How to Think Bigger-er with Bill Harper, Ep #42
How to Think Bigger-er with Bill Harper, Ep #42
Many brands are becoming myopic. They’ve stopped thinking outside of their own sphere. Bill Harper believes that this was made worse by the pandemic. Everyone froze like deer in headlights. The problem is that brands are starting to act like commodities. They’re all touting the same thing: “We have better product, better people, we work harder, we care more…” That has absolutely nothing to do with thinking big. They somehow believe the passion for their business will bleed through to the other side and will engage the consumer. It’s an interesting problem that’s been getting worse. In this episode, we talk about the right way to think bigger with your brand. Check it out!
Outline of This Episode
- [1:44] 3 actionable strategies + tactics
- [2:28] How to think bigger-er
- [11:14] Don’t let the cats herd you
- [21:22] It’s not about you and it never was
- [28:47] How to connect with Bill Harper
Resources & People Mentioned
Connect with Bill Harper
Connect With the Content Callout Team
Subscribe to CONTENT CALLOUT on
Bill HarperInsights Junkie | Undervalued Business Advocate | Change Agent
Mark: Hey, everyone. You've got Mark here from the Content Callout. Welcome to today's interview with Mr. Bill Harper. He is a brand guy, a really smart brand guy. He calls himself an insights junkie. And I think based on this interview, you would definitely agree. 30 years of marketing experience on brand strategy, and it shows in this amazing interview with him where we talked about thinking bigger with your brand. And not getting into the mindset of developing a commodity- structured brand, which a lot of companies are falling into the trap of. Don't let the cats herd you, which I thought was amazing insights from him. So often we feel like we're herding cats, when in reality, the cats are herding us. And the Cardinal Rule, it's not about you. Never has been, never was. It's about the customer, and how can we change our mindset to make sure that we're putting the customer first? I think you're going to love this amazing interview with Bill. And if you do, we'd appreciate a kind review on Apple Podcasts. Share it with your friends, family, and colleagues on the internet, especially those in the marketing profession. And give us a shout out on social. Tag us, let us know what you think. We appreciate you all. Thank you very much. Enjoy. Bill, we made it, man. How are you?
Bill Harper: I'm great. Thanks so much for having me. It's a pleasure to be here.
Mark: I'm excited to have you on the show. I know that we were chatting just before this and I want to give a shout out to Andrea Kale from Electric AI. I know that you enjoyed her show. So, shout out Andrea. Well done.
Bill Harper: It was a great show. Yeah, I thought it was phenomenal, and some of her insights were really amazing. So I reached out to say thanks on LinkedIn. I thought it was a great show.
Mark: Yeah, that's really cool, man. I'm really glad to hear that. She's a rock star. So the way that we start every show and the way that we're going to start the show as well is to get you to list off your three actionable strategies... And then we'll dive into those discussions.
Bill Harper: Yeah, so as a creative, I think mine are probably worded a little differently than the average duck. But mine are, think biggerer, don't let the cats herd you, and remember the Cardinal Rule... It's not about you, and it never was.
Mark: So what you didn't add was maybe the parentheses before the think biggerer, which was fuck fear.
Bill Harper: Well, yeah.
Mark: Which I love. I think that's the best part of that whole thing.
Bill Harper: Fuck fear, thing biggerer. I'm so used to being on regular radio. That's not a thing that we can pronounce.
Mark: Yeah, no. This is the internet, man. We can do whatever we want on here.
Bill Harper: That's right. It's fantastic.
Mark: So when you say think biggerer, what do you mean by that? I would assume that you mean that brands are just becoming very myopic in their viewpoint. And they're not really thinking outside of their own little shell. What does that mean, and how does that relate to branding?
Bill Harper: You're exactly right. And made worse by the pandemic and the freeze that everybody is in, standing like deer in headlights around all of this. As we approach brands, it was always that there was a bit of a disconnect between the internal team and the external, in terms of third- party objectivity. But what's happened now is that really brands have started acting like commodities. By and large, if you sit down and talk with them, what you hear in the hallways over and over again is," We have a better product. We have better people. We work harder. We care more, and all we need are a few more sales." And that's table stakes to get into business. That has absolutely nothing to do with thinking big. And this notion that somehow their passion for their own business is going to somehow come through to the other side and ultimately be the thing that engages the consumer, or the end user, or customer, or what have you just isn't the way that that's going to work. So that's been a really interesting problem to watch get worse over the years, not better. I really challenge the brands that we work with, and really any brand, to think biggerer than what they had. Back when businesses begin, the leadership teams that get behind them, they see no barriers to anything. The world is an opportunity, and you can see it in their eyes when they get started. And then they get around 50 people, 100 people, whatever, and all of a sudden they start being beholden to protecting their revenue, and their people, and whatever. And they start getting safer, and safer, and safer. And of course, that's the kiss of death. At the end of that road is a commodity brand. Where really what you wind up fighting on are parody type things like price, and features, and benefits. All of which are fleeting, and they can't maintain it. Somebody can always come along the can do it faster or cheaper. And I've really seen a big drop off where that's concerned, and it's a shame. Businesses are selling themselves short simply because they're not really pushing themselves to consider what if. They're really more focused on what is, and that's a big limiter.
Mark: I think we could definitely blame obviously the pandemic and all that kind of stuff. But to a large extent, I think we've also got to blame our own mindsets about getting stuck in that. You and I were having this discussion just before we got on here to talk about top of funnel, awareness- based content to build that brand. To really focus on building, so that the differentiating factor is the brand. How do we change that mindset in CMOs or in senior level leaders? How do we get them to think differently about that?
Bill Harper: I put a lot of the blame on leaderships not teaching people how to be proactive. At the end of the day, this is one of those fundamental things that you find down at the root of the problem. When people come into businesses, they are hired for all kinds of different skillsets. Can you sell? Can you strategize? Can you run a campaign? Can you manage external vendors? What have you. But what isn't frequently taught, or managed well, is how to be proactive in a way that ultimately serves the interests of the leadership team. Whether that's the founder themselves, or it is the bigger, broader leadership team, or it's building a bridge to the investor group, or what have you. At the end of the day, that doesn't happen. And as such, we wind up realizing that it's a trial and error thing. And that ultimately leads more often than not to failure. Someone comes in, they're very excited about the new position. They're full of ideas and opportunities. They come and they run in, and they say," We should do X." And for whatever reason, the leadership team shoots them and says," That's a horrible idea. I don't want to do that. I don't like that idea..." Whatever, whatever. What we just taught them to do is not participate. Instead of fostering," Hey, maybe that one wasn't the greatest idea, but I really appreciate you bringing an idea to me. Don't stop..." Moreover, what happens is a CYA environment where people go," Well, hell, I'm not going to poke my head back up again. I'm likely to get it knocked off." And I think that in concert with the sense that there's so much competition and the rest of it, leads people really to think, I've got 15 pounds to shove in my 5- pound day, and I don't have the time to do it. Or I don't feel like it's necessarily an environment where it's encouraged, or I saw someone else get their ass handed to them when they tried it or what have you. And I think people back off from trying to bring things to the table, and leadership is notoriously bad about fostering, or educating, how they could ultimately be proactive in a way that gets to the greater desire for the outcome of the business. And so most of the time, what I see is people that are time- starved. Who don't feel that they're in an environment where their contribution is ultimately going to be valued. Who then don't take it upon themselves to be bold or brave enough to step forward and say," Well, damn the torpedoes. Full speed ahead. This is a good idea anyway, even if you don't like it." And so, I think you're right. I think it has a lot to do with programming ourselves not to be fearful. And to say lots of good ideas come from inspiration that happens all over the place, and we really shouldn't shut the door on them.
Mark: I love that. I feel like we're training politicians to a large extent in a lot of these organizations. Where no one wants to make a decision, no one wants to take any risk. Even if they think it's a really good idea, no one wants to say anything because no one wants to get saddled with blame. And we really only have ourselves to blame for that as leaders within these organizations. Because once we do that, then that drives down creativity. And when creativity starts to get driven down, then opportunity itself starts to get driven down.
Bill Harper: I would agree. Jeremy Gutsche does a thing from Trend Hunter that talks about... And I can't remember now which of the typewriter companies it was. But for years, even after word processing came out, they stood their ground and said," No, we make the world's best typewriter." This was this mantra that they had, and they mantra- ed themselves right out of business. And I think that can be the other thing. The whole notion of we don't do it that way here, or that's not how we've done it in the past, really is more pervasive than people give it credit for. So I think you're absolutely right. We need to be fostering people's participation and contribution a whole lot more than I think happens on a day- to- day basis.
Mark: Yeah, there is something that I read recently from Tim Ferriss. He was actually talking about his daily routine. And he said," I think most people would find my daily routine very boring." And they asked why? Why would we find it boring? He said," Because most of my day is really just looking for the big domino."
Bill Harper: Yeah.
Mark: And they asked him," Okay, what does that mean? You just go about your day thinking about what the next big domino is going to be?" And he's like,"Yeah. Actually, I just spend most of my day thinking about what that next big, creative domino is going to be that's going to drive down everything else. And I give myself the time to be creative, to think about those things." And I think so often we classify creative thinking as not a productive task. And as such, it gets demonized because we can't measure it. And there's that famous saying," What gets measured, gets managed." And that's true to a large extent, but how do you measure creative thinking? And putting that time aside to have that creative thinking. I think that's a really difficult conversation to have at a C- level. To be able to say," Look, you need to give your people time to just ruminate. To think about how things are going to be effective. To look for that big domino effect."
Bill Harper: I love that analogy. I think it's a perfect way to look at the value of the contribution, to call it a big domino, not just the next domino. I read an article years and years ago that talked about how Ted Turner spent 75%... Now watch, I'll be wrong and somebody will write in and say," It wasn't Ted Turner. It was such and..." But that he spent the majority of his day, 75% of his time, simply considering what if? Just that. Just sitting and reading things, and thinking about what was the potential? What could be done with this to turn it into something? Well, I wrote down years ago on a piece of paper that that was really the job description that I wanted to have one day. Not for the feet up on the table aspect of it, although I'm certain that there would be an enjoyment to that.
Mark: That sounds amazing.
Bill Harper: Yeah. It sounds absolutely amazing, doesn't it? What more indulgent thing could you do that has positive business ramifications then to protect creative time to think about how you could iterate what you have to be something significantly greater? And your point is very well made. I don't think that anybody protects time that way. With the dings and pings that come from cell phones, and emails, and interruptions galore. And needing to be as efficient as possible with expenditures, and team, and so forth. We've ratcheted ourselves up to the point that performance has taken over in creative thought or intuition. And that's a shame because that's where innovation begins. And without that, there's very little progress to be made.
Mark: I love that. I think this is a really great segue to the next point that we were going to talk about. Which when we have those dings and those things that are trying to move us away from really thinking about what that big domino effect is, your second point was, don't let the cats herd you. You've got so many competing demands on your time, including all of these disparate parts of your business that may be trying to herd you for your time. We often try and describe ourselves as trying to herd cats, but often it's the opposite. Can you expand on that? And just let people know what you mean by that?
Bill Harper: Yeah. So CMOs, CEOs, leadership teams, anybody who's participating in the ongoing strategy and forward- development of the company... When we get involved, what we have found in particular over the last five years is that we spend the first bit of time, maybe a month or so, as we're walking through the process with them, literally walking them back off the ledge. Because between fragmented media, and the constant addition of media, and the consideration of how can we incorporate it? Should we incorporate it? Do we have budget to incorporate it? How will we measure it? Et cetera. And then you take into consideration specialty and fragmented agencies, the average fair- size, mid- size brand has between 15 and 17 specialist groups on call at any one time. And that doesn't take into consider large- scale companies, which frequently have more than 30 on call. When the CMOs are responsible for that number of diverse groups, all pinging... Trying to prove their value, trying to fight for a bigger piece of the pie. Each one trying so desperately to reinterpret the brand in a way that makes them excited, et cetera... The person internal to the brand is no longer focusing on the thing that they were hired really to do. Now, what they've become is jugglers. And therefore, the cats are now herding them around. Because they're trying to figure out how to manage all these different things. Who should be there? Who shouldn't be there? When you consider that the average CMO's job lifespan now is between 18 and 24 months, by the time these people have figured out what the political structure is, what they can and can't say, where the coffee pot is and how to work it, they're about on the way back out again. Because their concept" hasn't performed." But when you really take a look at that objectively, there's no way in the world that the average person, even the super- average person, can perform well in that environment. There are too many things that they're having to try to manage at one point in time. And ultimately, that stops them from being able to perform the duty that they were hired for in the first place.
Mark: So what's the solution to that? Do they need to just get aggressive with delegating those responsibilities, so that they can focus on it? How do they solve that problem?
Bill Harper: Well, that's a really interesting question. I think at the end of the day, the thing that seems missing by and large is that there is not a leader to the brand any longer. Whether that leadership was coming initially from the CMO, or there was an agency that, in particular, was tasked with or responsible for the development and maintenance of the brand across the rest of those groups. There isn't. All those voices have become equal, and there isn't anybody who is there to protect what the brand stands for, why the internal team should care, and why anybody else should. And as such, that rampant re- interpretation of the brand across the others is falling apart. So either, and there are really a couple of different ways to go about this, either begin to bring back under some form of focus how many of these groups you have. B, define what the brand is, and then bring all of the groups in, and make sure that they're appropriately trained on it. These are the ways that you would have to get back to it. And it's funny, people will fall into a couple of different camps. It's either sweep the board clean and start with one group that leads them all, and then add back underneath so that everybody is there. Or stop, drop, and bring everybody back together again. And say," No, no, no. This is what the brand is all about. Here's how we have to bring it to life. This is the expectation about how and where you'll play." Not to say that you're limited to it, but at least then, everybody is supporting it. I think internal teams have such a wish/ misperception that it's obvious. They see the business. They must see what we see. It should be immediately obvious. And therefore, they will come into alignment, but that's simply not the case. One person will take a look at it and interpret it one way, and another person will come another. I frequently use this when I'm getting together with new teams. And I say," If I come into your leadership team and I walk around, I will ask them something like,'What is it that you do?'" And to a person, everybody around the room will say," We make the best one- bedroom house in the world." Okay. And then you take them aside and you say," Tell me what that means." And they say," Oh, we make best one- bedroom log cabins." And then you talk to the next guy. He says," Oh, we make the best one- bedroom bungalow." And the next one says condo, and the next one says something else. Because everybody is more or less saying the same thing, the hope, desire, wish, perception, whatever you want to say about it is that they're all off the same sheet of music. In reality, each of them is interpreting it differently. Because the training that brought them into understanding the values that it stands for, how the brand should be expressed, beyond the style guide. How it wants to exhibit its reputation and build on that. Those things are never trained. And therefore, every one of those brands fragments it apart, and the brand waffles, and loses its focus, and winds up going in all different directions. None of which is positive for the business's growth.
Mark: I love what you said there, and it reminds me of a book that I read on brand strategy. Where the author said so many people forget that a brand is so much more than a style guide, or a color scheme, or a color palette. It's a promise. It's a promise that you make to the consumer. And it sounds ethereal when you talk about it that way, especially maybe to someone who's not in the marketing world. But there's so much of what we do on a day- to- day basis in every part of the business that ties into how that brand should be represented. That if that's not clear internally within the business, then that's when those disparate pieces start falling apart. And that's where I find most brands are struggling. And that may very well be the cause of why so many brands are moving towards being commodity- structured brands, as opposed to actually something that's worth looking at.
Bill Harper: I would have to agree with that. I think Jim Stengel, former CEO of Procter& Gamble, did a massive study. It was six plus years, where he took a look at brands that put purpose at the center of their being and their performance. And what he found was that the brands that did that outperformed the S& P 500 by 400% on average. So there have been numbers banded about for years and years, about 50% of your brand or your business success is the value of the brand. If your company is worth 100 million, well, 50 million of that is your brand reputation. And I liken that to James Bond. If James Bond came walking on set wearing Hawaiian shirt and ordered a mixed drink with a little fruit on top and an umbrella, everybody would cock their head and say," But that's not right. That's not correct." And I just think that it gets lost on business leader groups, that their business walks into a room exactly that same way. The reputation precedes them. And while that's a silly way, to use a fictional character to get to it, the mechanics of that are exactly correct. And the way that people respond to their expectation of what a brand is ultimately going to give them is a massive part of the success of each of those businesses.
Mark: Do you think it could be a result of brands not knowing well enough... I think most brands are good at saying," Look, this is what we are." But a lot of brands are really bad at saying," This is what we're not."
Bill Harper: Yes.
Mark: They're not stripping away the BS. We're not like them because of this. We're not like them because of that. And I think a lot of brands don't necessarily have an antithesis statement to say," We are the antithesis of this because of..." whatever it might be. They get stuck in what we are versus, yeah, we're very clear about what we're not and what we don't do.
Bill Harper: I think a lot of that has to do with changing people on teams, plus shiny object syndrome of opportunity. I spoke earlier about what is. I think what happens is, absent the filter, the desire not to miss an opportunity actually winds up giving false positive and reinforcement to leadership teams to chase after something that wasn't actually right. And I harken back to Vegas, who was very well- known for sinning safely. Like," This notion is very much right, and that's it." And not long ago, in the grand scheme of things, somebody from Disney was brought into their universe and suggested that they appeal to the family. Because they had shows and they had all these other things. Fine dining, and the rest of it. And when they tried to go that way, everything tanked. It all fell apart. Because you don't want to go to a place where you're going to sin safely, and have little Johnny or Sally see you coming back covered in Jell- O from your all- night excursion up on six. That's not what you want. And so, people really stepped back from that. And the result of that was the what happens here, stays here concept. That return to their roots of it. Volvo is not safe, and performance, and has really great resale value, and is beautiful design. Volvo's safe. And they're not even the ones that really own the title. Mercedes has been the leader of most of the development of those things for years. But as far as the public is concerned, that brand chose to hang its hat on that particular nail. And in doing so, they have staged out, for the people for whom safe is important, they are the lead within that. And I think that that is a massive misperception and lack of education that is had by most leadership teams. In terms of, the fear of losing out on an opportunity actually causes them to have less traction with the group for whom they are the most appropriate.
Mark: Yeah, we're trying to be everything to everyone.
Bill Harper: Yes, fair enough.
Mark: As opposed to understanding what our real niche is and who our real target is. Something that you talk about is understanding that it's not about us. It's about the company. And I think what you've said really ties into this quite nicely. Because all of this work has been justifying that really it's about us, but actually if we had done it properly, we would have realized from the beginning that it's about the customer, and providing the best customer experience, and the best brand for that target market. Because of the opportunity and I think the navel gazing that really exists with brand development, how do we help people to understand the customer better so that they get out of the mindset of... I know everyone's focused on revenue production, and so we want to try and grab on to every single opportunity. And we can maybe get into a philosophical discussion about the blend between a CRO and a CMO, and I think they should be separate. But why do we have that mindset? How do we break that?
Bill Harper: I think it ultimately comes down to an understanding of your own behavior. Once you become beholden to a brand and your paycheck comes from that, you lose all objectivity. It happens almost immediately. Within a month of receiving a paycheck from somebody, you're immediately on the inside and your perspective is no longer valid. It comes down to two pieces. Simon Sinek's book is almost there, Start With Why. There's an internal why, and there's an external why. There's why do we care? And there's why should they care? And those two things work in harmony together like two sides of a coin, but most businesses don't really think about that. They truly believe that because they care so deeply and desperately about what they do, that it's going to just come through everything that they do. And again, be obvious about it. So I think that there's a real education there in terms of making sure that there's a construct that people can grab hold of so that they know how to arrive at the appropriate messaging. The other thing is, to take a moment and catch yourself in the act of being human. I can't tell you how many people will come and tell me that they're not brand people while they're sitting and wearing a Rolex. Or they drive up in their Cadillac, or their Porsche, or whatever. And I chuckle because they're wearing their Hugo Boss suit or whatever, and then they come in and they make this profound gesture about how they are uninfluenced by brands. And I say," Nonsense, of course you are." The question is, do you truly catch yourself in the motion of, in the action of, how you engage with brands? And do you realize that what it ultimately is, is making people feel safe and important and changing their emotional state for the better. That is really, at the end of the day, the key thing. Brands have one responsibility with respect to this outgoing messaging. And that is to get other people to feel," Oh my gosh, do they get it?" That's it. The rest of it is later. People buy emotionally, and justify logically. So they've got to start with," Oh my gosh, do they get it?" Once that's there, then all the logic and all the rest of it comes back down the path. Which is why I talk all the time about, it's not about you is the most important thing in business. We are, all of us, nothing more than a doorstop to somebody else's arm full of groceries. If when we get there and we can't get the door, and we're reaching with the elbows, and the rest of it. Somebody else is there to open the door? Then we're valuable. And your guest the other day, Angela was it? Was talking about selling painkillers instead of vitamins. And I thought that that was such a great way to talk about that. Because at the end of the day, the more you're able to align what you do and are passionate about with an understanding of why they would put you in their universe in the first place... That's where that relationship is. It's not about how innovative you are, or how many features and benefits you have, or what cost advantage you've got, or that you're the biggest, or the oldest, or the whatever. All of that stuff is fleeting in the material. The real question is, at the moment when I'm standing there and I can't get where I'm trying to go, or I have pain behind me that I would like to go away... One of those two things. If you are relevant to the solution of that at that moment, then you're a good option. And if you're not, it won't matter how much we push and pry.
Mark: I love that. And for the listeners, if you're interested, I think you should take a listen to that interview with Andrea Kale. Where she specifically talks about painkillers versus vitamins. And she says," Are you selling painkillers, or are you selling vitamins? Because anyone can choose any kind of vitamin. But if you're selling a painkiller, you go for the best one possible." And that's the big difference, I think, between a lot of people's understandings about what it is they're trying to develop. Because if you're selling vitamins, now you're in the commodity game. And then that becomes a very challenging game to play if you don't have the brand, that you can charge more money. So that you can create a better experience, so that you can foster a more inclusive environment for your employees to work. Because all of that stems from the brand that you're developing. Now, obviously I'm biased because I'm a marketing guy. But-
Bill Harper: Well, no. But even beyond that though, let's think about the efficiency of sales. You have a Porsche on one side and a Prius on the other. How hard will you have to sell the Prius to the Porsche guy or vice versa?
Bill Harper: The value system is wrong. Why waste the time? Sure, there's an opportunity. You might convert 3% of the people, but at what cost? What insanely high cost is there in terms of dollars needed to convert in terms of time ill spent with the majority that won't convert? The person that enjoys 100 miles to a gallon, and wanting to make a smaller footprint on the world, and the rest of it who supports that Prius purchase is so emotionally, and fervently, and the rest of it... Is no less emotionally engaged than the person over in the Porsche who says," I want to throw my head into the back every time I put my foot down on the accelerator. I want to throw myself through the curves," and what have you. Totally different value sets. So it wouldn't matter how innovative. It wouldn't matter what features and benefits. It won't matter. The value structure is wrong to begin with. And thus, it's not a match. So you have to understand that it's not about you in order to understand what it is about, so that you can align the things that you value with the things that they do. That's the only way that that works.
Mark: And yet, they both sell cars. And I think this ties back to the conversation you had earlier about, we sell the best one bedroom, whatever it might be. Log cabins are very different than condos, are very different than bungalows. And so, if you don't understand the value system of the customer who's purchasing that thing, you're never going to be able to relate. They're never going to feel that feeling of this person gets me. They understand.
Bill Harper: Absolutely correct. Because they get it, is code for they get me, which is code for they share the same values that I do, which is code for these are my people. And because everything about the way that we value one another, and our communication skills, and our religion background, and our history, and everything else is based on that sense of community. Or as some people call it, tribe mentality, whatever. You're so hardwired for that, there's no way to escape it. So someone that has an opposing viewpoint, be it on a car, or a bakery item, or Dunkin' Donuts brown, hot liquid to Starbucks brown, hot liquid... It doesn't matter. At the end of the day, the perception of value starts with do they honor who I am first as a part of who they are as a company? If more businesses understood the value and the power of that, the success that they would see would be an exponential rise.
Mark: Love it. What a fantastic conversation. I'm sure people are going to want to reach out to you after this to thank you for such a great interview. How do people do that? Where do they find you online?
Bill Harper: LinkedIn, my name Bill Harper, or bill. harper @ wmharper. com.
Mark: Amazing. Bill, thank you so much for being here, man. Thank you for sharing your wisdom. For the listeners just so that you know, we will link out to all of Bill's social profiles in the show notes. All you have to do is go check that out on our website, contentcallout. com. Bill, thank you so much for being here, man. We greatly appreciate it.
Bill Harper: Oh, I so appreciate the opportunity. This was fun. Thanks so much.
Mark: Wow, amazing discussion with Mr. Bill Harper. My big takeaways are to think bigger. I'm not thinking big enough for my brand. I need to create more of a brand presence. Second biggest takeaway, was to not let all of the disparate partners within my business, serving my business who are valued, become cats that herd me. And I need to focus on making sure that I'm putting brand first and the customers first. Very interesting discussion. Let us know what your thoughts are on social. Tag us @ contentcallout, and give us a rating on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you download podcasts. Let us know what you think. We appreciate you all, enjoy.( silence)