range of value doesn’t mean that that’s what the business is going to sell for. So, ultimately, if somebody’s looking to sell a business, which is usually why people think that they should get a valuation, they’re in a position where they may or may not get that number, but I think it’s all over the map.

Mike Blake: [00:09:05] Yeah. And I think that that point is very important, in that defining value is actually deceptively hard. And Warren Buffett would say where price is what you pay, value is what you get, we know the technical definitions of value in terms of buying and willing informed seller and buyer, and the fact of the matter is that most of the time, an asset, particularly if it’s not on a liquid public market, an asset trades for, it’s something that can be quite far from what you and I might say is fair value, and that’s because the markets aren’t all that efficient.

Doug Marshall: [00:09:51] Right. Because it’s very limited and people don’t really pay attention to that, but you also might be a minority shareholder, so your value is less. You might not have marketability of your stock, so your value is less. You might have controlling interest, so your value is more. Yeah, but lack of marketability really creates a problem to get a true value for an owner. That’s why I think it’s so important to know the value well in advance of any event that takes place so that you’re not caught off guard.

Mike Blake: [00:10:23] Now, in your practice, what is involved in a business valuation? You talked about reviewing and analyzing historical financial data up to five years, but I imagine it’s much more than that. Can you share with our audience kind of what other processes and procedures enter into a business valuation process?

Doug Marshall: [00:10:45] Well, I know that we’re going to get to this question later, but predominantly, I’m using an online algorithmic system called BizEquity. And the reason for that is that I’m trying to not have the valuation process get in the way of the answer that the business owner really, really needs. And that is approximately, how much is my business worth? And this is well in advance of when they’re looking to sell it, so that the business owner can put in three years of financial data, we can do some projections out, and we come up with a report that will give them insight into the different valuation numbers for them.

Doug Marshall: [00:11:22] And it’s important to know, because if you’re going to do a buy-sell agreement with a partner, you want to know that that business is approximately worth seven-and-a-half million dollars, and you want to know that if I need to buy out my partner, it’s going to cost me three-and-a-half, if that’s what we agreed to. So, our process is relatively simple, because we want fast, inexpensive, and non-intrusive.

Doug Marshall: [00:11:51] Typically, and a lot of the work that you do, Mike, entails a lot of time and a lot of expense, and you’re worth it, but that’s because you’re trying to grind down the numbers so that you can support it legally from a tax standpoint, or you might have a litigation matter, or you’re doing something that’s highly subjective, saying, I don’t know what the future holds, so here’s this range, if anybody knows about your practice and the things that you do.

Doug Marshall: [00:12:20] I think one of the primary reasons, that I think there are two primary reasons why business owners don’t typically get a valuation. And the first reason is time and expense. It’s just like, it’s too much time, and owners, they have drive and discipline to grow their business, they’re not looking to spend time doing this other stuff that’s not directly growing their business. And to be quite honest, since more than 90% don’t keep valuations current, 90% of business owners don’t keep valuations current, business has gotten along fine without having formal valuations done on a regular basis, right? I mean, it’s not like we’re seeing businesses collapse, because they haven’t done these valuations.

Doug Marshall: [00:13:02] You know what I mean? If they need valuations to succeed, the business would be thriving and we’d have more than 10,000 professionals doing valuations throughout the country, but that’s not the case. So, normally, and I think owners also think that the only time that I really need a valuation is when I’m contemplating doing something like a gifting program, which that’s required. Like if I’m going to sue somebody, that might be required. If I’m going to transfer ownership, that’s going to be required. So, they’re only doing it when they’re required to do it, and I think having that knowledge well in advance makes a lot of sense for them, though.

Mike Blake: [00:13:39] And you mentioned the reasons why business owners don’t do valuations, I actually think there’s a third, and I’d love to get your view on it, and that is that I think that our profession has a little bit of a credibility problem. I think that, and for some reason, our profession largely is kind of okay with this. I think we have too much of a sense of humor about it, but I think we’re too willing to cave in to the argument that value is what somebody is willing to pay for it, which I’m not going to off-ramp onto that.

Mike Blake: [00:14:13] There’s a Freudian slip there, because I could easily rant on that for an hour, but I do think that a lot of people don’t know that there are people who do what we do, and I think our profession, frankly, has done a poor job of explaining to people, to the public what goes into a business valuation or appraisal, and I think there’s a distinction there that you’re kind of illustrating very nicely, actually. And I think that our profession hasn’t done enough to say, look, actually, there is some method to the madness here, really isn’t just shaking a magic eight ball, but there is some rigor that can lead you to make better decisions if you allow it.

Doug Marshall: [00:15:03] Oh, by all means. I always talked to owners about if an unexpected opportunity comes along, how are you going to measure that opportunity if you don’t really know the value of your business, for your business? Is that going to positively or negatively impact the value of my business? And should I be keeping—sometimes, what we’ll do with owners is we’ll do what ifs.

Doug Marshall: [00:15:28] We’ll say if you change this cash flow, if you reduce this expense, if you add this payroll, how much additional revenue is that going to create? How much risk is that creating for you, the owner? How much opportunity is that creating for you with growing your wealth? And you have to be really careful with the business, because you mentioned this before, it’s an illiquid and concentrated asset, it’s unlike anything else that somebody owns on the personal side, and that creates a lot more risk. So, knowing the value does make a lot of sense.

Mike Blake: [00:16:05] So, we touched on it, but I want to make sure we hit this clearly, because I think it’s central to the conversation, and that is, what exactly are the reasons why a company would want to have a valuation of their business done on a regular basis, whether it’s annually, semi-annually, biannually? What are the reasons for that?

Doug Marshall: [00:16:27] Yeah. Even if the business is not growing, it’s just pretty steady in sales, it’s doing $10 million of sales a year, its expenses remain relatively the same, I think just the very discipline of going through the process and establishing the value for the business, which might have a little bit of variation because of external factors, the economic climate and interest rates, of course, but just being able to show that this is something you were paying attention to, I mean, it’s not too different from showing that you’ve got good books and you can account for the money over the past 5 to 10 years.

Doug Marshall: [00:17:06] That shows that you are a disciplined business person and that your business has some value based on that. You want to show that you are a well-run business. So, knowing the value also puts you in that position of just being able to make better decisions on a regular basis, and then you also understand what drives the value. Very often, we will talk about, okay, what’s your equity value and what’s your liquidation value?

Doug Marshall: [00:17:33] I think those are two important numbers for a business owner to understand when it comes to protecting the value of your business, and this is a practical matter. So, your business value might be worth $10 million as a going concern, but only 2 or $3 million if you just have to shut the doors, because you haven’t done any proper planning or you become illiquid. So, that’s the amount that’s at risk, and I think facing that risk every year motivates someone to do some planning to make sure that that’s protected.

Doug Marshall: [00:18:05] Our buddy, Chris Mercer, he talks about the 1% solution, and he talks about, you should take 1%, or thereabouts, 1% of the value of your business and carve that off as a budgeted item to pay for your attorneys, and your CPAs, and your wealth advisors, your insurance people to make sure that you are doing the planning that is protecting the wealth, helping to unlock that wealth, ultimately, of that business, and not pay more taxes. There are all sorts of ways in which you can lose money in the ultimate transaction of transferring the value, because you’re paying too much in taxes, you’re not getting as much as you should for the business, because you were disorganized in the process and you haven’t positioned the business correctly to be sold.

Mike Blake: [00:18:58] And I think one of the things you said is really smart, which is I think that in a valuation process, the why is much more important, or at least as important, but I would argue more important than the what. We’re giving you numbers in round figures—giving a client a number, I should say, your business is worth $1,000,000, the end. I mean, yeah, that’s nice, but on the other hand, your business is worth $1,000,000, but it could be worth more, because of these five—if you do these five things, which, by the way, some of them may not be very hard to do at all. That’s easily worth a multiple of the fees that were invested in the valuation in the first place.

Doug Marshall: [00:19:40] Exactly.

Mike Blake: [00:19:42] So, let me get to some of the mechanics here. I think for many people, especially if they’re approaching business valuation for the first time and they may or may not have heard of people like us that do this for a living, they probably will turn to their CPA first. And there’s a rationale to it, right? They’re financially oriented. Some CPAs are, in fact, professional business appraisers or valuation analysts. Some do it a lot, some dabble. And of course, there’s an institutional knowledge of the company, most likely, at least for some period of time. Should the first place or should a company just sort of default to turning to their CPA to do the valuation of the company for them?

Doug Marshall: [00:20:34] Well, one, if the CPA does have experience in doing valuations and has really taken the time to learn how to do it, I would say, sure, that’s not a bad place to turn, yet at the same time, I think getting a secondary objective opinion on the value of the business, the range of value on the business does make sense. Another difficult thing, and this is nothing against the CPA profession, but they’re very seasonal. And so, they go through seasons where they are 100% unavailable because of the workload. And then, there are other times when they’re available. So, it’s not really in their business model to be doing valuations. And in your firm, I mean, you’re not doing tax work anymore, right?

Mike Blake: [00:21:25] No, I never was.

Doug Marshall: [00:21:29] And Owen, so I mean, you have a different side. So, I wouldn’t object to a CPA firm that had a valuation arm in it, I don’t think that’s a problem, but here has to be that relationship and there has to be experience in doing valuations for the particular type of industries, right? So, if you’ve never done a brewery before, you’ve got a learning curve as a valuator.

Mike Blake: [00:21:56] Now, what if the company is large enough that they have a CFO or a controller, is it a good idea maybe to say, hey, you’re a CFO, I’m paying you to do finance stuff, you tell me what the business is worth?

Doug Marshall: [00:22:10] Mm-hmm. I mean, once again, they can give you a general version, the idea of what the business is worth, but then you have to look at, what is the level of objectivity here? I don’t want, as the CPA, to be the person who should be telling the owner, that you think it’s worth 20, but it’s really worth 15. I’m not sure I really want to be put in that position. And then, with people in value, people that do valuations full time, even they’re going to come with their certain set of—they’re going to have bias in how valuation should be done. They’re going to have bias toward industry.

Doug Marshall: [00:22:52] And there are the human factors that you want to get as much out of the human factor as possible. If I wake up on Monday morning and start evaluation and I did not have a very good weekend, that might color my world a little bit to where my process is going to be different. And I think the same thing can happen to a CFO, so it’s better to have somebody to come in and do something objective. I don’t think having your CFO give an estimate is a bad idea, but I also wouldn’t take the CFO off of CFO type of stuff to go through a full-blown valuation, because that is going to take time.

Mike Blake: [00:23:39] And you mentioned something that I think is really important, and that is the independence. In the CPA example, can you really trust your CPA to tell you that your baby is ugly, or are they going to be a little concerned that in doing that, that the fees for their other services might be in jeopardy, or the CFO might be concerned that his or her job might be imperiled if you come back and say, your baby is ugly, this company isn’t really worth very much?

Mike Blake: [00:24:16] And candidly, that’s something that I address here at Brady Ware. When we receive an internal referral from an existing client, one of the first questions I—the first question I ask is, is there any scenario under which the answer that we come up with would make the client mad at us? And if the answer is yes or even if it’s supposedly infinitesimally small, and it probably isn’t, it’s probably bigger than we think it is, then even I’ll refer it out, because it’s just not worth it.

Doug Marshall: [00:24:52] I hear you on that. And I’m not trying to be self-serving for the two of us saying, you shouldn’t use your CPA, you shouldn’t use your CFO, I’m saying, as is good practice, there’s a lot of reasons to look outside to get that information.

Mike Blake: [00:25:08] So, I think the most common or maybe most accessible thesis for this is to have a valuation done annually, because you’re in a mode now where this might be the year that you’re going to sell, either you just decide that you want to throw it in, or this is the year that somebody calls you on the phone and makes an offer that you don’t hang up on them on. Are there other reasons to do it annually other than just be ready for a proposal to sell?

Doug Marshall: [00:25:40] I think it’s going to be easier if you do it on an annual basis. It might not be as costly, because a lot of the information is already there, and you just have to check and see what has changed. I think the habit of it is going to make it easier if you do it every five years. It’s like, you might say, ah, we can wait another year. But doing it every year probably makes the most sense, because then, I can quickly look at a company’s financials, and say, not much has changed here, so we’re probably not going to come up with too far of a different result, but it’s good to know.

Doug Marshall: [00:26:16] And I also might want to ask, why haven’t you grown, or why did your sales fall off, or why did your expenses go higher? What’s really fascinating about a valuation is that when you look at your accounting statements, your cash flow, your net cash flow statement, your gross revenue, your balance sheet, you can kind of pick and choose what numbers you focus in on to make yourself feel better as a business owner, and we’re just human, right? But the valuation puts together all of that stuff and comes out with one number. So, it throws it all in the mix, does all the calculations, looks at the future cash flow, and it acts as a barometer. So, it doesn’t allow the owner to kind of cheat themselves by telling them a story that’s not necessarily true.

Mike Blake: [00:27:12] And you touched on something that I think is worth pausing on for a minute, which is, again, the why, and even if your business likely has remained static in value over a year or two years, whatever, in the financial markets, they have a concept called performance attribution, and I think that applies here as well, in that why the business value has changed or not changed I think is important. Is it because you did something great or not as great, or some function of your company did something great or not as great, or were you bailed out by or were you hurt by simple market movements? And that’s just something that’s environmental and it doesn’t necessarily mean that you did anything right or wrong.

Doug Marshall: [00:28:08] Mm-hmm. And I’ve had owners that have said, “How much cash should I leave in my business?” And I don’t have a specific answer for them, but they say, “If I leave this million, how does that impact the value, as opposed to taking out 750,000?” We can do a quick calculation, so they can see what happens there, and then we can kind of talk about, does it make sense to leave it in the company or take it out of the company and redeploy it in other ways? So, there are forensic things that you can do and pro forma things that you can do in valuation to do what ifs, which helps in planning for future events.

Mike Blake: [00:28:51] Now, as you’ve touched upon, sometimes, companies will need to engage a valuation or an appraisal for something that is compliance-related. It could be for a gifting event, could be for, I don’t know, stock options, 83(b) elections, something having to do with gap, take your pick. Can a client simply take a document like that or a valuation, and then rely on that as the same document for strategic positioning?

Doug Marshall: [00:29:23] Yes and no, and I don’t want to be elusive on that because every valuation has a purpose and a goal. So, if you are doing something for a state planning purposes and gifting purposes, you might want to have to be able to justify a certain value for that gifting program. That might not be the same value that you would want if you were going to go sell the company or you are going to make a strategic decision. So, I mean, the number shouldn’t be that far off, but you have to keep in mind that if you had a different purpose for the valuation, the numbers might be a little bit different.

Mike Blake: [00:30:05] Now, our term of art that we use is something you and I, meaning, and others like us is we apply what’s called a standard of value, which really just means. It’s a definition of value or a context of value. And of course, for most tax things, it’s fair market value. For most accounting things and some litigation, it’s fair value. For transactional work, it might be something called investment value or synergistic value. But when we’re talking about having a valuation done as a strategic planning document, what standard or definition of value do you typically recommend, and why?

Doug Marshall: [00:30:46] I am more going toward the neutral fair market value, because there’s a lot less baked in. Now, I mean, now, what you can do from there is you can say from the fair market value, if the valuation is 10 million, maybe there is a strategic play out there that’s 15 million, but it’s only that 15 million because there’s somebody on the other side that has a different motivation than you do possibly for keeping it.

Doug Marshall: [00:30:46] So, I just kind of stick with the fair market value, because that’s the basic. I also think that one important point that we need to keep in mind is that since there are these different standards of value in a buy-sell agreement, now, this is going a little bit off the beaten path, it is important in your legal documents to establish which standard of value you’re going to use, because those numbers can be widely varied. And if you have not defined those things, then we start to get into the litigation process between business partners, and that’s one thing that we want to avoid by doing the valuations every year.

Doug Marshall: [00:32:06] Chris Mercer talks about having a single appraiser do a—select the appraiser at the beginning of the year, value the business at the beginning of the year, and all of the partners, if there are multiple owners, agree what the price would be for a buy-sell, what the price would be if somebody wanted to get out, rather than waiting for the event, going through the process of hiring an appraiser at that point in time, and then having them come up with a number that’s a complete surprise. So, being proactive on the valuation side definitely makes a lot of sense.

Mike Blake: [00:32:43] Yeah. Let’s pause on that, and for the record, I’m a big fan of Chris Mercer’s work on that. I’ve had his book in my library for years. I’ve expanded a little bit upon what he’s written, at least in that edition, but it really is an outstanding book. And I agree, if you can agree on a single appraiser and get rid of these sort of dueling appraiser things, processes, I think that’s really a fantastic way to go. But interestingly, you bring up a scenario that I have not encountered as much, I haven’t thought of as much, frankly, and that is the business partner scenario.

Mike Blake: [00:33:23] And I want to pause on that because I’ve done my share, I’m working on my share of resolving buy-sell agreements, and as I think through a lot of those assignments, boy, a lot of them could have been resolved much more easily had there simply been a trusted party by both or more, by all stakeholders involved to perform an independent appraisal, and then that number is just sort of there, as opposed to waiting. And then, like you said, the surprise that when you get a surprise valuation that you don’t like, that’s when the next call is to the lawyers, then you’re off to the races.

Doug Marshall: [00:34:01] And now, you’re talking significant money. So, I mean, you and I own a business for $5 million. We agree that the price is 5 million. If something happens to you, I agree to buy out your spouse for two-and-a-half, and if something happens to me, you agree to buy my portion out for two-and-one-half million dollars. And so, we each have to ask ourselves the question, am I satisfied with getting two-and-a-half or having my estate get two-and-a-half million, and am I satisfied with having to pay out two-and-a-half million? But I’m dealing with that ahead of time, rather than at the time that the event occurs.

Doug Marshall: [00:34:37] So, we can—and you and I might decide, well, that’s going to be a little too rich for our blood. I constantly run into owners that do have that situation to say, “Man, our business grew fast, but I don’t think that I have the liquidity to buy out my partner.” And now, they have to plan for, what can we do? And they might structure their buyout over a period of time, because it’s going to take them a period of time. And you can go back and look at the controlling documents and save people a lot of pain if they know what the dollar number is going to be.

Mike Blake: [00:35:18] Yeah. And I also think that perhaps having an independent appraisal done or valuation done regularly on a partnership like that eliminates or greatly reduces partner arbitrage. And what I mean by that is I think, in particular, when you have buy-sell agreements that call for either a formula or a specific price at which a buyout would occur, eventually, it becomes clear to one party or the other that they would benefit very much from being on one side or the other of a buyout. And there’s at least a financial incentive, ethics aside, there’s a financial incentive to manipulate that buyout, because there’s a substantial financial benefit to you. With an independent valuation or appraisal, I think a lot of that goes away and provides for a more kind of transparent and ultimately harmonious partnership.

Doug Marshall: [00:36:24] 100% agree on that.

Mike Blake: [00:36:27] So, when you get the valuation done, who should have access to it? Right? There’s a document, a work product, usually, of some kind produced, who should have access to that?

Doug Marshall: [00:36:45] Well, I think all key stakeholders that are responsible for driving the company. And I mean, maybe that doesn’t go all the way down to the bottom, but anybody that should know and should understand that this is now being used as a strategic document to guide us forward into the future, they need to understand what that is, whether they are an owner or not. So, you could have several key people where the owner says, “I just did a valuation of my company and it’s $9 million, and my goal is to get it up to $15 million in a certain period of time, and we need to work toward that goal.” So, anybody who’s a key stakeholder in that fashion needs to understand, I think the attorney needs to understand, the accountant should have that information, family members should also have that information as well.

Mike Blake: [00:37:44] And probably, the owner’s wealth advisors as well, I would imagine.

Doug Marshall: [00:37:48] Yeah, I meant to say that. Yes, of course.

Mike Blake: [00:37:54] And that work product, is that something that the business owner should be walking these people through? Should the provider be walking people through it to make sure everybody understands? Because despite our best of intentions, some of these documents can be quite hard to read, especially if you don’t have a lot of economics and finance training. Should the owners sort of set aside time to make sure that they understand and all the other stakeholders understand them?

Doug Marshall: [00:38:30] I think it’s worth taking the time. I don’t necessarily think it is the owner’s responsibility to put that together. I don’t think it’s that hard to put together a two-page summary of the valuation, what was done, the conclusions that were drawn, and some of the major factors that influenced the valuation of that, and what it means. So, it shouldn’t be in Greek, in a difficult to explain language, but I don’t necessarily think it’s the owner’s responsibility to do that, maybe it would be the CFO’s responsibility if the company is large enough to have one.

Mike Blake: [00:39:08] Now, I don’t know if you’ve encountered this, but I encounter a number of people who already “know” at least the multiples for being paid for companies in their market. They may get that from industry associations. They may get it from bankers. They may get it from competitors who may or may not be lying to them. They may get on the golf course. With people like that. What do you say to people like that that think that they kind of know their market multiples? What’s the argument that they may want to have a valuation done anyway?

Doug Marshall: [00:39:47] Well, before I answer that question, I would say, if you’re a franchise, you probably have a pretty good idea based on how the franchise works, especially if it’s a large one. So, I think the rules of thumb multiples in those particular situations are fairly accurate. The problem that I have with general rule of thumb multiples is that they end up becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, and that’s not good, because the valuation is still the economics of the company, how much cash flow is expected to generate, how much discretionary cash flow is available to the owner, and what’s the projected increase in the growth in that cash flow, and what’s the risk that that is not going to happen? Right?

Doug Marshall: [00:40:34] Those are the basics, right, Mike? And so, you could have a rule of thumb multiple that doesn’t make sense as it relates to the cash flow, because over time, that multiple has eroded into a self-fulfilling prophecy. And it may be to the detriment of the owner. It might say—the multiple might be telling the owner that your business is worth less, that your business is worth more. So, I think that the rule of thumb can be used after you understand the value of your company and you have something professionally done.

Mike Blake: [00:41:17] I’m talking with Doug Marshall on the topic, as should I have my business valued every year? One question I want to ask, I want to make explicit, we kind of danced around it, but I want to kind of nail it, and that is once you have a valuation in your hand, as a business owner or executive, what do you do with it? What are the next steps after you have that document?

Doug Marshall: [00:41:47] One, I would say, is, are you happy with the number? I might go to a business broker, and say, this is the valuation that I have, just in general terms, you think I could sell my company for that? That you could go to your attorney, your tax attorney, and say, hey, my business is worth this, is my estate plan in order based on the value of this business?

Doug Marshall: [00:42:19] You could go to your accountant, and say, hey, this is the value of my company, but I think that I could be a little bit more tax efficient, what could we be doing with that? So, I mean, anybody that’s going to help you make decisions about what to do for your personal planning and your business planning, you can use that document as something to stimulate some conversation and also give some insight into the conversation.

Mike Blake: [00:42:48] So, when we talk about an annual valuation, should it be treated as an update of an existing valuation or should it be considered almost a brand new blank sheet of paper kind of valuation every year? And I can see the arguments for both. The argument for one is obviously cost and efficiency, and institutional knowledge. On the other hand, the argument for sort of a de novo valuation would be to reduce the risk of bias materially impacting or influencing the valuation. Where do you fall on that?

Doug Marshall: [00:43:31] I don’t think that you have to do a brand new, clean slate every year, but maybe every five years, I would. Just say, let’s tear it all up and see what we’ve got. Let’s look at this whole thing all over again.

Mike Blake: [00:43:51] Does an annual valuation make sense for everybody? For example, are there cases where you’ve spoken to somebody and maybe they think they want an annual valuation or they’ve been told they should get one, and you sort of say, you know what, no, I don’t really think this is right for you? Has that ever happened, or what is the case—who shouldn’t necessarily have a valuation done every year?

Doug Marshall: [00:44:17] Well, if the business too much depends on one person, I don’t think that you can really get a clean, accurate valuation. And so, you’re talking about a smaller company. But I think once you get into a larger company size, where it is beyond one particular owner, I think having that knowledge is important. And I mean, I’m not trying to do the infomercial here, but I think that there is a legitimate place for the online algorithmic valuations that are kept up to date.

Doug Marshall: [00:44:47] And as long as the operator understands how these things are working and what can possibly go wrong by getting bad data into it, you can have a relatively good piece of information. I mean, you even have large accounting firms that now use independent valuation tools that are online just to confirm the stuff that they do and also to bring the cost of the valuation down for some of their clients that might not want to spend a five figure number to get a valuation on an annual basis.

Mike Blake: [00:45:21] So, here’s part of the hardest question I’m going to ask in the interview, and it’s pretty much coming at the end, if you or I do provide a valuation for a company, and then it sells for a price that’s materially different from what our conclusion was, does that mean that we are wrong?

Doug Marshall: [00:45:45] No, not in the slightest, unless you hired me to evaluate what you could sell your company for in the market conditions that exists today, but I think that’s more the role of a business broker or somebody in the M&A field, because they have connections with those people who might want to buy, who might want to pay a premium or might want to find a value in the marketplace. So, once again, our valuations are going to have a range of valuations that might differ by 20%.

Doug Marshall: [00:46:26] You might say your business is worth between 10 and $12 million. And so, if it doesn’t sell—we had one recently where the company sold for almost a third more, but a lot of that was because it had fully depreciated equipment that with the supply chain problems, they would not be able to replace that equipment. So, the equipment had significant value in addition to the company itself, the company’s ability to generate revenue. Does that make sense?

Mike Blake: [00:47:00] Yeah, it does. And it’s important, I think, and sometimes, I think it’s overlooked that nowhere in the professional standards does it say that the object of what we do is to get the right number, because as a recognition, I think one of the things our profession does well, there’s a humble recognition that there isn’t necessarily a right number to get, but one that’s credible and reliable.

Mike Blake: [00:47:29] But market conditions are idiosyncratic, and you may be selling a company under duress, for example, if it’s under a buy-sell, or there are so many things that can go wrong that aren’t—or right, frankly, that aren’t considered under the laboratory conditions of a conventional appraisal that even under the best of circumstances, I think what we do should be considered a starting point, not necessarily an ending point.

Doug Marshall: [00:47:58] And business owners deal with uncertainty all the time, so delivering them a number that is not necessarily going to be black and white, the same way that you expect their accounting to be black and white, right? I expect accounting to account for every dollar down to the penny, but we can’t do that, because there’s so much uncertainty out there in the world, but there is also a way to kind of predict what is the range of the value that is likely to be there for you at some point in time in the future or right now.

Mike Blake: [00:48:31] Doug, we’re running out of time, this has been a great conversation, but I’m sure there are questions that either some of our listeners wished that I would have asked or wish we spent more time on, if somebody wants to follow up with you about any of the topics we’ve covered today, can they do so? And if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Doug Marshall: [00:48:49] I am always happy to either have a conversation about this, answer any questions, they can email me at dougm, Doug Marshall, M is my last initial, @marshallviliesis.com, or feel free to call me on my cell, talk, text, it’s 206-605-4695.

Mike Blake: [00:49:16] That’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. I’d like to thank Doug Marshall so much for sharing his expertise with us. We will be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us so that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:49:37] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn is myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake, our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company, and this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Brady Ware & Company, business valuation, business valuations, Decision Vision, Doug Marshall, ebitda, Marshall+Viliesis, Mike Blake, valuation

Decision Vision Episode 168: Should I Adopt the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS)?- An Interview with Billy Potter, Snellings Walters Insurance Agency

May 12, 2022 by John Ray

Billy Potter
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 168: Should I Adopt the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS)?- An Interview with Billy Potter, Snellings Walters Insurance Agency
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Billy Potter

Decision Vision Episode 168: Should I Adopt the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS)? – An Interview with Billy Potter, Snellings Walters Insurance Agency

Billy Potter, CEO of Snellings Walters Insurance Agency, joined host Mike Blake to discuss the successful outcomes his firm achieved after implementing the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS). They discussed what EOS is, the role of values, the impact of EOS not only on the bottom line but in one’s personal life, the challenges implementing such a system brings, and much more.

Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Snellings Walters Insurance Agency

Snellings Walters has been providing honest advice & protecting what you value most for more than 69 years. They are the smartest way to protect your business & family. They identify the critical issues facing your company. Survival of your business requires managing risks. In today’s environment, these risks are rapidly changing and becoming more complex. They have built a customizable platform to provide you with the security you need.

Company website | LinkedIn | Twitter 

Billy Potter, CEO, Snellings Walters Insurance Agency

Billy Potter, CEO, Snellings Walters Insurance Agency

Billy Potter’s career in insurance spans more than two decades. In 2011, he joined Snellings Walters to head the Employee Benefits Division and quickly proved to be an effective consultant. His superior consultation contributed to his winning various awards within the agency, and in 2018, he was nationally recognized as “Broker of the Year” by BenefitsPRO Magazine.

His reputation as both a top consultant and engaged team leader resulted in an invitation to become an owner at Snellings Walters in 2018. As Chief Sales Officer, Potter led his team to produce record sales for the agency. The combination of his knowledge, experience, character, and passion resulted in his transition to Chief Executive Officer in 2022.

In addition to his expertise and technical know-how, Billy’s personal philosophy aligns with the core values that drive the Snellings Walters vision: engagement, accountability, curiosity, and authenticity.

By cultivating and nurturing an agency culture that allows its employees to feel empowered and supported, Billy’s mission is to inspire the next generation of successful business people at Snellings Walters and beyond.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:01] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:21] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, a clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision-making on a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:42] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m a director at Brady Ware & Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. I’m a managing partner of the Strategic Valuation and Advisory Services Practice, which brings clarity to the most important strategic decisions that business owners and executives face by presenting them with factual evidence for such decisions. Brady Ware is sponsoring this podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:01:09] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck, so please join that as well if you would like to engage.

Mike Blake: [00:01:26] Today’s topic is, should I adopt the entrepreneurial operating system or EOS? And according to Wipfli, almost 9000 companies now run on the EOS system that was presented and popularized by Gino Wickman in his book called Traction. And, I have a particular interest in this discussion because you may have – if you’re a long time listeners of the show, you may have noticed there’s a subtle change in the intro of the podcast, whereby we’ve spun off my practice group into a separate company and I was named managing partner. And in doing so, when something like that happens, you are both excited for the opportunity and terrified of the responsibility.

Mike Blake: [00:02:13] And, one of the things that I realized very quickly as this was happening was that I needed to have some kind of operating system, if you will, for my company, because this is my first time in that role. I’ve managed before. I’ve led before, but I’ve never sort of been at the top of the org chart before. And candidly, that’s a very different kind of responsibility and a different kind of opportunity. And, about a year ago, I ran across Gino Wickman’s book. Somebody recommended it to me, and really have fallen in love with it, have studied it, and we’re in the initial stages of implementing EOS in this new company. So, I know a tiny bit about it.

Billy Potter: [00:02:58] And so, to talk about this, and so that I can mooch off of somebody else’s expertise, I’ve invited somebody that’s actually been living the EOS life and has been successful in doing so, also in a professional services context. So, I’m very pleased to introduce to you Billy Potter whose career in insurance spans more than two decades. In 2011, he joined Snellings Walters to head the Employee Benefits Division and quickly proved to be an effective consultant. His superior consultation contributed to his winning various awards within the agency, and in 2018 he was nationally recognized as Broker of the Year by BenefitsPRO Magazine.

Mike Blake: [00:03:37] In addition to his expertise and technical know-how, Billy has a personal philosophy that aligns with the core values that drive the Snelling Walters vision, engagement and accountability, curiosity and authenticity. I think we’re going to hear those words a lot in the next hour. By cultivating and nurturing an agency culture that allows its employees to feel empowered and supported, Billy’s mission is to inspire the next generation of successful business people at Snellings Walters and beyond.

Mike Blake: [00:04:07] Snellings Walters leads complex businesses into safety and security through commercial insurance and employee benefits and they focus on their values of core delivery of process, energy, and growth. For more than 60 years, they’ve been advising clients on business, personal, and life/health insurance. They’re the only commercial insurance and employee benefits company that energizes with a proven process. Growth is personal for them. Billy Potter, welcome to the Decision Vision podcast.

Billy Potter: [00:04:34] Thank you, Mike. Happy to be here.

Mike Blake: [00:04:36] So, not enough people know about the EOS and surely some people who are listening have never heard of it before. So, you’re a guy that’s living and having success with it. How would you describe the entrepreneurial operating system or EOS to somebody else?

Billy Potter: [00:04:51] I think the easiest way to paint a picture of what it does for your business is EOS is an assembly line for small businesses. The assembly line allowed them to be more effective and more efficient with manufacturing product. And, this has the same impact to running your business. A lot of us in small businesses we get to where we’re at because we’re good at our craft, whether it be manufacturing or offering a service. And many of the times, we don’t get an actual chance to work on our business, to make the business – allow the business to have a better impact to our product or our service. And the opposite occurs where we’re incapable of delivering our product or service because we’re so poor at developing structures to run an effective business. So, I like to look at EOS as an assembly line for your organization. And that’s been our experience. In fact, I’m a direct product of EOS. They implemented it right when I got here. So, I’m the benefactor of that efficiency.

Mike Blake: [00:06:09] So, the operating system sounds kind of cheeky maybe to somebody who’s not familiar with it. Is the name apt? Is it truly an operating system?

Billy Potter: [00:06:18] I would say yes, it is. So as, you know, it’s not a sexy term at all, EOS. We commonly refer to it as a language that we all speak, a language of efficiency and smoking out issues. That’s what we commonly refer to. In our L10 meetings is let’s smoke out the issue. So, these are the things that we speak of, or maybe that we know about that we’re not openly sharing, that the operating system has a good way of shaping your conversation so that the issue is a safe thing to address. So, from a communication perspective, which I think is the most powerful component of EOS, it sounds a little cheesy, but it’s true. It allows you to speak with one another. And it also allows you data points that should align with what you’re saying.

Mike Blake: [00:07:15] So, you know, the back story is kind of interesting in that – and if I understood correctly, you walked into EOS. It wasn’t necessarily that you were running a company and chose EOS, but rather you came from one situation, I presume, that was not an EOS organization and you walked into one. As you did so, what were some of the immediate – what were some of the differences that you might have noticed immediately or very quickly after making that transition?

Billy Potter: [00:07:45] Yeah. So, I came to this organization December 1, 2011, and the only thing I brought to the company was debt. And I had to work my tail off to get square of the house. But I would say sometime in mid to late 2012, they decided to implement EOS and we were not a young company at that point. We were 60 years old, but we had a ceiling that we couldn’t get through. And, the owners at that time thought that pursuing EOS was a fix to breaking through that ceiling.

Billy Potter: [00:08:22] The first thing that we saw, and this is going to sound a little negative, but we found people that didn’t want to be in a culture of accountability. And, I don’t know what’s worse, having people that don’t want a culture of accountability in business or not knowing that you have people that don’t want a culture of accountability. That is even worse. So, that was a big shocker.

Billy Potter: [00:08:52] The second thing that I think that really jumped out at us is I believe that this operating system, it provides an environment that protects your highly engaged employees. So, the numbers are somewhere like 30% of your organization is highly engaged. I think, if I remember correctly, 50% is disengaged and 20% is actively disengaged. So, the actively disengaged means these people are trying to ruin your business. So, you’re fighting for the 50% and you’re trying to protect the 30%. The 50% are in the boat without a paddle. The 30% are not in the boat. They’re in the water with a rope pulling the boat, swimming in the river. And then, the 20% are in the back of the boat, rowing in the other direction. That was just a very polarizing picture for us.

Billy Potter: [00:09:49] And, once we started implementing EOS and having some traction with it, we realized that all the metrics that we thought that were valuable, they quadrupled in productivity. It was unbelievable; a 60-year-old firm quadrupled in productivity. We had single people that single-handedly shaped an entire division with how we run service. And these are not like industry veterans. These are rookies just like me that came in, that were highly engaged, that were attracted to a system. And honestly, it kind of unchained them and unleashed their potential.

Mike Blake: [00:10:32] And, I’m curious about that process. How long did it take to start showing results that dramatic?

Billy Potter: [00:10:40] You know, I’m not completely – I can’t completely remember. I’d say that we had some turnover that we experienced probably within the first two years.

Mike Blake: [00:10:50] Which is by design, right?

Billy Potter: [00:10:51] Which is – well, the book said it. The book said you’re going to lose really good people that know insurance. It doesn’t say that in the book, but that know that your product or know your service, they’re industry veterans. We didn’t really believe it.

Billy Potter: [00:11:07] The second thing is, I would probably say that those productivity scores probably jumped up about 2 to 3 years as well, where we were like, holy cow. But I think the squishier, the more the subjective impact, the things that you didn’t see in the scorecard is the harmony that started to create in our leadership team. And honestly, I think that that’s what the biggest plague is in most small businesses. It arrests the ego that’s driving the business.

Billy Potter: [00:11:40] So, if Mike and I are running a company, and Mike wants to do X and Billy wants to do Y, and then your employees can’t serve two masters, and there’s a lot of end-arounds, which is what the book refers to it. It’s an actual thing. It’s like, “I know Mike told you to do this but do that.” And there started to get alignment within our leadership team of what’s your role and responsibility? What’s my role and responsibilities? Let’s be accountable to that, which fostered a greater community.

Billy Potter: [00:12:14] The word conflict is kind of funny. We were implementing Patrick Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team at the same time of EOS, which is really a dynamic duo because – we might get into this later – healthy conflict is certainly a part of EOS. It’s not like a fight club. You know, conflict is a positive word. That’s how we look at it.

Billy Potter: [00:12:37] So, when you talk about immediate results, I’d say it opened our mind that conflict is a sign of progress, not a negative for a business if you think about conflict in your life. Probably the greatest conflict I’ve had is with family, maybe my spouse. But it’s because we have trust and we started to seeing more of that in our leadership dialogue.

Mike Blake: [00:13:03] Yeah. And, you know, there’s a thought that conflict is where ideas come from. And there’s a school of thought. I don’t remember who put this forward, but it suggests that truth only comes out of conflict, right, where at some point, there needs to be a conflict of ideas and that needs to be resolved. One of the things you’re kind of getting at, I think you’re getting at, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, is EOS is sort of the interferon for passive aggression. Like, passive-aggressiveness just cannot survive in an EOS implementation. It’s passive-aggressive killer.

Billy Potter: [00:13:46] Yeah. And Traction, the first chapter of Traction, I believe, is titled Letting Go of the Vine.

Mike Blake: [00:13:54] Yep.

Billy Potter: [00:13:54] And so, you know, I’d like to believe that most issues of most organizations start with leadership. And, you know, we work with a guy that likes to say that you are ridiculously in charge. And I love that. That saying, it just resonates with me that we’re ridiculously in charge. We are ridiculously responsible for employing employees that don’t want to be accountable. You know, that’s on us. That’s a product of leadership.

Billy Potter: [00:14:21] And so, once you drop this model and you start fostering, “Well, Mike, what do you think is best for the business? Why do you think that’s best for the business?” That kind of conflict and that rub. You’re right. That’s what births truth, and perhaps hopefully a better process for your business, which is where we’re both aligned. We both want a successful business. And that allows kind of the ego to be, “Okay, well, maybe Mike’s not attacking me. He’s making a logical argument of the business and what we have a shared goal on.” And that’s what EOS really does a good job of not making it about the person, but making it about the company.

Mike Blake: [00:15:01] One of the things I find seductive about EOS is how it ties in to so many other ideas. And you mentioned the word conflict. I want to stop on that for a second because I think that’s really important. And it ties in with part of my introduction, which talks about how much you value curiosity. Right? And if I’m not mistaken, the EOS, EOS system is about converting the anger of conflict and the threat of conflict into curiosity. Right? Because you can still get to the same place but if you phrase the debate away from you’re an idiot for thinking that to why do you think that, right, and you really listen to the answer, that’s such a much more constructive platform for that conflict to take place.

Billy Potter: [00:15:52] I couldn’t agree more. We implemented it for two reasons. And all of our core values, which was such a fun process that EOS suggests you follow, it was fantastic. It helped bring our leadership team closer together. But we also came up with little phrases to help us be centered on what the core value means. So, for example, curious is seek to understand. And so, the reason we did –

Mike Blake: [00:16:17] [Inaudible] it’s a highly effective people. Right?

Billy Potter: [00:16:18] There you go. There you go. And honestly, that’s one of our favorite values because it’s a little unique too. You don’t see curious as a core value in many organizations but it really does two things effectively. First, it attacks ego. And, I think a lot of the times, I don’t want to listen because I know better, right? And, when I’m forced to think, okay, we’ll seek to understand. Why is Mike bringing this up? And you know what? This is the fourth time he’s brought it up in a meeting. Let’s smoke out that issue. What is the issue behind the issue?

Billy Potter: [00:16:55] And then, secondly, assumptions. How much conversations we have on a daily basis where we assume that we understand and we don’t? Is it George Shaw, George Bernard Shaw, maybe, who has a phrase something along the lines of the most challenging thing about the communication is the illusion that it’s taking place?

Mike Blake: [00:17:18] I don’t know who said it but it certainly sounds wise.

Billy Potter: [00:17:20] It’s brilliant. And it’s like once you start becoming a student of this and realizing I don’t understand, I am assuming what Mike means by that, it’s incredible the dialogue it promotes within your teams and within your community. And it makes it more about someone other than you when your focus is understanding their message. And once you do a good enough job of understanding, I think the really the solution presents itself. I don’t think it’s really hard to solve the issue once you understand the issue, but it’s understanding the right issue, which is the yeoman’s work.

Mike Blake: [00:18:00] And, to me, the flip side of that is that that also requires vulnerability to admit when you don’t understand something and going back to your discussion of ego. And now, there’s sort of – at least people are writing about it. I don’t know if people are doing it. People are writing and talking more about authentic management, vulnerable leadership, and so forth. And it strikes me that that’s really the flip side of curiosity. It has to be, right?

Billy Potter: [00:18:31] Amen. And authenticity, which is another core value. So, you are kind of striking here why are we aligned with those core values. So, curiosity, seek to understand. Authenticity. Authentic is the core value; your true self.

Billy Potter: [00:18:46] Look, we want to create an environment where you’re allowed to disagree. You’re allowed to have an opinion. It’s incredible. Like, when we onboard a new employee and we ask for their candid feedback, they’re like wounded animals. They look at us and be like, “You really want to know? Are you sure?” And, we have to literally position it to the point where if you don’t tell us – if you tell us that everything’s right, we know you’re lying. The only way you’re going to get in trouble here is if you’re a silent sufferer. That’s it. And, we need you to love us enough to tell us when we have broccoli in our teeth.

Billy Potter: [00:19:27] And, new employees are actually really critical because these are uncontaminated people. They have a fresh perspective on what we’re doing. We’re drinking the Kool-Aid, we’re making the Kool-Aid, and we’re swimming in the Kool-Aid. So, having that fresh perspective to create a more vulnerable and authentic environment, it’s crucial. It allows us to not be aspirational.

Mike Blake: [00:19:50] It sounds a lot like something of one of my philosophies for what it’s worth is that I want our frontline people, when we’re delivering work product, everybody can, anybody can stop a work product going out. It can be an intern. If they see something that isn’t right, they don’t like, they don’t understand and they see it going out, I’m not going to kill you for stopping the work product. I’m not even going to kill you if we miss a deadline, if it isn’t too critical. Right? But, boy, what I’m going to lose it over is if you saw something that was wrong and you didn’t mention it to anybody. That drives me crazy.

Billy Potter: [00:20:30] Yes.

Billy Potter: [00:20:30] And that gets to – one of my, what I hope is our core value, is honesty and integrity, not just to our clients and not just to each other but to yourself. And if you don’t have that, then you’re not going to – you’re not going to stop that blunder from going out that everybody else overlooked, even though you’ve read the report four times. Right? Somebody else is going to find some of that fifth time. But the bargain for that is you got to create the safe space for that, right?

Billy Potter: [00:21:00] Yeah. And the way that we word it for a similar reason is accountable. And the tagline is, own your part. So, we don’t want somebody saying, “Well, what was Mike’s report? Mike sent it out. Yes, I did see the flaw in it, but that was Mike’s responsibility.” No, it’s not. Own your part. What is your responsibility in that incorrect report going out?

Billy Potter: [00:21:22] The former CEO of Ritz Carlton, he allowed any employee to spend up to $2000 on the spot to fix the customer’s problem. That’s a lot of money.

Mike Blake: [00:21:35] Yeah.

Billy Potter: [00:21:36] But – I mean, how empowering that is for them to be a part of the solution on whatever they’re touching. And, I’m so thankful for EOS and just forget about the business for allowing them to allow me time to reflect on how important some of these qualities are in my own personal life, in my marriage, with the children I’m raising. What a gift this structure, this operating system has given to help me live a more fulfilling life at work.

Mike Blake: [00:22:09] So, I want to pause on that because I do think that’s a really important facet of this conversation, in that if you’re not familiar with EOS, one might be tempted to jump to a conclusion, it’s just a way to make more money or just a way to squeeze more productivity. Right? Whatever. Productivity hacks, life hacks, whatever you want. But the thing that strikes me about EOS and I think why people such as yourself who have embraced it are so passionate about it is because it’s not just about your job, right? If you do it right, it has a virtuous cycle kind of knock-on effect of every element of your life. That’s what I’ve observed from people who’ve kind of made that journey and why I’m so excited and intent on starting it for our firm.

Billy Potter: [00:23:02] I couldn’t agree more with you. Truett Cathy said if you make people better, bigger is inevitable, and, you know, the whole concept of we’re a for-profit entity. So, just to be clear, we’re in business to become more successful. We want to grow. These are reasons that we want to be held accountable to something bigger than ourselves, and it’s okay to want to make more money. But that’s a lagging indicator, not a leading one. Making more money is a result of something.

Billy Potter: [00:23:32] And it’s almost like, I think most businesses are saying, we want to get an A on the test. Let’s not talk about our preparation for the test, you know. That’s what EOS does. It allows you a study guide to make sure that you get an A. Actually, it allows you to study guide to redefine what an A is. And that’s what all the metrics are that we have.

Billy Potter: [00:23:56] And so, of course, we want to make more money in the end or be more successful. We want to pay employees more money in the end. We want to do all those things. But, you know, it came down to what makes us unique, which again is a product of EOS. And the first one that we have of three uniques is growth is personal. And so, if we are winning at work and we are not winning at home, we’ve lost. We’ve missed the point. We want your personal life to benefit with your professional life. We want both to be enhanced. And, honestly, in the end, we’re going to get a better product, a better result, a better service, a better experience because we are open to improving both. It can’t just be one or the other.

Mike Blake: [00:24:41] And, you know, the way when you say things like the money is the result not the goal, I hear Simon Sinek talking.

Billy Potter: [00:24:49] Yeah. That’s exactly right.

Mike Blake: [00:24:51] People listening to the podcast, now I’m basically a cyberstalker of his. Like, Simon, please come on the show at some point. I haven’t gotten a restraining order yet, but I probably will. But again, another tie-in where the EOS comes in. Knowing your why, I think, is critical to understanding, to successfully adopting an eOS.

Billy Potter: [00:25:08] Mike, I almost feel like you’re stalking us. When you walk into our office, you’re going to see Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle taking up an entire wall.

Mike Blake: [00:25:19] Really?

Billy Potter: [00:25:20] Yes. I swear to you.

Mike Blake: [00:25:21] I may visit. I want to see that and take a photo.

Billy Potter: [00:25:23] You’re welcome. Any time you want, buddy. In fact, part of me wants to take the Zoom call right now and show you the wall. But he says, people don’t buy what you do; they buy why you do it. So, all of these things were coming together at once for us. We had Simon Sinek. It starts with the why. Honestly, the video is really all you need to see, the TED Talk. It’s 18 minutes long. How Great Leaders Inspire Action is the name of the TED Talk. And so, that influence combined with Patrick Lencioni’s Five Dysfunction of a Team and Gino Wickman’s Traction. All of those things came together at once for our organization, which was like bottling lightning, you know,

Billy Potter: [00:26:01] And, my partner, Steve Harmon, went on a trip with other people in our industry and they said, “Why do you do what you do?” And you want to know what he was told? Man, it’s great money. Man, it’s a well-known secret, you know, this industry. It’s just great. The substance of what he was looking for wasn’t being shared by his peers. So, then he came back to us and said, “Hey, why are we getting out of bed in the morning? Why is God waking us up?”

Billy Potter: [00:26:27] His name is Steve Harmon. He’s had a phenomenal impact on our culture and was really one of the thought leaders in inspiring us to go down this journey. And, you know, we do have a why statement from EOS, and it’s “we lead to inspire confidence so we can unleash your potential.” And that’s super important, especially when you’re thinking growth is personal. You know, it has nothing to do with insurance.

Mike Blake: [00:26:54] I was going to say that noticeably absent is the word insurance.

Billy Potter: [00:26:58] Of course. Yes, Chick-fil-A. They want to become the most caring organization in the world. Where do you see chicken in there? It just doesn’t – it’s not there. It’s not Care-fil-A.

Mike Blake: [00:27:11] Yeah. Yeah.

Billy Potter: [00:27:11] So, it’s inspiring. And they were describing all of this, not even EOS. They didn’t know it exist when I was interviewing them in 2011. And as skeptical as I am, I thought, if they deliver on 20% of what they’re describing, this will be pretty cool. And we knocked it out of the park. I mean, EOS has more than quadrupled our business in a decade. We’re a 70-year-old company. It’s more than quadrupled it in a decade. That’s incredible. That’s the lagging indicator that gets everybody’s attention. And what’s powerful about this experience is like, “Oh, wait a minute. How I’m leading the company could lead to better revenue? Like, that’s amazing.”

Mike Blake: [00:27:53] Who knew?

Billy Potter: [00:27:54] Yeah. That’s crazy. I just thought I needed a longer whip.

Mike Blake: [00:27:58] Yeah. And again, another tie-in. I mean, that’s classic good to great, right? That’s classic flywheel stuff, the EOS – before I encountered EOS, I had an inkling of this but it wasn’t – I didn’t – nobody’s buying my book. I didn’t even write one. They wouldn’t buy it if I wrote one. But I did have an understanding or an idea that what really matters is not key performance indicators, but [inaudible] key performance drivers. Right? What I care about is, are you doing the things that you need to be doing consistently and faithfully? Right? And if you do those, eventually the results are going to show.

Billy Potter: [00:28:35] That’s it. You’re right.

Mike Blake: [00:28:36] It may take a while. It may take a while, but, man, if you have the mental toughness and tenacity to do that and the faith that it’s going to work out. Just like a farmer, right, you’ve got to have faith that all that work is going to result in growing things. You can’t just start yanking carrots out of the ground two days after you put the seed in. That’s where the action is, isn’t it?

Billy Potter: [00:28:57] Amen. And, the leading indicators, you know, and the leading and the lagging indicators were a gift from EOS. And it’s fun to even come up. Well, what are the leading indicators? What are the things that we need to report on a weekly basis to let you know that I’m rowing the boat, man? We’re not at the destination yet, but we are well on our way. And, that was a fun dialogue. And it constantly evolves. You know, like once it was no longer an issue anymore or once that habit is formed, we move on to a new leading indicator. And then, suddenly you look back and you’re like, “Oh, my goodness. We’ve quadrupled the business. How did this happen?”

Billy Potter: [00:28:57] When I got here, we were 21 employees and we had a lot of attrition. I mean, this is the valley of EOS. We did have a lot of attrition. Some employees said, “Hey, I love where you’re going. It’s not for me.” And so, we helped some of them find a job. We were sad to lose some of them, but that’s the truth of it. And then, the peak that followed that valley was a level of operational excellence that we didn’t really think was achievable. Our employees helped develop that. That’s what EOS creates, a ground-up movement.

Mike Blake: [00:30:16] So, we’ve talked a lot in this conversation so far about value so I want to come back to that because I think values – I think a lot of people cringe when they hear the word corporate values because they’ve often been abused, frankly, and employees have been abused in the name of so-called corporate values. How do you get – how do you sort of get past that? How did you find, identify and articulate your company values, one? And then, what did it take to establish a credibility that it wasn’t just more PR speak, but there was a real – there is a real substance and authenticity behind it?

Billy Potter: [00:31:03] This is a phenomenal process. We locked the door, the four owners locked the door. And, we said, who are the two people in your life that you could take over the world with? And then, you describe them. What are their adjectives?

Billy Potter: [00:31:20] For me, the two people that I said were my father and a lady named Jennifer Goodwin. And I enjoyed, like, just reflecting on what are all the characteristics of these individuals that I love, that I hold so precious. And everybody in the room does that in their own little space. And then, we come back together and we throw all of our adjectives up on the board, and then you group the adjectives.

Billy Potter: [00:31:47] So, for example, you say honesty and I say transparency. And we settle on a word that encompasses integrity. Okay? And so, we whittled the board down to maybe eight adjectives. So, we started with what? I mean, probably something like 60. Okay? And then, we whittled it down. We paired all the adjectives, grouped them together into maybe eight, and then you evaluate one another round. And, the evaluation of these adjectives, these core values are three grades. A plus, meaning you usually demonstrate; you mostly demonstrate that behavior. A plus-minus, you sometimes do, you sometimes don’t; or a minus, you consistently do not demonstrate that behavior.

Billy Potter: [00:32:34] So, any value that any one of our leaders had a negative in, we threw the value out. You could not do it. Because if you have an owner or a leader or whatever your group is that’s deciding the core values not defend one of those behaviors, then you’re aspirational. And far too often, I think that is what occurs within an organization. They say these things or they have 11 of them, or nobody can remember all the core values. And the truth of the matter is, you shouldn’t have to remember them. You should see them on a weekly basis from your people, and it should be modeled mostly by your leadership.

Billy Potter: [00:33:19] And that was a really fantastic experience and something that you can be proud of. You know, there’s a personal connection within our ownership to each one of those core values, and there’s a beautiful story behind it as well. So, we had fun. It was probably a full-day exercise where we say, “Hey, tell me why specifically your dad. You know, what about your experience with your dad? Did you feel like you could take over the world with?” That was a joy to share. And it brought the team closer together.

Mike Blake: [00:33:52] I want to change – I want to change gears here because I just thought of a question I want to get out because I hope it’s interesting. And that is, I’ve been reading a lot recently about return-to-office and everybody’s talking about return-to-office, but one of the features of return-to-office is that it’s bringing back – it’s bringing back sort of the Peter principle guys, the people that tend to rise to the level of incompetence, the people who tend to get by more because of the relationships they develop with their superiors more than their objective capabilities and accomplishments. There’s probably a catch-all word for those types of people. I don’t know what that is, but I think you know what I’m talking about. And it led me to wonder as I sort of think about U.S. and our organization’s entirely virtual. I mean, you can come to the office if you want, I don’t care. It’s not necessary. And, I wonder if EOS is actually potentially easier to implement in a virtual environment because by necessity you have to be so much more intentional about how you communicate. It offers more opportunities for measurement and it frankly blunts the people that are getting by, by frankly schmoozing, for lack of a more polite better term. Do you think there’s anything to that, or am I smoking something from Colorado?

Billy Potter: [00:35:25] So, I don’t think you’re smoking Twinkies, although they’re not made anymore in Colorado. So, here’s what comes to mind when you ask that question. First and foremost, throughout COVID, everything that’s meaningful in our organization peaked. Record sales year. Record operational efficiency. We monitor tasks and activities within our client management record production of that. So, again, I don’t think that has to do with necessarily like in the office or outside of the office. I think it has to do with being a talent magnet of highly engaged people. Okay? And the truth of the matter is, when you have a highly engaged person, they want to do a good job, not for you but for them. And that’s pretty special. So, that’s the first thing that comes to mind when I think about the impact of working from home and things of that nature.

Billy Potter: [00:36:18] Secondly, I would actually say that there is a negative to EOS. And, the negative is you have a 90-minute meeting that your people sit in and it’s the same day, same time every week. Okay? And, I was a meeting snob. Well, actually, hold on, I am a meeting snob now. If I’m sitting in a meeting now and it’s not an EOS meeting, all I think about is, “Oh, my gosh. This is so inefficient.” So, I’m grateful for that structure and I’m not a structure guy, so I’m more of like a caged animal when you drop a structure on me. So, the fact that I welcome those 90-minute meetings says something about how much I appreciate the process.

Billy Potter: [00:37:00] But here’s the negative, Mike. The negative is of that 90 minutes, 60 of it is spent on identifying, discussing, and solving issues. And, people in America are not welcoming of conflict. That is not something that is, like, second nature. So I do believe there’s value in having face-to-face interaction and developing rapport and trust with your team. That is, it takes longer to do it remotely unless you’re like Simon Sinek.

Billy Potter: [00:37:34] Simon Sinek with his people has a call, like, every Monday where they all get on a Zoom call and the one rule is you can’t talk about work. It’s just to build rapport. It’s that lost time we have in the workplace where I’m going to get a cup of coffee and I’m like, “Hey, Mike, how was your kid’s baptism? How did it go, you know?” It’s that interaction that we lose virtually that we have to be intentional. It’s like a long-distance relationship. You have to be intentional about making it work.

Billy Potter: [00:38:07] And so, if there’s a negative to the effectiveness of EOS, it’s not like it’s less effective. But if you’re going to have juicier meetings, you’ve got to have trust so you can have healthy conflict. And I think the remoteness means you just need to be more intentional about creating that trust. Does that make sense, Mike?

Mike Blake: [00:38:26] Yeah. It does. It does make sense. You talked about sort of a downside of EOS, and one of the things that Wickman talks about in the book is that some companies just aren’t ready for EOS yet. They need to do some work before they’re there. He’s even talked about basically firing people, firing clients that want to do EOS. But once he got in there, he just realized they weren’t ready for it yet. And, I see you’re nodding. What makes a company – what does a company need to do to be ready for EOS? Or what are they lacking when they’re not ready?

Billy Potter: [00:39:03] So, if you have a desire to build a better business, go EOS. Okay? Now, here’s the whammy. You might be thinking that you don’t have a better business because of other people, which is the problem. You’re going to eat some serious humble pie throughout EOS. But you’ll gladly eat it because, in the end, you want to build a better business. And if that’s truly at your heart, building a better business, building a better environment, attracting better talent, making your employees want to be at work, then I would say EOS is for you.

Billy Potter: [00:39:44] But the truth of the matter is if you can’t find your part in the problem, you won’t be a part of the solution. And EOS does that. It helps you identify what the problem is. And if you want to foster an environment where there’s vulnerability and people can feel open and honest in sharing where you’ve let them down or how the process can be better, many times that’s leadership’s fault. And that’s hard to do. That’s why the book starts off with letting go of the vine and delegating and elevating. And what you hope is that I will delegate a duty to somebody else and they will elevate in their seat wanting to do that task or that service or that project on my behalf. But the hard part is letting me let them do it and letting them be better than me at it or letting them fail at it. That’s hard to do. And that’s just the humble pie that comes with operating the system.

Billy Potter: [00:40:43] And I’ll tell you when you’re aligned with wanting to build a better business, it’s like a spoonful of sugar. It helps the medicine go down. But if you’re not aligned with wanting to build a better business, there’s a potential chance that you’re going to take that personally and you will refuse to let go of the vine.

Mike Blake: [00:41:06] There’s so much to unpack there. I mean, number one, it goes – it really gets down to what do you define as a better business, right? If a better business is one that delivers on its mission that delights its customers, that it’s a great platform for people’s careers, etc., EOS may be a good fit. If, on the other hand, the goal is -the definition of bigger, of a better business is to show everybody that I’m right, it’s about as effective as dragging your spouse to marriage counseling for the sole goal of having them lecture your spouse and how they’re wrong about everything.

Billy Potter: [00:41:44] That’s right. That is a great analogy. We’re here, doctor. Could you please tell my spouse everything she’s doing wrong?

Mike Blake: [00:41:51] Yeah. I wouldn’t get so mad if you weren’t just so damn stupid.

Billy Potter: [00:41:57] That’s exactly right. Yeah. You have to look internally first. And so, when you work with an implementer, most of the time, I think they have you work the process of EOS just within your leadership first. I know – I was not a shareholder at the time and they did it for maybe six to eight months. And then, they rolled it out to sales and then they rolled it out to the entire company over the course of like a year or so, but to learn the cadence and get comfortable with how the meetings should be run and really adopt and embrace, you know, implementing this system. And, you know, Gino says that. He says, “You know, even if you don’t adopt EOS, just commit, commit to doing it.” You know, that’s the key. And that means sometimes you’ve got to take your medicine.

Mike Blake: [00:42:45] Yeah. I hope I’m not being too forward with this question, but I do think it’s really important so I hope you’re willing to answer it. But if not, we’ll let it out.

Billy Potter: [00:42:45] Okay.

Mike Blake: [00:42:56] My question is, you alluded pretty heavily to how adopting the EOS not only has helped your professional life but it’s also filtered back into your personal life. Would you be willing to share a couple of examples on how it’s done that? Because I think that would be very inspiring to some of our listeners.

Billy Potter: [00:43:14] Hundred percent. So, the first one that jumps out at me is, you know, EOS has a 1310. So when you create – there’s this thing called a VTO, vision traction organizer, that EOS has you fill out and it says, “Hey, what is your business going to look like in 10 years? What is it going to look like in three years? And then, what do you have to do in the next year to be on track with those goals?”

Billy Potter: [00:43:40] I did it personally for myself. We had our sales team do it personally. How old will your kids be in 10 years? What will be your expenses? What are – what’s the life you want to be living in 10 years? What’s the life you need to be living in three years to marry that 10-year vision? What’s the life you want in one year? And when I looked at my results and I thought about what I was doing, I was like, am I going to make it? I’m recognizing right now how I will fall short on the vision that I want to create for my family. And that was – that stunk. I wasn’t doing enough. I quantified how I was falling short on the Billy I wanted to be.

Billy Potter: [00:44:22] And EOS talks a lot about putting the right people in the right seat, and they have several tools that they suggest in helping you find the right people to be in the right seat. One of the tools that we use, and it came from the book Rocket Fuel, is this system called Culture Index.

Mike Blake: [00:44:43] Yep.

Billy Potter: [00:44:44] And so, the Culture Index kind of, it tells me who I was since I was age 12. And it is unbelievably accurate. It’s incredible. So, long story short, it told me who I needed to be in my prospect engagement with some of the people I was trying to make in clients. And it let me know that I needed to be a little bit more logical. I was too emotional. I would make a sarcastic joke. I’d show a level of humor that was inappropriate to be trusted with millions of dollars worth of their investment. And I was like, “What was that matter?” Well, I listened to it. I listened to the feedback, and I applied it. And, I saw my numbers soar. I smoked my 10-year vision, smoked it. It was incredible. And, it was all because I started finding my part in the problem. And, I’m a very high – I have a high A trait, which can be a big threat to other people.

Billy Potter: [00:45:48] And, I had my wife fill out the same tool that we use in our business. And, I realized in my marriage, the way that I engage in conversation was challenging and hurtful in my marriage. I was speaking to others as I want to be spoken to. And, that’s not appropriate. The golden rule, do unto others as you would have done unto you, doesn’t work with communication. What I’ve learned as a product of this system is I have to speak so that my audience can receive it, not how I want to say it. How do I have to convey my issue or my concern so that it’s appropriately received by my audience?

Billy Potter: [00:46:29] And, when I saw my wife’s results, I said, “Honey, have I been crushing you for 15 years?” And she goes, “It’s been rough.” And I felt so bad because I had a blind eye to it. But on paper, if I looked at how she was aligned to her seat, if she worked for me, I’d have an intervention. And, I’m coming home every day and I’m thinking to myself, she didn’t ask me about my day, you know. And, that was some serious humble pie about the man I could be that I’m not being at home. Now, I would become that man at work because my work was helping me become the man that I needed to be to hit my 10-year vision. But then I would check out at home and think that none of those principles apply.

Billy Potter: [00:47:18] And, look, I have EOS to thank, but growth is personal. It has benefited every relationship in my life and I use that word with great intention, every relationship in my life, solely because I’ve learned more about who I am and who I don’t need to be. Because the way that issues work – and I think about that, IDS, identify, discuss and solve issues – when we uncover an issue about Billy at work, which we have, it’s not like I don’t take that issue in every other one of my relationships. Of course, I do. And so, once we figure that out here, I’m able to solve it everywhere. What a gift.

Mike Blake: [00:47:59] I’m talking with Billy Potter, and the topic is should I adopt the entrepreneur operating system or EOS. So, you mentioned Rocket Fuel. In fact, I got into this, the concept of EOS, backward. Somebody recommended Rocket Fuel to me first and then I figured out, “Oh, this is the sequel. I’m basically watching the Star Wars movies out of order.” I’m not even sure the order they’re supposed to be in anymore, but I guess there is one. But anyway, are you a visionary or an integrator?

Billy Potter: [00:48:28] I’m a visionary.

Mike Blake: [00:48:30] Yeah.

Billy Potter: [00:48:31] Yeah. And honestly, whoever gave you that advice, I think is brilliant. Because now after reading those books myself, I encourage people to read, well, certain people to read the Rocket Fuel first because –

Mike Blake: [00:48:45] Do you really?

Billy Potter: [00:48:46] I do. Because think if you’re speaking to the visionary and/or the integrator, they’ll have a greater appreciation of the impact they can have on their business. And Traction is a brilliant book, but it is the blueprint. It’s not as wonderful of a read as Rocket Fuel. It’s not written in a story format. But I’ll tell you, if you’re a business owner, every issue that’s identified in Traction or that blueprint addresses almost every issue you have in your business. But Rocket Fuel is just a great appetizer, I think, because the most crucial – it only names to seats in your organization, visionary and integrator. And when you look back, just like Jim Collins did, when you look back at every great business in America, more than likely they had a wonderful dance between the visionary and the integrator, just a rock-solid relationship.

Mike Blake: [00:49:36] Yeah. Well, that’s exactly what my appetite and also what it made me realize that even though I’m a visionary type, which means I tend to look much more 5 miles ahead in the road and not necessarily the road that’s 10 feet in front of me and the pothole there, it made me realize I’m not a bad person or a bad executive. It just means that I’m normal and that I need to be paired with an integrator in order to achieve that – to realize my full potential.

Billy Potter: [00:50:06] Not only that, we need to hang scores on it. So, for example, one of my scores is, have I spent 4 hours this week thinking about our business, where we need to go, and what I need to solve in order for us to get there down the road? That is crucial. It’s part of my favorite score. When I actually carve out the time each week to think about growing our business, I love it, and that is using my gifts. That’s where I want to be. And so, you’re costing your business when you’re not in that seat, when you’re not looking down the road.

Billy Potter: [00:50:39] And it’s just so clear and crisp when you see what they call the accountability chart, we define all the roles and responsibilities by seat, and then we tie each role and responsibility to a score, usually a leading indicator. And then, monthly we do, we report on lagging indicators. But I love that. And, I took the test. Are you a visionary? Are you an integrator? All that stuff. And, I’m fulfilled by the work. I’m energized by it. So, your company is benefiting when you are working more out of your strengths, and that’s the key.

Mike Blake: [00:51:13] Yeah. I think that’s right. I read a book by Gallup called Focus on Your Strengths and made a very compelling case that ideally, you’re better off focusing on what you do really well because you can – the sky’s the limit on the things you do well, but you can only overcome the things you’re lousy at to a limited extent. Right? There are just certain things on my best day I’m going to be mediocre at.

Billy Potter: [00:51:40] Yeah. That’s right.

Mike Blake: [00:51:41] That’s an important function that’s going to hold the company back.

Billy Potter: [00:51:43] And it drains your energy.

Mike Blake: [00:51:45] It does.

Billy Potter: [00:51:45] You know. And I could work, you know, not that this is the goal, but I could work twice as many hours. But if I’m working on things that I’m gifted at, I’m fulfilled. Like, I could run home, versus, you know, no offense, but I couldn’t be an accountant. I just I don’t –

Mike Blake: [00:52:03] Neither can I.

Billy Potter: [00:52:03] I don’t have the bandwidth. I don’t have the appreciation or the level of execution on details. Could I do the job? Of course. Of course, I could do the job. But would I be good at it? Would it make me want to do more? That’s not my skill set. And conversely, we have other people that would be in more of a visionary or CEO seat that would be intimidated or not want to do the job. Like, I’d be fearful of making all kinds of mistakes as an accountant. I couldn’t do it.

Mike Blake: [00:52:32] Billy, this has been a great conversation. I could go another hour with you, but that’s not fair to you or your family, for that matter. There are probably topics that either our listeners wish we would have spent more time on or wish that we’d cover we didn’t get to. If somebody wants to ask more, ask you about the EOS and your experience with it, can they, and if so, what’s the best way for them to contact you?

Billy Potter: [00:52:53] Absolutely, they can. I’ll give you my direct line. So, the number is 470-660-8880.

Mike Blake: [00:53:06] That’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. I’d like to thank Billy Potter so much for sharing his expertise with us.

Mike Blake: [00:53:13] We’ll be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:53:28] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Billy Potter, Brady Ware & Company, Decision Vision, EOS, Gino Wickman, Mike Blake, Snellings Walters, The Entrepreneurial Operating System, Traction, values, vision

Decision Vision Episode 167: Should I Apply for Grants? – An Interview with Jill Wood, Phoenix Nest, Inc.

May 5, 2022 by John Ray

Grants
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 167: Should I Apply for Grants? - An Interview with Jill Wood, Phoenix Nest, Inc.
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Grants

Decision Vision Episode 167: Should I Apply for Grants? – An Interview with Jill Wood, Phoenix Nest, Inc.

Jill Wood, Co-Founder and CEO of Phoenix Nest, Inc., and Co-Founder of Jonah’s Just Begun- Foundation to Cure Sanfilippo, Inc.,  gave an overview of the process of applying for grants. She and her husband started the foundation when their son was diagnosed with Sanfilippo, Type C. With host Mike Blake, she covered the basics of applying for grants, becoming a “citizen scientist” to understand the science, where to begin, the need for help from consultants and grant writers, the strict requirements, timelines, and much more.

Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Phoenix Nest, Inc.

Phoenix Nest was founded by an alliance of parents with children suffering from Sanfilippo syndrome type C.

Our management team has a built-in sense of urgency and limitless determination to bring a treatment to the families affected by Sanfilippo syndrome to market. Phoenix Nest is the proud recipient of several Small Business Innovation Research grants from the National Institute of Health. Through funding from the NIH, we have been able to facilitate the research in academic labs and licensed these programs.  With support from our Independent Scientific Advisory Board and Board of Directors, we have thus far successfully met the challenges of pioneering treatments for these ultra-rare and untreatable diseases.

Company website

Jonah’s Just Begun – Foundation to Cure Sanfilippo, Inc.

Jonah’s Just Begun-Foundation to Cure Sanfilippo Inc. is a 501(c)3. The foundation raises funds then distributes them to academic research groups focused on finding treatments for Sanfilippo Syndrome, MPS III.

JJB was formed in 2011 after parents Jill Wood and Jeremy Weishaar after their son Jonah was diagnosed with Sanfilippo Type C. Jonah’s astute pediatrician, Dr. Hai Cao MD (South Slope Pediatrics), suggested that Jonah receives an MRI based on his abnormally large head size. Jonah’s Neurologist, Dr. Romaine Schubert (New York Methodist), concurred. At the time of diagnosis, Jonah was 22 months old and asymptomatic. Upon learning that their child had a fatal genetic disease that had no treatment, Jill and Jeremy received some advice from Jonah’s Geneticist, Dr. Karen David, also from New York Methodist. Dr. David told Jonah’s Parents to make a treatment happen. It was this advice that spawned JJB.

Jill and Jeremy hit the ground running, locating the world’s few scientists that were working on Sanfilippo, and seeking the support of like-minded parents. JJB brought these parents, scientists, and clinicians to New York for a patient population in May of 2011, just one year after Jonah’s diagnosis. Together they identified the three most promising approaches to a treatment. The parents went home filled with hope and began their grassroots fundraising efforts.  The scientists went back to their labs, inspired by the parents.

Today there are half a dozen Sanfilippo research projects in progress and a knockout mouse model.  Jonah’s Just Begun works hand in hand with other International and US type C Medical Research Foundation, we call this consortium HAND.

Website

Jill Wood, Co-Founder, Chief Executive Officer, Co-Founder, Phoenix Nest and Jonah’s Just Begun – Foundation to Cure Sanfilippo, Inc. and Chief Executive Officer

Jill Wood, Co-Founder, Jonah’s Just Begun and CEO, Co-Founder, Phoenix Nestc.

Jill Wood Co-Founded Jonah’s Just Begun-Foundation to Cure Sanfilippo (JJB) with her husband in May of 2010.  After their son Jonah was diagnosed with the ultra-rare genetic disease, Sanfilippo Syndrome type C.  JJB’s mission was to foster a treatment for Sanfilippo Syndrome type C; by connecting researchers, funding science, and mobilizing the patient population.

JJB revenue came through grassroots fundraising efforts, small grants, and private donors. Funding was then distributed to researchers through grants made by JJB.  Grassroots fundraising provided the seed money to initiate pre-clinical research but was far from what was needed to develop, test, and manufacture a drug. Jill founded Phoenix Nest (PN), a for-profit bespoke biotech in 2012. PN licensed the programs that JJB kickstarted, which allowed PN to apply for National Institute of Health (NIH) Small Business Innovation Research grants (SBIR/STTR). PN won its first SBIR grant in 2012, the start of a series of grants totaling $10,750,320.

The funding has allowed PN to bring one of its treatments almost entirely through its pre-IND studies and has funded a clinical observational study, still ongoing.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:02] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware and Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:21] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision making on a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:43] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m a director at Brady Ware and Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. I am Managing Partner of the Strategic Valuation and Advisory Services Practice, which brings clarity to the most important strategic decisions that business owners and executives face by presenting them with factual evidence for such decisions. Brady Ware is sponsoring this podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:01:12] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn Group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck, so please join that as well if you would like to engage.

Mike Blake: [00:01:30] Today’s topic is, Should I apply for grants? According to data from Foundation Center, there are over 86,000 grant making entities in the United States with 92 percent represented by independent foundations. According to the Instrumental Blog, there are 26 grant making agencies in the federal government. And corporations represent 17 percent of all non-government grant funding, according to Grant Station.

Mike Blake: [00:01:57] And I wanted to cover this topic separately from the discussion that we have with Lauren Cascio a couple of weeks ago on non-dilutive funding, because I do believe that grant making is its own animal. And, in fact, I don’t know that most people appreciate just how big the grant sector is in the United States, and how central the grant making sector is to supporting certain kinds of business, in particular biotechnology.

Mike Blake: [00:02:33] There’s a rule of thumb that says it takes about $100 million to get from molecule to market. And a lot of that early stage funding when you’re in that molecule phase and you’re not even sure that the molecule does anything useful yet, you’re trying to prove that (A) it might do something useful and then determine if it’s going to kill the person that you’re trying to cure. That’s what they call preclinical and phase one in clinical trials.

Mike Blake: [00:03:03] But to get to that point, that’s usually not done through venture investing. Sometimes it is, but it’s actually usually accomplished through some form of grants. And, indeed, I think this is something that my profession and the world of corporate finance has to come to grips with and really make a fundamental adjustment in how we value companies.

Mike Blake: [00:03:33] And I’m going to get a little bit technical here on that, because I think it’s really important, and then we’re going to get to the actual topic because you want to hear my guest, not me. But for those of you who are finance geeks out there – and I know that you’re out there because you send me you send me messages and emails – when we look at cost of capital to figure out the hurdle rate for a project, or a discount rate on an investment, or required rate of return, conventional wisdom says that we consider the cost of equity and the cost of debt financing, which is all well and good.

Mike Blake: [00:04:08] But conventional wisdom ignores non-dilutive financing. That is financing that has no cost of capital. There is no expectation that it’s going to generate a financial return to the investor. And, accordingly, I think that leads to a lot of companies, frankly, being undervalued – at least by people who do what I do – and explains, at least in part, some of the gap that exists between sort of academic finance and practical finance. So, I’ll put out a white paper on that. I’m not going to discuss that anymore because it really would make for a lousy podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:04:43] So, let’s go to the part that makes for a good podcast. And joining us today is Jill Wood, who co-founded Jonah’s Just Begun – Foundation to Cure Sanfilippo with her husband in May of 2010 after their son Jonah was diagnosed with the ultra rare genetic disease, Sanfilippo Syndrome Type C. Their mission was to foster treatment for Sanfilippo Syndrome Type C by connecting researchers, funding science, and mobilizing the patient population.

Mike Blake: [00:05:12] The revenue came through Grassroots Fundraising efforts, small grants, and private donors. Funding was then distributed to researchers through grants made by the foundation. Grassroots Fundraising provided the seed money to initiate pre-clinical research, but was far from what was needed to develop tests and manufacture a drug.

Mike Blake: [00:05:31] So, Jill then founded Phoenix Nest, a for-profit bespoke biotech in 2012. Phoenix Nest licensed the programs that the foundation kickstarted, which allowed them to apply for National Institute of Health, Small Business Innovation Research Grants. They won their first SBIR grant in 2012, the start of a series of grants totaling nearly $11 million. That funding has allowed Phoenix Nest to bring one of its treatments almost entirely through its pre-clinical studies and funded a clinical observation study which is still ongoing. Jill Wood, welcome to the Decision Vision podcast.

Jill Wood: [00:06:09] Thank you, Mike. Thanks for having me here.

Mike Blake: [00:06:13] So, let’s educate our audience first. We’ll talk about grants in a second. But what you do is so important and I also want to get into your origin story because I think it’s just amazing, candidly. I’m not sucking up to you. I truly believe that. What is Sanfilippo Syndrome? And so, you and I had spoken, I never heard of it, to be perfectly candid.

Jill Wood: [00:06:34] Yeah. Very few people have heard of it, and that’s one of the major problems with diagnosing this disease. So, Sanfilippo Syndrome is part of the umbrella group of syndromes called mucopolysaccaridosis, which is MPS for short. There are seven forms of MPS, and Sanfilippo Syndrome is MPS III, which breaks down to another four syndromes, MPS III A, B, C and D, or you can call it Sanfilippo Syndrome A, B, C, and D. I don’t know why they have to make this stuff so complicated, but that’s what it is.

Jill Wood: [00:07:16] So, my son, Jonah, was diagnosed with Sanfilippo Syndrome Type C about a year into his first year of life. We were really very lucky, for lack of better words, we lived in New York where we are surrounded by some really great institution, health care hospitals, who our pediatrician recognized that something was off with Jonah. And it was basically the head size, his head circumference, which a normal pediatrician would sweep under the rug, like no big deal. You know, if they’re Polish, they all have big heads, you know.

Jill Wood: [00:07:57] But he sent us over to a neurologist and that neurologists took a hard look at Jonah and saw some other things. And they sent us to an MRI that was done at NYU. And, luckily for us, the techs saw in Jonah’s brain deformities or lesions. The deformity was a skull deformity that’s pointed towards mucopolysaccharidosis. So, we were able to zero in right away into what diagnostic testing we needed to do for Jonah.

Jill Wood: [00:08:42] So, Sanfilippo Syndrome, it’s a genetic disease that has a mutation on one of the chromosomes. And a husband and a wife have a 25 percent chance of giving both of those bad genes to their child. And so, Jonah has a defect on his gene that stops an enzyme from forming. And that enzyme’s job is to break down a protein called heparan sulfate. And because that enzyme is not there or lacking, it doesn’t break down that protein. And the protein sits in the cell in every single cell.

Jill Wood: [00:09:26] This is called a lysosomal storage disease. There are numerous lysosomal storage disease out there. Gaucher, Fabry are some of the more popular ones that people might recognize. So, anyways, you could imagine what this storage must do to your cells that’s not supposed to be there, right? It has catastrophic effects. It starts with near degenerative progressive disease, a lot of behavioral issues. The symptoms are really quite diverse and it’s very hard to pick up because a lot of it in the early diagnosis is hyperactivity.

Jill Wood: [00:10:08] So, you have a two year old that’s extremely hyper. The two year old with a large head that’s extremely hyper. Then, what really sets people off to search is their speech delays and not keeping up with their peers. A lot of times, if they have older brothers, siblings, they’re like, “They’re just not like his older brother Johnny. You know, this is not the way he developed.” And so, they start on that odyssey of getting the diagnosis, and they usually get diagnosed as in the autism spectrum disorders until they start regressing.

Mike Blake: [00:10:47] And in the regression, they’ll start to lose their speech, their ability to walk, their ability to eat on their own, and they succumb to death between the ages of 10 to 30, really, depending on the severity of the syndrome.

Mike Blake: [00:11:04] So, at the time your son was diagnosed, were you already a biologist? Were you already a trained pharmaceutical researcher? What was your background?

Jill Wood: [00:11:16] No. Everybody always asks me that, Mike. They call us citizen scientist, is the term that came out. No. I was in the fashion industry. I think what gave me the ability to do what I’ve done is just being able to talk to people, not being shy. And it’s okay to not understand. And going after people and making those connections is one of my strong suits.

Mike Blake: [00:11:49] You know, and I think just aside from the story, being remarkable that you’re undertaking that challenge and you really just pivoted your life to pursue this, you’ve gone from that point to raising over $11 million of grant money. Which tells me – and I mean, this in no disrespect to you and in any way diminish your accomplishment – that you don’t necessarily have to be a “insider” to raise grant money. You don’t necessarily have to have lived that entire life, you’re part of a secret club, or anything, that there is a process, that if you muster that process, then grant money is achievable.

Jill Wood: [00:12:33] Yeah. But, Mike, I do think they were shocked. I think the people that released the funds when they talk to me that first round and they asked me who I was and what kind of financial setup I had, they were shocked. I could hear them gasp on the other line.

Jill Wood: [00:12:56] I would be curious to know how many other parents have started out. And since I’ve started doing this and telling my story – you know, the NIH brings me out all the time to campus to speak – and since I’ve started this, many families, many parents said, “Okay. I can do this too.” So, I know there’s been an uptick in that, but I would be curious to know.

Mike Blake: [00:13:19] So, walk through your first grant, if you can remember that. What was that like? How did you approach it? Was it successful?

Jill Wood: [00:13:34] You know, it took a couple of times, a couple of rounds to have our first successful grant. Obviously, I did not do this grant writing on my own. You do need to have a medical degree or a PhD – actually, you don’t. I mean, you could really educate yourself up to that point. But if you want to expedite the situation, you should probably bring some consultants in.

Jill Wood: [00:13:57] And so, I did have my colleague, my co-founder, was a PhD, and he had NIH grants under his belt. He inspired me and said, “Let’s do this.” I have really great researchers that I work with. We had preclinical work. We had efficacy. And we really had what was needed to start writing grants. So, he helped me put together our first grant application.

Jill Wood: [00:14:27] And to go back, so my major funding comes from the National Institute of Health, NINDS, as I mentioned, the Small Business Innovation Research Grants. To get these fundings, to start up, even able to apply, is a major undertaking. You can’t just go and log in and sign yourself up. There are several different agencies that you have to go through. The dance number, your cage code, all these steps that you have to go and be certified for. So, anyways, that could take you four to six months. So, if you’re going to do this, you’ve got to get started.

Jill Wood: [00:15:14] There’s very little cost that’s involved in starting up, though. I think there might just be a couple of fees, but, anyhow, it’s inexpensive to do, so – go ahead.

Mike Blake: [00:15:25] Please go ahead. No. Go ahead, please.

Jill Wood: [00:15:26] Okay. So, my researchers, with these small business grants, usually it’s a requirement. You’re working with an academic, and that academic worked with my grant writer, and we put together a strategy. There is a format to these grants. And I suggest you read the instructions over and over and over again. And you don’t throw anything in there that you think is really great. You need to follow what the FOA asks you to do.

Mike Blake: [00:16:04] FOA stands for what?

Jill Wood: [00:16:08] You put me on the spot there, and you’re going to come up –

Mike Blake: [00:16:12] I’ll look it up.

Jill Wood: [00:16:13] Yeah. Thanks. Look it up. You can call for grant FOA.

Mike Blake: [00:16:23] Funding Opportunity Announcement.

Jill Wood: [00:16:25] Thank you. There it is.

Mike Blake: [00:16:26] You’re such an expert, you’re so in it, it’s hard for you to get back to the [inaudible].

Jill Wood: [00:16:33] I was impressed that it came up with SBIR. So, anyways, you follow what the FOA is asking. And if you don’t, that is your first rejection. They’ll kick it right back at you. The NIH is not messing around. I once had a grant kicked back to me because there was a hyperlink in the page within the body of a CV. That was kicked back to me. I’ve had grants kicked back because we went over the page limit. I mean, you don’t even get reviewed. They kick it back and you can’t reapply for another six months.

Jill Wood: [00:17:13] So, you really got to take these things very, very seriously. Have other people take another eyeball on it, pass it over. I mean, bio sketches have to be in the form of an NIH bio sketch. Anyhow, so our first grants we applied had really great comments. We did not win. But you take those comments, and you take them seriously, and you go back and you address them. And you could have a chance, within time you can go and address those before your grant will go to committee for final review. But most often you have to reapply to the grant funding opportunities, which usually happen every six months.

Mike Blake: [00:18:04] Now, you’ve also received other grants from non-governmental organizations as well, correct?

Jill Wood: [00:18:14] Correct.

Mike Blake: [00:18:15] So, I guess I’m curious, why are they giving away money? I understand and our listeners will understand, government agencies, in a way, it’s sort of their job. But there are these private foundations, individuals, I guess, corporate entities, and so forth, what do you think kind of makes them tick?

Jill Wood: [00:18:39] Obviously, breast cancer awareness, you can see how that got started, because it affected people and maybe affected loved ones. A wealthy entrepreneur out there may have had a grandchild with a rare disease and somebody on a staff started up a foundation, because they want to help and maybe they don’t have the time or the resources to do what I’ve done.

Jill Wood: [00:19:11] And I’m sorry I keep regressing here, but I’m thinking back to the science. What was there ten years ago is here now. Alzheimer’s is a really good example. You know, that is a disease that’s only recently had treatments and it’s been known for 70 years. You can look that one up, Mike, as well. But some of these ultra rare diseases are easy fixes where a single gene defect and the science is finally here. You know, CRISPR gene therapy, it’s just opened up the world to us.

Jill Wood: [00:19:53] So, I’m going back to make my point is that, these large foundations that have been there for so long, they had to fund a lot of science to get to where they’re at now. I think we’re going to be seeing a lot more treatments coming out in the next couple of decades with the recent discoveries that we’ve had. So, yes, I think they have a connection. They have a connection to the community.

Mike Blake: [00:20:23] So, I’m not sure if the way to ask this question have you think back or maybe just if you’re going to start today. But, you know, I’m sure somebody who’s listening to this podcast is thinking this out, “You know, I’ve been thinking about getting a grant and this conversation with Jill is giving me the confidence to give this a shot.” Where do you start? How do you start figuring out what might be a potential source of grant money?

Jill Wood: [00:20:53] Well, you’re going to want to look at the institutions or the smaller nonprofits that are in your space. And NIH was obvious to me. But if you might have an education grants, you can go for the Department of Education. Department of Defense is a really good, huge funding opportunity. So, look within your space.

Mike Blake: [00:21:20] I imagine a lot of this can be just accomplished by Google Search, right? Because I think some organizations are very private, they don’t necessarily want a solicitation at large, but then there are some that do. But one thing I’ve read, and I’m curious if you agree with or have any experience with this, is that, it might be easier to obtain money from a smaller organization than a larger one simply because they may not have as many applicants. Any comment on that?

Jill Wood: [00:21:55] No offense, Mike, finding those is pretty dang tough. So, we can go on a tangent here, maybe there’s foundations. So, in my space you’ll have a foundation that supports MPS, but they support MPS as in the families, getting help to the families, and getting families to where they need to be. And I’m looking for foundations that are willing to fund research to bring a treatment.

Jill Wood: [00:22:30] The smaller ones are hard, I think, to find unless you know them because they’re in your space and then you have a link to them. But the larger foundations, you know, everybody always says, “Did you go for a Zuckerberg grant? Have you talked to Bill Gates?” It’s always the first thing out of people’s mouths. And it’s like, “Those are the people that are inundated with grant applications.”

Jill Wood: [00:22:56] You know, you really need to have an in, you need to have somebody you can talk to, a name, and ask for advice, what are people looking for, what’s the tone of this grant. And a lot of times you’ll look at the FOAs and it’s like, “I don’t even know they’re so all over the place.” Nothing has really zeroed in and there’s so many different ones. It’s really convoluted.

Jill Wood: [00:23:24] So, you start out doing that because that’s what everybody tells you to do. But I turned around and just walked away from it because it was all misses. You know, you could spend a lot of time putting things together and it’s just not what they’re looking for. But they don’t really tell you what they’re looking for. And the goalposts are changing all the time, whichever way the wind blows, what’s the sexy right here that I’m funding.

Mike Blake: [00:23:52] You know, the interesting thing about what you just described, I think, is that a lot of people who have had to raise venture capital would offer a very similar description. You’ve got to have an in and you’re not really sure what they want. The VCs aren’t sure what they want. It’s sort of like trying to define the difference between art and pornography. They don’t know. They can’t define exactly where it is, but they know it when they see it. And so, you get bouncing around saying, “Well, no. I’m really not into this. But maybe if you do this, I’ll take another look.”

Jill Wood: [00:24:26] And I don’t know about you, but I know that at least on the VC side of it, the funding seeker side, that can just be immensely frustrating, because it’s hard to tell the difference between being tasked to do something with a specific objective versus just sort of being frankly jerked around.

Jill Wood: [00:24:46] Yeah. Exactly. Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:24:49] So, in your experience, what does the timeline look like for applying to a grant? I’m curious, is it fairly quick? Is it lengthy? Is it variable? What’s your experience with that?

Jill Wood: [00:25:04] It’s all lengthy. From small to large, it’s all lengthy. I mean, small operations don’t have as many people onboard looking at it. They want to vet the application. So, it might take more time to find the right eyes to look at the application. And then, large institutions, you think they’re large, but the NIH, I feel like they don’t have enough employees, The FDA, they don’t have enough employees. And there’s a lot to go through as well. So, they’re about six months rotation. And if you have a government shutdown, it’s all over, and it happens all the time.

Mike Blake: [00:25:49] When that happens, do you basically have to start over or is it sort of extended animation?

Jill Wood: [00:25:53] No. We just sit in limbo. We sit in limbo. You know, it’s happened to me a couple of times during the Obama Administration, where towards the end we had shutdowns every other day. And it was between we had won the grant and now we’re waiting for the funds to release. Well, the funds aren’t being released because nobody’s made their decision on how much funds are being released. They’re all squabbling there. So, yeah, you sit down for another three months. It’s extremely frustrating. I mean, you think you got the funds, but it could take you a year to actually get them.

Jill Wood: [00:26:33] And I should preface that, too, maybe this is obvious to most people, but maybe not. Those funds don’t hit your bank account. They’re sitting up there in the cloud somewhere – we call it the Payment Management System – and you only pull down funds when you’re paying an invoice.

Mike Blake: [00:26:51] Oh, that’s interesting. I didn’t know that and I’ll bet our listeners didn’t know that. How does that impact your operations as you try to operate your company?

Jill Wood: [00:27:02] Mike, it’s really hard. I was laughing, I could tell you all the horror stories behind this. So, you know, you have to budget so fine tuned. You need to know every penny. And when those invoices are coming, a lot of these grants are milestone driven. If you don’t get to your milestones, your grants can be frozen. If you have a researcher that changes positions or you have to move to a different site, your grant is frozen. And if you’re in between a funding cycle and they only release fundings at certain points, it’s frozen, then you have to get permission to release it, and then here the funds come another six months.

Jill Wood: [00:27:58] So, you can’t get ahead of yourself. You can’t ever overcommit. You really need to be prepared for those things to happen because it is inevitable. They will happen. And if you are living from paycheck to paycheck, it can crush you.

Mike Blake: [00:28:19] And I’m guessing also it probably creates a vendor management challenge, too.

Jill Wood: [00:28:25] Yes, it is. Yeah. I always go in. And a lot of these vendors, believe it or not, even though the money is there, they don’t take on uber rare projects. You know, it’s like $1,000,000 actually means nothing to them. You know, patient population with 15 patients, I’ve had vendors have turned me down because my projects are too small. So, you get these good ones that want to work with you, that understand the situation, and they realize this is what’s happening, but we’re going to do the right thing. And I’ve had several of those vendors.

Jill Wood: [00:29:06] But, yeah, I work with one company that has been incredibly patient where that exact same thing happened. My grant got waylaid and I owed them hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they sat there for six months. And they continued to work, they kept on working until the funds were released. But I couldn’t sleep at night. I do not like living like this.

Mike Blake: [00:29:30] No, of course. I guess, on the bright side, I have to imagine if you provide those services or vendors provide, for example, clinical research organizations, that kind of thing, many of their clients are in your position. And so, my guess, if they’re smart, is that their business model already foresees the fact that there may be a six month delay between invoicing and being paid simply because that’s the nature of the beast.

Jill Wood: [00:30:05] Yeah. It’s like the venture capitalist, you know, they’re taking a little bit of a risk helping you out.

Mike Blake: [00:30:15] So, let’s go to the NIH, because I think that’s obviously a big source for you. How important has it been to develop a personal relationship with people at the NIH? And if that was important, how did that happen?

Jill Wood: [00:30:38] You know, they have to be very careful. There cannot be any favoritism there. You can’t take these guys out for lunch or buy them a drink. That is not appropriate. And if you’re in this space, it’s a small fishbowl. And I was fortunate enough where my grant funding came from the NINDS. And there’s a representative, our program manager that runs in the same circle – her name is actually the same as mine – who I just got to know her. And she really understood the science. She understood the disease. And so, when the grant application came through, it hit her desk. We already had the rapport. She knew the people that I work with.

Jill Wood: [00:31:27] But she’s not the one who’s making the decisions on reviews. You know, when your grant goes in, she gives it to the right people. But you never see your reviewers. They give you a list of their names, but you actually don’t know which ones are looking at your grant. And it is a major no-no to ever contact these reviewers. Don’t ever say anything to them. And it’s those guys that are making the decisions on giving you the score. And those guys can tear you apart if their idea does not fit with yours.

Jill Wood: [00:32:07] But the grant managers, how they can really help you is fight for you. When they do see something that is not in sync with the guidelines, they can call a reviewer out and say, “Hey, you know, this was an unjust comment.” During those times when grant funding freezes, they can help you find other ways to get bridge funding. So, my program managers are priceless. I do have a really great relationship with them. And they are extremely helpful, and networking, and giving ideas.

Mike Blake: [00:32:46] So, you’ve indicated that you’ve in the past, and perhaps you still do, have relied on the help of outside consultants and advisors to help you prepare grants. And I’ve read the same thing, like many organizations have internal grant writers because it’s such a specialized skill. If you’re going to apply for grants such as the ones that you’ve received, how much should somebody budget in terms of the cost of applying for this “free money,” which isn’t so free?

Jill Wood: [00:33:19] It’s not free. Oh, geez. You know, I think it could probably cost you, it depends, like, are you going to hire these people and keep them on staff. That’s where I always worry about. They need to not only have the gift of writing, they need to understand your disease too. And so, it’s hard to find a consultant out there that’s going to be able to nail both of them. So, I would suggest hiring somebody and then you’re going to give them a full salary, which you want to Google it, $100,000 to 300,000.

Jill Wood: [00:34:02] If you are going to piecemeal it, I just think you get what you pay for. You’re not going to get quality work out – maybe you will, maybe you can find somebody – just saying, “Here’s my package, put it together.” I would say that probably costs you at least $10,000.

Mike Blake: [00:34:23] Have you had grant applications rejected?

Jill Wood: [00:34:27] Oh, all the time nonstop. This one grant goes to cancel May 18th. And we are sitting on the edge of our seats. We got a really great score. And that grant has gone through three times. This is its fourth time.

Mike Blake: [00:34:48] It’s fourth time being submitted?

Jill Wood: [00:34:50] Fourth time being submitted.

Mike Blake: [00:34:52] And you’re hopeful that the fourth time is the charm?

Jill Wood: [00:34:55] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:34:56] Okay. So, actually this is one of my questions, I was curious if you’re able to apply for grants more than once. That sounds like you are. That may even be expected.

Jill Wood: [00:35:07] Yeah. So, you’ll get your comments, and you’re not always going to have the same reviewers. And sometimes you get lucky with a reviewer that knows exactly what it is that you’re trying to convey and get across, they’ve been in this space. They’re in your space. These people are in your space. They have understanding of the disease. And then, you’ll have somebody who is like, “No. That is not the route of administration I would suggest. No.” “F.” They score you for, like, one to eight, one being good, eight all the way across. So, it’s some egos in there.

Mike Blake: [00:35:44] So, is it fair to say there’s a certain amount of luck involved? Do I get the right application in front of the right reviewer on the right day in the right mood?

Jill Wood: [00:35:55] Yeah. I think with all honesty, Mike, yes. Because we’ve resubmitted it and gotten way different comments from the previous round, so it’s extremely frustrating.

Mike Blake: [00:36:13] Now, when you receive a grant – we touched upon this in terms of how money is dispersed – what other things do you have to change about your business or build your business around in order to manage the grant? Because my understanding is when there’s a grant, there’s just usually some sort of reporting function to send to the granting organization to verify, basically, that you took the money, you didn’t go to Atlantic City and put it all in 22 black. So, what does that look like?

Jill Wood: [00:36:43] It’s hard. And that was really scary for me. And I found there’s niche companies out there that specialize in managing your funds and helping you with the accounting. Yes, there will be line item budgets for travel, for equipment, for subcontracts, yadda yadda. And you get your F&A portion of it and your fee. There’s a lot of calculation that goes into these. It’s epic. It’s quite a lot of work. And your invoices all need to be properly coded.

Jill Wood: [00:37:22] So, all that goes into – I use this company and I’ll pitch them because I think they’re fabulous – Jameson, is my company that does that for me. But I take the invoices and I code them. They manage all the backend of it for me. And then, when you hit a milestone, it’s 750,000 in funding, you’re audited. It triggers an audit. And so, these guys come in, they’re certified by the NIH, and they come in and they look at all your books and make sure you spend down to the time cards, to every single sub-award, seeing the contracts, knowing how you vetted these different contracts. It’s pretty intense and it’s extremely intimidating.

Jill Wood: [00:38:14] So, I strongly suggest you bring somebody in to help you with that. Academia, who wins a lot of these kind of grants, they have entire departments that manage this. They manage the researchers grants for them. But I did not. And so, I found a company that could manage it for me.

Mike Blake: [00:38:38] So, I’m curious, does that also mean that you have to – I’m guessing – kind of approach accounting in a separate and kind of a different way? Some companies, frankly, can be pretty loosey goosey about accounting. And if all you’re doing is you’re running a business selling peat moss out of the back of your truck, you can do that. But it sounds like for you, you probably effectively need at least a controller, if not an outright CFO, and maybe even a whole separate kind of firm even to sell off on it to make sure that you’re doing what you need to do. Because I’m guessing that’s the kind of thing where a misstep can destroy a relationship forever.

Jill Wood: [00:39:24] Yeah. So, yeah, that’s why I depend on this company, and I really want to make sure. This was a portion that I did not know. There’s always that behind the scenes stuff, and this was one of them, is the reporting of the funds, how you spend the funds. I mean, there’s stipulations on how much funds you can roll over to the next accounting period. If you come up short in one budget item and over in the other one, how much you can reallocate to different areas. You know, it’s really detailed.

Mike Blake: [00:40:05] I’m talking with Jill Wood. And the topic is, Should I apply for grants? With the time we have left one question I want to get your thoughts on here is, who shouldn’t apply for grants? I’m sure you’ve probably talked to people that have asked, you know, “Hey, this sounds great. I want to get some of this free money to do X, Y, and Z.” Have you ever talked somebody out of applying for grants or can you see a scenario under which you might talk somebody out of applying for grants? Because for whatever reason, they’re not wired for it, they’re not appropriate, not the right space. Hopefully, you get my question there.

Jill Wood: [00:40:46] Yeah. I would say not in the right space. This is not free money. Because free means it’s my time. This is a massive amount of work that you’re doing to managing these grants. So, if you think you’re going to get free money, who’s going to manage that money for you? That’s not free. So, it would be the person that I would talk out of it.

Jill Wood: [00:41:14] Like, I know where I’m at. And I only have one child. I live in New York. I have access to a large infrastructure, lots of consultants at my fingertips. I don’t want to pick on anybody, but Arkansas did not have the infrastructure that I do and have more than one child, four kids, maybe two, very sick. It’s too much. It’s too much work. I know how hard it is.

Jill Wood: [00:41:52] And you’re not just managing grants. You’re also managing your research. You’re managing the companies. You’re managing your vendors. You’re trying to understand where to go to next, the NIH, the whole landscape. You have to quit your job. And if you’re taking care of multiple sick children, that’s too much. I ask myself all the time, “Is it worth it?”

Mike Blake: [00:42:20] And I imagine it must feel sometimes like you’re working for your granting organizations.

Jill Wood: [00:42:27] Yeah. I do. I really do. I would say that’s a good portion of my time is to make sure all my books are in order, that I’m making all my milestones, planning ahead so that I’ll get the funding when my milestones are met. Yeah. It’s a lot of juggling.

Mike Blake: [00:42:52] So, one way to potentially approach applying for grants is to basically put out as many applications as you possibly can, sort of a shotgun approach as opposed to being surgical. I think I know what the answer is going to be. That’s okay. But I’m sure somebody has tried that. Is that a viable strategy or do you really have to be zeroed in and decide and bet on organizations?

Jill Wood: [00:43:20] If you have nothing better to do, if you have nothing else to lose, you could sit around and write. I mean, some of these grants are small, but some of them are 30 pages. And you’re also wasting other people’s time. If you’re not serious about your grant writing, you’re wasting other people’s time because you have to go and get quotes from all your CROs. Maybe you need to rent a space. Maybe you need to hire other people. You have to get letters of support. There’s a lot that goes into this.

Jill Wood: [00:43:54] So, that would make me mad if you did that, because you are wasting a lot of people’s time, and you are wasting reviewer’s precious time by putting something in their face that’s just worthless. So, be focused.

Mike Blake: [00:44:17] What are the most common reasons that a grant is rejected in your mind?

Jill Wood: [00:44:23] Mistake.

Mike Blake: [00:44:26] Yeah?

Jill Wood: [00:44:27] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:44:28] Just like a factual error or –

Jill Wood: [00:44:30] A mistake. A hyperlink, too many pages, you didn’t follow the format. This was supposed to be ten pages, you know. Or in the mistake that you missed the concept, the FOA, you misunderstood it. You should really talk to the grant managers before you apply and say, “Are my aims, does this fall under what the reviewers are expecting?”

Mike Blake: [00:45:02] Jill, we’re running out of time and there are probably questions that our listeners would have liked me to have asked, but didn’t, or would have liked us to spend more time on, or maybe they just want to find out more about Sanfilippo Syndrome and how they can help. If somebody would like to contact you, can they? And if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Jill Wood: [00:45:24] You can contact me directly at my email address. If you have a place to put that, it’s in the blog text or in a text somewhere under my bio, it’s jwood@phoenixnestbiotech.com.

Mike Blake: [00:45:41] Very good. That’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. And I’d like to thank Jill Wood so much for sharing her expertise with us.

Mike Blake: [00:45:48] We’ll be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us so that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:46:05] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my new LinkedIn Group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware and Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Brady Ware & Company, Decision Vision, grants, Jill Wood, JJB, Jonah's Just Begun, Mike Blake, NGO grants, NIH, Phoenix Nest, Sanfilippo Syndrome

Decision Vision Episode 166: Should I Use Artificial Intelligence in my Business? – An Interview with Charles Wardell, Digital Cortex, Inc.

April 28, 2022 by John Ray

Digital Cortex
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 166: Should I Use Artificial Intelligence in my Business? - An Interview with Charles Wardell, Digital Cortex, Inc.
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Digital Cortex

Decision Vision Episode 166: Should I Use Artificial Intelligence in my Business? – An Interview with Charles Wardell, Digital Cortex, Inc.

Exploring the evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) in general and specifically for business use, Charles Wardell, CEO of Digital Cortex, and host Mike Blake discussed how to define AI, machine learning, and its applications both commercial and otherwise. They also covered its impact on the pandemic, the social implications of AI, the need for a commitment to trustworthy data, and much more.

Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Digital Cortex, Inc.

As technology rapidly evolves, so does the need for faster, more efficient data processing methods.

The Central Processing Unit (CPU) has been the workhorse behind digital endeavors, but today’s computation and data volumes challenge even the fastest CPUs. The modern world is increasingly becoming one where data reigns supreme. Data processing has evolved from serial computation and sequential storage to parallel computing with large pipelines and vast amounts of memory.

Today, there are options for accelerating computation, graphics processing units, FPGAs, ASICs, and DPUs designed specifically for data processing. Digital Cortex aims to converge these advanced technologies into a single unified platform, creating an ecosystem that simplifies the hyperscaling of complex data processing.

The Digital Cortex platform is a data appliance with built-in acceleration. It handles the undifferentiated heavy lifting so that you can focus on logic, analysis, and results. Our company is designed to bring the power of the Cloud to those use cases that cannot tolerate outage, latency, or uncapped expense.

Company website | LinkedIn 

Charles Wardell, CEO, Digital Cortex, Inc.

Charles Wardell, CEO, Digital Cortex, Inc.

Charles Wardell, CTO, Tech Visionary, Maker of Things That Work Fast with decades of experience working with leading MPP databases to implement world-class BI platforms, and then designing and developing one of the world’s most powerful cloud and edge-based analytics engines using MPP (massively parallel processing), grid computing, ML (machine learning), and AI (artificial intelligence), Charlie routinely tackles some of the world’s messiest and most intractable problems. The fact is, Charlie is one of the best big data platform architects in the world.

His superpower is weaving hardware, software, and database technologies into cutting-edge, high-performance solutions that provide insights at the scale and speed modern businesses require. The breadth and depth of Charlie’s experience also enable him to see around the corners well in advance, and the combination of his and David’s vision targeted on the biggest and most valuable solutions is what makes this duo such an amazing team.

If intellectual curiosity was a degree, Charlie would have a PhD. His curriculum has been intensive, and it continues today, his library is extensive, not in one discipline, but several: hardware, software, and database technology. But beyond reading, Charlie’s best work comes out of his lab, whether it’s a customized FPGA, the fastest database in the world (measured by inserts), or it’s a new application that integrates symbolic and connectedness AI, there is nothing he can’t do. However, his best problem-solving characteristics are that he is a natural systems thinker and he never brings bias to a problem, every problem gets his full attention, so he can always focus on identifying the best tool for the job, not necessarily the tool he knows. This is what makes him one of the best architects on the planet, maybe the solar system.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:02] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:22] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision-making on a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:44] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m a director at Brady Ware & Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. I am managing partner of the Strategic Valuation and Advisory Services Practice, which brings clarity to the most important strategic decisions that business owners and executives face by presenting them with factual evidence for such decisions. Brady Ware is sponsoring this podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:01:12] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I am on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. So, please join that as well if you would like to engage.

Mike Blake: [00:01:31] Today’s topic is, should I use artificial intelligence in my business? According to PEGA, 77% of people already use a device or service that is AI powered. Eighty-five percent of customer relationships with business enterprises will be managed without human involvement, according to Gartner. And, according to Forbes, the number of AI startups since 2000 has increased four times.

Mike Blake: [00:01:57] And, you know, I’m actually a little surprised we haven’t gotten to this topic until now. It’s such an important topic. And, AI and the things that go with it or talk about it today are so pervasive that to be candid, spoiler alert, I think we’re going to come away from this conversation not so much debating how one, whether one should incorporate AI into your business, but what is the best way to do it or what’s the feasible way to do it because, you know, it’s in everything.

Mike Blake: [00:02:30] So, if you’ve been sort of living with a fear or a notion of robots sort of taking over or taking over things in our society, I got bad news for you. It’s already been happening for about 15 years or so, if not longer. But, knowledge is power, and the power of AI, and I think our guest is going to agree, is something where we have only scratched the surface. And it’s probably limited as much as anything by hardware at this point as it is by human ingenuity and the ability to write code.

Mike Blake: [00:03:10] And so, my suspicion is that for a lot of us who are small business executives and owners, we may have written off or not paid attention to artificial intelligence because, you know, candidly and I’m guilty of this too, it sounds like something that only the big largest companies can afford. Right? AI is so expansive. And, we’re going to talk a little bit about the alphabet soup that goes into AI and how to make a little bit of sense from it. But it’s been around a long time now. It’s beyond, well beyond that early adopter phase or the cutting edge phase. Maybe it’s still in early adoption, but that means there’s plenty of room for AI to grow, to be creatively addressed, to be approached, and probably no two businesses are going to use AI exactly alike.

Mike Blake: [00:04:01] And, as usual, since I know almost nothing about the topic that we’re going to discuss, we’ve brought in an expert. And, joining us today is Charlie Wardell of Digital Cortex. Charlie is a technology entrepreneur, inventor, and consultant with over 20 years of experience in the field. He has a passion for innovation, which is showcased by patents related to big data and distributed computing, text analytics, and emotion detection in texts. He is also the owner of a provisional patent for a very unique FPGA that’s freely programmable gate array, for those of you scoring at home, hardware accelerator that brought the demand of financial institution back testing from 130 servers down to five. And, he also has a patent on a big data business approach.

Mike Blake: [00:04:46] Digital Cortex is the ultimate data processing and machine learning accelerator. They read anything, apply solutions, specific models and analysis, and put the results for you where you need them. With its combination of proprietary hardware and software, Digital Cortex delivers hyperscale data processing and inferencing performance. Multiple CPUs, FPGA, GPUs, and DPUs work together to enable you to achieve blazing fast speeds for your most demanding tasks that are focused on solving, once and for all, the scalability issues that keep meaningful insights hidden in large data sets. With Digital Cortex, you get line speed and hyperscalable access to those insights when you need them. Charlie Wardell, welcome to the program.

Charlie Wardell: [00:05:30] Thank you. Thank you for having me.

Mike Blake: [00:05:33] So, what is AI? Some people who think about artificial intelligence out there know a lot more about it and they actually know what it is. Others think back to the time they last watched a Terminator movie and they think artificial is used to go back and kill John Connor. I don’t think we’re there yet, but if we did, we wouldn’t know about it. How do you describe artificial intelligence to somebody who doesn’t have a Ph.D. in the field?

Charlie Wardell: [00:05:57] Yeah. So, you know, AI has been around for ages, right, since the ’60s. They’ve been trying to crack the AI code and make essentially have computers make decisions. Not to be confused with machine learning, which is a subset of AI that helps drive those decisions, but AI is essentially a technique by which decisions are being made whether a human is in the loop or not is irrelevant. And then, there are various forms of AI. You have symbolic AI. You have expert systems. You have neural networks and things like that that help you drive these decision-making processes. So it’s a complex topic with many facets. But what I hope to do on this call is boil it down to some of the practical as to what it means for small and mid-sized businesses.

Mike Blake: [00:06:51] So, in around artificial intelligence, you see or hear a lot the terms neural networks and machine learning. In fact, you just spoke of them, right? How do those three things interact with one another?

Charlie Wardell: [00:07:09] Okay. So, machine learning is the analysis of data in one of two forms. It is analyzing data where you’re either analyzing it in a supervised fashion, like there’s a human in the middle, right? We are providing data to a machine. That is what we call labeled. Here are examples of smiles or happiness, okay, and we provide as many different variations of that smile as possible, maybe in an image. Okay. So, that’s human-annotated labeled data. And then, the machine learns that these are smiles, these are frowns. That’s essentially one type of machine learning.

Charlie Wardell: [00:07:54] Another type is unsupervised. And you say, given all of this data, maybe cluster together the ones that look alike and do it on your own. And, that’s a clustering algorithm and that’s another form of machine learning. Both of which are used or can bubble up into an AI solution, but by themselves are not necessarily AI. You might think the fact that a machine can pick out a smile versus a frown is artificial intelligence. And, you know, I guess at a rudimentary level, it is. But it is not the AI that we’re talking about today where you have some smart drones being able to pick out the proper target, you know, in Ukraine, which is crazy AI. It’s pretty wild. So, that’s machine learning. AI is layers and layers of the machine learning that actually create a human-like decision. Right?

Mike Blake: [00:08:57] So, I might be completely off base, but I’ve often thought of artificial intelligence, like you said, going back, I would argue that artificial intelligence on some level has been around almost as long as computer programming has. Right? The second that they started letting you make if-then statements, that is a rudimentary form of artificial intelligence. Right? But where the machine learning comes in – and I love your smile analogy, so I’m going to take it, steal it and run with it – and that is that under a sort of a pure or plain vanilla AI framework. The programmer would have to tell in exacting detail the computer what a – what the characteristics of a smile or group of smiles or an epistemology of smiles looks like. Whereas under machine learning, you can show a bunch of facial expressions and over time it becomes good at understanding on its own what a smile looks like and it doesn’t have to be a separate algorithm that is fixed, that defines that smile rigidly. Is that a fair distinction?

Charlie Wardell: [00:10:05] Yeah. I guess, so really interesting. So, your analogy about the if-then statement is spot on. Back then, we called those expert systems. They were based on Prolog and lists some – I’m dating myself, but those expert systems were essentially if-then statements to the extreme, so many of them that it’s not humanly possible to code them all and maintain them all. And some of the best expert systems are used in the medical field where you interview a doctor and he may be a specialist in cardiology and you just interview him every single weekend over a cup of coffee until you pick his entire brain and you document these things as rules. Right? And then, you have a patient that comes to you and you type in his symptoms and it traverses all of this logic and all of these if-then statements and it says you have this. And the doctor looks and he thinks about it and goes, “Oh, it’s right. Holy smokes.” So, that’s a form of AI, right? That is an expert system AI.

Charlie Wardell: [00:11:07] Today, you have the smile analogy where the machine is actually picking up what a smile looks like. You’re not telling it any rules. It’s actually figuring it out and it’s like, “Wow, this – you told me these were smiles. So, I’m going to figure out why they’re smiles. Okay. Teeth are showing. Maybe, the mouth is wider or maybe the eyes are squintier, or maybe all of that stuff. I’m going to figure out why.” And that’s a different kind of AI.

Charlie Wardell: [00:11:34] What’s happening today and what should be happening today is the convergence of the two, right? Because together they’re better. And I can give you an example of a chatbot that I did. So, you have a chatbot. Let’s say it’s a mortgage application chatbot and people are saying, hey, I want a mortgage. And then, you have this thing traversing through the rules and parsing out that text and say, “Mortgage wants to know about a mortgage. Here’s my response.” It’s a canned response. And he says, “Well, do I need – how much is my down payment?” Looks up, answers. That appears to be AI, but that’s all this symbolic expert system-driven stuff. Then, they throw you a curveball and they say, “Hey, did you see the game last night?” Because they think they’re talking to a real person. That’s not in my decision tree. So, what do I do? I go to a neural network that was trained with the latest news. And I see game, scores and I’m able to pull that out and reply, right? So, now I’m doing the best of both worlds and I’m now making a real AI experience that is very different than the old school symbolic if-then statements. People are like, “Wow, how did it know that.”

Mike Blake: [00:12:53] You know, as I listen to you and even as I was doing research for this conversation, I think I’ve probably made a moron of myself. I mean, it’s more in an okay way, but I’ve probably been very polite and I’ve probably been very complimentary to basically robots that have given me customer service. Right? Because I try to – I do try to be empathetic with customer service. They have a tough job. They probably have people that call up and swear at them and threaten to blow up their houses and God knows what else. They’re not happy with the outcome. And so, I get good service. I try to be positive about it, just like I do in life. I try to be acknowledging of when good things happen. I’ve probably told at least one robot how much I think they did a great job and I love them. I think they’re just awesome, quote-unquote, people, right, if we’re honest about it.

Charlie Wardell: [00:13:46] Right.

Mike Blake: [00:13:46] Right.

Charlie Wardell: [00:13:47] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:13:48] Which shows us doing its job, right? Because it had, the chatbot in this case had such a human quality. The artificial intelligence was so well developed that indeed I had no conception that there wasn’t actually somebody busily typing on a window somewhere actually helping me.

Charlie Wardell: [00:14:06] Yeah. You know, and AI, it’s getting to the point where it is so unbelievable that you are getting to a point where you’re not really able to tell a difference. My entire resume – my entire resume, I wrote, and then I put it into this AI machine. There’s a few of them out there. And it rewrote it for me and it was amazing. I was like, “Yep. we’re going to clip that. They didn’t get that quite right.” And people would say, “Oh, my gosh, your resume is amazing.” And, it’s all factually true. Everything in there is factually true. But the embellishments that it made and the connected words that it used, it’s just absolutely mind-blowing. So, that’s just one aspect of AI that anybody can use in their business, this narrative generator. And it’s scary how awesome it is. It really is. It’s very awesome. It is.

Mike Blake: [00:15:07] So, let’s talk about the awesome because I’m not sure there’s a full appreciation of the awesome. I think a lot of the awesome is sort of hidden from view by design. In your mind, what are some of the most exciting recent developments in AI? What’s kind of new and neat that’s come out? And if you want to talk about the stuff you’re doing, that’s fine too. I’m familiar with it to some extent. Chris has briefed me. Or, other things too. But what’s really neat and new with AI right now?

Charlie Wardell: [00:15:34] Well, you know, let’s go with Ukraine right now, you know, which is, maybe people didn’t realize what AI could do from a military aspect. Right? So, you have these things called slaughter bots, right? They’re called killbots. And they’re this £6-drone that launches and it can travel like 6 miles and hover the air and it looks for targets. Now, you have a line, a caravan of, you know, heavy equipment, you know, enemy personnel. Well, out of all of those, which one should a dive bomb? Well, it’s going to look for the gas tanker, got to kill that supply chain. And it knows. It knows. I’m going to go for those first. Right? And, after I get rid of all of those, then I’m going to start getting these, and I’m going to do the missile battery next, and I’m going to do this next. That’s where AI gets – that’s where people can relate to say, because it’s in the news right now and say, “Oh, I get it. I understand what AI is doing now. I can discern and I can make decisions in flight, in real time, and do my job.”

Charlie Wardell: [00:16:00] From a business standpoint, on marketing – my wife has a business. It’s an e-commerce site. And, in that business, it’s made up of moms. Right? And, these moms have certain characteristics of the things they like, the things they don’t like, the things they buy, the things they don’t buy. You can upload your customer list to Facebook. And you can say, “Hey, Facebook, you have a billion people in your audience. What I want you to do is I want you to give me a new audience that is not my customer base but that looks exactly like my customer base,” from mathematical point of view, exactly, age, demographic, region, interests, and all this other stuff. And, now that becomes my target list for sending ads or messaging or email or whatnot. It’s called lookalike audiences, and it uses clustering technologies.

Charlie Wardell: [00:17:44] So, you have the one extreme where you can see that, wow, this is real AI. It’s autonomous and it is just doing its job. And those things cost, you know, $6,000 apiece as opposed to $6 million apiece. And then, you have lookalike audiences that help small and midsize businesses become a little bit more effective and who they’re targeting. Right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:18:05] Back in the day, you had to buy a list, got to buy a list. You had to tell them, “Hey, you know, give me you know, people in this age, this demographic.” You buy a list, you put a stamp on an envelope and you sent it out. Those days are gone. Right? And it’s so far more accurate that this is the day and age of AI.

Mike Blake: [00:18:26] You know, one of the – the Ukraine thing that you bring up, that’s for personal reasons, that’s a conflict I’m following very closely. And the AI that you describe brings up another very interesting point, which I’ve kind of wondered about, and that is that in that war, friend or foe detection has got to be extremely difficult because they’re basically using the same stuff.

Charlie Wardell: [00:18:54] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:18:54] Right? It all looks the same. It’s not supposed to be that way, right? Everything was built so that our stuff would look like our stuff. And their stuff looks like their stuff. But now there’s stuff and our stuff or the Ukrainian stuff all looks the same. Right? And I got to imagine there’s also an AI – there has to be an AI component to helping assist, to make sure there’s not a lot of friendly fire. And, it’s interesting that I’ve not heard of a single incident of friendly fire, of a significant incident of friendly fire yet in this war.

Charlie Wardell: [00:19:22] Yeah. And that’s where expert systems start coming in play, right, where you have a rule-based on top of it. Okay, I’ve done my job. I’ve analyzed visually. Here’s my target. Now a series of rules start happening, right? There was another project that we were working on where, you know, there are experts in theater that they’re in the military and they just know when something’s up. There’s a van parked on that corner. There’s a dead dog over on this corner. There’s a group of people over on this corner. And there’s an IED under the dog who’s whimpering or dead, and you go over there to help the dog, and boom. Right.

Charlie Wardell: [00:20:03] So, this scenario, right, this scenario, that’s all rule-based. You know, what they’re doing is they’re typing in all these rules. The intelligence gathering is trying to type in environmental rules and then the expert system type AI will take over in cases like that. Others are visual. Others are audio. Others are streaming data where it’s such high velocity that you’re kind of stuck in having the machine make the decision for you in real time. And, that’s where things like the Digital Cortex comes in because the amount of data is so enormous that you’ve got a hyperscale and hyperspeed the processing of this data, and you can’t do it in the cloud, right? I cannot have this thing. It’s got to be in my backpack. It’s got to be on this machine. Can’t do that from the cloud.

Mike Blake: [00:20:53] So, what are the most common applications of AI right now? Is it all big data analytics or are there other applications that maybe are more visible that our audience would be familiar with?

Charlie Wardell: [00:21:10] Well, you’re going to see more and more of this writing style, help-me-write books and blog posts, and automatically you just seed your thoughts in it and it’ll ghostwrite an entire book for you. You’re going to see. That’s happening now. You can Google it. I’m not touting any one technology over another, but you can go find them and trial for 30 days. They are unbelievable.

Mike Blake: [00:21:37] I’ve seen the ads for that. Do they actually work?

Charlie Wardell: [00:21:39] They work.

Mike Blake: [00:21:40] They work.

Charlie Wardell: [00:21:41] They work. They are incredible. Then, you know, other aspects of AI, you know, obviously, in a practical sense, it’s – think of a camera hanging out in a WalMart parking lot and a guy taking out a gun out of the back of his truck. Is he returning it, or is he going to open fire on somebody? Is this an actual threat or is this just a customer that’s returning his gun, right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:22:14] And, given enough scenarios, right, given enough scenarios where we can actually train AI and all of the, what we call labeled data, it can make guesses and the guesses return percentage of probability. And that percentage of probability, once it crosses a threshold, then requires action to be taken. So, you’re going to see it in all aspects of life. And I know people are afraid of it, but there are good there are good aspects of AI that can help humanity, obviously.

Mike Blake: [00:22:49] Yeah. No, I think you’re right. I mean, you know – the thing about AI is that it never gets distracted, never gets bored, never gets arrogant and thinks it knows everything, right? And so, for things like things that require checklists, whether it’s prepping for surgery or landing an A350, AI’s not doing that. Yeah. Although I think AI probably could land a plane. We just never got on a plane that didn’t have a pilot in it.

Charlie Wardell: [00:23:22] Well, there’s AI – there’s AI Assist. Yeah, there’s AI Assist. And, this is where it’s human in the middle. Right? Trust your instruments. Trust your instruments. How many flights have gone down because they didn’t trust their instruments?

Mike Blake: [00:23:37] Oh, yeah. Yeah. Literally, pilots are fighting planes into the ground.

Charlie Wardell: [00:23:42] Yeah, exactly. Now, with AI – AI – see, AI is getting data that you can’t see, comprehend or process because it’s looking further down the road. It sees that there’s – it knows there’s turbulence ahead. Why? Because someone else reported it. It knows the wind speed. It knows, so it’s figuring stuff out, right? So, it’s going to have to take a lot of surrender to surrender to these machines and to totally trust it. And, machines have failed us miserably in the past. So, it’s going to be a while, but it’s definitely.

Mike Blake: [00:24:21] So, this is an impossibly broad question, but I have to ask because we have to start somewhere. Somebody is listening to this podcast or will be listening in when it gets published and they’re saying, “Okay. Hey, I can do all these things. I’m probably not knowingly using it a great deal in my company.” How do you get started? Where do you go from there, from saying, I’m kind of interested in getting AI into my company to have it actually do something useful for it?

Charlie Wardell: [00:24:52] Yeah. So, every company has their different aspects of AI, right? If you’re marketing product and services and things like that, and you’re an e-commerce site, there’s just tons of AI available to you in the form of lookalike audiences and market basket analysis to figure out if you buy this and most people buy this along with it and make recommendations. And Amazon’s been famous for that. You know, if you’re a bank, maybe you’re using AI to do some risk mitigation, you know, maybe you have all the people that defaulted and all their properties at default and you’re looking at this person’s characteristics and you have a default probability.

Charlie Wardell: [00:25:39] You know, most of it is related to the data that you’re collecting. A lot of it is is about lookalike audience. It’s about churn probability. These customers have the, hey, I know historically that a customer that visits my support site three times in a single month has called up and asked specifically about his contract price and has basically stop doing X, Y, or Z is likely to churn, right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:26:15] So, those are the types of things that businesses are doing now. Now, what’s typically required in order to get to that level of analysis is that you have a data scientist who has a hypothesis or you have a mandate from a company that says, “Hey, I want to identify my high churn risk customers.” Then, you get a data scientist to say, “Okay, give me a list of all the customers that churn and let me find out what’s in common with them,” and then runs it through these steps of trying to identify the actual machine models that would predict it with great precision and great recall. So, it usually starts there.

Mike Blake: [00:26:53] So, that suggests to me, correct me if I’m wrong, but that suggests to me that a prerequisite step for adopting an AI centric or AI adjacent strategy is you’ve got to have good data collection in place.

Charlie Wardell: [00:27:08] Absolutely.

Mike Blake: [00:27:10] Right? If you don’t have the data asking any – computers are no better at making decisions based on no data than we are.

Charlie Wardell: [00:27:17] That’s right. And, you remember the phrase, GIGO, right, garbage in, garbage out.

Mike Blake: [00:27:21] Sure.

Charlie Wardell: [00:27:22] Yeah. So, you know, it’s – we’re – I’m on a project right now where we have all of these customers calling in and these are accounts. And, I’m able to cluster the accounts together and say, these accounts look like this and this account looks like this. But what we’re trying to do is we’re trying to find out, okay, they’re service calls that they’re calling in about each product or platform that they’re calling in about. What is the tie between their overall happiness and the calling in that they’re doing on these products and actually seeing if there is upsell potential into new products? Is there expansion opportunity? Is there – are they about to churn or are they – so, the more data that I can feed this machine about that customer and about their interactions across my organization, the better. Now, the challenge is in these organizations. All this data is disparate. They’re in silos and they don’t connect. There’s no one single ID that connects this and this and this and this. They’re legacy systems. And that’s typically what the big challenge is.

Charlie Wardell: [00:28:27] And then, the next big challenge is, I have all this data and I can’t process it fast enough to make any difference because this is a wash,rinse, repeat cycle over and over and over again until you get to the model that does the prediction accurately. So, it’s an expensive proposition in some cases. But these off the shelf things, like lookalike audiences, that most of these social platforms and ad platforms have, they’re set it and forget it. You upload your list. It handles everything for you. So, you don’t have to really get involved in doing anything.

Mike Blake: [00:29:02] So, that leads me to a couple of questions. I hope I remember to ask them both, because I think they’re both important. The first question is, it seems to me, based on what you’re saying, that in some cases a move to heavy reliance on AI, whatever that may be may also require an accompanying culture change. Right? Because if you’re not used to collecting data, if you’re not used to, you don’t have a culture that’s willing to share data, you have little fiefdoms, you may even have a culture that resists accountability. And we know there are cultures out there that do that. And data is kryptonite for lack of accountability. There may be a culture change that needs to accompany this [inauidible] to work, right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:29:53] Well, so I think back to the example where I think it was Microsoft that put out this amazing chatbot. And the internet went crazy teaching the chatbot how to become a fascist. Right? The chatbot actually became rogue. They had to take them down. So, yeah, there’s a big cultural aspect of AI as well, because –

Mike Blake: [00:30:18] A fascist chatbot. I hadn’t heard of that. I can’t wait to Google that after this interview and hopefully Homeland Security will not be paying me a visit, but –

Charlie Wardell: [00:30:27] It’s crazy, you know, because the Internet is a thing of its own, right? And, AI learns what you teach it. And if you teach it, if enough people get together and start telling it truths that are not necessarily truths, it’s wrong.

Mike Blake: [00:30:47] Sure. And, was that an act of sabotage from within Microsoft?

Charlie Wardell: [00:30:52] No. It’s just the Internet having fun. Internet trolls having fun with it.

Mike Blake: [00:30:56] Okay. But what about within a company again? It seems to me that the move to AI, if you’re not already a data-centric company, if you’re already a company, that’s not – that struggles with internal transparency, sharing and teamwork, AI probably is not going to work all that well for such a company unless you kind of address those underlying cultural features.

Charlie Wardell: [00:31:25] That’s true. So, most of the data that’s curated is internal and well guarded, and they understand that there needs to be a big effort in protecting your biggest and most important asset, which is your data. Right? And, it’s only up until recently that people understand that their data is everything. Every company that I’ve been talking to, every single one, no matter how large or small, they want to be a data-driven business. Right? And, getting access to that data and treating it like gold is really, really important. And, they’re starting to get that part. People are just starting to embark on their AI efforts now because they’re only starting to grapple with the fact that we have to make an investment in curating our data in a way that is clean and trustworthy and accessible.

Mike Blake: [00:32:19] And so, I want to go back and ask the other question about that, which is, is AI in some fashion, is that in the realm of affordability for a small business? Are there models, other pieces of AI where a small business is doing, let’s say 1 to $10 million of revenue a year could reasonably take advantage of this technology? [Inaudible]

Charlie Wardell: [00:32:45] Yeah. Yeah. AI is white hot right now. The market for students coming out of the university, wanting to be developing machine learning algorithms and AI and things like that. They’re available, you know, for a reasonable salary. You can get reasonable AI work that will definitely help you drive good decisions in your business. And then, there are applications that you can download for $30 a month and have it write your your daily blog. You know, seriously, it’s that crazy.

Charlie Wardell: [00:33:19] And then, things like look alike audiences, if you’re doing ad spend and stuff like that that’s free. They just want your ad spend, right? So, for a once – for a milllion dollar company to get into the game, it’s not hard. And, those things will make you a $2 million company and the $3 million and then eventually you’ll have a team of data scientists doing amazing things. But, yeah, the barrier to entry has definitely reduced, over the last few years has definitely reduced.

Mike Blake: [00:33:52] Now, you’ve touched on this a little bit, and I want to make this explicit because I do think it’s important. If you’re going to undertake AI in a serious way, do you need to think about having a captive AI specialist or big data specialist on your team? And is that even possible? I mean, those people are very hard to hire anyway, even if you wanted to. But is that a prerequisite for success using AI tools?

Charlie Wardell: [00:34:20] It depends on the AI. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, if I’m, you know, just wanting something to write my blogs and my responses and my creative, no, right? There are applications out there that do that. But if I have a hypothesis and I have all this data and you definitely do need some sort of architect, some sort of data scientist that knows how to get there from here. There is a part of machine learning that is a black hole that we all fear. It’s called feature engineering. And, you have all of these attributes of data and only a handful of them make a difference. Right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:35:02] I’ll give you an example of – so, I’m big in text analytics and I would analyze text and try to pull out all the topics out of text and I curated a list of texts that were very pro a product, very pro, this product. And, I identified the language that made it pro the product. Now, think about the iPhone when it first came out. “Oh, my gosh, this is amazing. This is a game changer. You know, I’ve never seen anything like it.” or the iPad. “Hey, now I don’t have to carry my laptop with me wherever I go.”

Charlie Wardell: [00:35:40] So, there is a language of this wow. Right? There’s this language. So, I’m able to tease out this language and identify all of the features so that when a new tweak comes in, I can compare it to that model and say, is that wow factor in there or not? No. But here’s the interesting thing. Out of all the features that I found, and I added them all in, the sentiment of the text, the length of the words, the number of periods, commas, exclamation points, the number of curse words, the date, the length of the author’s email, there was one feature that made it really interesting, and that was the number of sentences, was an indicator to how prolific this product experience was for this person. It was the number one feature in machine learning, and nobody would have ever thought that unless the machine figured it out. The machine figured it out. It wouldn’t be something. I just threw it in as a happenstance. Right? Number of sentences.

Mike Blake: [00:36:51] Where in your mind is AI not being utilized to its fullest potential? Where you see as a sector or an application, you say, “You know what? I’m surprised more people are doing this.”

Charlie Wardell: [00:37:03] You know, schools, how we teach our children, we don’t all understand. Right? I think the schools should be looking at clusters of students and figuring out how best to hone curriculum for those types of students. We learn differently. I think that – you know, everything from your spending patterns and how you optimize your budget and where you should be investing, I think those types of things are very ripe for consumer programs where you feed in the characteristics of your family, your spending, your goals, and it comes out with a plan and says, follow this plan and you’ll get to where you’re going. And, I think there’s a lot of consumer activity that can happen in these just turnkey applications.

Mike Blake: [00:38:01] So, how do you evaluate AI platforms? Let’s take the lookalike audience platform. You brought that up a number of times. I presume that’s important and fairly widespread and I’m assuming there’s more than one source you can go to. How do you evaluate among competing or I guess what will be presented to the market as comparable platforms? How do you evaluate that? Is there a checklist? Are there certain things that sort of top three or top five things that you need to be looking at? You need to hire an external specialist or consultant that really understand this stuff. How do you go about doing that?

Charlie Wardell: [00:38:52] Lookalike audience. You know, they’ve really dumbed it down so that anybody can use it. But the success of the lookalike audience really determines – it’s really how much of the features do have you collected so that it can match up against. So if the only thing I have is gender and age, and I say give me a lookalike audience for gender and age, it’s a coin toss as to whether or not I’m going to hit the right demographic. But if I have gender, age, the car you drive, you know, the number of friends in your social sphere, the part of the world you’re in, the hobbies you do, and all of this other stuff, I’m going to radically change my marketing return on investment. Right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:39:44] So, what they’ve done is, they made it so easy. You upload a CSV spreadsheet to our platform and we’re going to carve out your lookalike audience, but give us as many of the features as you possibly have, because we have them all. They have them all and more. Right? You’d be surprised as to what they have. Right? So, what you’re doing is you’re uploading what you have and they’re matching it with what they have and are carving it out. So, very simple, very easy. And, most platforms to this day, specifically Facebook, all have this type of lookalike audience.

Mike Blake: [00:40:13] So, as we all know, looking back on the last two years, the world has just changed dramatically. Our relationship, among other things, with technology has changed dramatically because we had to. We had this sort of shock therapy in terms of digital transformation. Now, that we’re in this what I call a trans-pandemic period, I don’t think we’re out of it, but we’re not, and I’m not sure where we are so I’m calling it trans. Looking back, where did AI contribute to making that less terrible than it otherwise would have been? And then, if I can also ask this, I know this is a complicated question, but you can handle it, and that is, what opportunities for AI have been revealed or exposed by the COVID experience in your view?

Charlie Wardell: [00:41:15] Wow. Well, it may go hand-in-hand. I’ll answer your second question first. But we all know, and we spent so much time listening to what fake news was, right? And, you know, curating data and actual correct data is paramount to having good AI. So, I think that when you have such a divisive country in what they’re sharing in this sentiment and it becomes very nebulous and this is where AI failed you. This is like what is it about, you know?

Charlie Wardell: [00:42:11] But, you know, where AI succeeds is looking at the cellular level of maybe this disease state and looking at the characteristics and matching it up with others to to say there’s a similarity between these two and we’ve already figured out how to solve this one and it’s very similar and how we can apply some similar therapies to this and try it out and see if it works. That’s where it really could help us. So, on one hand, in the pandemic, you could see how it hurt. On the other hand, you could see very clearly how it helped. So, I think I got both your questions. Did I miss one?

Mike Blake: [00:42:59] No, no. I think you did. You answered it in a way I did not expect, but that didn’t make it bad. I think it’s a very – that’s a very thought-provoking answer, because in my view, I’ve got to be careful because I don’t want to be partisan the way that I express this. In one fashion or another, we have been flooded and continue to be flooded with – call it- anti-data. Right? Now, we’re in a a society now where gaslighting is a contact sport now and just like your analogy or your example of Microsoft chatbot being trained to be a fascist basically because of a big cyber prank, right?

Mike Blake: [00:44:01] Yeah. I do think that the drawback of AI, and this isn’t unique to AI, it’s really technology in general. Right? Technology is an amplifier first and foremost. Technology is basically a lever when you really boil down to it, or a power tool. So, something that’s good and productive be amplified tremendously by technology, and something that is destructive can also be and is amplified by technology. Right?

Charlie Wardell: [00:44:38] And, whether you’re a bot or whether you’re a person, you cannot possibly make – I shouldn’t say you can’t possibly – you can’t reliably and sustainably make good decisions. You can lock into a good decision even with bad data. That does happen. But you can’t be a sustainable and reliable decision-maker if the data on the front end is bad. But now what happens, I’ve posted about this before, particularly the way that the news and the social media business models are, it’s no longer about informing people. It’s about getting people riled up because riled up people tend to be better customers. They tend to watch through your commercials. Right? And they tend to spend more. They tend to pay more. They’re a much more valuable audience.

Charlie Wardell: [00:45:31] You’re absolutely right. You could see this in technologies like TikTok, where it’s bringing things up to you that are somewhat controversial and it may not be what you’re interested in, but it gets a lot of the stickiness. And then, when you start looking at all of the reactions, you start seeing that you’re in a bubble. If this is your only platform, you’re in a bubble. You think the world is exactly like what was just presented to you. And it is not. It is really not.

Charlie Wardell: [00:46:04] So, there’s got to be a gatekeeper of truth in AI. There’s got to be. And you call them fact checkers now, right? There’s got to be a move – with AI, the responsibility is truth. There’s got to be truth. And I don’t think we’re there. I think we’re far from there.

Charlie Wardell: [00:46:25] Now, into your internal organization, you can guarantee the truth, right? You could say this is the facts. These are customers that left me. These are customers who love me. This is where we screwed it up. This is where you have facts, you have truth. And then, you could trust that AI. But when you start coming into this social sphere, it’s going to represent what humanity looks like today. It’s just going to become whatever it’s being fed.

Mike Blake: [00:46:53] Well, I mean, definitionally, it’s a feedback loop, right? That’s what it’s designed to do. And, maybe that’s a flaw. Not a flaw, but that’s just a – it’s a point where we need to just be aware. And, we’re getting a fascinating social discussion here. Right? But perhaps an area of evolution for AI, and maybe this is already happening. And you tell me this, we’ve already got this. But one area of AI that has to, I think has to evolve is there has to be some sort of emergency brake that just sort of cuts off the feedback loop or it doesn’t go off an artificially intellectual deep end and go into a feedback loop that just sort of drives the AI off the rails and becomes and perpetuates more extreme decision-making.

Charlie Wardell: [00:47:46] You’re absolutely right. And, this is probably one of the scariest factors of AI in use is what happens because there are some malicious people out there. They’re just trolls and they don’t understand the impact of what they’re doing. Now, from a social perspective, I don’t think it’s going to make a difference as to whether an AI assists a doctor in atrial fibrillation ablation. It’s not going to make a big difference because completely different kind of AI. But from a social perspective, yeah, it’s a whole new can of worms that we haven’t even begun to navigate through yet.

Mike Blake: [00:48:34] So, let’s bring it back to business for a second even though I could talk about this for three hours, and maybe you could too but our listeners don’t want to listen to it for three hours. What are the risks of of bringing AI into a business? What could be unintended consequences? What could go wrong?

Charlie Wardell: [00:48:51] All right. So, I’ve been doing data warehousing for many years, close to 30 years. And, there are some key indicators as to why data warehouses fail. Lack of executive sponsorship, not understanding the technology or choosing the wrong technology, not understanding what you’re getting into and the commitment required to get into it. Lack of adoption, dirty data. These types of things all apply to AI initiatives today. Thirty years later, they still apply. Seventy percent of data warehouses failed because of the things I just mentioned.

Charlie Wardell: [00:49:33] Well, if you’re going to embark in an AI initiative, you have to have executive sponsors that say we are going to be a data-driven organization. Right? And if they say that, that means we are going to make an effort to make sure our data is trustworthy and properly cleansed and integrated. And, we’re going to have one source of the truth so that when we do develop our AI models, that we can trust our AI models and we are going to reasonably expect realistic expectations of AI. Is it 86% where we make a decision or does it have to be 95% in order for us to trust our AI models?

Charlie Wardell: [00:50:18] And it is a continuous, nonstop endeavor of constantly moving forward. So once you start, you’re always continuing to better it, right? So, if you’re taking it from a perspective of this is how I am going to be transformational in my business, it comes with a certain understanding that you have a – this is a marathon, it’s not a sprint. You want to sprint, go download that app to write your blog. You’re an AI. You want to be transformational, you have to be willing to run the marathon.

Mike Blake: [00:50:55] I’m talking with Charlie Wardell. The topic is, should I use artificial intelligence in my business? I want to be respectful of your time, so I only have time for a couple more questions. But one thing I want to get out of you, because I think your answer is just going to be awesome, that is, what’s coming ahead? What are some future applications of AI that you see that aren’t in use yet but we may see as viable in the next 5 to 10 years?

Charlie Wardell: [00:51:28] I think the obvious one is driverless cars. Logistics and supply chain, you know. I don’t understand the levers that are moving our supply chain problems right now. I just don’t understand. It makes no rhyme or reason to me that we have this supply chain problem.

Charlie Wardell: [00:51:52] Because we’re given a different reason. Every time something goes bad, there’s a different reason.

Charlie Wardell: [00:51:56] That’s right. But being able to predict manufacturing and supply chain and things like that, to be fully optimized in the supply chain, I think that’s another aspect that we’re going to see a lot of AI. Obviously, fintech. And, fintech has its problems, right? You have to be able to explain your AI. And, AI does not necessarily lend itself to explainability all the time. You got this black box of this machine doing something and figuring it out and comes out with an answer. And you don’t know how it came out with that answer. But it did and it’s right. I think there’s going to be some changes that you’re going to start seeing more AI used in the financial markets that is more widely accepted.

Mike Blake: [00:52:51] That’s a really interesting observation. So, I’m the world’s lousiest accountant, which is even though I work for an accounting firm, I don’t do any accounting. And, they’re smart not to let me do that. But that brings up a very interesting point, which I’ll bet you some smart accountants are thinking of and probably some of our people at Brady Ware are thinking of, which is, how do you audit data that is AI generated? Right? There’s a recognition in the accounting literature and the literature of what I do in business valuation and informed professional judgment is a recognized piece of the overall analytical story. But what if the informed professional judgment is my tablet or it’s in the cloud or it’s an app? How do we reconcile ourselves to that? I don’t expect you to have an answer for that, so it’s a rhetorical question generally, but it gets to the heart, I think, of that next level is, how do you make judgment? How do you make artificial judgment transparent?

Charlie Wardell: [00:54:01] Yeah. Well, I’m not sure that I’ve seen that aspect of it right now. I think people are more trying to figure out what the answers are, and we’ll deal with that a little bit later. But think about for a moment like all the CEOs that are doing earnings calls at the end of the year or every quarter, and you have 20 years worth of earnings calls from a CEO or an executive. And I train my model as to the cadence of his narrative. And then, I see a deviation, or the machine sees a deviation into what he’s saying is forward looking statements, so to speak. And, I start suspecting there may be deception. And maybe the first time, I was right, and maybe the second time is called reinforcement learning. The more the machine is right, the more right it becomes. Right? So, there are aspects of that that are pretty interesting right now, and that is auditing. Right? Auditing records of what people are saying. How do you transparently audit? I’m not 100% sure. How do you know that the data that is generated is artificial, if it’s speaking the truth?

Mike Blake: [00:55:36] Well, whether the data is generated is artificial, I think is beside the point. It’s really just understanding. You know, it’s either – it’s a combination of understanding how the AI reacts to and interprets that data. And then, asking the bigger philosophical question, again, this gets into the three-hour seminar on the quad kind of thing, but it gets into the question of, what an AI or does AI have the capacity to synthesize and interpret that data the same way that a human being would if it had the computing capacity to actually process it? And is that even the appropriate standard? At what point do we just say, you know what, not only can a computer process more data more quickly and more comprehensively without error, but also the computer just has better judgment. Right? And, that question – I’m sure that question’s been positive. Somebody has written a dissertation on that at some point. But it’s going to move out of a dusty old dissertation in someplace and some of these three-and-a-half inch floppy disks and into a really important practical question that has to be solved, or otherwise AI is just going to be permanently handcuffed.

Charlie Wardell: [00:57:02] Yeah. And it’s going to go back to the quality of the data and is the data non-biased? Is the data trustworthy? And it – here’s the thing about AI, you know, as a human, you can run through a few scenarios. Right? And AI can run through a few hundred models simultaneously. It’s like the hurricane models, right? You see the hurricane models and they all converged. And then, you have confidence that, yep, it’s going to hit Tampa. Right? They all converge. And it’s not just one model. So, what’s going to happen is you’re going to have many, many models and they’re all going to converge and they’re all going to say, yep, morning, you know, this is what we think. And, sooner or later, like, we – sometimes we’re just shocked at how the weather is predicted. And other times we’re just like, what were they thinking? Right?

Mike Blake: [00:58:00] Right.

Charlie Wardell: [00:58:01] It’s all about the data, right? It’s all about the data. So, it’s a little – I think a little easier than predicting the weather. When you have 100 models and you have your data and you can run it through all these scenarios simultaneously and they all come up with the same answer, you need to listen.

Mike Blake: [00:58:19] Charlie, this has been a great conversation. We didn’t even get to all the questions and I anticipated that would be the case. That’s okay. But there are questions I’m sure that people, our listeners, would have wished that we had discussed or would have or wished that we would have spent more time on. If somebody wants to follow up with you about discussing using AI in their business, how to formulate a business strategy around it, can they contact you for more information? And if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Charlie Wardell: [00:58:47] Yeah. They can reach out to me on email. I’m charlie@digital-cortex.io, or my partner in crime, chris@digital-cortex.io. And, yeah, we love talking about this stuff. I didn’t get to speak about the Digital Cortex product and its revolutionary aspects of how it’s going to change the game. But that’s yet to come. We’ll have another podcast specifically on that one because that’s exciting. That’s what I’m – that’s my passion project.

Mike Blake: [00:59:20] Sounds good. Well, I think people will be visiting your website once they listen to this conversation to learn more at any rate. So, that’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. And I’d like to thank Charlie Wardell so much for sharing his expertise with us.

Mike Blake: [00:59:34] We’ll be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:59:51] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

 

Tagged With: artificial intelligence, Brady Ware & Company, Charles Wardell, data analysis, data gathering, Decision Vision, Digital Cortex, Machine Learning, Mike Blake

Decision Vision Episode 165: Should I Pursue Non-Dilutive Funding for my Start-up? – An Interview Lauren Cascio, Gulp Data

April 21, 2022 by John Ray

Gulp Data
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 165: Should I Pursue Non-Dilutive Funding for my Start-up? - An Interview Lauren Cascio, Gulp Data
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Gulp Data

Decision Vision Episode 165: Should I Pursue Non-Dilutive Funding for my Start-up? – An Interview Lauren Cascio, Gulp Data

Lauren Cascio, President of Gulp Data, was host Mike Blake’s guest to explore if start-ups should be looking for non-dilutive funding. They discussed the difference between non-dilutive and dilutive funding, different types of non-dilutive funding, risks and restrictions, the companies it works best for, and much more. Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Gulp Data

Gulp Data provides non-dilutive funding to early-stage companies using their data as collateral.

Unlike other sources of funding, Gulp Data recognizes your data as an asset. Use it as collateral for your loan – they make a secure, temporary copy that is held in escrow and released once you’re done. Gulp Data provides the capital you need now, at a lower cost, and without the hooks.

Gulp Data ensures you keep your equity and your board seats. They aim to close loans with minimal touchpoints and in less than two weeks.

Company website | LinkedIn

Lauren Cascio, President, Gulp Data

Lauren Cascio, President, Gulp Data

Lauren Cascio is the founder of Gulp Data, a company providing non-dilutive funding using data assets as collateral. She also recently founded aKinned, a seed fund backing healthcare in Africa. Prior to her recent move into funding, she co-founded abartysHealth, a growth stage health-tech company, where she ran product, data, and development for six years. She is a proven angel investor and an active tech ecosystem builder, successfully advising and mentoring dozens of companies through go-to-market, data monetization and fundraising.

LinkedIn

 

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:01] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:25] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, a clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision-making on a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:46] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m a director at Brady Ware & Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. I’m also managing partner of the Strategic Valuation and Advisory Services Practice, which brings clarity to the most important strategic decisions that business owners and executives face by presenting them with factual evidence for such decisions. Brady Ware is sponsoring this podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:01:15] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. So, please join that as well if you would like to engage.

Mike Blake: [00:01:32] Today’s topic is, should I pursue non-dilutive funding? And probably if I were more detail-oriented, I’d say should I pursue non-dilutive funding for startups because that’s really what this is talking about. And, I wasn’t able to find data for the entire non-dilutive funding market, but just the revenue-based financing market, which I’m sure we’ll touch upon today, is expected to reach $42 billion globally by 2027 according to Allied Market Research.

Mike Blake: [00:02:02] And revenue-based funding is fairly novel. I’ve actually had a couple of clients that have used it and there are now, in effect, providers of capital that will lend you money based on your expected revenue coming in. So, in a way, it’s kind of like purchase order financing. But instead of doing that with equipment, it’s generally made available to software as a service company.

Mike Blake: [00:02:30] And it turns out it’s a not very visible market, but it is a much larger one that I think most people realize. And I’ve never met a startup yet that isn’t interested in the question of how to fund their business. So, we leave no stone unturned here on the Decision Vision podcast, and I hope that you’ll agree that this is a useful topic. And, I’m really happy to have somebody on that knows a lot about this topic and really a lot about the venture game as a whole. She’s just going to be a fabulous guest and a fabulous interview today.

Mike Blake: [00:03:04] Lauren Cascio is founder of Gulp Data, a company providing non-dilutive funding using data assets as collateral. She also recently founded aKinned, a seed fund, backing health care in Africa. Prior to her recent move into funding, she co-founded Arbutus Health, a growth-stage health tech company, where she ran product data and development for six years. She is a proven angel investor and an active tech ecosystem builder, successfully advising and mentoring dozens of companies through go-to-market, data monetization, and fundraising. And joining us as our first guest from Puerto Rico, Lauren Cascio, welcome to the Decision Vision podcast.

Lauren Cascio: [00:03:44] Thanks, Mike. I’m so excited to be here and to represent Puerto Rico. How fun. There are a ton of entrepreneurs here.

Mike Blake: [00:03:51] So, for a lot of our listeners, I think their ears are perking up because I don’t know if they necessarily understand when we say non-dilutive funding, even what that is. So, can you take us through, how do you define to somebody what non-dilutive funding is and how does that compare to funding that actually is dilutive?

Lauren Cascio: [00:04:13] Yes. So, this is – by the way, this is one of my absolute favorite topics to cover with founders. This is something that a lot of founders have to learn about the hard way both equity financing and non-dilutive funding. And, it’s never easy or fun to learn about things the hard way, specifically when it’s something you’ve felt.

Lauren Cascio: [00:04:35] I have so many questions about funding and fundraising and what it was like. I now have experience on both sides of the table. So, simply put, non-dilutive funding is any capital that does not require you to give up equity or ownership. And that compares with dilutive funding, where dilutive funding requires you to give up equity or ownership in exchange for capital.

Lauren Cascio: [00:05:03] Dilutive funding also early on can require you to give up things like board seats and preferred equity, anti-dilution provisions, warrants, all of the things that early-stage founders typically think that they need to give up in the beginning of building their business. And there are some caveats to non-dilutive funding as well, specifically around venture debt. We’ll get into the different types. But, yeah, that’s it in a nutshell. It’s either giving up equity or not.

Mike Blake: [00:05:35] So, whether you’re new to the game or you just sort of watch it play out on Shark Tank, which is kind of the WWE version of venture capital, we typically hear about venture funding, the venture capitalists are the ones that get all the pub, they’re the ones that that everybody knows, the Peter Thiel’s of the world, and so forth. Why are some investors now trying to change the model? Especially since that model has worked very well, at least for investors, why are some investors interested in changing the model and providing capital that goes outside the raised capital sell stock kind of model?

Lauren Cascio: [00:06:15] Yeah. So, I don’t think that this is a new tool that VCs or investors are using, but essentially it can do a few things and I have some examples. So, it can definitely lower the risk for VCs by passing on risk to future investors. So, for example, a company that has raised a bunch of money, maybe $10 million, they are going to be eligible for, I don’t know, pretty what’s considered friendly venture debt terms where they’ll be paying interest rates of like 10, 12, 15% and they can probably find financing for about 25 to 50% of that capital. That’s usually later-stage companies that are raising more money, and in turn, the investors like this because they’re essentially passing on that risk to future investors. The life cycle of venture debt is that people raise it and then future rounds pay it off.

Lauren Cascio: [00:07:18] There are some other non-dilutive, and we haven’t gone into the types of non-dilutive funding yet, which I know we will. But there are other types of non-dilutive funding that can be complimentary to VC as well. So, in some cases, VCs have a limitation on the amount of follow-on they can provide into a company, or they have a capped amount of their total fund that they can make into a single investment.

Lauren Cascio: [00:07:45] So, if they want to preserve their position as the company goes on to raise later rounds but they just don’t have the spare capital or can’t make those investments, non-dilutive funding can help them preserve their position in those companies. It’s also – so, yeah, I think with market conditions like we saw last year, we saw insane markups in 2021. We saw valuations go through the roof, seeds, average seed-stage rounds, where I mean over 4 million, I think, in the US, and 2022 is not producing the same valuations.

Lauren Cascio: [00:08:26] And what that means is that investors are locked into these companies and these companies don’t have a choice because a lot of them can’t take a down round because of anti-dilution or whatever other terms they have with their current investors. And so, they’re looking to bridge and they’re looking to preserve their own position in the company, but also the position of their current investors. And so, when we see stagnant valuations, non-dilutive capital can be great. So, yes –

Mike Blake: [00:08:57] You said something that’s really interesting. I’m sorry to interrupt, but I told you we might go off script and we are in question too and that’s okay. But you said something I think is really intriguing and I’m not – it may have been intentional and that is that non-dilutive funding might be used to create effectively a synthetic anti-dilution position. Right? Anti-dilution, at least the way I see it, is considered a pretty onerous, almost punitive term. You don’t see it that often, thank God, because valuing anti-dilution is a nightmare. But on the other hand, you could achieve some anti-dilution by offering non-dilutive financing and sort of have your cake and eat it too.

Lauren Cascio: [00:09:41] Exactly. Exactly.

Mike Blake: [00:09:43] I mean the thought of that.

Lauren Cascio: [00:09:45] It takes – yeah. It really takes risks out of the game for investors. So, yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:09:51] So, one type of non-dilutive funding that I don’t want to talk a lot about today because I have a separate interview scheduled is grants, right? But there are a number of other forms of non-dilutive funding that are available and to the extent that you can. Can you talk a little bit about what other forms of nondilutive funding are out there?

Lauren Cascio: [00:10:15] Yes. All right. So, I won’t cover grants even though I love grants. So, I will definitely dial in for that podcast. All right. So, there are a ton of non-dilutive funding, mechanisms, tools. I think the one that most founders think of when they think of non-dilutive funding is venture debt. And, venture debt can be very predatory. And it can really kill an early-stage company because the interest rates are typically very high because the risk is very high for an early-stage company. And, there are covenants and rights typically in those agreements. And so, venture debt is one type that’s like a Silicon Valley Bank, Mercury, a few others that offer the services, a ton of independent lenders that offer these services. But that is like the typical of what founders think of. It’s either venture debt or VC but is not true.

Lauren Cascio: [00:11:24] So, you also have accelerators that offer non-dilutive funding. I personally have been part of an accelerator here in Puerto Rico some years ago called Parallel 18 that provided just non-dilutive cash, a cash grant for joining their accelerator. You have crowdfunding which is like Kickstarter, Indiegogo, and this is essentially people buying your future product. So, any time that people are buying a future part of the company, that’s non-dilutive funding. They are funding you to get started.

Lauren Cascio: [00:11:59] You have revenue-based financing, which you mentioned earlier. And, revenue-based financing is one of my favorite types of non-dilutive financing for early-stage companies that have MRR or ARR multiples. And, those are companies like Pipe and Founderpath, Uncapped. I think most of those companies do revenue-based financing and factoring, which is for invoices. And, it’s great if you have the metrics to qualify for revenue-based financing.

Mike Blake: [00:12:36] And MRR and ARR for those of us who aren’t necessarily in that world, that’s basically for your sustainable revenue or sustainable growing revenue.

Lauren Cascio: [00:12:45] Yes.

Mike Blake: [00:12:46] Right?

Lauren Cascio: [00:12:46] Sorry about that. Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:12:47] Monthly run rate or annual run rate.

Lauren Cascio: [00:12:49] Yes. Sorry. So, yeah, it’s based on recurring. Well, I’m probably using acronyms. And I’m like, what? Don’t you know those acronyms? Yeah. Based on recurring revenue. So, predictable revenue. And then, they take a percentage of – so they’ll front you the money upfront, maybe 12 months of your monthly recurring revenue, and then you pay it off over time and they’re tapped into your bank account. They have some algorithms that tell you how much you’re eligible for and all of that.

Lauren Cascio: [00:13:21] You also have tax credits. And this is not something that a lot of companies think about, but it’s something that I have used myself living in Puerto Rico. There are other places like Australia that provide tax incentives typically in the form of income tax credits that you can then sell for cash and that’s just for doing research and development.

Lauren Cascio: [00:13:47] And then, you have government loans, like SBA loans, and you also have asset-backed lending. So, that can either be tangible assets or intangible assets like IP financing for patents and some other things. That was a mouthful. I’m sorry. There are a lot of different types of non-dilutive funding.

Mike Blake: [00:14:07] Well, yeah, look, it is a mouthful, but I think it’s really important because this is a world that I don’t think is very visible. Right? And, I share the same view with you in terms of venture debt. You know, it’s out there. But I don’t know that I’ve ever actually worked with or even met a company that has raised significant venture debt because either the terms themselves are so onerous, or if they’re not onerous the company is really in a point where it’s not really venture debt anymore anyway. It’s more like an SBA loan or something. And it’s like, wow, thanks a lot. We could have gotten money from nine other places. But, you know, not many people know about these other possibilities that are out there. And some companies have been very successful on that model.

Lauren Cascio: [00:14:58] Yeah. I’m actually really interested to hear how, for companies that were seeking revenue-based financing, how impacted their finances. I mean, I imagined it had a really positive impact.

Mike Blake: [00:15:14] Well, it did have a positive impact. And, I think what happens – I think what’s happened, at least in my experience, you know, the folks that are providing revenue financing are no dummies. Right? And, they do good due diligence to make sure that that’s a good investment or at least an investment that is at the appropriate risk level for their particular asset class. And, I think there’s a validation perspective there that is beneficial. And, there’s probably a little bit of selection bias too. I think the companies that are successful with revenue financing, they’ve achieved revenue financing because they were likely to be successful.

Lauren Cascio: [00:16:00] Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It’s a special kind of company typically that is eligible or a good candidate for revenue-based financing because they’ve obviously proven product-market fit, which is a lot of the uncertainty and risk that you have in early-stage financing or early-stage companies. And so, yeah, they’re definitely not the only but definitely a strong candidate for success. I agree.

Mike Blake: [00:16:28] Now, some listeners may be hearing this and thinking that this non-dilutive financing may almost sound too good to be true. Is there a risk? Is there anybody that’s taking advantage of this, of the attractiveness of non-dilutive financing, and doing bad things with it? Is there a risk of being scammed in this space?

Lauren Cascio: [00:16:54] I don’t know if it’s being scammed. Probably, in a lot of – and this is not just for non-dilutive funding and raising debt. This happens all the time in VC. It’s being misled and founders who are so focused on getting back. So, regardless if you’re doing non-dilutive funding in most cases or equity financing, it is very distracting process for a founder. They are plucked from their day-to-day. Probably, their sales pipeline is suffering and their development pipeline is suffering because they can really only focus on either fundraising or running their company. You can’t do both well simultaneously. Probably, very few founders will say that they can.

Lauren Cascio: [00:17:45] It’s a distracting and time-consuming process. And so, what happens is that founders get to the finish line after doing all of this due diligence and creating data rooms and all of these things, maybe if they’re doing non-dilutive funding and it’s like one of the – we didn’t talk about this, but a hybrid like a convertible note. They’re just glad to be getting the money so they can get back to work and they ignore the fine print. They don’t seek the proper legal advice.

Lauren Cascio: [00:18:13] And so, yeah, they can be misled. They were unaware of certain covenants. They didn’t know that they were signing up for a conversion into preferred shares or whatever it is. You have to be really, really careful. So, the takeaway here is that the wrong venture debt can definitely kill a company if they’re unable to pay the principal. And, what you really need to understand is your worst-case scenario when you’re signing a document. If I’m unable to pay this back, what happens to my company? And you should be asking yourself that whether you’re raising non-dilutive financing or equity. It doesn’t matter. You should always know what happens in the worst-case scenario.

Lauren Cascio: [00:18:57] And so, yeah. I don’t want to see it’s too good to be true or that people are trying to scam you as an entrepreneur, but they definitely have their own best interests in mind. That said, we’re seeing a lot of innovation like the revenue-based financing companies, the factoring companies that have very standard product and very standard terms, which I love, kind of like what safe agreement did for raising equity as an early-stage founder. We’re just finding these standard terms. And that’s great because then you know what you’re getting and everyone’s getting the same thing. But, yeah, legal advice is worth it.

Mike Blake: [00:19:41] Yeah. I was going to say one of the takeaways there probably is that it’s important to have an attorney look this over for you if you’re not really comfortable reading agreements, especially because, you know, some of these platforms, particularly in the revenue-based financing area, do this thing entirely online. Right? And so, I didn’t go through one of the processes, but I suspect that if they are run entirely online and it’s basically a bot that’s going to approve your loan or not, right, you start off by asking, by answering some questions, and the next thing you know, you’re offered a loan and you’re given just a, hey, click to accept. And the next thing you know, right, you’ve got some things you didn’t realize you were agreeing to, and having a lawyer ride shotgun in that can be really important.

Lauren Cascio: [00:20:29] Yeah. Yeah, definitely. Even in the standard products, I agree. It’s really important to understand what you’re signing and what you’re getting into. And you should always, as an entrepreneur, I assume that’s the audience, you should always plan for worst case. And so your worst case in non-dilutive funding is, I’m not paying you back or I’m not paying the interest during the loan term, or I can’t pay the principal or a combination of both. What happens? Do they have security over the entire company? Can they shut down your company and sue you for the assets? You have to understand what you’re signing.

Lauren Cascio: [00:21:07] So, in venture debt, it’s possible. But in the more innovative asset-backed loans and revenue-based financing, factoring, tax credits, typically, no. Typically, I find them more founder-friendly. I’m a big supporter of founder-friendly terms.

Mike Blake: [00:21:31] So, let’s say somebody listening is interested and I’m sure somebody will be. They’re going to want to find out on their own where they might be able to obtain this non-dilutive funding. Sounds great. What’s the best way to go about identifying those sources? Is it as simple as a Google search or are there databases? Are there trade associations, conferences? What’s the best way to go find these sources?

Lauren Cascio: [00:21:57] I really wish that there was – this is something that people ask all the time. They’re like, well, how do you find out about all of these different resources? I wish there was a better collective resource for this in general. You know, it’s so funny when you’re starting a company, there’s a ton of information you can find online about how to raise VC, how to create a pitch deck, how to run all of these metrics of turn and customer acquisition cost, and pretty much give yourself a degree online on how to start a company. It never – like one of the things that it never touches non-dilutive funding sources. And so, I wish there was a better collective for this.

Lauren Cascio: [00:22:40] But for the most part, I think that you can actually just Google some resources and maybe later we’ll start a website that just gives out resources. I’m kidding. I’m not going to do that. But, yeah, you can Google. You can look for, for example, you can Google crowdfunding and you’ll probably find like Indiegogo and Kickstarter. You can look up government loans or like SBA. You can go through SBA. It has a ton of loans. Grants, we’re not going to talk about grants, but there are a bunch of resources for how to find SBIR and grants online.

Lauren Cascio: [00:23:18] For revenue-based financing, you would Google like revenue-based financing for SaaS companies or for service companies or whatever you’re doing and you’ll find, yeah, like Founders Factory, Pipe, Uncapped, those companies. For the tax credits, I think that this is really regional. So, I know really well the tax incentives, the R&D incentives in Puerto Rico, familiar a bit because of a project about the ones in Australia. But I think that this is really regional. So, depending on where you live, maybe like look up research and development, tax credits in wherever you are and they’re maybe –

Mike Blake: [00:24:02] Or ask your CPA.

Lauren Cascio: [00:24:02] Or ask – so that’s another thing that you’re bringing up a really good point, Mike, asking your CPA or your CFO. A lot of early-stage founders don’t have this resource.

Mike Blake: [00:24:14] Yeah.

Lauren Cascio: [00:24:15] Which is part of this problem because part of their job is to find this type of financing. And, it’s one of the last things that founders hire. I mean, you must know this.

Mike Blake: [00:24:26] Oh, yeah. Yeah. In fact, one of the first shows we ever did was, should I hire a CFO? Right? I mean, the answer is yes as soon as you can. But a lot of people don’t because initially, it is a cost center. Right? A CFO is not a profit center. So, that’s very hard. But it’s exactly questions like this that a good CFO can not only help you answer but navigate kind of what is the best – what’s the best model? What’s the best provider?

Mike Blake: [00:24:55] Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but I think one of the other areas, one of the other characteristics that differentiate non-dilutive financing from equity, venture capital, in particular, is it seems to me that a lot of non-dilutive financing is almost anonymous. Right? I see so many online providers where you may never necessarily meet one another and we’re going to get into the process a little bit.

Mike Blake: [00:25:23] Whereas, with equity financing the game, you know, there’s no – you don’t just walk into a venture capitalist office, say, hey, can I have some funding? Right? It’s all about, you got to know somebody. You’ve got to get introduced by one of their investee companies or their investors or something. And, that in itself is very much a barrier to entry for people that are raising capital. Right? If you’re not a very good network, it makes it really tough. But for non-dilutive financings, it’s a little bit different, isn’t it?

Lauren Cascio: [00:25:52] Yeah. Depending on the type of non-dilutive funding, it is. There are some really innovative companies that have put this new spin on revenue financing and factoring and asset-backed lending where you don’t even need to talk to anybody on the phone. You connect your bank account and some metrics about your business model, and they spit out a, you know, a loan amount. And I think it’s great because it’s leveling the playing field for founders that are outside of the circles that are outside of these geographies. And so, it doesn’t require you to be in this insulated inner circle of VCs and what used to be just like Silicon Valley or New York or wherever. Now, it’s expanding a bit post-COVID. But that’s wonderful.

Lauren Cascio: [00:26:47] And I think knowing, and this is where this goes back to having the CFO, knowing the best type of financing for whatever you built is really important because there’s a better fit of non-dilutive funding for each type of company. But, yeah, you would basically plug in your the metrics that they’re asking for. Due diligence is probably not nearly as bad as it is in venture capital and get a loan. And, some of these companies are doing loans in like a day. It’s crazy.

Mike Blake: [00:27:21] Yeah. And that part, I think, also makes it attractive, right? Because the other – one of the other pieces that makes venture capital unattractive is best-case scenario. It’s a months-long process. Right? And, for a startup, months is a lot of time.

Lauren Cascio: [00:27:37] Oh, yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:27:38] Companies live and die in a few months. Right? But, yeah, I was noticing this that it’s almost like some of these non-dilutive loan sources almost operate like online mortgage companies, right, or car lending companies. You put in some information and semi-instant approval. It’s remarkable.

Lauren Cascio: [00:28:00] Yeah. And there will be more of this as well. I think we are just in the beginning. You shared an exciting number at the beginning of this podcast and it’s a growing market. It’s going to, I don’t want to say it’s going to take over portions of VC because there’s just never enough funding. You can never have enough funding. So, just more companies will have capital available to them based on what they’ve built.

Mike Blake: [00:28:29] So, we’ve made a pretty good case that non-dilutive funding is pretty attractive. It’s pretty awesome. Are there – what is the role for venture capital going forward? I’m not sure that Mark Cuban and Peter Thiel are going to be put out of business any time soon. When might somebody kind of pump the brakes in going after non-dilutive funding and instead start seeking equity capital in spite of the shortcomings that we’ve discussed? When might a more traditional route actually be appropriate?

Lauren Cascio: [00:29:03] So, my one-line summary for this is they should always – I want to say – I believe they need to coexist. That equity funding and non-dilutive funding should coexist. There is a time and a place for both of them, and in some cases, there is a time and a place for them to coexist on the same round or at the same time.

Lauren Cascio: [00:29:30] So, even though I’ve had my share of bad experiences with equity funding and boards and venture debt personally, I believe that taking on equity partners or equity investors, pardon me, is really important when you’re making strategic moves in your industry. This is like when you’ve found product-market fit, at least a bit of it, you can repeat the customer a dozen times and they’re paying a similar price for it. And/or you’re ready for an alignment for scale or go public strategy or exit.

Lauren Cascio: [00:30:22] The caveat to that is that there are so many empty promises that are made by VCs. Some VCs have hundreds of companies in their portfolio and not nearly enough time or effort to support all of these companies the way that they need to be supported through their pivots and changes and change management and all the things that happen in early-stage companies. And so, one advice that I often give to founders is that the majority of VC money is just money, and look at it that way and don’t trust the promises. But I always encourage founders to do diligence their investors the same way that the investors are doing diligence on them.

Mike Blake: [00:31:05] I agree with that.

Lauren Cascio: [00:31:06] One of my favorite ways to do that is to talk to their portfolio companies, but not the references that the VC gives you. Because if you ask an investor for references and their network, they’re going to cherry-pick references. I’m talking about going into Crunchbase, finding out the companies that may have died or gone out of business, and interviewing those founders, and understanding what the relationship was like and where there were weaknesses or blind spots within the VC firm.

Lauren Cascio: [00:31:43] So, it’s really, and I think already said this, it’s like getting married. You are bringing somebody into your company. And if you’re at like a seed-stage or Series A stage, likely you’re giving them board seats. You’re giving them power in your company. It was less common probably in the last year or so, where VCs were just handing out a bunch of checks with all the free money that was falling. But they take board seats. And so, you have to work with them. You’re going to have to understand how they envision your company, and you have to understand how you’ll work together just as much as you do with your co-founders or your top executives.

Lauren Cascio: [00:32:24] And so, yeah, there are pros and cons to both. And, I think that most successful companies will dabble in both types of financing because it can be done really eloquently when done correctly. That’s like the long and short of it.

Mike Blake: [00:32:45] Okay.

Lauren Cascio: [00:32:45] I have some other thoughts on how market conditions affect it and valuations play a role and the times that venture debt can be riskier. But, yeah, the main takeaways are that they really should coexist. And, as we see a rise in more standardized non-dilutive funding companies, we’re going to see the two marry in a lot more of the companies that hit the series A, series B, and scale metrics.

Mike Blake: [00:33:21] So, this was actually a nice segue to the next question I wanted to ask, which is, when we think of traditional non-dilutive funding, i.e. loans, the agreement will typically have something that are – some things that are called covenants, which is just another word for agreement, obviously, but they’re restrictive covenants that restrict what the borrower is allowed to do, and in some cases may impose penalties if the company fails to meet certain performance targets. Do those kinds of things, do covenants like that work their way into non-dilutive funding as well?

Lauren Cascio: [00:34:05] Into certain types of non-dilutive funding, absolutely. For example, traditional venture debt will carry usually financial and performance covenants and these are requirements that are part of the loan agreement. Yeah. If you violate – it depends. And this is another one of my many issues with venture debt. If you violate one, you may be defaulting. You may be in breach of contract. And so, they may be able to go after assets or after the company without you even realizing that you’ve done anything wrong.

Lauren Cascio: [00:34:46] It’s not specific to debt. It happens in equity too. But, yes, so you have covenants. You also have right of first refusal which can prevent you from taking other types of debt or other lenders. So, you have to be careful and this is going to go back to one of our first points, which was have a lawyer because you have to make sure that your lenders can coexist. You need to make sure that your debt and your equity can coexist, meaning that your debt does not violate terms of your equity agreements and your equity agreements do not violate terms of your debt. For example, some debt will be above even preferred equity. And so, if you have investors that are earlier investors that had preferred shares, which I also advise against, then – am I allowed to give advice? That’s my own advice.

Mike Blake: [00:35:39] Please.

Lauren Cascio: [00:35:39] My personal advice. Personal advice, don’t give preferred shares. But yes. So then, you would need sometimes subordination signatures and all of these complicated things that I don’t do that lawyers do. And so, yeah, you need to understand what you’re reading or what you’re signing. And, some of the documents can be really long, specifically in venture debt. You can have secured debt that’s like a general obligation of the company. It could also be specifically asset-backed.

Lauren Cascio: [00:36:11] And so, yeah, it’s not innocent, you know, specifically venture debt, it’s not innocent. Typically, it is secured in some form or fashion. It’s not just free money. If you want just free money for doing research and development, I’ll segue into your podcast about grants, so.

Mike Blake: [00:36:34] So, those terms obviously can be very complicated, can certainly be very impactful. In your experience, are non-dilutive capital providers open to negotiation? Is it worth trying to negotiate with them or do they typically just issue a term sheet take it or leave it?

Lauren Cascio: [00:36:55] Everything in life is negotiable. You can negotiate anything in life. So, okay, in the standard products – so Pipe is actually a really good example of this. They’re a marketplace. They take bids for contracts. And so, essentially, those terms are set. Right? They are standard terms. They’ve been evaluated by some models. There hasn’t been a back and forth. There hasn’t been an in-person meeting or a phone call. They’re just terms that are given and people can bid on those terms and you’ll take the best terms that are available. Right?

Lauren Cascio: [00:37:37] And I really love these standardized products because, again, it levels the playing field that you can’t really hide much under it. Everyone’s getting the same deal. And you know what you’re getting into as a founder, which you should be able to safely feel like you know what you’re getting into as a founder. However, when you’re doing convertible debt or you’re doing venture debt, or just like a general note on the company in any form or fashion, yeah, usually you can just negotiate them. They’re not – I mean, I don’t think that any – I don’t think there’s ever a time where you shouldn’t negotiate.

Mike Blake: [00:38:17] Okay. Are there certain kinds of companies or models that tend to be a better fit for non-dilutive funding than others?

Lauren Cascio: [00:38:28] Oh, yeah. Definitely. So, I’ll just say that for mature companies that have clear product-market fit, they’re able to raise equity with strategic investors from strategic, from big firms. They’re on the path to IPO or exit or whatever it is. Equity is definitely a frontrunner. I don’t think that they shouldn’t supplement with financing, taking advantage of financing the other assets they built. Like if they built a strong annual recurring revenue, why not take financing to grow with that asset? Or, if they have created a portfolio of IP assets, why not borrow against those IP assets, if you can, for a reasonable amount of money? And those types of financings are typically reasonable. They have very reasonable loan terms.

Lauren Cascio: [00:39:33] So, the companies that are typically attracted to like, I don’t know, tax incentives, grants, or asset-backed loans, specifically intangible asset back, are typically companies that have taken a heavy technical risk. So, they’ve spent a lot of money developing the infrastructure, the architecture of the product, those are your deep tech companies, and a lot less on sales and marketing efforts. And so, they won’t be able to get revenue-based financing. And in some cases, it’s very difficult for them to raise VC on favorable terms because investors just simply don’t value those intangible assets the way that, I don’t want to say the way that they should, but, yeah, really, the way that they should. Intangible assets are an asset that should be on our financial statements. They should be on our balance sheets, and they’re just not and so –

Mike Blake: [00:40:34] That would be a three-hour rant for me. Don’t get me started on that. Oh, boy.

Lauren Cascio: [00:40:39] Exactly. Yeah. That’s a rabbit hole there. But – that’s one of the big blind areas, in my opinion, of venture capital, is that they have absolutely no idea how to value intangible assets properly specifically for the SME market.

Mike Blake: [00:41:00] Yeah. And the accounting world in general.

Lauren Cascio: [00:41:02] The accounting gap. We’re all running off of gap.

Mike Blake: [00:41:06] It all behaves as if intangible assets don’t exist. Right? I mean, okay, I need to center myself because otherwise we’ll be a three-hour off-ramp into intangible asset valuation and gap, and –

Lauren Cascio: [00:41:18] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:41:19] No. We’re just not going to do that.

Lauren Cascio: [00:41:21] Okay. So, we’re not going to go down that rabbit hole. I would jump down the hole with you, Mike. Maybe, we’ll crack open a bottle of port and have a virtual session to commiserate. But, yeah, so, definitely companies that have taken heavy technical risks, deep tech companies, research companies should absolutely optimize what they’ve built with grants and tax incentives or intangible asset-backed loans.

Lauren Cascio: [00:41:51] Companies that have focused more on sales and marketing that have some strong early traction should be looking at revenue-based financing or factoring, depending on what they’re selling and how they’re selling it. Why not? And allow that to fund your build-out of your product or whatever your version too. Companies that are direct-to-consumer, D2C, companies that have tangible products, so many founders I’ve talked to that are building tangible products and I don’t do tangible things. I’m like, I live in the intangible space, data systems, cloud infrastructure, code. But founders that build tangible products, they almost never consider crowdfunding. I’m like, why? If you have all these people asking to buy your product or have purchased prototypes, do crowdfunding effort. Like, that is the perfect non-dilutive financing and you have revenue built in to your funding. And so, yeah –

Mike Blake: [00:42:56] It’s the ultimate customer validation.

Lauren Cascio: [00:42:58] Absolutely, the ultimate. And you don’t even have to take risk because unless you hit a certain metric or sell a certain number, you’re not going to build it and you don’t have to pay the factories or the suppliers. And so, yeah, so there are definitely better types of financing. Maybe, I should write like a post on this, a blog post. I have lots to say.

Mike Blake: [00:43:24] I think you should. You know crowdfunding reminds me – have you ever watched the movie The Producers?

Lauren Cascio: [00:43:30] Possibly.

Mike Blake: [00:43:32] It’s a Mel Brooks movie. It was eventually remade. But basically, the story goes, it’s about a couple of playwrights that recognize that failed plays actually enrich the playwrights more than successful plays. Right? If you raise a bunch of money, it bombs night one, you shut it down, and then you actually pocket the rest of the money. Right? Whereas if it’s successful, you may not. And so, the producers deliberately set out, these two guys, deliberately set out to make a play that would fail, raise a bunch of money for it, sabotage the play, and then pocket the proceeds. The problem was, and they thought they had this winning theme, they called it Springtime for Hitler. Right? It was a musical about Adolf Hitler basically in Brooklyn. And the problem is, that it was so bad, it was hilarious. And it was a smash hit and it basically ruined the two guys that had raised the money.

Lauren Cascio: [00:44:31] That’s funny. I have to check it out.

Mike Blake: [00:44:32] It just occurred to me that whole story was just Mel Brooks talking about crowdfunding in the 1970s.

Lauren Cascio: [00:44:38] Love it. Yeah. There you go. It’s not a new concept. Well, don’t do that to any –

Mike Blake: [00:44:45] Don’t do that. We’re not advocating fraud at the end of the day. I should point out that was fraud, so.

Lauren Cascio: [00:44:52] Yes.

Mike Blake: [00:44:53] And also, don’t make material about Hitler. Only Mel Brooks can get away with making Hitler funny. Nobody else can do that, so.

Lauren Cascio: [00:45:02] No.

Mike Blake: [00:45:02] Not a place we recommend that you go. I’m talking with Lauren Cascio and the topic is, should I pursue non-dilutive financing? I’m curious because you have a unique or certainly a very an unusually informed perspective on this because you’ve been with companies that have raised capital, you’re now a capital provider yourself. Is non-dilutive financing starting to disrupt conventional venture capital?

Lauren Cascio: [00:45:36] This is such a tough question because I think that they’ve co-existed for a long time for as long as I’ve been in the game, at least. And, I don’t – I believe – I firmly believe there’s a shortage of capital, that there is a higher demand and there always will be a higher demand for capital. And there is a true funding gap not only in the US but in global markets, and we will never have enough funding.

Lauren Cascio: [00:46:11] I believe that non-dilutive funding, outside of traditional venture debt, but the other types that we talked about, is going to be a key mechanism in the ability for companies to capitalize on the things that they’ve built and fund their companies to success. And that doesn’t mean that it’s going to take away from the VC market. There’s still a time and a place for VC. We’re seeing a ton of VC funds that are very small emerging – from emerging managers, new managers. People have never run VC funds before. A lot of them, ex-founders, left their own firms to build impact firms.

Lauren Cascio: [00:46:58] And so, I think that that will continue. That trend will continue where you have a lot of emerging managers beginning to fund companies that are seeking to make impact. But I think that non-dilutive funding is just going to slightly close the funding gap that we have. And, you know, as entrepreneurship and building companies become more status quo for people that we’ve seen or seen in post-COVID, people creating their own businesses, leaving the corporate world, there will always just be a demand for capital, and we’re not ever going to be able to fill it.

Mike Blake: [00:47:45] So, before we wrap up, I’d like to ask you a patently unfair question. But I only ask patently unfair questions to my very best, very smartest guests because I know you can handle the curveball.

Lauren Cascio: [00:47:57] Oh God.

Mike Blake: [00:47:58] And that is that it seems to me that non-dilutive funding might also be a path to closing the gender and race bias in early-stage financing because it’s not so personalized. Right? It’s not about being part of the same club, the same alumni association, the same country club. But as we talked about earlier, the sources of financing may not even know who you are. Right?

Lauren Cascio: [00:48:26] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:48:27] And there’s no basis for the bias. Does that resonate at all or am I just grasping at straws here?

Lauren Cascio: [00:48:33] Yeah. No. 100%. I’ll make one reference to Gulp Data. In our survey, we ask a question about being minority-owned or being women-owned and that is because I want to compare funding metrics with the SBA’s funding report that they did. I think it was in 2020. There’s a huge gap not only in minority and gender but in geography. And, I think that non-dilutive funding is, I mean, one of the questions you asked me was this decision-making process is essentially blind. It is because it’s merit-based. Does the company fit the profile we’re looking for? Does it fit the risk profile that we’re looking for? And if it does, it gets funded. And if it doesn’t, it does not. It doesn’t matter who you know. It doesn’t matter what school you went to, where you live, what gender you are, what race you are, you get funded. And it’s a beautiful – I mean, I wish that more funding operated like this, including government loans and grants. Like, this is information that they also know typically when you’re applying for funding, and I don’t think it should be relevant. It’s just not a relevant input metric to determine risk.

Mike Blake: [00:50:04] And in fact, that in part is why I sort of carved out grants into a separate topic because a lot of the automation, a lot of sort of the distance between a funding applicant and funding provider that exists in a lot of these revenue-based financing solutions does not exist in a lot of the grant world. The grant world, in my view, actually resembles much more closely venture capital, right, in terms of the relationship building and so forth. That’s why I did carve it out.

Mike Blake: [00:50:39] Lauren, this has been a great conversation. I know it’s an hour later for you there than it is for us, although knowing you, you’re probably working another 10 hours. But if – there are probably questions that we haven’t covered or maybe a listener would have wished we’d spent more time on. If somebody wants to contact you to follow up about this, I mean, you’re so knowledgeable about the topic, can they do so? And if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Lauren Cascio: [00:51:04] Oh, yeah. So – absolutely. And I’m always, like, happy to help founders navigate fundraising or whatever they’re facing. I’ve been there, done that, doing it again. So, the short one I think is lc, like Lauren Cascio, but lc@gulpdata.com. That’s like an easy one. Or you can find me on LinkedIn. I like notes though. You connect with me at a note, so I know why you’re connecting with me.

Mike Blake: [00:51:35] Okay. Well, that’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. And, I’d like to thank Lauren Cascio so much for sharing her expertise with us.

Mike Blake: [00:51:43] We’ll be exploring any topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us so that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:52:00] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I am on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my new LinkedIn group called Unblekable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Brady Ware & Company, Crowdfunding, Decision Vision, Gulp Data, Lauren Cascio, Mike Blake, non-dilutive funding, venture capital funding

Decision Vision Episode 164: Should I Do Business in Ukraine? – An Interview with Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tetyana Lypova

April 14, 2022 by John Ray

Ukraine
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 164: Should I Do Business in Ukraine? - An Interview with Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tetyana Lypova
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Ukraine

Decision Vision Episode 164: Should I Do Business in Ukraine? – An Interview with Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tetyana Lypova, IPR Group

Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tetyana Lypova, co-founders of Kyiv-based IPR Group and long-term friends of host Mike Blake, joined the show from Poland after safely escaping their home country Ukraine. They discussed their work, the evolution of their work as they cope with the realities of war, the way the war has reshaped the economy in Ukraine, the resiliency of the Ukrainian people, future opportunities in the country, and much more.

Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

During the show, Leonid and Tetyana offered several causes to which you can contribute to help the Ukrainian cause. Follow this link for more information.

Dr. Leonid Kistersky

Dr. Leonid Kistersky

Doctor of Economics, Professor, Founding Director of the Institute for International Business Development (Kyiv), Professor of Vasyl Stus Donetsk National University (Vinnytsia).

He worked as an economic adviser at the Secretariat of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in Geneva (Switzerland), was the founding chairman of the National Center for Implementation of the International Technical Assistance to Ukraine in the rank of a Minister. 

Leonid Kistersky has taught and conducted research at the world’s leading research centers and universities – Institute of Economics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Konstance University (Germany), Brown and Stanford Universities (USA), Kyiv Institute of International Relations at Taras Shevchenko National University, Higher School of Business (Poland). 

Dr. Kisterski is the author and co-author of almost 150 scientific works, including 15 books and textbooks on international economic relations and business development, published in Ukraine, Switzerland, Russia, USA, Great Britain, Poland, Germany, Czech Republic and in other countries; international organizations such as the UN, the World Bank and the European Union also published his books and articles. 

Leonid Kistersky is a member of prestigious international and national scientific institutions and organizations – specialized scientific councils at the Kyiv Institute of International Relations and Vasyl Stus Donetsk National University, Ukrainian Association of International Economists, Ukrainian Academy of Economics, the Academy of Higher Education of Ukraine; for many years he was a member of the UN Scientific Council, editorial boards of foreign and Ukrainian scientific journals and publications.

In 2019, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy awarded Professor Kistersky the title of “Honored Worker of Science and Technology of Ukraine”.

LinkedIn

Dr. Tetyana Lypova (Tatiana Lipovaya)

Dr. Tetyana Lypova

Dr. Tetyana Lypova received a Ph.D. in economics from the Institute of International Relations of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. She is Associate Professor and Deputy Director of the Institute for International Business Development, which promotes business development and financing of business projects.

Graduated from the Faculty of Economics and Management of Vadym Hetman National Economic University of Kyiv. She underwent internships in the programs of Brown University (USA), the London Center for International Economics, and the Consortium for the Improvement of Education Management in Ukraine. 

Tetyana Lypova has worked as a trainer, consultant, expert analyst on numerous projects and programs of such international organizations as the EU, UNDP, World Bank, USAID, Know-How Found, and other leading international institutions.

Since 2015, she has also been working as the head of the licensing department at the international company IPR Group, where she provides advice to Ukrainian and foreign entrepreneurs on prosecution and registration of trademarks, enforcement of rights, licensing and franchising, protection of geographical indications, copyrights, dispute resolutions, etc. She works with national and international clients and companies on intellectual property protection in Ukraine and in post-soviet independent countries like Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Moldova.

She was a member of the Geographical Indications Committee of the International Trademark Association (INTA).

Tetyana Lypova is the author of about 60 scientific publications, including 5 monographs and textbooks on international economic relations, international technical assistance, and small and medium business development.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:01] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:22] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision making on a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:45] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I am a director at Brady Ware & Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. I am Managing Partner of the Strategic Valuation and Advisory Services Practice, which brings clarity to the most important strategic decisions that business owners and executives face by presenting them with factual evidence for such decisions. Brady Ware is sponsoring this podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:01:16] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn Group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck, so please join that as well if you would like to engage.

Mike Blake: [00:01:39] Today’s topic is a topic that I hoped that I would address at some point over the course of this program in a very different context. But there’s a saying in Yiddish that roughly translates into, Man plans and God laughs. And there’s nothing particularly funny about this topic, but life does have a way of of bringing the unexpected.

Mike Blake: [00:02:06] So, as I record this on the 8th of April 2022, we are something on the order of about six weeks into the Russia-Ukraine war. And I recorded a podcast on this about five or six weeks ago with the topic Should I continue to do business in Russia and Belarus? And I explained my qualifications to address that topic in that episode. And I would encourage you to listen to that episode for that information as well as more.

Mike Blake: [00:02:39] And the only thing that I’ll rehash here – I dislike strongly that I have to address this topic in the way that it is being addressed – the early part of my career was formed by living and working in Russia, and in Belarus, and in Ukraine. And if there’s anything good that I’ve brought to the table professionally today in large part, it is due to the learning experiences of which I had the benefit those many years ago, long before I had any grey hair, that’s for sure, and I was a lot thinner then as well. But here we have it.

Mike Blake: [00:03:28] And so, the topic we’re going to discuss is sort of the flip side of the topic, instead of Should I do business with Russia and Belarus, I laid forth a case that I don’t think you should. And, frankly, I’m not sure it’s realistically feasible. I think it’s very difficult to do business there. I think that although no set of economic sanctions work perfectly, we have certainly made life very difficult for the Russians and for those who may seek to do business with them.

Mike Blake: [00:04:00] And if they choose to become a client state of China, as appears to be their choice at this point, there’s really nothing that we can do about that. But one thing we can do, and I guess I’m pleased to say that I’m pleased that we’re doing is we are supporting Ukraine, a fascinating country with a fascinating history that for most of its history has been a people much longer than it has been an organized country, if you will. It’s very paradoxical, and there are people who can discuss it much better than I can. We have professors that do that. But it’s a very interesting place with a very complicated history.

Mike Blake: [00:04:51] And as we’re now six weeks into the Russian invasion and we’ve witnessed extraordinary events, things that I think my generation -I’m going to be 52 next month – we never thought that we would see in my generation. We thought this is something that my grandfather would have dealt with, but certainly not today. But, again, here it is. History does have a tendency to be cyclical in nature.

Mike Blake: [00:05:27] And the discussion of whether or not to do business in Ukraine may seem bizarre. And I grant you, if you’re not all that familiar with Ukraine, its history, its geography, I can understand that. And that’s why this topic is so necessary, because Ukraine is a very big place. And although a large portion of the country – really, any portion of the country in those conditions be considered large – but something on the order of about 10 percent is an active war zone. And most of the country is under threat of some attack in some fashion by the Russian armed forces.

Mike Blake: [00:06:13] The fact of the matter is that (A) there has been a war going on since 2014, since the annexation of Crimea and the bizarre quasi independence of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. That’s been going on anyway. It was simply sort of self-contained. But, of course, now it’s been expanded, and most of you have seen the pictures, you’ve read the news, in many ways it’s probably worse than is being reported on the ground, there before the grace of God go I.

Mike Blake: [00:06:50] But the reality is that there’s a lot of Ukraine that amazingly is still functioning. It is still a functioning state. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, their President, who, frankly, if I’m honest about it, I had a lot of doubts when he was elected. That a comedic actor would rise to the level of being able to govern such a complex country with a very complex political structure as Ukraine. And, now, he’s being mentioned in the same words as Winston Churchill. So, it really goes to show you what I know, which is probably absolutely nothing.

Mike Blake: [00:07:28] But all of a sudden now we all know who he is. We all know his famous quote that he says he wants weapons, not a ride. And, you know, this is a country that’s not going away silently by any stretch of the imagination.

Mike Blake: [00:07:46] And I think I owe it to you as the listeners to help you understand what the opportunities are to do business in Ukraine, not just from a humanitarian perspective, not just from a moral and ethical imperative, although those do still exist. But the country is amazingly, with all the things that are happening to it, that they are still open for business.

Mike Blake: [00:08:17] And joining us today are two longtime dear friends of mine, who I was very relieved to speak to only a few days ago. I realized that they had managed to escape the country after their home came under attack. And joining us from Poland are Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tatiana Lipovaya. Who, again, I’ve known for a very long time.

Mike Blake: [00:08:44] And they are co-founders of a company called IPR. That, among other things, is a law firm that provides counsel for companies seeking to do business from the West into the former Soviet Union. I’m not even sure what that region of the world is going to be called anymore. I think it’s going to be different. I just can’t predict what that’s going to be. And their specialization has long been about protecting Western intellectual property rights in those countries, anti-counterfeiting in particular.

Mike Blake: [00:09:25] As well as working with a sister company, where I guess I was sort of an entrepreneur or teacher in residence, for lack of a better term, for about two-and-a-half years, The Institute for International Business Development, whose focus has been to serve as a bridge between Western companies seeking to learn about how to do business in that region, how to take advantage of the opportunities that that region has held and, I think, will hold at some point in the future – God knows only when – as well as how to navigate the many risks that region holds.

Mike Blake: [00:10:07] And they’ve just been fantastic people. And I’m delighted – but really proud – to call them my friends. By way of a little bit of a professional introduction in no particular order, Dr. Leonid Kistersky got a lot of things to his claim to fame. I could read a very lengthy bio, but I don’t want to do that because I want to get to questions.

Mike Blake: [00:10:35] But suffice to say that he was the First Minister of Foreign Economic Relations in the First Post-Independent Ukrainian Government of the early 1990s. He has been a visiting instructor at places such as Brown University, Stanford University, and Columbia, there are others that I’m probably forgetting. And he’s been doing this for about 50 years.

Mike Blake: [00:11:01] I couldn’t believe it when I looked up his bio, he does not look like he’s as old as his calendar would say. Hedoesn’t sound like he’s that old either. I look and sound older than the guy does. So, Leonid, whatever you’re doing, keep doing it because God knows it’s helping you.

Mike Blake: [00:11:19] And he was also recently the recipient of Ukraine’s Highest National Honor in Support of Science and Technology for the Republic of Ukraine.

Mike Blake: [00:11:31] Dr. Tatiana Lipovaya is the Head of Licensing and Trademark at IPR, where she’s been advising national and international clients on trademark filing, prosecution and enforcement, domain name infringements, unfair competition assignments, licensing, and all the work that goes with that. Has done a tremendous amount of work, in particular with some places that are very hard to do business in, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, et cetera.

Mike Blake: [00:12:05] And she, herself – I can’t believe it’s been this long. We knew each other when we were much younger – accumulated over two decades of experience in not just the legal aspect, but also becoming a top notch business advisor and holds a PhD in International Economics. She’s a member of INTA as well as the Ukrainian Association of International Economics. Has graduated with economics and management degrees of the Kiev National Economic University.

Mike Blake: [00:12:42] The firm itself has been in operation since 1999, and the sister group, IIBD, since before that, since at least the early 1990s. And I guess fittingly, it’s always seemed to me to be a very awkward translation, but the title of Ukrainian’s National Anthem is Ukraine is not yet perished, and neither has their firm. And I think when you think about what they’re doing, how they continue to do business in spite of all that’s going on, it gives you an appreciation as to why the Russians have, frankly, failed to achieve their military objectives by and large, and have redefined kind of what a Pyrrhic victory is, if you can even call it that.

Mike Blake: [00:13:34] I’m going to stop talking. I think I’ve established these are really good guests. You’re really going to enjoy talking to them. The more I talk, the less you hear from them. So, Leonid and Tatiana, welcome to the program. It is so good to see you and it’s so good to hear from you, more or less safe and sound. And I guess you’re joining us from Poland.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:13:57] Yes. Mike, thank you very much for such a very kind introduction. And sometimes I think that you know more about us than we do. Anyway, we can see that you to be, not only our long term friend, but we consider you also to be a founding father of our businesses and all endeavors since, as you rightly mentioned, we came together in the middle of previous millennium a long time ago.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:14:42] And in order to train Ukrainian entrepreneurs who set up Institute for International Business Development, which you helped to establish, and through which we started developing private business training people in Ukraine more than a quarter of a century ago already. And, in fact, IPR Group, it’s probably sort of a business which has been set up by the Institute for International Business Development and helped to develop even to a much more important private business now than the Institute for International Business Development is.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:15:42] So, both of us try to combine private business since I keep on provide consultancy before the war, of course, for governmental institutions, for international companies, for Ukrainian private businesses, just helping them to establish and to use high ethical norms in business, and was helping to develop high moral values of them, like personalities and like entrepreneurs. And still combining my activities with consultancy and private business.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:16:33] I still until now keep on training it to Ukrainian universities, Kiev National, Taras Shevchenko University, and Donetsk National University named after Vasyl’ Stus, which, eight years ago, moved from Donetsk to Vinnytsia in order to continue its activity. And they needed specialists in international economic relations. And that’s why I willingly joined them. And still I keep on doing this online until today and will continue to do so.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:17:25] Well, Tatiana is more a private businessman now.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:17:30] Businesswoman.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:17:33] Businesswoman, yeah. And probably she will tell herself about what is she doing in the IPR Group.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:17:45] I actually deal with the trademarks protection, prosecution. So, our IPR Group company, it’s a Ukrainian established and based in Ukraine business, but we deal with a lot of other countries. We provide our services in former Soviet Union countries, like Mike already mentioned, Georgia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and other countries which are not accessible for foreigners because they have special laws, they have special rules which you need to know to deal with these countries, especially for business and for also intellectual property rights protection, there are a lot of specific in these countries.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:18:39] And I’m really happy that I’m involved in such kind of business. I received a lot of new skills. And all the time develop myself, not only as a business consultant, which I used to be for the last 20 years, but now I developed myself as a lawyer and as a specialist in intellectual property rights protection.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:19:11] So, it’s also important for developing business, because intellectual property rights is the very important part of the business development, especially for new companies, for companies who involve the new technologies, would like to protect their property rights, patents licensing. So, they need a lot of advice and a lot of support for doing business in our countries.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:19:48] So, we continue our businesses.

Mike Blake: [00:19:52] And I think that’s remarkable and I think that’s one thing I want to make sure our audience hears, is, how are you continuing your business?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:20:07] Well, as you know, we had to move from Ukraine further to west, west, west, and so we appeared in Poland. And, currently, we are in the City of Nowy Sącz in Poland.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:20:28] Of course, we used to live some 30 kilometers from Kiev, in the City of Vasylkiv. Probably does ring a bell for you since press wrote a lot of the city there was the [inaudible] and airport and the tank farm which was bombed every day, and we were living nearby. In a couple of weeks, the situation at that time became dangerous to my mind. And we read that Russian, you know, monsters rush into houses, kill people, rape women and girls. So, that’s why we drove to the west in a couple of weeks after the start of the Russian invasion.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:21:30] So, we were going west and west, and so Tatiana’s colleague wrote us when we were in Lviv, and we were invited to live three weeks in their house while her kids were away. And so, during this time, we somehow managed to do now business, establish again contacts to start doing business online. And so, moving in, we rented a small apartment in Nowy Sącz. There is a famous school of business here where I taught 25 years ago, again for some time, and my colleagues helped us to rent an apartment here.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:22:26] So, there are, of course, difficulties in doing business outside of Ukraine, but in Ukraine. But still it is quite possible as far as teaching is concerned, it’s almost no difference. You have good internet, you have good connections, and you keep on doing it online.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:22:52] With Tatiana’s business, it is more complicated. Tatiana probably will tell about it herself. Not only our businessmen, but also our government on a daily basis introduces new opportunities first to revive businesses in Ukraine and to further develop there.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:23:26] As for my business, we understood that in such situations which all of us need to move from Kiev to other places, some of us still stay in Ukraine. For example, in the western part of Ukraine, some of our staff – and some of our staff means women – who can leave Ukraine, they are moved to Poland and to other countries in the Western Europe. We understand there’s a weak possibility to keep our business awake. It’s only the distance, the remote work on a distance. It’s online work. Hopefully, our kind of business, because we provide the services for international companies, our business allowed us to work remotely.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:24:30] So, our technical specialists did as much as possible to secure our business, our services, emails, our database, to put them to the safe servers to support our everyday activities. We’re happy that the Government of Ukraine, especially the national body, which is responsible for intellectual property rights protection in Ukraine, allowed us to work and link to them also online. So, they provided the system which allowed us to apply and file trademarks, patents, other intellectual property requests to the office online without providing papers.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:25:37] You mean Ukrainian Patent Office?

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:25:40] Yes. I mean the Ukrainian Patent Office, which still works, still keep their activities, and still provide full range of services to the clients and allowed us, as the patent attorneys, to conduct our activities on a very good level.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:26:03] In fact, Tatiana already mentioned a very good example of the Ukrainian State Patent Office, which provides all opportunities for this business to be on the surface, so to say. And private entrepreneurs, as you taught us, still used to take care of themselves. Moreover, I would like to say that we have a lot of big and middle sized businesses in Ukraine.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:26:38] And, now, our government helps them materially to move from those parts of our country, which is still bombed by Russian monsters, to move to the center of Ukraine, to the more safe areas. And until today, several hundreds of such businesses were moved to central part of our country and they keep on functioning. Also, government introduced several important privileges for businesses to function.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:27:20] Now, this is decreased taxation. For example, when I saw the consultant, I owned some small money and there is so-called simplified system of taxation. I was paying just 5 percent from turnover. Now, during the war time, it was brought down to 2 percent only. And we keep on paying taxes. We keep on paying now for our communal services for the apartments.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:28:02] Also, businesses were given an opportunity to have access to cheap credits, sometimes interest free credits. Tatiana, what is the amount of such? Several million hryvnia. Effective cost of hryvnia to U.S. dollar is approximately, roughly, 29 hryvnias per U.S. dollar. And you can get several million hryvnias of interest-free credit. So, there are simplified now procedures for registering your business, for reporting about your financial and other situations.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:28:53] So, I would like to say that it’s very sad that really this awful war triggered such support of private business in Ukraine. But, still, I am absolutely sure that after our victory, the war is over, business in Ukraine will be developing at a very high speed, especially internationally.

Mike Blake: [00:29:24] So, you said something I had not even thought of, and it reminds me of history. Because in World War II, the Soviet Union had to move entire industries east, out of the way of Hitler. And it hadn’t even occurred to me, but I suppose in a way that’s actually a skill and, in fact, if factories were built during Soviet times, they may have been designed to be moved again in case of an invasion. It’s history repeating itself.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:29:57] Yes, the history repeating. But to tell you very openly, we did not expect that this history repeats in Ukraine. We didn’t expect it.

Mike Blake: [00:30:12] Of course. And you didn’t think you’d be moving out west.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:30:18] I think [inaudible] how we cope with it.l

Mike Blake: [00:30:18] But I hadn’t even thought of that, but you’re right. I mean, there’s historical precedent that entire industries, factories can be picked up and simply moved to a part of the country that is not as close to the combat area.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:30:36] Look, now combat area, it’s all over Ukraine now. Of course, Russian bombed the country or fired missiles on a random basis. That is done deliberately to create panic, to create atmosphere of fright. But, still, people in Ukraine somehow coped with it, and business continues functioning despite. This is one of the purposes of Russia now, to destroy Ukraine.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:31:24] Again, also like you, Michael, I like history. And very recent history after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. And when Putin came to power, on many occasions, including internationally, he was saying that dissolution of the Soviet Union is the greatest, probably, awful event of the 19th Century. He did not mention First World War. He did not mention starvation. He didn’t mention Second World War. A lot of original wars. But dissolution of the Soviet Union. And this is his maniacal idea to restore it in some form. And, of course, without Ukraine, that is not attainable. And that’s why he is trying to do away with our country. But as you rightly said, he failed and continues to fail.

Mike Blake: [00:32:36] So, a thought that occurred is one of the things that already is resulting from the war, and I think will result for a generation, is that, economic ties between Russia and Ukraine will be effectively cut off. Forgive and forget is one thing. But I think there’s decades of healing that’s going to have to take place, I think, for that to occur. Belarus the same.

Mike Blake: [00:33:13] And as you know, oddly enough, you guys are as pro-Russia as any Ukrainians I’d ever met. You always took a very pragmatic view. Why do we want to make a big enemy? There’s no reason to do that. Not that it matters. I’m an American citizen, but I always thought it was smart. But now this has happened.

Mike Blake: [00:33:36] And there are certain things that Ukraine is not going to be able to get from Russia or Belarus anymore. Are there opportunities now for other countries to supply those things? What are those things that you can’t get from Russia anymore? Is it steel? Or is it fuel? Or is it something else? And are there opportunities for another country now to come in and and fill the void that is left because the Russia trade link has been cut off?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:34:09] Yeah. That’s true. Because sentiments in Ukraine against Russia now are self-understandable, because our country to no extent was anti-Russian. We treated Russia in a very friendly way. And we did not expect such a cruelty from their side and such behavior to do away with our country. And, now, I am, and all of us, are so anti-Russian and we cannot forgive what they did. And during my lifetime, I will never forgive them. And probably that will take several generations, somehow, to cool down with our sentiments towards Russia.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:35:11] Because a recent statistical polls indicated that now about 85 percent of Ukrainians see no way of improving the relations with Russia. And the other 12 percent just are still hesitant and they think that maybe it may take a generation or 10, 15 years. And only two or three percent believe that it could be repaired very soon. So, unfortunately, Russia should blame itself only for such a cut off of all kind of relations with Ukraine and with other countries.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:36:05] And so, I would like to separately single out one sphere that we have lost Russia and they have lost us for generations. But we gained a lot of friends, other friends. We are so grateful to Poland, which hosted 2.5 million Ukrainians now. And we feel such friendly relations and they take care of Ukraine and they support us. Also, the United Kingdom.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:36:47] Separately, I would like to mention the United States, which is the country with which we have long term friendly relations, including a lot of individuals. I would like to mention Al and Cher who introduced us to each other, and we continue this cooperation and friendly. Of course, the United States is the world leader, which provides moral, economic, military, all types of support. And other countries, I cannot just mention every country, a lot of them.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:37:29] That is why we are very optimistic about the outcome of this war and the prospects of business development in Ukraine. Michael and John, you have our invitation to meet in Kiev after the victory in this war and you will enjoy our hospitality.

Mike Blake: [00:37:56] I’ll be on the first plane.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:37:59] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:38:00] I’ll be on the first plane. So, now that trade has been cut off, what did Ukraine used to import from Russia that it can’t get anymore and now has to go to a different source?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:38:14] First of all, oil and gas. Anything else is of meager importance. It could not be even mentioned. And so, moreover, they are deliberately bombing and destroying our tank farms. They bombed one of them, I mentioned near Vasylkiv, where we used to live before the war for several years, for almost ten years already. And so, they wanted to cut off, not only supplies of oil, but also to destroy available oil tanks in our country.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:39:06] And we started to receive gas on a reverse basis from Europe. And, again, I would like to mention the very important initiative of the United States is to discontinue buying oil, gas, and coal from Russia, which is extremely important. But more so, United States announced, to put it correctly, the availability of their strategic oil reserves for the international market. And, you know, it’s like a positive signal for the market and other countries join this initiative. And, now, about 30 countries, including the United States, made their strategic oil reserves available for the international market.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:40:11] So, due to this, our military drivers and other sectors of economy started receiving gas – I mean, petrol. Meaning petrol, you call it gas in the United States. But for us, gas is gas, petrol is petrol. So, we started receiving it by railways, through automobile supplies in the country. Of course, we felt sometimes, you know, deficit of petrol in Ukraine, but still it is in the quantity sufficient for the country to survive now. So, energy resources, of course.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:41:07] Same thing with Belarus. But we were supplying services of electricity for Belarus, which we do not do anymore. And we discontinued our electricity system from Russia a couple of months ago. And it took Europe, European Union, only about three days to include Ukraine into the European system of electricity. And so, it functions properly. So, step by step, we are discontinuing our ties and our business links with Russia, Belarus, and other countries from former Soviet Union, and switched it to Europe and to the United States. Among the countries, of course, I would like to mention Canada and North America.

Mike Blake: [00:42:09] Of course, there’s a very large Ukrainian diaspora in Canada, especially in the western part of the country.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:42:15] Which raised their voice and provide support.

Mike Blake: [00:42:20] So, another challenge to the economy must be labor, right? Four million people have left. Ten million people have been displaced. We don’t know how many people have been killed. I’m guessing 100,000 people have probably been killed. We just can’t count them yet. And pretty much almost every able bodied man, whatever they were doing six weeks ago, they’re now holding a gun. And many women as well, by the way. There’s a lot of reports that women are also in active military service as well. And is that impacting simply the supply of labor to actually do economic things?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:43:11] Of course, this is an issue which is widely discussed, but there are speculations how many people were killed in Ukraine. I would like to say that especially we have heavy casualties among the civil population, of course. Probably today you’ve heard that they bombed the railway station killing several thousands of people and wounding more than 100.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:43:52] But our economy now is being restructured. And, again, it’s an irony that war forces us to reform at a quicker pace, introducing higher technologies which are not so labor intensive. And that is the way out of the situation. More so, as I see from internet, IPR Group, from Tatiana’s business, that ladies now do all this business. Even sometimes Tatiana invites our 18 year old daughter, Olga, to join. So, even kids, even grown up already with kids, but, still, they do what they can to make the country not to feel the deficit of a labor force. That is, high technologies, less labor important technologies. And, of course, our female population started to do a lot of work, which they were not even thinking about before the war.

Mike Blake: [00:45:13] So, you mentioned something that surprised me positively. I think you said the hryvnia is something around 29 to the dollar, is that correct?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:45:26] Yes. That is correct.

Mike Blake: [00:45:29] So, it’s fairly –

Leonid Kistersky: [00:45:31] 29.3 it seems to be.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:45:33] [Inaudible].

Leonid Kistersky: [00:45:34] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:45:35] 29.3.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:45:37] It’s by the National Bank.

Mike Blake: [00:45:40] So, is the banking system able to still function? It sounds like it is.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:45:51] Yes. Look, again, I like very much comparison and historic examples like you. And before the war, the exchange rate of hryvnia-dollar was something 27.9, about 28. Now, it’s 29.3. It says that our government understands the basics of the economy. If we recollect historically, Adam Smith, who wrote his famous book some 250 years ago, he said, “Stable exchange rate is a fundamental principles of successful functioning of any economy.” And he explained why.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:46:51] So, our National Bank maintains stable, despite there is higher inflation – of course as compared before the war period – but still the exchange rate is very stable.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:47:10] Examples, we keep on working. We receive hryvnias on our business cards, and we can pay by those cards in Poland. Our National Bank agreed with the Polish banking system about the exchange rate, which is fair enough, and so we can pay by hryvnias from our business cards in Poland. Tatiana, maybe you will tell the rest.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:47:46] For businesses, there are still some problems since the beginning of the war [inaudible] because budgetary deficit and, again, a lot of countries support us on a grand basis supporting our budget. But, still, our Ministry of Finance and National Bank are doing a lot of useful things on their own. At the beginning of war, they stopped currency operations, which was not very useful for business but, still, it helped our economy to survive and our banking system to function. And today, it was announced that they are easing those regulations in order to allow our businesses to function internationally to make payments and to receive payments.

Mike Blake: [00:48:43] So, that means that they’re loosening capital controls.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:48:46] Yes.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:48:47] Yes. Exactly, Michael. Exactly. Yeah. Despite there are still some limitations, but they are also because –

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:48:59] Emergency goods, medical goods, and for humanitarian purposes. They just drove down this –

Leonid Kistersky: [00:49:06] Easing, easing regulation.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:49:08] And they allowed for payments in the foreign currencies as well.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:49:15] That is true, especially for critical sectors of our economy, like agriculture, chemistry, and others.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:49:27] It’s a first step for the future.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:49:33] For future business development internationally.

Mike Blake: [00:49:40] So, as a matter of history, any time that there’s a great disruption, such as a war, that also sometimes creates opportunities in its aftermath. And I’m curious, what do you see will be the opportunities of a post-war or post-victory Ukraine?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:50:09] I am very optimistic about those opportunities. Of course, for those weeks, maybe weeks or month ahead of us, in this state of war, I hope people understand the importance of real values. You cannot imagine how people in Ukraine became friendly to each other. I was always surprised in the United States or in Western Europe, people were smiling to each other, helping each other. When driving, they’re making friendly gestures. They are just letting all the cars to go.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:50:55] It was not the case in Ukraine before the war, as you probably know. But, now, it took us several weeks to cover this huge distance. So, before war period, I see a period of very quick reconstruction of our country. Of course, our government and our administration are ready to take steps to achieve agreements with countries, with companies for reconstructing Ukraine.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:51:35] And remember that some 22 years ago, I published an article – it is available in English – Marshall Plan for Ukraine. At that time, I was thinking of reforming the economy of Ukraine. But, now, it will be a real Marshall Plan for Ukraine to reconstruct the country, and ways of reconstruction, and ways of further development will be unprecedented, believe me. And Ukraine may become, in some near future, a member of the European Union. And we have support of key players in Europe and in North America. So, I’m very optimistic about this period. Of course, war changed people in my country in a very positive way.

Mike Blake: [00:52:33] I’m talking with Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tatiana Lipovaya. And the topic is, Should I do business in Ukraine? So, I’m going to ask you a very unfair question, but I want to know the answer. I know our listeners want to know the answer. And that is, how do you think this ends? What does it look like? Is there a total Ukrainian victory? Is there a return to the 2014 situation? Is it something else? How does this end?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:53:10] Michael, it’s one of the most probably difficult questions for me to address. And I could just mention that there are possible scenarios. If we receive more weapons, more support, then maybe rather quickly with our victory. Of course, Russia behaving in such a monstrous way because before recently, nobody dared to protect itself and to give them heavy blows, which they received from Ukraine.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:54:06] If we come back to a more remote history, I always remember an article so-called Long Telegram of the prominent American Historian Diplomat George Kennan. In his Long Telegram, who explained the essence of Russian empire and of the Soviet Union. And Russia inherited the Soviet Union efficiently, all of them. So, it will be attacking and attacking its neighbors because of its traditions. They are not capable of creating something on their own. They are capable of destroying other people.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:54:58] Let’s take now very recent history, for example, 1993, occupation of part of Moldova, Pridnestrovian so-called, non-recognised artificial republic. Then, ’08 the War in Georgia, they unleashed and occupied Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Then, Syria, other countries, some other continents, and 14 that is occupation of Crimea and part of Donbas. And at that time, there was their market. They’re in charge of Ukraine, which, in fact, allowed infiltrating our country by Russian agents.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:55:58] So, now, it’s different. And February 24, Russia attacked Ukraine, it received severe blows and keep on receiving it. So, end of the war depends decisively, probably not on negotiations, but on the performance of our military, and our territorial defense, and on patriotic support of all Ukrainian population, which is practically unanimous now. So, it may take more time. It may take several weeks or several months.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:56:51] I don’t like to see freezing this conflict because our military are in a position, not only to defend, but also to attack. And, now, I see that Western democracies at least started supplying heavy weapons to Ukraine, which may be a decisive factor in achieving a victory in the quite predictable future. Anyway, I will inform you. I’ll be the first to inform you that this is end of war. But end of war could be only a victory for Ukraine.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [00:57:39] Yeah.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:57:41] As our president told this.

Mike Blake: [00:57:44] I think not many people would doubt you at this point. Underestimate Ukraine at your peril, I think, is probably a good way to put this and maybe a good way to wrap this up. I know it’s late there. You have a lot of other things that you need to take care of.

Mike Blake: [00:58:08] But I would like to ask you this, and that is, many people are asking me – and I’m helping them as best I can, but you probably have better information – people, individual citizens, in the United States do want to donate money or other things to support Ukrainian refugees, to support Ukraine’s struggle against Russia, are there organizations that you recommend that you think are the most helpful that provide the most direct assistance on the ground?

Leonid Kistersky: [00:58:44] Yeah. First of all, Michael, when we will prepare the information which we promised to do after the show, we will probably give you official addresses how to do it. But may I tell you what Tatiana and I are doing in this respect. We are not rich people, as you know, but at least we are well to do, I would like to say some middle Ukrainian class.

Leonid Kistersky: [00:59:19] First of all, we donate money to official sides of Ukraine for our military. Then, we know a lot of individual families whose husbands or fathers now in the military of Ukraine and they require some equipment, some arms. And the people who know those family, we put our money together in order to buy what they require. They have all these devices which make it possible to see during night time, for example, the necessity of such.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:00:16] Then, we like animals very much, and we have a cat here in Poland. We took it together. We said that all of us or nobody. So, all of us. And we donate money to special organizations which support animals. Plus, we buy tickets for zoos in various parts of Ukraine. They appeal, “Please buy tickets for our zoos online. Transfer money for buying tickets.” And they feed their animals.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:00:55] So, there are a lot of opportunities how to support Ukraine, and probably people in the United States they would prefer to support it in some official way, which supports directly Ukrainian military or humanitarian support. And we will send those addresses to you, so you could provide your fellow citizens with those reliable addresses.

Mike Blake: [01:01:33] Very good. Well, we’ll make sure that those get published when we publish this show next Thursday.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:01:40] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [01:01:44] Leonid, Tatiana, I can’t tell you how this is a confusing time. It’s a very difficult time, obviously. But I truly thank God that you and Olga are safe. I know many others are not. And I wish I could help them, but I can’t. But I can at least speak to you. And I cannot imagine what you’re going through physically, emotionally. But, again, if there’s any way that I or my family can help or our community here – and we do even have a Ukrainian church here in Atlanta – please let us know. I would like to know.

Mike Blake: [01:02:33] But you’ve shared, I think, a lot of information that I don’t think gets reported here. And I’m extremely grateful. [Foreign Language] that you agreed to come on our show. Yeah, I still remember a little Ukrainian. In fact I find it very hard to speak Russian right now. It’s emotionally very difficult. But thank you very much for, again, being on the program and for being patriots.

Mike Blake: [01:03:06] And I think you guys realize and we realize in America that the war for, in many cases, humanity’s soul is being fought in Ukraine. We always thought that it would be in Iraq over oil for something like that. But it turns out it’s in Ukraine. And, you know, we all are pulling for you. And we just thank you for your courage. We admire you for your courage and the sacrifice you’re making. And, hopefully, you’ll achieve a swift victory and get this thing over with and send a message that this just was a bad idea from the outset.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:03:49] Yeah. Michael, may I say that we are very grateful to our American friends, Michael Blake and John Ray, and to all of the American people who are interested in Ukraine, who support Ukraine. And so, this is minimum what we can do now for American-Ukrainian development sharing our information with you. And we will be more than happy to do it in the future. We are so grateful to you. Thank you, guys.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [01:04:28] Thank you very much.

Mike Blake: [01:04:30] Well, all right. Thank you very much. And have a pleasant evening. And we will tell you when the podcast is ready so that you can see it and listen to it and, hopefully, share with other people that you think will be interested and have an impact.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:04:44] Thank you very much, Michael.

Tatiana Lipovaya: [01:04:45] Thank you, Michael.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:04:45] And we will try to share this show with our Ukrainian contacts back in Ukraine to demonstrate to everybody that America fully supports us on all levels. Thank you.

Mike Blake: [01:05:01] [Foreign Language]. Thank you very much and all the very best.

Leonid Kistersky: [01:05:08] [Foreign Language].

Tatiana Lipovaya: [01:05:10] [Foreign Language].

Mike Blake: [01:05:11] Okay. That’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. And I’d like to thank Dr. Leonid Kistersky and Dr. Tatiana Lipovaya so much for sharing their expertise with us.

Mike Blake: [01:05:21] We will be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us so that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [01:05:38] If you would like to engage with us on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my new LinkedIn Group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

 

Tagged With: Brady Ware & Company, Decision Vision, Dr Tetyana Lypova, Dr. Leonid Kistersky, hryvnia, Mike Blake, Ukraine

Decision Vision Episode 163: Should I Increase Inventory? – An Interview with Jason Haith, OEC Group, Louisville

April 7, 2022 by John Ray

OEC
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 163: Should I Increase Inventory? - An Interview with Jason Haith, OEC Group, Louisville
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

OEC

Decision Vision Episode 163: Should I Increase Inventory? – An Interview with Jason Haith, OEC Group, Louisville

Many businesses are wrestling with the question of whether they should build up inventory to counter delivery delays due to supply chain disruption. In this interview with host Mike Blake, Jason Haith of the OEC Group contends that while those supply chain challenges have abated somewhat, they have not been solved, and may become even more challenging. Jason discussed many of the issues at hand, what may be coming later in 2022, what solutions may be available, diversifying shipping and sourcing, and much more. Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

OEC Group

Founded in 1981, OEC Group had a vision to provide comprehensive logistics services to clients.

Today OEC Group serves destinations throughout the world and has grown into one of the leading logistics providers from Asia to North America.

Their annual cargo volume has consistently put us in the top position for Transpacific Trade.

With offices in over fifty countries, they take pride in being close to your cargo at all times.

Proximity of their OEC logistics professionals to your cargo enables them to stay on top of relevant market trade intelligence. Their Asia offices bridge the connection between you and your supplier, bringing additional insight to the entirety of your supply chain.

Company website | LinkedIn | Twitter

Jason Haith, Manager, OEC Group, Louisville

Jason Haith, Manager, OEC Group Louisville

OEC Group is an incredibly dynamic International Logistics company specializing in the Asia and West Asia trade. OEC offers Full container, LCL, Airfreight, warehousing, and Customs Compliance services.

Jason is the manager of the office in Louisville, Kentucky and has been with OEC since 2011.

Jason has a degree from The University of Kansas. He lives in Louisville.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:01] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision-making in a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:41] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. This program is sponsored by Brady Ware & Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. I am managing partner of the Strategic Valuation and Advisory Services Practice, which brings clarity to clients facing critical strategic decisions by presenting clients with empirical facts that enable great decision making.

Mike Blake: [00:00:41] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn is myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. So, please join that as well if you would like to engage. If you like this podcast, please subscribe on your favorite podcast aggregator and please consider leaving a review of the podcast as well.

Mike Blake: [00:01:32] Today’s topic is, should I increase my inventory holdings, and, specifically inventory holdings coming from abroad? During the pandemic, according to the US Census Bureau Data, US businesses on average have 37 days of inventory in hand. That is the lowest since the 2009 recession and is still trending lower. So, we all know that there are supply chain issues whether you had a hard time getting a Peloton during COVID and now they can’t give them away. It’s taking four or five weeks to get a brand new MacBook Pro. We’re routinely seeing products that we’re used to seeing on the shelves. We’re seeing empty shelves from everything – everything from steak to corned beef hash to oyster crackers. And, of course, remember in the early days when there were massive shortages of disinfectant wipes, disinfectant sprays, the great toilet paper craze of 2020, and the list goes on and on.

Mike Blake: [00:02:39] And, we are told that the reason or a reason that we’re seeing, the inflation that we’re seeing of late, is because the supply chain has yet to recover. And, that appears to be true. And from a consumer’s perspective, of course, it’s irritating. It’s disappointing. And, in some cases where inflation is really hitting, it’s potentially existential. But, of course, this is a show that is aimed at business decision-makers and this is impacting many businesses that are simply running out of product. And running out of product is a bigger deal than you might imagine, at least in some cases. Our guest will talk more about this, I’m sure.

Mike Blake: [00:03:31] But, you know, I think about – it wasn’t that long ago when you could walk into a Home Depot and you could buy Halloween or Christmas decorations on Christmas Eve and they would still have fully stocked shelves. Right. And then, if you wanted to, you could wait a few days later, they’d be selling everything off at $0.30 on the dollar or something. Now, if you’re not stocked up on that stuff by December 15th, that’s already out of there because companies have really tightened up their inventory management practices and they have decided in some cases that they’d rather miss out on a sale rather than being left holding the bag on inventory that they can’t move or going to have to take a bath on.

Mike Blake: [00:04:16] But we’re seeing now the exposure that that creates just in time inventory is fantastic when everything is working the way that it’s supposed to. But it’s vulnerable to one thing not working as well. One bottleneck will have ripple effects throughout the entire supply chain. And then, if you have ten bottlenecks as is the case or more in some of our supply chain, well, you see what we have. Right. And so, you lead to stockouts, which lead to disappointed customers. And if you’re dealing with online retail, I understand that one of the things that can just kill your rankings is if you’re just out of inventory. And that’s really hurting a lot of electronic retailers.

Mike Blake: [00:05:03] And so, this is an important decision, I’m sorry, an important conversation that is leading to a decision about whether or not companies need to change their inventory practices. Some probably have. Others are probably thinking about it very hard. If so, how to do that now? I’m not an inventory guy. I’m not a supply chain guy. I’m a finance guy through and through. So, I have told you the sum total of everything I know about the topic. So, we’ve brought in a guest who knows a heck of a lot more about the topic.

Mike Blake: [00:05:32] And joining us today is Jason Haith, who is the branch manager for OEC Group, Louisville. He’s been with OEC for 16 years, handling full container import-export, less-than-container consolidations, including buyer consolidation, airfreight import-export, along with consulting with clients and documentation. Founded in 1981, OEC had the vision to provide comprehensive logistics services to clients. They serve destinations throughout the world, and has grown into one of the leading logistics providers from Asia to North America. Jason, welcome to the program.

Jason Haith: [00:06:04] Mike, thanks so much for having me.

Mike Blake: [00:06:07] So, I’ve tried to, in a very ham-handed way, set the table here. We’ve been told for a long time excess inventory is bad. It consumes cash. It promotes inefficiency, among other things. Now, all of a sudden, we’re finding ourselves lacking in inventory. Why would companies want to go back the other way right now?

Jason Haith: [00:06:35] In terms of adding additional inventory, you mean?

Mike Blake: [00:06:37] Yes, that’s right.

Jason Haith: [00:06:38] So, I think a lot of what you’d said in your introduction is accurate. I think one of the biggest challenges the import community has faced isn’t just the cost of product in particular or shipping. It’s the uncertainty of transit time. Those issues have abated some as we’ve come out of Chinese New Year this year. But there is an issue that’s looming on the horizon that importers are really going to have to start taking a look at. And that’s the contract, the labor contract renegotiations on the West Coast. That contract is up this year, July 1st, and the possibility of a labor disruption or a full-on strike is likely enough that it’s forced conversations with clients to provide alternatives.

Jason Haith: [00:07:34] The ILWU, the International Longshore and Warehouse Association, effectively controls all of the freight terminals, and these are the terminals that [inaudible] actual vessels come into to be unloaded at the ports. They are the men and women that operate the cranes and move containers around the port facility. That contract is due July 1. And if they’re unable to reach an agreement, the possibility of a labor disruption is likely.

Jason Haith: [00:08:08] That poses a number of problems for the community. The first is that the West Coast of the United States is responsible for something around 60% of all of the volume that’s coming into the country. So, if those gateways effectively go down or inoperable, it places a huge amount of pressure on the remaining ports that are still operable. That would be the Gulf Coast, primarily Houston; the East Coast, primarily Savannah, Norfolk, and New York I think at this point. Those facilities are much smaller. They’re much smaller facilities and just not really capable of handling the volumes that are going to be coming their way. I think it’s going to be tough.

Mike Blake: [00:08:59] Now, leading up to this, there’s been an obsession, I think, or at least certainly a lot of focus on not carrying excess inventory. So, let’s go back to sort of inventory supply chain 101. How did we get to that point? Why did – why have people – why do people decide they wanted to carry as little inventory as possible? Why did we expose ourselves to this risk now?

Jason Haith: [00:09:24] I mean, ironically, I think it was because of the fluidity of the supply chain. Several years ago companies were easily able to operate in that JIT sort of scenario because product was – and product production and the transportation of that product was efficient enough that it allowed companies to sort of build these foundational pillars and how they’re going to operate moving forward. It’s those foundational pillars, I think, that have been shaken by what we saw in 2021.

Jason Haith: [00:09:59] In terms of inefficiency and excess cost, I think importers were looking at what was happening on the sales side and thinking to themselves, “Oh, my gosh, I don’t have – based on the way sales are now, I’m not sure I have the product that I’m going to need in the future. Let’s get more product moving.” And, the difficulties that I think importers saw in 2021 are really leading them to pursue a different course of action up to and including carrying inventory now that they may not have previously just because they’re unsure, not just from a transportation perspective. Transportation is incredibly inefficient. But that’s just one portion of it.

Jason Haith: [00:10:47] On the production side, there are issues as well. COVID lockdowns in China continue. Suppliers in China continue to have issues with inflation and increased product costs. The shipping delays have left product at supplier facilities longer than expected. In some cases, suppliers have had to either slow production or cancel it altogether not because they don’t have the raw materials to produce it, but because once it’s produced, they physically have no other, nowhere to put the product. Their warehouses are so stuffed full of product that was supposed to ship that didn’t that it’s hampering production. So the importers are really in a tough spot because they’re seeing these issues from literally all sides.

Mike Blake: [00:11:39] So, speaking as a citizen now and here as a consumer, I think we are under the hope that supply chain would have been kind of fixed by now or figured out by now. And clearly, it’s not. If anything, I don’t know if it’s worse or not, but it’s clearly not the way we’re used to seeing it. Why are there supply chain challenges? Is it still just on the raw production side where companies are having trouble just getting people in to do the work? Or, is it more on the distribution side? Or is it everywhere throughout?

Jason Haith: [00:12:16] I would say, to answer your question directly, it’s everywhere throughout. I think the initial problem began and is directly related to COVID. Specifically, the first three months of 2020, China was shut down. They were all locked down and US importers couldn’t really get much production because there wasn’t anyone working. And just as China starts to come out of those lockdowns, the US goes under lockdown. And so, US importers are, again, unsure. Should I bring product in or not?

Jason Haith: [00:12:49] When the US starts opening, there’s effectively a 5 to 6 month period in 2020 where not a whole heck of a lot happened, and the economy starts picking up and importers are seeing sales increase so they start to place more orders. That’s what really kicked off this craziness.

Jason Haith: [00:13:09] We find ourselves in this position now because of all of the issues that the initial problems spurred. So, all of this volume starts coming out of Asia. Steamship lines add additional vessels to start carrying it. But the ports on the US side aren’t capable of processing all of those vessels. So, we start to see congestion and then we start to see congestion at the rail, and then we start to see steamship lines canceling sailings because boats are stuck off the West Coast for three weeks. If you’re three weeks late getting to LA, you’re also three weeks late getting back to Shanghai. So, each one of these issues that we’ve seen that’s sort of propagated across the supply chain in this wave are really sort of predicated on the previous problem.

Jason Haith: [00:14:01] And, the issue I think now is I don’t – there’s no real way to throw money at the problem. A lot of people, I think, in the US are sort of under the understanding, well, let’s just build more infrastructure. And, that’s I think a necessity where it’s possible. LA, there’s just no more land. They need to make the ports more efficient. But the caveat is you don’t necessarily build the transcontinental railroad in two weeks or dredge a whole new port terminal in a month.

Mike Blake: [00:14:39] Right.

Jason Haith: [00:14:39] That infrastructure is necessary. But, man, oh, man, is it going to take a while to show up. And these issues have sort of spring boarded or bounced from one side of the Pacific to the other from the US side, back to the Asia side, back to the US side. And I think that is what has continued to present problems. I believe the community, in general, sort of thinks that all of the infrastructure that’s required to get product, say, from a supplier’s door in Shanghai to their door in Wisconsin or Illinois, it’s all the same person.

Jason Haith: [00:15:20] Similar to Amazon here in the US, you order a product on Amazon and it’s Amazon that shows up at your doorstep in most cases to deliver that. This is different. The trucking companies on the China side are not associated with the depot where they collect the container and they’re not – neither the depot nor the trucking company is really associated with the port terminal. And, the terminal is different than the steamship line. And, the steamship lines are different than the railroads in the US.

Jason Haith: [00:15:50] So, these are all sorts of segmented parts of the process that previously worked together in relative harmony. I mean, it was amazing that you could get a 40-foot container of product from, say, Shenzhen to Kansas City or Chicago in 27 days with very little problem and accurately predict the timing. And now, because, just, for example, the port gets congested in Los Angeles and the, excuse me, the truckers aren’t able to have filled enough chassis to pull out all the containers. A vessel discharges 1000 boxes. There’s only enough chassis to pull 500. Then, the next vessel arrives with 1000 containers on it and discharges all of those. They’ve got to go somewhere. So, those containers get put on top of the 500 that didn’t leave, that weren’t pulled out, and now they’re buried in a stack somewhere waiting to be exposed so that somebody can come in and collect them.

Jason Haith: [00:16:51] So, that particular problem, truckers, chassis shortage, in Los Angeles compound the issue at the port because now there are additional containers at the port that aren’t able to be cleared out. And, those containers compound the congestion issue in vessels waiting because the port can’t process as many vessels if they don’t have a place to put all of those containers, so that vessel gets delayed, and then it gets back up to Shanghai. And that’s sort of the circle, the vicious circle, I think that we in the market find ourselves.

Mike Blake: [00:17:23] So, does that mean that what we’re in is a new normal at least for a while? And if so, what is the timeframe in which we’re going to have to cope with uneven supply issues, especially from foreign sources, before it gets back to what we’re used to?

Jason Haith: [00:17:44] I think the term new normal is pretty accurate, and I think that is a lot of the pain that the import community has gone through that adjustment specifically. I think the remainder of this year will be very challenging. There are already processes underway to try and avert issues with the US West Coast. I think importers are really going to have to take a look at, excuse me – really going to have to take a look at what product is important to them. I think these problems could potentially extend through 2023, where the market and steamship lines are introducing new IMO regulations. Effectively, it’s a Go Green Decarbonization program that will result in lower overall capacity in terms of ships in the water available to move containers.

Jason Haith: [00:18:46] So from the import perspective, I do think it’s a good idea for importers to start looking for product and soon. I think those transit times, most importers right now are already considering or directly arranging shipments to avert the West Coast. The appetite for risk on the import community side is just zero. They don’t need or want any other problems or possibilities that could cause delays. So, I think they’re already taking action in sending product to some of these other places. I do think that’s a good way of proceeding. The other side is the economic side, what’s happening with the economy and our sales in three, six, nine months going to be the same as what they may be looking at right now.

Mike Blake: [00:19:40] So, in this, in the before time, if you will, there is pretty established math or algorithms to decide or determine what your optimal inventory level should be. And I’m guessing a lot of those are being either updated or thrown out the window entirely. In this new normal, how do you attack this? Do you just make sure that you have like, you’re used to having 60 days inventory, you need to make room for 120? Or, is there more math or rigor that can be used to optimize inventory under these conditions? Or is it even possible to do something like that?

Jason Haith: [00:20:22] I think a lot of people have taken a genuine swing at that problem. I’m not sure many have connected with a genuine solution that resolves the issue. The problem is the uncertainty of transit time. Yes, production is an issue. Maybe, it’s delayed a week or two or maybe a month. But the uncertainty of transit is the really difficult part. I’ve seen some shipments take 92 to 120 days to arrive. I’ve seen shipments on the subsequent vessel show up in 25 days. So, that span is incredible to try and account for.

Mike Blake: [00:21:04] Yes. It seems random.

Jason Haith: [00:21:05] It’s complete – it seems like some of these shipments that move really quickly should be kind of statistical outliers. But then, there’s an instance where your vessel arrives and the port’s too congested and they have nowhere to store the containers so you just happen to be the lucky person whose container gets moved straight over because they have no other place to physically put the product. It moves straight through. I’ve seen other instances where the containers get buried in stacks.

Jason Haith: [00:21:34] I think one of the best things that importers could probably do to the best of their ability is diversify, how some of this cargo is coming over and how the product is being routed. So, for example, a 40-foot high cube will hold roughly 65 to 67 cubic meters of cargo. If you just think of a regular old pallet, 4-foot by 4-foot by 4-foot tall, that’s about 1.81 cubic meters. So, a high cube will hold 65 to 67, excuse me, ICBMs. If you take 10 cubic meters off that order and put it in a 40-foot container and send that container to Houston and maybe arrange the other 10 cubic meters through a different port, Savannah or New York or Charleston or something along those lines, that arrangement from a financial perspective is probably more expensive than putting everything in one container. The difference is the product itself, the routing, has been diversified.

Jason Haith: [00:22:39] So, if your container in Houston gets stuck, for example, because there’s port congestion, it sits there for 45 days. If all of your product is in one container, that whole PO is stranded until the vessel docks. If you split that order up, yes, you may be looking at additional costs, but you’re also garnering an additional gateway and access to that product.

Jason Haith: [00:23:05] So, those are some of the ways and some of the advice that I’ve worked with current clients on because I really think that what we’re looking at will be extraordinarily challenging. And, like I said, if all the product is in a single container and there’s a problem with the vessel, with the port, with congestion, you’re basically waiting for everything to be processed at once.

Mike Blake: [00:23:32] That’s interesting. So, I mean, at the end of the day, it is a diversification problem, I suppose. But I don’t know. You tell me that. The reason supplies were concentrated in the first place was because that’s probably how you got the best pricing.

Jason Haith: [00:23:48] Yes.

Mike Blake: [00:23:49] And so, implicit is that you’re probably going to give some ground on pricing in order to ensure or at least hedge to make sure at least some inventory is getting through in a timely or at least net/net on a semi-regular basis. Is that right?

Jason Haith: [00:24:06] That is 100% correct. Price was initially the concern, as it should be, should always be considered. But I think if you were to pose the question to a general importer, would you be willing to pay more money? Fill in the blank, whatever that number may be. More money for better access or more consistent access to your product. I think the answer might be yes because it’s not only the cost that’s really become a problem.

Jason Haith: [00:24:40] Like, I said, I mean, the costs have jumped substantially, but importers have been able to make some of that difference up in increasing their price. That’s a problem that they’re able to cope with in one way, one form or another, not knowing when that product is going to show up. And, the span of time could be 30, 60, 90 days. That’s a problem that retailers and importers don’t really have a good solution for. And so, splitting some of these things up and looking at different gateways will help make more product available more often.

Jason Haith: [00:25:21] I do think all of the Gulf and East Coast ports will be congested, but we could see individual issues exacerbate the problem. Say, in Houston, maybe there’s a chassis issue in Houston and the port overall slows down substantially. If that’s the only bet you’ve made, all your product is subject to that contention. But if you have something coming through Savannah, maybe the delays in Savannah are only 10 days. You know, they’ve recently had to commandeer an airport to store empty equipment because of how much cargo was inside those terminals. At least, the tap is still running. And I think that’s going to be really key moving into third and fourth quarters of this year because this could be really, really challenging.

Mike Blake: [00:26:14] But you touched on something I want to come back to a little bit more explicitly, and that’s pricing. Basic economics says, well, if there’s a shortage of a product, simply raise the price, so I get a market-clearing price. It made me, at least, in the short term, that the seller may make more money. Is that a viable strategy? Or why don’t more companies adopt that approach? Or, maybe they are and I just don’t realize it.

Jason Haith: [00:26:46] I think a lot of companies are trying to do that. I think a lot of them have been successful. Larger companies tend to take a little bit longer to move that mark because the numbers are just a little bit different. I think the short-term answer to your question is, yes, raising their price is a viable solution to the fire that’s in front of them, but there just naturally comes a point when whatever that price is, it’s just too high. Whatever that price becomes just becomes too expensive for that individual making the decision at the store to purchase.

Jason Haith: [00:27:27] And, I think the scary part for a good part of the community is it’s really difficult to find that out quickly. And, what I mean by that is if March 1, let’s say April 1, the consumer is making this decision not to buy that item, you may start to see that develop or become represented in sales, maybe on the 15th of the month. But you could already have 10 or 15 or 20 containers on the water of that product with the costing built-in, assuming the price that is now too high for people to pay. So the long-term answer, I think, is, no, I don’t think it’s a viable option to continue to have to raise the costing. I think that’s a temporary answer to a problem that needs something more resolute in the long term.

Mike Blake: [00:28:25] Are there – other than what you suggest, are there areas where or elements that boiled down to, and put in quotes, simple, and there’s nothing simple about it but maybe just straight-ahead inventory management. Are there other inventory management techniques that can be tightened up also, that can help alleviate, you know make this problem a little bit less severe for businesses?

Jason Haith: [00:28:55] I do. Yeah. I think the answer is yes. I think that requires a lot of coordination between the sales team for that particular company and their operations staff who may be fulfilling those orders. I’ve frequently encountered situations where salespeople are selling a product or presenting a product that may not have arrived, that may still be stuck in congestion.

Jason Haith: [00:29:23] And so, one of the things I do in working with my clients every few weeks, I will personally put together market updates that really speak to issues that I think affect or could affect specific clients. And, I do that because I certainly want the people I’m working with to know what’s going on. But I frequently invite in not just salespeople to those conversations, but also those from the purchasing team because oftentimes the severity of the problem may not necessarily get accurately communicated to a salesperson or a purchasing person, and then they’re sort of left to whatever devices they’ve come up with to manage the problem.

Jason Haith: [00:30:10] So, I think the first place to start is to make sure all of the staff or employees in that chain to move the product from operations to sales are communicating. I think accurate information and really close coordination with providers of all types is really, really important and in conjunction with communication with suppliers, the ones actually producing the product. You definitely don’t want to solve or answer the transportation question, the warehousing question, the congestion or delay question and find out your supplier’s 60 days behind in production.

Jason Haith: [00:30:55] And so, I think businesses in the US have really been sort of stricken with a lot of requirements to operate now that just didn’t exist. These just weren’t problems that the average employee had to really address three years ago. It’s just – everything just kind of happened. The shipment got booked, it moved, showed up when it was supposed to. They got an invoice that matched what they were expecting. They paid it and life went on. So, I think communication is the first place to start.

Mike Blake: [00:31:28] So, actually, that segue is very nice in the next question I want to ask which is, how much do supplier relationships matter? And, I’m going to lump transportation and logistics here, too. And I guess what I’m really getting at is, do relationships matter to make sure or at least influence whether your shipment is going to be prioritized versus somebody else’s I guess what I’m really getting at. Does that matter? Is that a thing?

Jason Haith: [00:32:00] It can be. There are avenues. It’s certainly not easy. On the forwarding side, it requires an awful lot of communication and late-night phone calls and those types of things. That is possible for individual shipments or purchase orders. When you start talking about I want you to prioritize everything I do, that’s a different – sort of a different question. It’s no secret that capacity is really tight. Again, it’s abated. Right now, it’s a little easier now than it used to be. But capacity is expected to be really tight moving forward.

Jason Haith: [00:32:41] And so, I think forming a realistic plan with your provider on how to handle shipments that may genuinely be a line-down situation as opposed to, yes, I need this but I also understand the difficulty in getting this product moved. It is possible to prioritize individual shipments. Usually, that means there’s a cost associated with it, especially if it’s something you’re going to want to continue to do on a regular basis. If everything is hot and priority important, then sort of effectively nothing is because it’s all the same.

Mike Blake: [00:33:21] So, in this kind of and this kind of new normal, what’s the – do we change? Are there different KPIs now for inventory management than they were, or are the KPIs the same but the goalposts have moved?

Jason Haith: [00:33:42] I think the KPIs have probably changed and I think the KPIs have probably changed as a result of changes in sales that importers have seen. And I think that’s one of the big difficulties. In 2020, up through June, nothing had really been ordered because no one was really buying anything. And then, the importers started to see sales increase, realized they hadn’t really placed purchase orders for five or six months, and really started driving inventory because sales really dictated that as a necessity. I think that is likely one of the biggest challenges importers have faced is this violent swing in demand from very light to nonexistent to all of the sudden, more people want to buy my product than I have product. There is, I think, absolutely a backside to this mountain that we’re climbing, the difficulties we face, the challenges. There’s definitely a backside to this.

Jason Haith: [00:34:54] I wish I knew when exactly that was going to be. But the violent swing up in consumer demand and purchasing may result in a similar swing downward trend where people or the general consumer recoils from purchasing those items, maybe because of inflation, whatever the reason may be. And so, I think the topic of conversation, what should I do with inventory, is really pertinent for importers. I think the best direct advice I could provide, I do think importers should add to inventory soon. I do not think importers should assume sales numbers currently or in the previous quarter are the same numbers that will carry over into maybe third, fourth quarter, first quarter of 2023, kind of time frame. I think demand will wane.

Mike Blake: [00:35:52] So, we’re seeing a couple of cases. I don’t know if they’re outliers or not, but one thing we’re seeing is that semiconductor manufacturers or semiconductor vendors, probably the best way to put it, are now starting to break ground on facilities back here in the United States. Do you think there’s going to be – will there be more repatriation of production, or do you think that that’s going to be a very unique scenario? And, we’re just so interwoven with Asia that it’s just not realistic to break ourselves out unless something cataclysmic happens.

Jason Haith: [00:36:29] Yeah. So, funny you mention it. I was just earlier today speaking with a client about this exact topic. I think a few things are going to happen. I think companies, semiconductors, and auto parts potentially will reshore product just exactly like they’re doing because the disruption of supply of that item is so significant to the company that increased cost to produce it here makes sense. It’s a viable option, even though it may be a little more expensive.

Jason Haith: [00:37:04] For companies that aren’t necessarily able to reshore production because of a cost scenario, I think what a lot of them start doing is looking to other sources for similar product. Maybe, that means 60% production in Guangdong, in South China, 40% in a place like Brazil or Germany or France, or something like that. For particular commodities that are able to do it, garments, textiles, things like that, there’s an awful lot of production that goes on in places like India, Pakistan, Central America. There is a sort of pseudo trend, I suppose, called nearshoring, which isn’t necessarily coming back to the United States, but that of a country that is a lot closer, say, than Asia will be.

Jason Haith: [00:37:53] But I definitely think this problem forces importers to genuinely consider where that product is being sourced from. The process was so smooth and so easy that huge swaths of the import community had no problem whatsoever, sinking 100% of their production or near that into the Asian market because things were working so well. And this disruption, I think, has proved that changes can come swiftly and can be painful. And having options available in time of need is now a necessity.

Mike Blake: [00:38:37] So, it makes me wonder, and again I speak more of this as a citizen rather than a business person, but maybe we found the trap that we were paying too little for what we were getting because in effect, what we’re talking about is, whether you’re diversifying supply or repatriating production and those are going to lead to higher costs to some extent, mostly. But that higher cost is basically an insurance policy. Right? An insurance. Insurance is a cost of doing business.

Jason Haith: [00:39:10] I think you are exactly right. Companies in the US, you know, if you go back to the ’40s, ’50s, ’60s, maybe even ’70s, production was substantial in the United States of everything, televisions, refrigerators, all that kind of stuff. That production got outsourced specifically because it was less expensive. They didn’t have to pay people as much and the supply chain infrastructure allowed for it.

Jason Haith: [00:39:39] And I think now what the market is seeing is a period of exceptional delay. There have been disruptions in the industry before and sometimes it took a month and sometimes it was three months, sometimes it was four or five months, but things always went back to the way that they were. And I think that maybe detrimentally reinforced companies’ decisions to leave production in Asia because the problem always blew over and this issue that we’re seeing now hasn’t. It hasn’t gone away in three months or six months. It may not go away for 18 to 24 months. It could be 2023, from 2020. It could be 2023 before we see this settle at whatever it’s going to evolve into. And that landscape warrants a different approach to how companies conduct business as opposed to the landscape or environment that they saw in, say, 2015 or 16, when all of these issues were really sort of resolved.

Jason Haith: [00:40:45] You’re right. I think the US, general US consumer has benefited substantially from the lower cost of that item, and maybe not just the lower cost of the item, but the lower cost, the lower associated cost of production of that item. There are a lot of places in China that have been turned into just terrible places to be, with river pollution and air pollution and those types of things. It didn’t happen here because it was produced somewhere else.

Jason Haith: [00:41:17] I think you’re right. I think people are going to have to adjust to a higher cost product if they want to be able, in your example, to walk into a Home Depot and purchase whatever the item is whenever they happen to be at that particular place.

Mike Blake: [00:41:35] So, I want to ask sort of a broader question here. So, as we rerecord this on March 23rd, 2022, the Russia-Ukrainian War is entering its fourth week and the result of that has been in effect. The West has basically said we’re no longer interested in doing business on almost any level with Russia. And I think that a knock-on effect with that is that I think China will do business with Russia, maybe not to the extent that Russia wants to, but I don’t see them joining the sanctions, which tells me that there’s going to be competing – there’s going to be competing interests for Chinese production capacity and probably capacity throughout Asia, again for the countries that are not participating in the Russian sanctions. Is that something now – is this yet another headache that American or European importers now may have to consider? Is it that – because we’re likely seeing a massive realignment of trade flows at a fundamental level that China may not quite be as available to us just by sheer demand for capacity than it has been in the past?

Jason Haith: [00:42:58] Yeah. You know, there are, I think, a lot of issues that are stemming from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. One of them is the average consumer certainly sees that when they go to a gas station to put fuel in their car. Trucking companies absolutely see it when they go to fill trucks up with fuel. So, you know, the cost of goods delivered by truck increases. That’s where the average US consumer, I think, sees those problems.

Jason Haith: [00:43:27] I do think this is, as you explained, a realignment potentially of trade. You know, China recently opened a railroad that flows from central China into Europe in the hopes of sort of relying less maybe on ocean transportation but a portion of that rail runs through Russia. And since they’re sanctioned now, they’re not able to bring that product through into Europe because part of the railroad goes through Russia.

Jason Haith: [00:43:58] I do think that China may look to align themselves a little more closely with Russia. Russia may look to buy more products. They may look to settle more transactions internationally, financially, not just for product. But they may look to settle more financial transactions in the yuan as opposed to maybe the dollar, which could really change the dynamic of trade in exactly the way that you had described. Chinese suppliers may be at capacity in providing products into Russia as opposed to providing that product into the United States.

Jason Haith: [00:44:39] Now, I think it has to be said that the Russian economy as compared if you’re China and you’re looking at Russia as a potential customer and the United States as a potential customer, the US wins on pretty much all fronts. They order more products. They’re more consistent. The transactions are easier. People get paid on time, all of those types of things.

Jason Haith: [00:45:04] So, there may be instances where Russia looks to maybe soak up some of that Chinese production, but I’m not sure suppliers opt to offer preference to a supplier in Russia because in most cases, those OEM buyers in the United States will be buying much larger portions of product.

Mike Blake: [00:45:30] Now, this assumes, I think that the suppliers have full freedom of choice.

Jason Haith: [00:45:36] Correct. That’s absolutely true.

Mike Blake: [00:45:39] I’m not sure they will.

Jason Haith: [00:45:39] That’s absolutely true. You know, China’s really exercised pretty stringent control over a lot of functions of business in the economy over there. A lot of their tech companies have been delisted on the US side or are in jeopardy of being delisted from stock exchanges. China’s had no problem in allowing Alibaba and Tencent and guys like that to effectively lose tens of billions of dollars in value to regain some sort of authority over how that business operates and what they do.

Jason Haith: [00:46:20] There certainly could be cases where the Chinese government may be redirects particular product or I think potentially more likely China looks to purchase product from Russia that they weren’t able, that they may not have been able to purchase on their own. So, Russia and Ukraine produce a lot of fertilizer, fertilizer components. I’ve seen some articles around that these additives are really important to US farmers in terms of crop growth.

Jason Haith: [00:46:53] If Russia and Ukraine are potentially unable to sell that product to the United States, China, I don’t think right now, wants to be seen donating money or equipment to Russia because of the sanctions. But I don’t know that it would be all that unrealistic for them to purchase products from Russia that they’re either already purchasing, but just now in larger quantities or new products that they’re trying to pull production out of as a way to sort of funnel money into the government there.

Jason Haith: [00:47:26] It’s a really, really difficult and I think extremely tenuous situation. This is definitely I don’t think the type of situation the US government wanted to find themselves in, not just with Ukraine and Russia, but the relationship specifically with China and Taiwan because it’s a very similar type of situation, I think.

Mike Blake: [00:47:50] Yeah. Well, I think China is watching this very carefully. And my own view, I think China has no interest in getting directly involved in the Russia-Ukraine thing. But they’re not our friends. They’re not our friends either. So, I think they’ll probably offer just enough support to maintain the Russian relationship but no more than that. They might supply food. They’re going to want to buy Russian oil and oil for food kind of thing, but I don’t think it will go much beyond that.

Jason Haith: [00:48:23] Yeah. It’s a tough – it’s, I mean, definitely not what any market needed right now, financial, transportation, or otherwise. It’s just one more additive to this variable concoction that people now have to try and figure out how to account for. And I think at this point, there are so many variables that people are really having a hard time coming up with a solution to the equation.

Mike Blake: [00:48:51] I’m talking with Jason Haith. And the topic is, should I increase my imported inventory holdings? Running up against the clock here, but one or two more questions I want to ask before we let you go. One is, it sounds like a tongue-in-cheek question, but it really isn’t. And that is, if we’re advocating – we’re advocating in some cases that companies may want to carry more inventory than they’re used to carrying but there are shortages. That seems paradoxical. Right? How do you build up inventory in a shortage economy?

Jason Haith: [00:49:32] I think an awful lot of people are trying to answer that question. The way that – I mean, effectively, the only way to do it is to order the product and try and wait for it to get there and hope that more product arrives than what you sell, so you’re able to increase that inventory. Now, if that’s what you’re looking to do, the only realistic way, I think, to get ahead is to just spend the money and airfreight everything over. I think in a lot of instances that’s just prohibitively expensive but I think certainly placing orders to start with. But I also think diversifying how that product is coming over, it will be a real benefit.

Jason Haith: [00:50:17] I think changing the way POs are placed. You know, maybe an importer only sends a 40-foot container instead of a 40-foot high cube. The remaining 10 cubic meters of that product are sent through a different port, and maybe you pull 15 or 20 cartons to airfreight that product over. So, you sort of have three modes of transportation, three different gateways for products to come into the United States in order to try and get ahead of the issue. I think watching sales is going to be really pertinent to try and match on the inventory that may be on the water with what types of numbers are coming down the pipeline. So, you’re in a position where you’re not over-ordering.

Jason Haith: [00:51:09] But I really think diversifying how your product, even if you don’t want to separate individual containers out, I don’t think it’s a good idea to send everything you got to one place. If you’re an importer in Chicago, I would be considering potential Mexico gateways – OEC Group has a program to bring containers into Manzanilla, Mexico – and then transport those containers in bond into Laredo, Texas. Customs clearance works exactly the same. Products get spotted in a warehouse in Laredo and then it can be pushed out to wherever it may need to go.

Jason Haith: [00:51:45] I think Houston would be an option. I would be looking at Norfolk and I’d be looking at New York. And if I had four different containers, I would send one through Mexico, one to Houston, one through Norfolk, and one in New York. Because the problem is product isn’t transiting in a timeframe that can be accurately predicted. And, if all of your product is going into one place and there’s a problem at that one place, you’re dead in the water. Everything you have is sitting on a vessel outside of Savannah or whatever. And, at least, if you’re considering additional gateways and potentially methods of transportation, airfreight or LCL, something like that, you’re lessening the risk that your business gets slammed with a huge backorder issue because all your product is stuck in a single area.

Mike Blake: [00:52:42] Jason, it’s a great topic. We covered a lot of ground, but there’s still other questions we could cover and there are likely questions that our listeners would have liked us to spend more time and a lot more depth. If they want to reach out to you for more information about this topic, can they reach out to you? And if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Jason Haith: [00:53:00] Yeah. They can send me a message, jh.sdf@oecgroup.com. I’d be happy to explain market conditions and offer some advice about how to move forward and some different options to get product over and really sort of strategize in learning what they’re trying to accomplish and trying to tailor something that most closely meets that need.

Mike Blake: [00:53:26] That’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. I’d like to thank Jason Haith so much for sharing his expertise with us.

Jason Haith: [00:53:32] We’ll be exploring a new topic each week, so please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:53:49] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn is myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my LinkedIn group called Unblakeable Group’s That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Brady Ware & Company, consumer goods, Decision Vision podcast, international shipping, Jason Haith, Mike Blake, OEC Group, shipping, Supply Chain

Decision Vision Episode 162: Should I Replace My Salespeople with Customer Service Representatives? – An Interview with Kristin Zhivago, Zhivago Partners

March 31, 2022 by John Ray

Zhivago Partners
Decision Vision
Decision Vision Episode 162: Should I Replace My Salespeople with Customer Service Representatives? - An Interview with Kristin Zhivago, Zhivago Partners
Loading
00:00 /
RSS Feed
Share
Link
Embed

Download file

Zhivago Partners

Decision Vision Episode 162: Should I Replace My Salespeople with Customer Service Representatives? – An Interview with Kristin Zhivago, Zhivago Partners

In an age where customers can do extensive research on their own before they buy, does a business still need a traditional sales force? Kristin Zhivago, President of Zhivago Partners, and host Mike Blake explored the shifting nature of sales from a traditional salesperson to a role of customer service. They discussed the evolving needs of the customer or client, how companies meet those needs while still being able to track results, the implications for compensation and corporate culture, and much more.  Decision Vision is presented by Brady Ware & Company and produced by the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Zhivago Partners

Kristin Zhivago is the president of Zhivago Partners, a digital marketing management company that serves both B2B and B2C clients in a variety of industries. Her digital agency is comprised of a core infrastructure team and a variety of specialists in various digital methods and media.

If any of your performance “arrows” aren’t going up, we work on them until they do. That’s what Zhivago Partners think of as the whole point of marketing and sales efforts.

Today’s successful marketing demands best-practice approaches and constant attention to the success of those approaches. We all move quickly when something isn’t working as it should, improving and experimenting until the arrows start moving in the right direction.

So many clients come to Zhivago Partners after “spending so much and not getting anything for it.” You won’t have that problem with them, because they keep working on the issue—whatever it is—until your arrows start moving in the right direction.

Company website | LinkedIn | Twitter | Facebook

Kristin Zhivago, President, Zhivago Partners

Kristin Zhivago, President, Zhivago Partners

Kristin Zhivago’s career began in the high-tech industry; she and her husband, through their high-tech agency, helped introduce and market all of the technologies we take for granted today. When the web emerged as a commercial medium, she branched out into other industries and re-invented herself to become a revenue coach, helping CEOs and entrepreneurs sell the way the customers want to buy. Her 5-star book, Roadmap to Revenue: How to Sell the Way Your Customers Want to Buy was chosen by Forbes as one of the top sales and marketing books. Zhivago speaks frequently on the subject of the customer’s buying process, which she was one of the first to identify as being key to selling to today’s customers, and about building your business to compete effectively in our fast-changing, hyper-competitive markets.

LinkedIn

Mike Blake, Brady Ware & Company

Mike Blake, Host of the “Decision Vision” podcast series

Michael Blake is the host of the Decision Vision podcast series and a Director of Brady Ware & Company. Mike specializes in the valuation of intellectual property-driven firms, such as software firms, aerospace firms, and professional services firms, most frequently in the capacity as a transaction advisor, helping clients obtain great outcomes from complex transaction opportunities. He is also a specialist in the appraisal of intellectual properties as stand-alone assets, such as software, trade secrets, and patents.

Mike has been a full-time business appraiser for 13 years with public accounting firms, boutique business appraisal firms, and an owner of his own firm. Prior to that, he spent 8 years in venture capital and investment banking, including transactions in the U.S., Israel, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.

LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

Brady Ware & Company

Brady Ware & Company is a regional full-service accounting and advisory firm which helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality. Brady Ware services clients nationally from its offices in Alpharetta, GA; Columbus and Dayton, OH; and Richmond, IN. The firm is growth-minded, committed to the regions in which they operate, and most importantly, they make significant investments in their people and service offerings to meet the changing financial needs of those they are privileged to serve. The firm is dedicated to providing results that make a difference for its clients.

Decision Vision Podcast Series

Decision Vision is a podcast covering topics and issues facing small business owners and connecting them with solutions from leading experts. This series is presented by Brady Ware & Company. If you are a decision-maker for a small business, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us at decisionvision@bradyware.com and make sure to listen to every Thursday to the Decision Vision podcast.

Past episodes of Decision Vision can be found at decisionvisionpodcast.com. Decision Vision is produced by John Ray and the North Fulton studio of Business RadioX®.

Connect with Brady Ware & Company:

Website | LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

TRANSCRIPT

Intro: [00:00:02] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast series focusing on critical business decisions. Brought to you by Brady Ware & Company. Brady Ware is a regional, full-service accounting and advisory firm that helps businesses and entrepreneurs make visions a reality.

Mike Blake: [00:00:21] Welcome to Decision Vision, a podcast giving you, the listener, clear vision to make great decisions. In each episode, we discuss the process of decision-making on a different topic from the business owners’ or executives’ perspective. We aren’t necessarily telling you what to do, but we can put you in a position to make an informed decision on your own and understand when you might need help along the way.

Mike Blake: [00:00:44] My name is Mike Blake, and I’m your host for today’s program. I’m a director at Brady Ware & Company, a full-service accounting firm based in Dayton, Ohio, with offices in Dayton; Columbus, Ohio; Richmond, Indiana; and Alpharetta, Georgia. My practice specializes in providing fact-based, strategic, and risk management advice to clients that are buying, selling, or growing the value of companies and their intellectual property. Brady Ware is sponsoring this podcast, which is being recorded in Atlanta for social distancing protocols.

Mike Blake: [00:01:12] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, clubhouse, and Instagram. I also recently launched a new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. So please join that as well if you would like to engage. If you like this podcast, please subscribe on your favorite podcast aggregator, and please consider leaving a review of the podcast as well.

Mike Blake: [00:01:39] Today’s topic is, should I replace my salespeople with customer service or customer care representatives? According to the State of the Connected Customer Report, 2nd Edition, produced by salesforce.com, 84% of customers say that the key to winning their business is being treated like a person and not a number.

Mike Blake: [00:01:57] And, you know, like so many things in the last two years, I think we’ve changed our relationship with sales. It’s been very difficult, I think, for a conventional sales approach to survive in a coronavirus, trans coronavirus pandemic. Hopefully, we’re getting to the other side of this thing, but who the heck knows? And for a long time, some of the traditional sales approaches and techniques simply are not available to us.

Mike Blake: [00:02:38] You couldn’t take someone out to a ball game because they weren’t playing. You couldn’t meet people in bars and restaurants. Conferences were effectively shut down for a year. Flying out to see people was difficult at best, and the list goes on and on. And meanwhile, we’ve undergone a massive digital transformation, and traditional sales methods are being replaced. At a minimum, they’re being supplemented, but they’re largely being replaced by digital relationships, real conversations, freely providing information with no expectation of something in return, an approach to business that is about alignment with core beliefs of customers, employees, and even shareholders. You know, it’s all changing and has all changed and some of it will change back. But I don’t think that all of it will. I don’t think anybody thinks that all of it will. And sales have changed. And if we want to continue to being as successful as we have been in the past, this is simply one more of the areas in which we need to change.

Mike Blake: [00:03:59] I was having a conversation with our guest about a week and a half ago. And she brought to me this idea and this concept that she’s been advising her clients on in terms of changing a posture of sales from the traditional sales representative to a customer, a customer care representative, if you will. And I thought that was really interesting.

Mike Blake: [00:04:28] And as we continued that conversation, it got my wheels turning and thinking, you know, there’s a lot here. And I think a lot of companies may be starting to do this or they’re at least sniffing around the concept if they haven’t pulled the trigger. And that tells me it’s an opportune time to address this topic on the podcast.

Mike Blake: [00:04:48] So, joining us today is Kristin Zhivago. Kristin is the president of Zhivago Partners, a digital marketing management company that serves both business-to-business and business-to-customer clients, consumer clients in a variety of industries. Her digital agency is comprised of a core infrastructure team and a variety of specialists in the various digital methods and media.

Mike Blake: [00:05:11] Kristin’s career began in the high-tech industry. She and her husband, through their high-tech agency, helped introduce and market all the technologies we take for granted today. When the web emerged as a commercial medium, she branched out into other industries and reinvented herself to become a revenue coach, helping CEOs and entrepreneurs sell the way her customers want to buy. Her five-star book, Roadmap to Revenue: How to Sell the Way Your Customers Want to Buy, was chosen by Forbes as one of the top sales and marketing books. Kristin Zhivago, welcome to the program.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:05:43] Thank you so much. Good to be here.

Mike Blake: [00:05:46] So, I want to start off with a very basic question that may not be so basic, but it sounds basic, but the answer may not be. In your mind, what is the difference between a sales representative and a customer service or customer care representative?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:06:03] There’s a big answer, several big answers to that question. I’ll try to keep it succinct. One is the way salespeople are compensated. So, they are compensated to close sales, get to the end, make the money come in. So, there’s commission, there’s quota, there’s usual push, push, push kinds of things. The other is the type of person who enjoys working in that environment and thrives in that environment, as we used to call them hunters. And then, there are other types of people who are farmers or nurturers, and those people tended to stay out of sales because they didn’t want to work on a quota and they didn’t want to do that push, push, push stuff.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:06:49] Now, the real problem is that, and I used to call myself a recovering salesperson, but I think I’m so far beyond it now. I don’t need to worry about that anymore. But there’s a tendency among salespeople to want to be the ones in the conversation who know the most about that particular thing. It’s a point of pride where they know the product and they know the answers and so on, and they’re educating the customer.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:07:18] The problem is customers are no longer dependent on salespeople anymore for their information. And even ten years ago, when I was giving speeches in Holland to sales groups about customers, even then I was saying that the customers are getting 60 to 80% of their questions answered on the web before they ever talk to a salesperson. And they had access. And they definitely do now, even more than before, to other customers who had bought that product or service. And so, they not only knew the good, wonderful stuff that the salespeople would say but the stuff that the salesperson wouldn’t say. They find out that sort of the ugly underlying truth, if there is one.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:08:06] So, that’s changed. And the customer, by the time they get to a salesperson, they have one or two very specific questions. And, the salesperson has to be able to answer those questions. And, another problem with salespeople is that they’re often trained more for the general top-of-the-funnel types of questions. And they always have to say, oh, I have to get my technical expert in on that one or something or a subject matter expert for the bottom of the funnel.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:08:38] So, there’s a lot of disconnects going on right now in all industries. And if you ask a normal person, you know, do you like being sold to? The answer is no. So, we’ve just got a real problem with people hiring people to do things that other people that they’re selling to don’t want.

Mike Blake: [00:09:00] Yeah. And, you know, I think we even have less of a tolerance for it now, for whatever reason, whether it’s lack of patience or we just find our time to be more valuable or – it’s just a rewiring of how we as human beings approach things. I think we’re even less tolerant of being sold to now than we were, say, 2 to 3 years ago. Do you agree with that?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:09:24] Oh, yeah. I definitely agree with that. And especially because, you know, Google still owns about 95% of the search market and they’ve continued to get better and better at giving you what you want when you go to look. You might have to revise your search term a little bit, but there’s a new quality among customers now, characteristic, which, and I just wrote a blog article about this recently where they assume if they just keep trying, they’re going to find exactly what they want. So, they’re just – they have no patience.

Mike Blake: [00:10:05] Now, I’m curious. I was kind of thinking about this conversation. Can customer service representatives be confused or conflated with an inside sales position? Some inside sales being defined as somebody with whom you already have a relationship as opposed to a brand new relationship that you’re trying to convert. Is there a comparison or contrast that can be made there?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:10:34] Well, it’s an interesting question. I have a client who is the shining star example of this whole approach because I’ve been talking for years to people about making this shift because I saw it coming because I interview customers for my clients all the time. And I just – there’s no question that we’ve made this shift. But this particular client is a very good manager and he’s also an operations guy. He’s a logistics person. So, he tends to think in terms of logistics and he could see that that wholesales thing wasn’t working. He made the shift and brought his customer service people into this role of making it easy for customers to buy, which is another aspect of this. By the time they come to you, they have the money in their hand, burning a hole in their pocket, their virtual pocket, and they are ready to buy.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:11:31] So, you really have to just get out of the way, give them exactly what they need, and let them make the purchase. They’re on a quest to spend the money. So, you’re really helping them buy. You’re not selling them. You’re not trying to convince them of anything. You’re just giving them the facts. You understand – you know the product really well. And you understand how to give them what they want, maybe by doing things a little differently. If they need something right away and you’re stuck with the supply chain issue, maybe you help them rent something for a month before they get the product. This particular client makes data center equipment and they found that to work.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:12:16] These same people also go back to existing customers, people they’ve had, bought the product maybe two years ago or a year ago or whatever. And they have, as part of their job, to discuss those issues with those folks and check back with them and say, how are you doing? You bought this, how is it going? And people actually appreciate that and they’ve gotten a lot of sales out of that as well.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:12:42] I do have to say that since he did this, their sales have done that wonderful hockey stick thing that we love to see, that – I live for the hockey stick, where it just was going along, going along. And then, it zooms up. And this is a company that’s been around for a long time. And even with COVID, even with supply chain issues, they’re just – they’re going gangbusters. They can’t make them fast enough.

Mike Blake: [00:13:08] You know, that brings an interesting question, at least to me in mind, is that I think what you’re saying is that the role of the salesperson as gatekeeper to information has been made obsolete.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:13:24] Oh, absolutely.

Mike Blake: [00:13:25] By that.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:13:27] Yep.

Mike Blake: [00:13:27] Now, also, I might argue that a little knowledge can go a long way to be dangerous as well.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:13:36] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:13:37] A customer having done their research, but, and they may be informed, but they’re not experienced and may have in mind something, one thing, but there’s something completely different or just different, perhaps even more expensive, but is a much better fit with their actual need. And, is that something that the customer service representative is equipped to address?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:14:09] They should be. And, the trick here is they need to be humble enough and honest enough to say, “I don’t know. I’ll help you find out,” or, “let me check with my boss. Let’s get him on the phone,” or whatever they need to do to keep the conversation going, but to help the customer make the decision. And, a good customer service person if something else is better for the client will say that. And, again, because they’re not on a quota, they don’t have a commission, they’re not going to be personally penalized. Sometimes you can put them on a company-wide, if our revenue goes up a certain percentage, you get a bonus. That kind of thing is good because it’s for everybody. Everybody shares and if they help each other, they all benefit. So, I think that’s a better way to handle that kind of incentive.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:15:01] But in the individual conversation, they should be able and willing to just say, “You know what? I need to find out more.” Or, “You know what? I think this other solution might be better for you.” And what’s interesting about that is that the trust factor goes up like 1000% because now the person knows that they’re willing to help you to help them make a decision without being all biased and pushing them into something they don’t want. And they will remember that later when they’re in a position where they might want that, or if they want to recommend someone to someone else. If somebody says, do you know anybody good? And they’ll say, well, you know, I didn’t actually buy from these people, but they were so helpful and this might be what you want but they’ll tell you the truth. So if you go to them, you’ll get the straight scoop.

Mike Blake: [00:15:55] And I wonder in that context too, there’s just something about the dynamic where if the representative of the company, whatever form that takes, is willing to kind of let you go, if you will, that if they’re not the right – they’re not the right solution, you don’t have the right solution for them. But you’re not trying to hammer that square peg into a round hole. And I can tell you that some of my best and most loyal clients, for me anyway, are people that I initially said, you know what, we’re not the right people to help you.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:16:30] Yes. Happens all the time. Much more than anybody likes to admit, but that is correct. I’ve even had clients where when I first started talking to them, I kept thinking, I don’t know, I don’t know if we’re right for you. And I was saying it and they kind of had to talk me into it because we started realizing maybe I could help them. But you have to be agendaless.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:16:55] The problem with the classic salesperson is they have an agenda and that’s to close the sale. And that agenda is not the same as the customer’s. The customer wants to make the correct decision. Those are two very different agendas. So, if all you’re doing is trying to help them make the right decision and think it through, they’re actually going to be appreciative of the time you spend with them and the knowledge that you do bring to that process.

Mike Blake: [00:17:23] So, I think when most of us think of a customer service representative, myself included, I think of somebody that I’m calling when there’s an issue to be addressed or a problem that has to be solved or a failure that needs to be fixed. And, in making this switch, what we’re doing is that we’re expanding the role of existing customer service representatives to then add this responsibility to take care of potential new buyers, if you will, or new purchases. Or is there a redefining kind of both roles that creates more alignment with the descriptive vocabulary?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:18:11] I think it’s more of a realignment. I was just talking to one of the wonderful people. She’s very helpful. She’s done a fantastic job in this role. And she said something interesting. She said, you know, if her manager, the guy I’ve been talking about, had set it up just like the normal sales thing, she wasn’t interested at all. You know, she wasn’t interested in the extra money. She wasn’t interested in the whole push, push, push. But she loves helping people make these decisions.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:18:43] Now, you do still have to have customer service people and they have, in this particular company, it’s a mid-size company, they have two people handling these types of conversations and then other, a couple of other people who handle the normal customer service kinds of stuff. Because that’s more of after you buy, now you’ve got an issue you need to deal with. It’s a very different thing.

Mike Blake: [00:19:11] Yep. So, you know, making this transition – let’s talk about the mechanics of making the transition because if somebody is interested in this topic, they’re probably wondering, okay, how do I go about this? And the first question is, can an existing sales force be retrained, reconfigured, reoriented realistically to adopt a customer service posture? Or, is it more likely that you’re going to have to make some wholesale changes?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:19:50] The latter. I mean, I always laugh. I mean, I would love to say you could teach. And we tried, actually, you know, because this wonderful manager had already bought into the whole concept. And so, they had me do some coaching of their current salespeople. It didn’t work, and I’m a pretty good sales coach, but it was just – it was so contrary to what got them up in the morning. They liked being the guy who knew it all. They liked being the guy who was reaching out, talking to people. And as it turns out, they actually left the company for other reasons, but which turned out to be a good thing. So, we were able to work that out. Excuse me.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:20:34] But, when we looked back at their activity, most of what they were doing was talking to existing big customers and doing that hi, how you doing, Bob? How’s the wife and kids? And going out for golf back in the day when people did that. And they weren’t really selling anyway. They were just riding on the coattails of some large deals. So that was – but that was a separate thing, I mean, that particular group of folks.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:21:08] But they really don’t have the same kind of mindset. Now, you’re going to think, well, what are salespeople going to do if the role of the salesperson is gone? And the answer is, I don’t know. I have a lot of friends who are salespeople. I love salespeople. They are great, you know. But in a way, this is like cats and dogs. Salespeople are dogs. They jump up and greet you and they’re all happy and outgoing. And the customer service people, I don’t know, if they’re exactly cats because cats kind of turn you into a slave instead of the other way around.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:21:41] But it’s a different – it’s a nurturing thing. It’s a comforting thing. It’s a caring thing. It’s a helpful thing. It’s the only thing that matters is that you end up happy when you hang up the phone. And that’s all they care about. It’s a different kind of thing. So, at the moment, I haven’t seen that work. So, yes, you probably have to hire, at least hire somebody to start working on this even if it’s part-time from their home, which is good because you can do a virtual thing and try it out.

Mike Blake: [00:22:13] I wonder if a future role for traditional salespeople – first of all, I wonder if there are industries where that’s still going to work, for example, something that’s heavily commodity-driven, where it’s really not about information at that point because everything’s homogeneous. But also I wonder if there’s still a role for that kind of salesperson making outbound calls because it seems to me, and correct me if I’m wrong, the customer service role that you’re describing seems awkward to me in an outbound role.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:22:54] Yeah. I agree.

Mike Blake: [00:22:55] And that, it’s like calling up random people and saying, “Hey, do you need help?”

Kristin Zhivago: [00:23:00] Yeah. I’m glad you brought that up.

Mike Blake: [00:23:00] And, maybe well-intentioned but [inaudible].

Kristin Zhivago: [00:23:01] Yeah. I’m really glad you brought that up because there’s another aspect of this, another part of this, which is one of the reasons that this is working so well for this particular client, is that we happen – our company, our agency lives to bring in leads, good leads for people. And, we just keep figuring out what digital channels or what other things we need to do to make that happen. And so, they have a good flow of incoming leads. They don’t need anybody to make outgoing cold calls. So, that’s number one.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:23:36] Number two, the whole idea of cold calling doesn’t really work anymore. There’s a lot of companies that claim they can do it. I’m honestly, I keep trying to see if I can make it work somehow, and I’m just not convinced. When somebody is ready to buy, nothing will stop them from going out to Google or their friends or whatever and finding the people they should talk to and then reaching out. They’re just – they know you’re accessible. The websites are all there for them. They can go and go and find you in a nanosecond.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:24:12] So, the whole idea of calling someone who might have a need maybe because of their title or their role or whatever or the company that they’re in, it’s just – the only you can do with those folks is to nurture them over time with really good information that you keep sending to them and do kind of a cold email outreach, maybe combine it with LinkedIn or something. But until they’re ready, they’re not interested. And they’re just – it’s just going to be a very discouraging exercise for someone.

Mike Blake: [00:24:46] Yeah. And to that point, I mean, I’m not even sure. In many cases, I’m not even sure how you effectively cold call, although companies still do it right. We all still receive phone calls for extended warranties and somebody wants to buy our house. So, it’s still going on. Although, again, it’s weird that this focused on those two things.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:25:08] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:25:09] Presumably, it works so they wouldn’t do it.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:25:11] Well, I think the extended warranty people are playing a game of numbers. They make millions of automated calls and –

Mike Blake: [00:25:19] Yeah. That’s right.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:25:20] And then, they get enough to pay for it so they keep it up.

Mike Blake: [00:25:24] And, you know, I think that I think that’s exactly right. And that because the calls themselves are automated, the economics can kind of work. But the notion of sort of dialing for dollars, how do you get through to anybody anymore?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:25:41] Well, that’s the other thing. Everyone has caller ID.

Mike Blake: [00:25:44] Yep.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:25:44] And whether it’s on their office system or their phone, mostly their phone. And they just aren’t going to answer the phone and even says, you know, possible spam.

Mike Blake: [00:25:54] Yep.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:25:55] Or I live in Rhode Island and there’s a little island off the coast of where I live, and it’s called Block Island. And I know for sure that there is no corporation on Block Island that’s going to be calling me about anything. So, when it says it’s Block Island, I just laugh. I just – you know, so the screening aspect is, oh, golly, 100 times more effective than it used to be. And so, you just don’t get through. And if they don’t want to answer you, they just don’t – they’re not interested. People don’t return every call anymore. They’re just not going to do it.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:26:31] So, yeah, I think it is broken. You said it was totally obsolete and it really is. And to me, it’s a real shame. And this is one of the biggest problems with sales and marketing, in general, is that people will go on for decades doing the wrong thing, hoping it’s going to work because somebody sold them on the idea. And it’s very different from manufacturing or finance or any of the other areas of business where you can tell pretty soon that something’s not working, especially manufacturing, and you stop doing it. But they’re not doing that with sales and marketing. They keep beating their heads against the same wall and hoping it’s going to work. It’s very sad.

Mike Blake: [00:27:13] Yeah. And, it’s interesting because I think it speaks to how hard sales and marketing is.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:27:24] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:27:24] That I think to some extent, you’re almost – it’s a placebo effect, right? You’re almost happy just hiring somebody that even says that they’re capable of doing it and that they want to do it.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:27:37] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:27:37] Even when –

Kristin Zhivago: [00:27:39] And six months later, you spent all the money. This is the situation our clients are in when they come to us is I’ve tried this and this and this and I spent all this money and the needle didn’t move. And, that’s sad. That’s really sad.

Mike Blake: [00:27:55] I’m really glad you brought that up because that segues in another question I wanted to ask, which is, it seems to me that a key difference between traditional sales and, I’m going to call this, this new approach, if you will, or the customer service approach to sales is that that traditional sales are very easy to measure, right? Number of calls, number of conversions, etc., etc. You just go down the line. Customer service seems, to me, harder to kind of define and measure and manage KPIs over time. But you tell me, is that true?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:28:32] No, it’s not true. This manager is very logistically driven, as I mentioned. And we have KPIs. We have advertising that we do. We do content marketing for them. In fact, we started advertising some of their most popular blog articles, which is bringing in wonderful leads for us. Something we just started. And, we can track. If you have a good CRM system and you’re tying the activities of the marketing campaign, the machinery of the marketing campaign, the infrastructure, to the client’s system, you can absolutely track the outgoing or the marketing effort all the way through to a closed sale. And in fact, each month we get on with the CEO of the company and we show them the actual ROI numbers. Here’s what has come from marketing and here’s your ROI. And, it’s a really big number and it’s a wonderful thing. So, yes, you can do that. There’s really no difference, I mean. And in fact, salespeople were never that good at entering data into CRM systems anyway.

Mike Blake: [00:29:46] That’s true.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:29:46] Yeah. Yeah. So, you can’t depend on them for that anyway. You really couldn’t, ever. So, now it’s a matter of automating that process going through and having little trigger points that say, okay, this was speed it came in. The only tricky thing is when they came into an ad and then they came back three months later looking at a blog article, and then maybe they had some kind of we had an email go out to them or something, and then they buy. So, which one of those things do you then attribute that to? And, we tend to there’s this is not a perfect science that you get as close as you can get. And in that case, we would attribute it to the first touch, the ad.

Mike Blake: [00:30:33] So, I wonder, do you ever encounter that maybe there’s a little bit of a stigma here that needs to be addressed and that being that there’s a distinction in sales between the originator and the order taker? And, much of what you’re describing candidly doesn’t exactly fit. But I think you can see where I’m going. And if you look through the lens of a traditional sales role, it sounds an awful lot like an order taker. And, an order taker is sort of a dirty word because the feeling is that anybody can answer the phone, take an order and not screw it up. I think I know how you’re going to respond to that, but I’d like you to react to that. Is that stigma going away and what’s sort of happening with that belief system?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:31:26] Well, first of all, they’re not order takers. They are people who are helping the customer with their buying process. And, one of the big things I’ve been pushing for years in my book and all my speeches is that our job is not to sell the customer. Our job is to make it easy for them to buy. They want to buy. We need to make it easy for them. So, how do we do that?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:31:50] Now, I need to segue into something else for a second. In the book, I talk about the four types of products and services in the world based on the amount of scrutiny that the customer applies to the purchase. So, you’ve got light scrutiny, medium scrutiny, heavy scrutiny, and intense scrutiny. The light scrutiny products are commodities, really cheap. See it, buy it. Don’t have many questions; you know, the candy bar at the checkout counter kind of thing.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:32:16] Medium scrutiny is things like clothing on the B2C side and maybe some simple software on the B2B side. You have a few questions. It costs a little bit more than hardly anything. And there might be a few other people involved maybe. Then, there’s heavy scrutiny where you have lots of questions and there’s many people involved and there’s a salesperson who has to get involved to help you figure out how to structure the deal and all that. You have a lot of questions. On the B2C side, obviously, those are houses and cars and those kinds of big purchases. And then, intense scrutiny is all of that but you get married. It’s a long-term process or it’s a big, big deal like a Boeing airplane or something that somebody’s having Boeing make.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:33:05] So, obviously, this type of thing that I’m talking about is more in the heavy to intense scrutiny products and services that cost thousands to millions of dollars. And there needs to be somebody to answer those specific questions. Is this going to fit in my physical or virtual environment? How big is it? And honestly, even on Amazon, people don’t answer that question properly.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:33:35] And, now I need to talk about one other concept, which is something came up with a few years ago, which is the mindset of the customer when they set out to buy is more important than all the other characteristics of a customer. And, the mindset consists of their desires, their concerns, and their questions. And if you address all of those in your website and every place else, if you know what they actually are because you’ve interviewed your customers, then you’re going to make sales.

Mike Blake: [00:34:10] So, in making this change and I know you’ve shepherded at least a couple of companies in making this transition, does the change have to go beyond simply swapping out traditional salespeople for customer service representatives? Or, has it changed just sort of localized to what previously had been called the sales department and sales function?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:34:35] Well, you definitely have to get the CEO on board. CEOs love sales because, to them, it’s a very logical thing. You send people out into the world and beat the bushes and knock on doors and you get money. That’s how they see it. And, as we’ve talked about extensively in this segment here, those days are done. And so, it’s kind of sad, but they don’t have that anymore.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:35:04] So, now, you have to convince them that there’s another way, a better way. And, telling a CEO that you’re going to replace the salespeople with customer service people who are going to make it easy for the customer to buy will scare him to death, especially if you don’t have the right number of leads coming in. Because if you don’t have anybody calling out, even if it wasn’t working very well, it still felt like activity, your marketing better be working, bringing in qualified clients with content marketing and social marketing and all the stuff that we do to bring to bring customers in. So, that’s the part that is difficult. He has to be – he or she has to be on board with it or you’re going to be fighting and fighting and fighting all the way.

Mike Blake: [00:35:50] And, you know, to me, it also seems there needs to be a mindset change, even a cultural change in some respects. You know, when you – I’m, as I’ve said many times on this program, I’m a big, big fan of Simon Sinek’s Start With Why.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:36:08] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:36:09] Just re-read the book.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:36:10] Yeah. Good old Simon.

Mike Blake: [00:36:12] You know, one of the things, one of the lessons he teaches in that book is how so much of sales is outright manipulation.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:36:21] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:36:22] Right? Especially when you change price, when you lower price, for example, to land a sale, that’s just outright manipulation, which is, to me, was a brilliant observation.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:36:32] It’s true.

Mike Blake: [00:36:34] When you rely on outbound sales in a traditional sense, whether you realize it or not, whether you like it or not, you’ve basically put your chips in the middle of the table saying that we rely on manipulation to sell, right, and if you’re honest about it.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:36:54] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:36:54] Whereas –

Kristin Zhivago: [00:36:55] And the people at the receiving end would definitely say that for sure.

Mike Blake: [00:36:59] Yeah. I mean, the people on the offering end probably would not say that and that would be a very painful revelation to many of them. But from where I sit, that’s what’s happening. That would be my analysis. I think Simon would say the same thing.

Mike Blake: [00:37:13] So, the deeper organizational change, the deeper kind of soul shift, if you will, if I can get a little bit metaphysical here, is you have to embrace the fact that you’re going to do a lot of things for people that you don’t know, who may very well never buy from you and buy from your competitors instead and get nothing for it. But that’s now table stakes.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:37:46] Yeah.

Mike Blake: [00:37:47] Because otherwise, there’s no reason for somebody to kind of come to you.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:37:52] Yeah. That is correct. You’ve said it very well.

Mike Blake: [00:37:55] And that’s easy to say. I don’t think that that’s very easy to do.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:38:02] Yeah. And, you know, the guy who headed up Zappos had a very unfortunate end. Sorry about that. Because I did read his book and I was very impressed with what he was doing there at Zappos. But he built a whole business selling shoes and those people were instructed to do whatever they could to help a customer. And there’s a famous story in there about a woman who was on with another one, a customer, a female customer. It took them 8 hours to find the right shoe for her. And, you know, usually, a CEO would be horrified that somebody would spend eight full hours for one pair of $200 shoes or whatever.

Mike Blake: [00:38:46] Right.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:38:47] But the absolute delight. You know, that was their whole thing. We’re out to delight people. And it worked. And he became a billionaire. You know, Amazon bought the company. It wasn’t a bad result. But you really have to be willing. This takes some bravery and courage.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:39:06] You have to trust the fact that your buyers really do want to buy from you and that you really do have a good product or service and you’ve trained your people to be able to help the customer when they set out to buy and have that good, meaningful, consultative conversation, which is why I don’t like the word order taker because that’s not it. They’re not just sitting there taking orders.

Mike Blake: [00:39:30] Yep.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:39:31] They’re talking about, oh, you need this buy. Okay, we’ll have to figure that out. We can’t do it by that date. What if we do this? And what’s the basic setup of your data center, for example, and what kind of floors do you have and how high are the racks up from the floor? And, you know, so you have a lot of very specific requirements that people have.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:39:57] And by the way, this whole scrutiny model has been interesting to me in a sense where you can spend four hours on Amazon trying to find the proper $10 item. I mean, it’s gotten kind of skewed because, again, people think they’re going to be able to find exactly what they need. And, their needs are very specific. And so, your customer service people have to be able to address those needs and solve – and given the power and the knowledge to solve problems for the customer. They’re problem solvers.

Mike Blake: [00:40:35] And because they’re problem solvers, I think that the process of implementing this goes as deep as to even how you recruit.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:40:46] Oh, absolutely.

Mike Blake: [00:40:47] And onboard and compensate such people.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:40:49] Yes, of course. Absolutely. As I mentioned, you stay away from commissions and quotas and you make them very aware of the sales and where it’s going overall for the company. And you also give them bonuses, maybe quarter by quarter or at the end of the year. Let’s say the whole company went up this much and you were a big part of that so you get this percentage of that.

Mike Blake: [00:41:18] So, let me throw out kind of a radical idea. I’d like you to react to it. And if you just think that I’m crazy, please feel free to say that. You will not be the first person on the show to [inaudible]. I promise you.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:41:30] That’s fine. I’m not afraid.

Mike Blake: [00:41:31] But what about – can you even go so far as to reward somebody that make sure that you don’t get a – that you don’t acquire a bad customer? Because in a traditional sales function, you bring in the sale, you get your commission, and then it’s no longer your problem, generally. Right?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:41:55] Right. Right.

Mike Blake: [00:41:56] But it could be somebody else’s big problem, big headache. And, I’ll go back to start with why and there was an anecdote about a woman who constantly sent letters to the CEO of Southwest Airlines about how she was unhappy with the service because she expected full service on a discount service airline. And, finally, they basically responded to this person, the CEO responded to this person saying, you know, “Dear Mrs. Smith,” whatever her name was, “we’re sure going to miss you.” Because they spent so much time trying to satisfy a customer that can never be satisfied.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:42:35] Right.

Mike Blake: [00:42:36] And I don’t know about you, but I mean, I’ve had customers, clients I deeply regretted taking on. I can remember every single one of them. They can be so damaging to an organization. And, I wonder if a role also of a customer service representative is to identify a customer that in the long run, and maybe even the short run, is going to wind up costing the company money and filtering them out.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:43:08] Yeah. It’s an interesting question. For service businesses – and I am one and have been for years. I have a jerk test because I refused to work with jerks. I don’t have any jerk employees and I don’t have any jerk clients. So, we’re living in this bubble, this jerk-free bubble, which is a wonderful thing. I mean, honestly, nobody’s hurting anybody. Everybody’s helping anybody. And, I define a jerk as a person who makes life harder on other people. The good people don’t do that. They try to make life easier on everybody else. So, you live in an environment if you’re jerk-free where everybody is trying to help everybody do a good job and be happy.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:43:51] As much as you can do that in a service company, in particular, it’s a really good idea, or if you have long-term relationships with people. And just like the CEO of Southwest, you have to be willing to walk away if they are making life hard on the other people in the company.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:44:10] One of my clients right now is a big company that does benefit programs for H.R. companies. They manage the benefit programs. And so, I’ve been interviewing H.R. people lately and I’ve been asking – one of my questions when I do these interviews is, what’s your biggest problem right now? And, of course, the biggest problem is finding qualified talent.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:44:31] And, what really keeps people in companies in my experience working with hundreds of companies and thousands of customers and thousands and thousands of workers inside companies, large and small, is that management and the customers make it easier for them to do their job. They come to work. Nobody’s stopping them from doing the right thing. They have permission and full support to do a good job.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:45:01] So, that’s really what we’re talking about here and it has to be a culture in the company. And if the CEO or somebody on top is a jerk and they’re just jerking people around all day and making life hard, it poisons the well, and the good people leave. They don’t need to take it. They’ll find a job somewhere else in the blink of an eye, especially these days.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:45:24] So, I think in a way, this whole thing is about caring. That’s really what this is. It’s not about manipulating. It’s not about pushing people to get what you want. It’s caring enough about the people who are interested in what you have and the people working for you so that you make it easy for them to accomplish their goals. And then, that pays off. In my experience, it pays off big time.

Mike Blake: [00:45:52] So, what are some signs of – somebody listening to this may be thinking, oh, boy, you know, this is interesting. I got to think about it. I think very carefully about maybe moving in this direction. What are some signs that somebody listening to this show could use or try to identify in order to diagnose whether or not this is a scenario that’s hurting their own organization and this may be a change they should consider making? What are the symptoms of the disease?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:46:31] Unfortunately, they are very hidden from general management. And, I used to do sales and marketing department turnarounds, and I made sure that my office was right next to – I was, you know, at the side office with the windows. But in all the cubicles, there were salespeople. And, I could hear their conversations with customers. That’s absolutely essential if you’re managing a sales department because you want to know how they’re – what they’re doing with customers.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:47:02] Now, these days, you also usually record all the conversations and you start listening. This is where you’re going to find out if they’re pushing, if they’re trying to sell the whole presentation to the customer. You know, they want to tell the history of the company and all that.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:47:21] I was just talking to somebody recently. They said they went into a dealership to buy a car. They knew just what they wanted. They thought, okay, I could go in there and 15 minutes later, walk out with a car because I know they’ll have it and I know what I want. And, instead, the salesman tried to take them through the history of the company, and then his history working with the company and then the history of the brand that he was going to sell them. The guy was like, just give me the car. You know, just give me –

Mike Blake: [00:47:50] Right. Do you want to sell me a car or not?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:47:51] Yeah. So, top management has to listen to at least ten or 20 of the calls that a salesperson is making in a given week or whatever, and just start to realize, oh, man, if I was a customer on the other end, he didn’t hear – he or she didn’t hear what I just said. They’re pushing. They’re not answering the customers’ questions.

Kristin Zhivago: [00:48:17] And, you know, with all of this in mind, are we making it easier for them to buy? Or even not just the people, but our policies. We can’t sell it this way. We can only sell it this way. And what if the majority of your customers are saying, “Well, I want it this way.” So, this is what you find out when you get into the weeds, into those conversations because the conversation is where the sale is going to be made or lost.

Mike Blake: [00:48:49] I’m talking with Kristin Zhivago, and the topic is, should I replace my salespeople with customer service representatives?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:48:57] We don’t have much time left and I want to try to squeeze every bit of information we can out of you before you take off. Are there any industries in which this kind of transformation tends to be more effective than others? Is this shift tailor-made for specific, for some industries more than others?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:49:18] Well, I’d go back to the heavy and intense scrutiny industry. So, if your sales depend on someone being on the phone, you know, it’s not an e-commerce purchase where they can figure it all out and buy it online or clothing, the medium and light scrutiny things, this isn’t – you don’t need this kind of people, although there are some companies who use this method and are selling clothing and they do really well because customers know they can get answers. Again, we go back to Zappos as an example. But I think most of what I’m talking about here applies to B2C and B2B heavy or intense scrutiny products and services.

Mike Blake: [00:50:10] Kristin, this has been a great conversation. I’ve learned a lot, and I’m sure there are questions that somebody in the audience thought of that I didn’t or wished that we would have spent more time on one question more than we did. If somebody wants to follow up with you on this conversation, ask you questions, can they do so? And if so, what’s the best way to do that?

Kristin Zhivago: [00:50:31] Yeah. You can just Google me. I dominate the top pages, so just my name, and Google is fine. Our website is zhivagopartners.com. And in addition to the digital, the whole scale of digital marketing, the whole spectrum of digital marketing services that we provide, I also do revenue coaching. I continue to do that. I did that for decades before I opened this company. And I opened this company because I saw a lot of mid-sized companies who needed to understand digital marketing, and they had digital savvy competitors who were beating them in the marketplace. So, anyway, that’s how they can find me. And the book is on Amazon. It’s Roadmap to Revenue: How to Sell the Way Your Customers Want to Buy.

Mike Blake: [00:51:24] That’s going to wrap it up for today’s program. I’d like to thank Kristin Zhivago so much for sharing her expertise with us.

Mike Blake: [00:51:31] We’ll be exploring a new topic each week. So, Please tune in so that when you’re faced with your next business decision, you have clear vision when making it. If you enjoy these podcasts, please consider leaving a review with your favorite podcast aggregator. It helps people find us that we can help them.

Mike Blake: [00:51:48] If you would like to engage with me on social media with my Chart of the Day and other content, I’m on LinkedIn as myself and @unblakeable on Facebook, Twitter, Clubhouse, and Instagram. Also, check out my new LinkedIn group called Unblakeable’s Group That Doesn’t Suck. Once again, this is Mike Blake. Our sponsor is Brady Ware & Company. And this has been the Decision Vision podcast.

 

Tagged With: Brady Ware & Company, customer service, Decision Vision, Kristin Zhivago, Mike Blake, revenue coach, Sales, Zhivago Partners

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 20
  • Next Page »

Business RadioX ® Network


 

Our Most Recent Episode

CONNECT WITH US

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Our Mission

We help local business leaders get the word out about the important work they’re doing to serve their market, their community, and their profession.

We support and celebrate business by sharing positive business stories that traditional media ignores. Some media leans left. Some media leans right. We lean business.

Sponsor a Show

Build Relationships and Grow Your Business. Click here for more details.

Partner With Us

Discover More Here

Terms and Conditions
Privacy Policy

Connect with us

Want to keep up with the latest in pro-business news across the network? Follow us on social media for the latest stories!
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Business RadioX® Headquarters
1000 Abernathy Rd. NE
Building 400, Suite L-10
Sandy Springs, GA 30328

© 2025 Business RadioX ® · Rainmaker Platform

BRXStudioCoversLA

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of LA Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversDENVER

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Denver Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversPENSACOLA

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Pensacola Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversBIRMINGHAM

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Birmingham Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversTALLAHASSEE

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Tallahassee Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversRALEIGH

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Raleigh Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversRICHMONDNoWhite

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Richmond Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversNASHVILLENoWhite

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Nashville Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversDETROIT

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Detroit Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversSTLOUIS

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of St. Louis Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversCOLUMBUS-small

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Columbus Business Radio

Coachthecoach-08-08

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Coach the Coach

BRXStudioCoversBAYAREA

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Bay Area Business Radio

BRXStudioCoversCHICAGO

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Chicago Business Radio

Wait! Don’t Miss an Episode of Atlanta Business Radio