LPRC - CrimeScience – The Weekly Review – Episode 149 with Dr. Read Hayes, Tom Meehan & Tony D’Onofrio

Episode Date: May 25, 2023

This week on CrimeScience, our hosts discuss unprecedented store closures among retailers and some of the potential causes and ramifications of that, the LPRC Eastside initiative and how that may enhance our understanding of community level safety, retail fraud and AI news, and sales trends in retail getting worse, especially with inflation. Listen in to stay updated on hot topics in the industry and more! The post CrimeScience – The Weekly Review – Episode 149 with Dr. Read Hayes, Tom Meehan & Tony D’Onofrio appeared first on Loss Prevention Research Council.

Hi, everyone, and welcome to Crime Science. In this podcast, we explore the science of crime and the practical application of this science for loss prevention and asset protection practitioners as well as other professionals. Welcome, everybody, to another episode of Crime Science, the podcast. That's the latest in our weekly update series. Today, we're going to talk with Tony D'Onofrio and Tom Meehan. We're going to go around the world and discuss some of the things that are happening, and particularly crime and loss, but in retailing in general. It's an active season. We were just talking before we started recording about just the plethora of issues,

the dynamics that are going on in certain states and cities and markets. that are going on in certain states and cities and markets. Retailers are literally closing their doors in markets like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Albuquerque, Los Angeles, and other places that they're looking at and unprecedented moves, at least as far as I can recall going back three decades. So I'm trying to dig in and understand, but I can tell you in one-on-one conferences and meetings that we're having with some of the major retailers in our labs, and I'm talking about the big guys that are coming through here to do strategy sessions, and they're disclosing some of these closings before they actually happen. They're talking about the dynamics, how they've hardened the core

of their stores, really almost at a financially unviable level and at a level that they are not comfortable with, and because their employees and their customers or shoppers are at risk. And as they start to harden those targets, they are seeing, they believe, some crime displacement out into other areas. This has always happened, right? This has always happened. People, offenders are going to look for the most vulnerable of the desirable targets. They may not be as desirable because there's more travel time and things like that, but if it's easier to get away, to get what they want, get more of what they want in these types of things, they're willing to do that. Well, now the retailers

are telling us in some of these markets, again, that they are now they're having to raise the protective levels at these stores. And again, it's becoming financially unviable for them, non-viable. So we'll have to stay tuned and stand by. Of course, the media, like always, is following this and trying to understand to a certain extent. One of the major issues we've noted over the last six months with this, and goes back beyond, is the use by cities, by municipalities, by politicians, and sometimes by the media. And what they'll talk about is, well, there is no rise in crime, or why are you claiming that? We look at arrests and calls for service that the police and sheriffs and so on put out or the FBI has, and we're not seeing that. In fact,

in a lot of cases, these areas you're talking about, you being the retailer, we're seeing decreases. And of course, we then all understand and try and talk about what's happening on the ground. Fewer law enforcement officers, they're reprioritized in a lot of cases because there are fewer of them. We know that there are in many markets now these reluctant prosecutors that just are not prosecuting these solicitors or state attorneys or state's attorneys, district attorneys, depending on what they're called, county attorneys, have drawn back in some cases. They're overwhelmed in others. And so, and on the other side of the

equation, you know, they only know what the crime victim tells them. And so, if nobody reports, then they don't know about it. And when the Corey, Dr. Lowe and our team and others talk to the retailers through surveys and collect their data, they're only reporting maybe 50% of what they're experiencing. And most of them are very aware that they don't know a lot to even sometimes most of what's going on in their stores, particularly in the larger formats with very few employees. They just don't of what's going on in their stores, particularly in the larger formats with very few employees. They just don't know what's going on. And most retailers don't have a daily, weekly, or monthly systematic video review where they go through and take stock and

try and understand all the dynamics and attribute losses or other problems to certain people, places, time, products, products and so on in addition to their loss numbers based on that or their sales numbers impacts and so on but the point is we have very very incomplete data and when the media or the politicians rely on official reported statistics we can see the issue uh it's just not reflective of the real world um and it's not their fault again they only know what we tell them so there's a lot of opportunity to combine what police the issue. It's just not reflective of the real world. And it's not their fault. Again, they only know what we tell them. So there's a lot of opportunity to combine what police know and what the retailer knows, and maybe third-party guard companies or off-duty law enforcement or

mall security and things like that. So to paint a more complete picture, in addition to maybe some of that systematic review i mentioned before where you might have a random sampling a retailer and try and get it do a deeper dive and understand what's happening where and when and how uh to a better extent so there's there's some of the opportunities there um we know that with our lprc and the university of florida safer places lab east side. We've had multiple meetings now with Gainesville Police Department. We just had the chief of police from GPD and some of his top command staff in our labs last Friday. Huge progress there as we work on a

memorandum of understanding, brief each other, get an understanding of what we're going to do. We've been having one-on-one in-depth talks with the eight to nine retailers that probably will participate we anticipate right now we've got at least six that are locked in um that was a go a green light for us to start to move on this so steven and james on our team uh and myself were doing detailed planning um but again look at the east side initiative being pretty critical as far as translating what we're learning in interior labs outside at the Saber Placers lab, around our labs in the Innovation Square area, what other retailers are learning. And of course, we're all working now. We just got a brand new book that came out from authors that Corey,

myself, and others in criminology know very well. And so we are issuing that book. I've already been through it and marked the heck out of it as I've been traveling lately. LPRC is gaining expanded capability, we've mentioned before. We just had Sam and Christina join the team as two more incremental research scientists. We're excited about it. Sam's got a PhD. His is in psychology. He's also, though, he can handle Python and other AI technical things.

He's going to be amazing. They have both started. He won't be in residence until June in our labs. And Christina is finishing up her criminology PhD at University of Central Florida. So she'll be part-time until November. So we're excited about that. We're also adding a research assistant just to help us handle all the myriad details as we take on more and more of these projects, particularly though these very complex field projects where we're out in the real world. very complex field projects where we're out in the real world.

We're launching in Port St. Lucie the three Walmart store tests. James on our team has been analyzing with LiveView and others at Paducah, Kentucky, and Opelika, Alabama, where there was a massive deployment of mobile protective platforms, these sensor and deterrent platforms to add to the evidence base. Here we're going to be moving our platforms, these sensor and deterrent platforms to add to the evidence base here. We're going to be moving our platforms, some of them to the east side, as I mentioned, and elsewhere. So a whole lot going on as we move into bigger and bigger research venues to understand through across the five zones, left, at, and right of bang. A couple of highlights of things we've been doing today as we speak here on Tuesday, 5-23-2023. Dr. Corey Lowe is leading, along with Chad

McIntosh and others, the Violent Crime Working Group Summit in Houston, Texas. We're excited. We've got dozens of retailers coming in and participating in that. We've got law enforcement at Allstrata. They're looking at some of the, excuse me, dozens of takedown robberies that took place across Houston in one retailer in one year. Very dangerous armed robberies

where they take down the entire store and or pharmacy or cash office. Very dangerous. Over 60 plus in one year, one retailer, one city. So that gives you an idea. It's just some of the things we're up against. They're going through some of the active assailant research that others have done and ourselves. So that's going to be a pretty active summit there, the Violent Crime Working Group Summit. At the same time, or this week, Dr. Justin Smith, Justin and the Product Protection Working Group, which is sort of our anti-theft working group, they're having a virtual summit online this week.

And so he and the Product Protection Working Group co-leaders have put this together. They've had a cook-off. Dozens and dozens of solutions were submitted across the five zones of influence by solution partner members of the LPRC, which we have now over 105. And by the way, we just hit the 80 retail corporation member mark. And bear in mind, again, Kroger accounts as one member, even though there are 16 huge chains or banners within that member alone. So we're pretty excited about that. And it continually gives us more bandwidth,

more access to more data and more venues. And I think it also provides a larger and larger community for our solution partners to come in and engage with. So we had a meeting last week hosted by Mace Rich that operates over 50 high-end shopping centers. This was in the Tyson's Corner Center right near Washington, D.C. So a beautiful three-decker, and it was active. It was not one of these malls you might see where they're struggling. This place was amazing. And so Mace Rich asked us to come in along with others. So there was Dave from the National Retail Federation. We had multiple FBI. It was good to be near their headquarters, evidently, as well as HSI come in and talk about things. Fairfax Police Department, they have that area, that county they were in. And so it was a real good exchange of

information and ideas. Scott McBride, the VP at American Eagle, and we had Joe Cole from Macy's and others that were going through some of the issues they had and beyond. So those are the kind of local types of gatherings that take place where everybody can share and learn together. We know that there was a great RELA conference our team came back from, very energized, a ton of contacts and opportunities coming out of that. This week, the International Council of Shopping Centers having their big, big annual gathering of all the shopping centers. ICSC now is an active paying member of the LPRC. I know they're working together with NRF. And we mentioned before,

we hosted that summit in Gainesville at the university where we had RELA, NRF, FMI, ICSC. We had the chain drug stores group and others, as well as major retailers and shopping center security directors. And to go through a strategy, we also there had FBI and Homeland Security and so forth. So things are happening. People realize we've got to have an overarching strategy in the United States and North America that includes research and evidence, you know, frameworks, five zones type of concepts that includes, of course, good training and lobbying, very focused, precise lobbying at the local, at the state, and at the federal level,

you know, to try and take back and take the high ground here. This crime is just too dangerous, whether it's theft, fraud, or violence. A lot of this is hybrid and includes that aggression and violence. So a lot happening. We'll talk more on the next episodes about crime in place interactions and some of the research in the theory or frameworks that underpin what we're doing and how we're doing it in each and every effort that we make to better understand and affect the offenders, their decisions, their choices, and of course, the choice opportunities that they've got out there, those structures. So, without further ado, let me go over to Tom Meehan, who, as per normal, is getting ready to race out to another destination. So, Tom, if you could take it away.

Great. Thank you, Reid. Just a couple of things. One, I thought it'd be remiss if I didn't mention that it was all over the news with Target's announcement of an increase of a half a billion dollars, so a billion dollars in shrink. What that led to is a lot of chatter. There is a tremendous amount of chatter on both the open social media channels and some of the back channels of what that means. And interestingly enough, some of the bad actors are talking about, well, does that mean they're going to be more aggressive with stops? So the news media definitely affects everybody involved. So certainly customer sentiment changes, but also the bad guys are paying attention.

In addition to that, when I was reading up on Target, I thought it was really interesting that there was quite a bit of news around companies changing how they'll accept returns or refunds. So there were 20 companies that basically made a pretty public announcement. It's actually 23, I think, that basically made a pretty public announcement. It's actually 23, I think, where they were taking away the free return for online returns. It started with Amazon saying, hey, if you're going to bring this to a UPS store, it's no longer free. We're going to charge you a dollar. But then it kind of went on to a list of many retailers. Really, I'm not going to sit here and name them all, but interestingly enough, that most of them basically said, hey, if this is an online refund, there's going to be a

cost associated with that return regardless of what the circumstances are, in addition to some other saying that there's varying restocking fees. So the list is major retailers. So this is not an offshoot, you know, Amber Comby and Fitch to Barnes & Noble to Big Lots to Pennies to Foot Locker, just a whole list of very reputable brands saying, hey, we're no longer going to do these for free. Some, you know, actually putting a very unique kind of varying policy. If it's this, there's a restocking fee. If it's that, there's another fee.

In this same forum, there were talks about which retailers had really easy return fees. Now, I'm not making any scientific correlation here, but it's interesting that a forum about theft talks about Target potentially tightening the reins and then goes right into refund changes of where you can and can't do returns. Logically, you would conclude that these folks, if they're talking about where to steal, they're also talking about where they can refund. And that's what it was really about. And interestingly enough, I did some research and they had really accurate information. So as we always talk about with these forums and things like this podcast, the bad guys are out there doing their research as well as we are. So they're out there and they're consistently

sharing information and really in actual real time. So something that I'll continue to monitor, will continue to monitor at the LPRC and give information as we see it makes sense. Next, I want to talk a little bit about ChatGPT. I think I said that this will come up every week. ChatGPT released its official Apple iOS app this past week. It was number one on the App Store. I think it's now hovering between two and three. Why am I talking about this? When you're downloading chat GPT apps, there are a lot of bad apps and not necessarily bad apps in the sense that they're written poorly, but ones that aren't actually chat GPT, ones that are other artificial intelligence that charge money. So it's important that if you are looking for the chat GPT experience that you look for the one that is by OpenAI. It is the exact replica there.

I think we, I talk about this every week because I think it's intriguing. OpenAI's biggest competitor, which would be Orthopod or Anthropod, which is their engine instead of chat GPT is called claude has just released an update to accept documents with you know up to a hundred thousand words to summarize so a lot of a lot of change happening here uh and you know we'll continue to monitor this i think it's something to monitor um i think it will affect everybody here it It will affect us in business. You will see that shopping apps and the way you're interacting on the Internet is changing in real time. that we're, I talked to in this study, so it was actually about 61% had said that they were concerned with where AI was going

and the lack of regulation around it. So something certainly that we're gonna watch, as we always say here, the AI, it is a large language model. These AIs are really predictive language models. So they're prone to error and they are driven, the model is driven by a human. So they often have biases. And the more that you try to write biases out, unfortunately, a lot of times AI, the more biases actually are there. Switching gears a little bit, this was all over the news. It actually made global news. The EU

finds Meta, Facebook's parent company, $1.2 billion. And I think it's important here because if you don't read into the story, you might misunderstand it. It's on the exchange of European data and how it's recorded in the United States. So one thing here is that while this fine is in effect, there's some caveats to it. This dates back to a law that was created in 2000, the year 2000. Think about that, 23 years ago, where the EU and the US were back and forth about how European data is stored in the United States. So this is somewhat tied to the Edward Snowden leaks when

this information was made available, what was going on and how the US for sales, the Australian, not the Austrian government, so Max Scherner led a legal movement to stop EU citizens data from being stored in the US. So I went just think of the 23 years ago. So the European court, you know, basically 13 years later in 2000, the struck down another law. This all stems around the same thing. This fine might not need to be paid. Here's the really interesting point. And it affects everybody who operates in a US company. This law applies to anybody, retailer, bank, social media, that has any Europeans' data in their systems. So essentially, in the next three years, if this information is not addressed, you will see a tremendous amount of this information. There are these type of finds coming out.

In 2016, the EU and the US improved a version, and it's called the Safe Harbor. It's called Safe Harbor, and that has to do with where data is being stored. So, think about this. Starts in 2000, changes in 2013, changes in 2016. Here's the caveat. When it changed in 2016, it allowed for boilerplate or common legal language to be put in a contract around how data was stored. And that in 2020 was then basically struck down to say that although that framework was there, it didn't actually meet the requirements. If it sounds confusing, it is. And this is why a company like Meta has this huge fine, because in the 23 years or so, it has changed multiple times and is expected to change again. If you house data, which probably everybody who's listening, unless you're an end user consumer does, this will, in fact, affect you.

So stay tuned to this. This is definitely something that's happening in real time. So I think it's something we want to look at. I wanted to just close out with, I've been talking about Chinese-based apps. And as everybody knows who listens, I travel all over the world. I've been to China many times. And I think oftentimes the Chinese folks get a bad rap. But this has more to do with the Chinese government. We talk a lot about TikTok, and we'll talk just briefly about TikTok. It does, in fact, look like the state of Montana is going to ban it. What does that mean? Well, right now, it's said to be banned in January. There are a couple of lawsuits of 2024.

There are a couple of lawsuits around free speech saying citizens of Montana challenging the government saying this is stifling their free speech. I'm not sure that that will go through or not. The law has some pretty significant fines for distribution of the app. One of the challenges here is how do you enforce it? So how do you enforce this? You can definitely enforce the stopping of downloading, but the use of the app, yes, you could create a geofence that basically blocks the IP addresses, but there are easy ways around that. But this is a really interesting kind of case study to see what happens here. Because if this happens, where does the government reach start or stop with banning of apps? Well, we talked about the top, you know, out of the top 10,

generally five or six of the top apps usually are Chinese-made and often government-backed. One of the top apps today in both Android and iOS is called Timu, and it's a shopping app. And it is affiliated with the Chinese government. If you do research, it's a little tricky to figure out how. But one of the things that came out earlier this week is, aside from some of the Timu security problems that we talked about here back in April, Timu's sister app, which is Pindu Duo, was actually caught using malicious code to bypass security settings to spy on other apps, read notifications and messages, even when the settings were changed. So this is something fairly new release. It was

released about a week ago, but the U.S. government is now saying to Timu that they're saying, hey, there's the same type of risk here that this could be occurring. With these malicious codes, sometimes it's very difficult to see what happens because it's happening in real time on the app. But Pindu Duo actually was intentionally, and when I say intentionally, it's malicious code to bypass the security settings to get information. So the recommendation from cybersecurity professionals is to not use the app Timu. Timu is a social selling app. It actually is a really unique way. If I buy something and I share it with Reed, Reed gets an additional discount and so on and so forth. But it just really talks to when we're downloading apps that we really need to

understand where they come from and what we're willing to give up. I think some of the experts talked about having a second phone or device that you don't use for anything sensitive. I think, well, at the surface, that sounds really easy. But a lot of us have two phones. But to really segregate out, this is the app, this is the phone I'm going to use these potentially malicious apps on versus the other, doesn't make a lot of sense in the long run. As usual, one of the things I often remind everybody of, and it's really important, is to make sure that on your smartphones and desktop computers and laptops that you're updating and patching, it's one way to stop some of this malicious code. Unfortunately, with this type of attack, you're actually downloading the app yourself, willfully bringing

it onto your phone, which in turn allows it to have access. This is malicious code. This is not asking you for that access. You're just actually granting it to download. But you're not saying, yes, you can have permissions to this. This is doing it behind the scenes. So we'll continue to monitor it here and continue to communicate it. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Tony.

Thank you very much, Tom, and really great updates from both you and Reid in terms of what's going on out there in the world. So let me actually start this week with a summary of a new article that I just published titled, We Can and Do Need to Solve the Problem of Retail Shrink. And I opened the article with a Wall Street Journal statement from the CEO of Target when he said, quote, the unfortunate fact is that violent incidents are increasing at our stores and across the entire industry. And when products are stolen, simply put, they are no longer available for guests who depend on them. Beyond safety concerns, worsening shrink rates are putting significant

pressure on our financial results, unquote. And this follows earlier this month, really, when Target also highlighted what Tom just said, which is retail crime is fueling a $500 million more in stolen and lost merchandise this year at Target compared to a year ago. And they're not the only ones. Other major retailers that are triggering similar retail theft alarms in their earnings call are Home Depot, Walmart, Best Buy, Walgreens, and CVS. It might be the three major challenges which, from discussions with technology companies and retailers, have been elevated as the highest USA priorities for loss prevention right now are active shooter,

safety, and organized retail crime. And the questions that I try to answer in the article are how do we get here? What's the latest data telling us? Is technology delivering on the solution promised? And how do we ultimately solve this problem? And as I summarize in that article, the pandemic was not counting to retail crime. In a different Wall Street Journal article, in fact, CVS even said that the pandemic, because of the pandemic, their stores experienced a 300% increase in theft since the pandemic started. The increase in organized retail crime compounds a problem for retail as a society.

And today, ORC is leading to more brazen and more violent attacks in stores throughout the country. Many of the criminal rings are orchestrated in these thefts are also involved in other serious criminal activities such as human trafficking, narcotics, weapons trafficking, and more. Tackling this growing threat is more important to the safety of store employees, customers, and communities across the country. So lots of pressure going on. And what you are seeing to me is real, more visible, and the retailers are more violent. In fact, there's some data that I point to in the article. And unfortunately, it's not isolated to just the United States. Other countries,

including UK and Australia, have been saying similar things. And as I summarize, the problem is complex, as are the solutions. A key message that I delivered is that retail technology solutions have not kept up, in my view, with the growth of the problems. Too many silo products are chasing niche opportunity. It's not tackling the challenges in an integrated approach with the top three priorities now required. The legal framework, in my view, was stuck in the past and is not keeping pace with advancements outside the retail industries better solutions are needed to address the challenges introduced by the world wide web into the retailer models and connectivity across interrelated framework is now the new required normal to effectively tackle the problem of retail shrink. Strong partnerships are needed across multiple boundaries, especially retailers and law enforcement.

The good news, I think there are some good models around the world. We just need to take some different new thinking in place to actually get into broader global adoption. Locking up merchandise to reduce shrinkage only reduces revenue and really forces consumers to look at alternate retail models. And safety needs to remain the number one priority in whatever path we take to address the problem of retail shrink. So the pandemic really did accelerate trends, but it didn't do it just for retail. It did it for a lot of different industries that were already underway. And it's time to reinvent retail, in my view, once again, to a brighter, more profitable future where we can manage shrink. And consumers, once again, are at the center of immersive, safer customer experiences.

Lots more in the arc, including data on violence and theft and apprehension, so I encourage you to look it up in social media. Switching topics, let me go to CNBC and a summary of the five takeaways that they saw from the recent earnings releases from Walmart and other retailers. Number one, sales trends have weakened in the retail industry so far. At least five retailers target Walmart, Tapestry, Bath & Body Works, and food lockers have all spoken about sales trends across the country getting worse in retail. Number two, inflation is still a key factor. It is easing, as the latest department said, but that's not a lot of comfort to consumers who are still paying a lot more at the grocery store than they did a few years ago. Number three, consumers are spending on needs, not ones. Targets, Home Depot and Walmart also are noticeable patterns.

One's targets, Home Depot and Walmart, also are noticeable patterns, fewer pricey items in their shopping carts. So they're just focusing on their needs. Number four, the weather has actually not cooperated in lower demand, and it's really not worked in the retail favorites. said. Cooler and wetter weather in California and parts of the western U.S. hit its sales, contributing to its biggest revenue miss in 20 years. Walmart is also eager to see a lot more warmer weather. And number five, shoppers are changing how they're shopping. They're becoming more last minute. So we're seeing a lot less buying early in the season, more in the late in the season. So no more stocking up early as we were doing in the past. And let me close with some interesting news that actually I saw from Apple in terms of the power of Apple. We all carry smartphones. Earlier this month, Apple, and this actually comes from Statista, earlier this month,

Apple reported their second quarter physical earnings, which included over $24 billion in profit on revenue of nearly $95 billion for the three months ending April 1, 2023. Those results translated into Apple having a 21% market share on smartphones, second only to Samsung. But if you look beyond the market share, Apple is winning a lot more other fronts. Thanks to its high average selling price and its healthy profit margins, Apple captures, are you ready for this, 50% of the global smartphone revenues and more than 80% of the industry profits in the first three months of 2023. Wow, in terms of what Apple is doing. And I do have a lot of Apple devices,

so they have hooked me. And with that, let me give it back to Reid. All right. Thanks so much, everybody. Thank you, Tom, earlier for that. That's some interesting feedback. And we know that chat and GPD, these different bots driven by AI, in this case, this generative AI, are making a huge move at a rapid pace. And the heads up and warnings about really what is authentic and what's not is a big help. We've already seen that some of these technologies are good at some things and not others.

I heard a University of Florida colleague of mine talk about hallucinations sometimes. In other words, false information or nonsensical information being put into things that are absolutely amazing. And again, you heard the bias warnings, that bias is in the eye of the beholder sometimes, and in this case, in the eye of the programmer. And so everybody has some biases to survive, according to psychologists. So stay tuned on that. But I think everybody's trying to do the right – or not everybody, the developers that are legitimate and the users that are needing stronger tools to get more done faster and more accurately

and include sources and citations of things that they just might not know about, no way have the time to go and find, even sometimes read and so on. But these technologies have huge upsides, but they come with a huge asterisk and warnings about buyer or user beware. And thank you, Tony, for all the insights around the U.S. and the globe. And it really is interesting how rapidly people are waking up and starting to understand the critical role that all this fraud and violence in retail environments is playing for the retailer, for that neighborhood, for that community, and for us as a nation in this case.

In an economy, even, in an economy even. It's just, it's pretty dramatic, but the harm, it's something I think all of us in this industry realized or were coming to realize years ago. Now, how do we address and attack it? And you mentioned, Tony, you call a big call out on integration, integration, integration, but integration, of course, like you say, around a common framework. What are we exactly trying to get done here? What's our strategy and what are we trying to get done? How are we trying to do that? Our operational design. And now let's integrate for effect. Let's trial. Let's fail. Let's learn. Let's readjust and adapt. So, all right. Good stuff. I appreciate it. I appreciate everybody for dialing in. We look forward to seeing everybody in Gainesville at the 2023 version of LPRC Impact. That first week in October, it's going to be

unbelievable. The content, the social and other engagement interactions, the Solutions Center, the events at the labs, outside the labs, in the Swamp Stadium and beyond. So it's not like anything else. If you haven't been to LPRC Impact, if you haven't been to Gainesville, if you haven't been into our lab suite and so forth, you just got to do it. And 400 to 500 of your colleagues will be. So we'd love to see you there. Go to lpresearch.org. Thanks, everybody, for tuning in. Stay safe and stay in touch. podcast is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for legal, financial, or other advice. Views expressed by guests of the Crime Science Podcast are those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions or positions of the Loss Prevention Research Council.