TBPN - Why My Article Just Tanked the Market

Episode Date: February 23, 2026

This is our full interview with Alap Shah, recorded live on TBPN.We discuss whether AI is triggering a structural decline in white collar jobs, why agentic AI may compress platform margins at companies like DoorDash and Uber,  how labs like Anthropic and OpenAI could capture enormous value as public markets struggle, and what political and economic solutions might prevent an AI driven contagion.TBPN is a live tech talk show hosted by John Coogan and Jordi Hays, streaming weekdays from 11–2 PT on X and YouTube, with full episodes posted to podcast platforms immediately after.Described by The New York Times as “Silicon Valley’s newest obsession,” TBPN has recently featured Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, Mark Cuban, and Satya Nadella.Sign up for TBPN’s daily newsletter at TBPN.comTBPN.com is made possible by:Ramp - https://Ramp.comAppLovin - https://axon.aiCisco - https://www.cisco.comCognition - https://cognition.aiConsole - https://console.comCrowdStrike - https://crowdstrike.comElevenLabs - https://elevenlabs.ioFigma - https://figma.comFin - https://fin.aiGemini - https://gemini.google.comGraphite - https://graphite.comGusto - https://gusto.com/tbpnKashi - https://kalshi.comLabelbox - https://labelbox.comLambda - https://lambda.aiLinear - https://linear.appMongoDB - https://mongodb.comNYSE - https://nyse.comOkta - https://www.okta.comPhantom - https://phantom.com/cashPlaid - https://plaid.comPublic - https://public.comRailway - https://railway.comRamp - https://ramp.comRestream - https://restream.ioSentry - https://sentry.ioShopify - https://shopify.comTurbopuffer - https://turbopuffer.comVanta - https://vanta.comVibe - https://vibe.coFollow TBPN:https://TBPN.comhttps://x.com/tbpnhttps://open.spotify.com/show/2L6WMqY3GUPCGBD0dX6p00?si=674252d53acf4231https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/technology-brothers/id1772360235https://www.youtube.com/@TBPNLive

And without further ado, we'll bring in our first guest to the show. A lot. How are you doing? What's going on? Oh, great. How are you guys? Doing great. Is this your first time triggering a global sell-off?

The first time so far, but I'm just the messenger. It's the way I look at it. We've got a lot of opportunities and a lot of scary things coming down the pipe. Okay. So, yeah, take us through the thought process. Like, how long have this been simmering? What was the actual process of putting together this report? And then what do you want people to take away from it?

And then maybe we can go into some of the reactions and your reactions to those reactions. Absolutely. The process ultimately is that I've been building an AI for 15 years and I've been an investor for 20. And so especially the last six months, as I've just been using agentic coding myself and my teams have adopted it, it's just been a step change function and how much we can get done. and just thinking through, hey, how is this going to, we're early, we're a startup, you know, we're going to be at the leading edge of how people are adopting things, you know, assume the corporate world is a year or two years away, it's going to be pretty profound.

And I think the underlying thing, you know, as, you know, sort of an amateur macroeconomist is we're just not producing white-collar jobs to begin with. I hadn't actually seen the extent of that until I kind of looked at, you know, specifically what we call like the information sector, so different parts of kind of technology, those jobs are down 8% from the peak in 2022 already. And so those are the places where people are adopting the most aggressively already. And we know, you know, every week there's firings out of like big tech. And so in that world, what happens when the technology that big tech's been using for a while has gotten a lot better?

And now, you know, your average corporate starts using it as well. It can get quite scary. And so, you know, we wanted to kind of think through the implications of that. And, you know, the piece. But how much of those layoffs do you think are, you know, we, We've talked about a bunch of those layoffs on the show. They're usually attributed to AI, but if you dig under the hood, it's like they just wanted to kind of resize or get more efficient or they're reprioritizing resources and not actually because they just launched some new agent and suddenly everything's changed. Hey, we don't need these thousand engineers anymore.

So I think, you know, those are all great corporate euphemisms and of course that's how they're going to say it. But I think the way I would think about this is it's not necessarily like agentic powers happened and now everyone's going to get fired. You know, agents and LLMs broadly are just sort of on the tech tree as a continuum from software. And so software has been making companies more efficient for decades. And, you know, that has caused a lot of downstream effects. And now that software has just become much more intelligent. And so in that sense, I think, you know, companies that are efficient have been doing a form of this for a really long time. And we think about the age starting now in 26 as just something that's going to accelerate that.

Okay. So yeah, what else was like key in the thesis or maybe potentially overlooked that you think people should be really focusing on? I think the problem, A, the first thing, the most important thing is just the labor market dynamics. We've just been in a really weak labor market for a while. And that's before these things roll out. But then you put that together with the fact that we just have a very structural environment where what is the thing that drives our entire economy? It's wages.

Most of those wages that are ultimately driving all the discretionary spending is coming from the white-collar worker. And the problem with that is that we're now entering this place where you made all these assumptions on loaning money to all these companies to mortgages and everything else. Like where white collar economy is our economy, if you all of a sudden just take a leg out of that economy, it has a contagion effect into basically every asset in the world. And so that I think is the part that people haven't thought about because when people were making these loans, no one ever consumed of a world in which, wow, okay, now like white collar jobs are in sort of permanent decline. If that's at 2% a year, then I think we can skate through. But if it's at 4% or 5% a year, then we need action a lot more quickly.

Is the white-collar economy actually the full economy, or is it more just like the stock market? Because it feels like white-collar workers are disproportionately allocated to assets versus consumption. And you see things like, you know, like there's a lot of health in more blue-collar sectors, health care is growing, and then you also see dynamics like just, you know, like we've seen like jitters in the in the, in the, consumer market for a long time and then we just see the health of the American consumer just continuing continue and continue and it feels like it's maybe driven by something like lower level and there's always this disconnect in my mind between

like the economy and the market it's a great question I think the issue here is that it's all just one labor market and right now blue collar is doing better because there are not firings there yeah I don't think you know I think robots are probably 18 like 24 to 36 months behind yeah other forms of ELMs that are just diffusing through society. But the problem is, let's just say that it's one labor market ultimately. If there's no more white collar jobs are going away, let's say, in our scenario, we talk about 5% of folks might get fired in a couple years. Those 5%, if there aren't white collar jobs for them to relocate into, then they're going to have to

move into the gig economy and the blue collar labor force. And so that puts pressure on the entire labor market, not just the white collar one. And to answer your other question, healthcare is growing, education is growing. The reason those things are growing ultimately. And we did some work in our piece to try and isolate white collar that is not government-driven. And so the government continues to spend more. That's why healthcare is growing. They're the biggest payer in health care. They're guaranteeing all the loans in the education industry. And so those sectors continue to grow because government spending grows. But that's, again, it gets very circular if government spending is coming primarily from taxes and primarily payroll taxes

because the average worker pays a lot more in taxes per dollar than the average corporate does. And so some corporates make a lot more money. Workers payroll taxes go down more than there is a bit of a contagion effect into bonds as well there too. On Saturday, John and I were going back and forth about some of the really wild predictions around the impact of the Internet that were being made in the 90s. There was clicks, replace bricks. People were predicting total die-off. Flicks did? Well, I mean, to be fair, I'm like that.

be like I'll just finish they were expecting a total die-off of all brick and mortar stores in five to 10 years which was like widely widely discussed prediction it was like why would you ever go to a store to buy something if you could just get it online sent to you directly yeah and I think a couple a couple other so like not as relevant to your piece but people were predicting like permanent high growth, the end of business cycles. There was the media disintermediation narrative, which was like the Napster era. Everyone was going to get all media for free forever. Newspapers would would die off. Record labels. Aren't you guys the media disintermediation narrative? Yeah, we are. But yeah, it's all about timelines. 20 years later and CNBC is still a much, much bigger business than

all all business media. at least in our world. But like newspapers, like magazines, completely gone, right? All of that has moved to the internet. Totally, totally. It's just like, like, like 5% employment shock and, you know, unique example. I mean, like a 5% unemployment shock is completely different if it happens over a quarter than if it happens over two decades, right?

Like, these are just fundamentally way different things. Yeah. Yeah. The other thing I would say is like there was like this concept of like frictionless capitalism, meaning that like middlemen would be eliminated because you could just go directly to the source and that would push pricing pressure down. My question, and I know you guys are not writing your piece saying like, you know, this, we believe we will stake our entire reputation on this sort of narrative. But what do you think? What, what how much did you pay attention to like the 90s, early 2000s internet predictions?

what do you think they got wrong? Why is this time different in terms of how a new technology will diffuse to the economy? I think the difference is if you just plot what's happening to technology, it's all just going exponentials. These are all just continuous timelines of like we have microcomputers, we have the internet, we have mobile phones, and today, you know, we have very powerful AI. And so I think most of the predictions that you ticked off there, it's kind of interesting, I would Just looking at them today, I would say they couldn't really happen until you had proper AI. Because if you have the ability to just freely, you know, have commerce the way you do today, doesn't work if you still have to do all the work.

Ultimately, like, you have to go in, you have to log. And think about the amount of friction there is in buying a product for most people today, right? You still have to go to the website. You have to put your credit card in. It's all work. We only have gotten to kind of the tech required for those predictions, I think, this year. And that's why this is the year that I think it really begins because now it is completely seamless. And no one's really doing this yet, but it's going to happen.

I think, you know, in the next six months is just tell your agent, you know, tell Gemini, tell ChatchipT, go buy these things. It has your credit card. And now that world that they were describing is truly going to come to pass. Yeah. What about the Canary and the coal mine analogy? I was looking at unemployment statistics in India and the Philippines. and it doesn't seem to be doom and gloom over there. I don't know.

I didn't dig in super far, but would you at least expect that the unemployment rate would spike overseas before it spikes in America? Or do you think this all happens simultaneously? It's a tricky question. I think ultimately white collar work is a lot more of our economy than it is the economy of India and the Philippines. And they are much sort of like more immature economies that are growing through investment and do things like that.

But certainly, I think we called it out. The consulting sectors in India are certainly going to be challenged in other places as well. But the reality is like the timing is everything in the markets clearly. But the trick here is if you're a corporate and you are hard pressed to get AI into your organization today, you know, chat DBT and Open AI will send you a forward deployed engineer if you have billion dollars in budget, right? If you have a $10 million budget, they're not going to. And so who are those folks turning to? can't usually do it themselves.

And so they are going to the outsource providers, the censures of the world. And so I think those businesses are likely going to be in a lot of trouble over the medium term, but they probably will have a big bump from people really putting that AI into their organizations first. And so it's a bit of a tricky timeline there. What moats do you think hold beyond this?

Because I think a lot of people latched on to like the DoorDash example as something that they thought had a moat. And that in the post, you sort of underline like how that could maybe not be as durable as a mode as people thought. But in the long case, like what moats do exist? Like do network effects stay? Do complex coordination, intellectual property? Like what doesn't break down?

You know, real brand value where people are choosing you over other things because of the brand and the status signaling across brands matters a ton. network effects are more powerful than ever, I think, in this world. So things like meta really have a lot to sort of gain in that sense. But I think things that look like their network effect businesses, but in fact are just the ones that are doing the hard work of aggregating demand and supply, I think will be more challenged. And so Doordash is a good example there.

It's not necessarily the biggest risk versus some of the other things. But I just was in a thread with Gavin Baker talking about this. But the problem for DoorDash and Uber and folks like that is right now, they're doing two jobs. They're doing the job of aggregating demand and the job of aggregating supply. They're both hard jobs, but the demand side is the harder side. And we think the world of the future, there are lots of folks in, let's say, food delivery, you know, Instacart wants to get a bunch of market share. And, you know, Grubb Hub wants to get a bunch of market share. And so let's say the agents are the ones doing the buying. It's 2028 and 40% of the sales are through agents. You just tell Gemini, hey, order me some noodles.

in that world instead of it's going to go to each and every provider. And right now there are four providers that do that. But now it's very easy. If I'm building a startup in the space, previously I had to get all the drivers on board, get all the restaurants on board, and acquire customers. Now, Gemini and ChatchipT are acquiring the customers for me,

and all I have to do is get the supply side going. So it makes it much easier for new entrants to come in. And for existing, you know, second, third, fourth tier players can really sort of say, hey, I'm going to like relax my margins, try to get more top line. And so you would think that, you know, whatever the 15% Vig is that Doordash gets today, maybe it's more than that. You know, some of that, I would think Gemini and ChatchipT are going to ask for themselves. Wherever I send the traffic, I'm going to get a piece of that.

And then some of that's going to go back to the consumer. Yeah, it feels like, was this the most like stretched or controversial prediction? It seems like it was certainly the one that got, you know, that's getting the most chaps. And I think we did it for a reason. We wanted to be a little provocative in thinking it through because, you know, it's an amazing business and they're gaining a much market share. But the fundamental idea that you're, because what did the lock in, right? Like the drivers have lock in on DoorDash or on Uber?

Not really, right? They're, you know, most drivers are doing Lyft and Uber, so they're not locked in. The real lock in, the real business value, the franchise value of an Uber or DoorDash is the customer lock in because the customer gets comfortable, they've got everything saved, they want to hit a couple buttons. They don't price shop. Agents are happy to price shop as much as possible. And so if you take that away, then it's a real problem for businesses that are ultimately built on customer lock in.

Yeah. Yeah, I don't know. I think the interviews that we've had with the lifts, I mean, you know, again, take away the grain of salt. They have a narrative that is important to their business. But like, if you ask these people, what is the greatest challenge? It is managing the supply side. It is not the demand side is not where they're. they're saying like, hey, like, this is really what we need to solve.

It's like, hey, as we get more drivers on the platform, revenue naturally, naturally goes up. And so I just, I'm just hard pressed to imagine a world in which, you know, somebody, think about if somebody in my town, which is like 15,000 people, like vibe codes, a delivery, a delivery app. and I go into chat GPT or with another agent, and I say, like, I want food. It's like the agent wants to get the best possible service. I would imagine the agent to route to the platform

with the supply that is going to be able to deliver in the shortest possible time horizon. And imagining a world where there's like this, you know, vibe-coded, small team operating that just happens to aggregate as much supply, which is just this increased. the likelihood that my order will be delivered on the best possible timeline, which is going to be the number one factor for customer satisfaction. I just don't see how solving the front end kind of demand piece actually

makes a better consumer experience, which I assume the agent would optimize for on behalf of the user. So let's consider what actually happens here, right? You make the order on DoorDash. DoorDash sends it to the restaurant. The restaurant essentially, you know, something. Sometimes they use their own drivers, sometimes they send the drivers from DoorDash. But now imagine the agent can take you directly to the restaurant site and place to order directly with the restaurant. And you can keep half the savings and the agent can keep half the savings, right? But where's the driver?

Where's the driver coming from? Because I feel like I understand the customer demand side. Like you start with an LLM or an agent who shops around for you. So maybe that's solved. Maybe it'll find you just via SEO, and you can just put out, like, we only take a 5% cut instead of 15% and the agent picks you.

I understand getting all the restaurants on board because you email them and say, hey, it's 5% instead of 15%. They're sure, we'll turn it on. But for the drivers, how do you actually reach out to them and get them on the platform? And how does AI lower that cost? Because right now, I think about like, what was the driver marketing?

budget over the last decade at Uber or at DoorDash. And it's probably like in the billions of dollars. And so I feel like to generate that much liquidity, I have to invest that much to onboard all those drivers, build awareness. Maybe it just goes viral because they're like, hey, I can make more money here, but that feels hard. I think it's going to take time,

but I think there are a bunch of smaller sort of driver aggregation networks that exist today that are not the ones that we know about. For instance, I started a business called Thistle, and we do delivery of healthy foods to your door. We split it between half of them our own employee drivers and the other half, I think we have like 500 or 700 drivers that we just use a third-party service to provide.

So I think there are a lot more of these businesses. All those businesses now will also just have huge opportunities to kind of take market share. Ultimately, what we're saying is the friction in doing commerce is going way down, places where there are rents. The prices can go down. But ultimately, this is just an opportunity for more entrepreneurs to kind of build businesses

for the new world. Yeah, I think it's interesting because we're here debating like this somewhat temporary thing because self-driving cars, robotics, like changes all of that in a huge way. But we use the term slopable for companies that can be vibe-coded away and clankable for companies that can be disrupted by robotics.

And I've always put the delivery services more in the clankable category than the sloppable category. So I was shocked to see. What are the, what would you spend more time on if you knew you were going to get 50 million views and the markets would react in the way that they have? I would have finished writing the third piece where I talk about solutions, which I have not got. A lot of people are demanding solutions. You just got a, you just hit me with a ton of problems. That's funny.

Do you think that there's any, there's this question about like, in my mind, like, yes, Google and Nvidia are public, but Anthropic, Open AI, and XAI through SpaceX are not public. There's sort of like this massive, you know, multiple hundred billion dollar sell-off in the public markets that sort of should, if you believe your thesis, that should sort of funnel to the labs, I would imagine. When I read it, like there's a lot of doom and gloom about companies that are out there, but it's a lot of bull case for AI labs. But that can't happen in one day because like rounds happen every once in a while. They're private. There's all these different things. But do you think that the world would change when the big labs get out in the public markets?

I think it's absolutely going to change. I have a strong suspicion that Anthropic is going to go, you know, in the next three to six months. They just have so much momentum and there's a lot of value being first. Their P&L also just looks a lot better than anyone else. So I would think that gets public and it's going to be pretty interesting. interesting if it happens. Certainly labs are ultimately, they seem like they're very well positioned to win. I would wonder over the medium term, like, you know, what happens with some of the Chinese models and whatnot if people actually want just something that's more local and something

that they own, but it does seem like the most likely outcome is going to be that the existing incumbents are going to get the most share. And I think Google is particularly well positioned since they already own all those customers today and they can finance losses from inference a lot longer than everyone else. But I think ultimately, like, there's a world in which the labs are the biggest winners here. There's also a world in which, like, you end up with just a lot more competition and people trade and change. But the thing that seems very clear to me that the absolute, like, there's no way they won't be the hugest winners here is going to be the underlying tech, meaning the semiconductors. So, you know, everything and you go even deeper. You could go into,

like, you know, commodities and like copper and energy and oil and natural gas and stuff. And people have. Yes. Did you see that? I have to. Yeah. Did you see some of the criticism was that the essay was very Marxist? Oh, yeah. Heet said, Marx, writing during the Industrial Revolution predicted capitalism would periodically devour itself.

Firms replace labor with machinery to boost profits, but competition diffuses the technology drives prices to marginal costs and the gains get competed away. Meanwhile, displaced workers lose purchasing power, hollowing out the demand the whole system depends on. Production rises, but no one can afford to buy what's produced. contradiction between production and realization. So Trini's piece describes this exact dynamic, then declares there's no natural break.

It's the most Marxist piece of financial analysis. Not my word. I don't think you were expecting that critique. And makes the same errors Marx did. Yeah. Creative destruction doesn't just destroy. It creates industries we can't yet conceive of. Yeah, that's interesting.

I mean, maybe that's going in the solutions. Is that going into solutions? So let me address it a few ways. Mark's was a really smart dude. He got a lot of things. right very early. Marxists can mean communist. Marxist can also mean just understanding how capital and later interact. And in that sense, yes, it was Marxist. He was very insightful. But I think the thing that we're missing here is that there's there's the economic layer, but ultimately it's the

political layer that matters. And we're in a world where we've we've had two parties. And both parties economically have a little bit of difference but not a huge amount of difference and so we kind of bicker but in a world in which jobs are going away really fast I think there's going to be a much stronger alignment for you know just the laboring class overall to say hey we need to fix this problem it's a very fixable problem what I'm what we're actually expounding here is that GDP if done properly will absolutely explode right we're getting way more efficient we have you know we've built a machine dot we build machine intelligence but we have to

structure our society such that as those things happen, hopefully very slowly, you know, we do the right thing from a taxation perspective to say the winners should win, but, you know, if that's what's causing the displacement, let's sort of make the pie a little bit bigger for everyone. And that I think ultimately should be something that appeals to a lot of folks in the AI complex. Because if we don't, then something like this is likely to happen. And, you know, AI progress will slow down because we'll have an economic crisis and we're not going to go to finance nearly as much of it as we otherwise would. So do you think the future, sure is what Anthropics head of sales position in France, the company will be spending 530,000

euros per year. The government will get 340,000 euros, and the employee will get 190,000. Is that the level of taxation? Do you think we're headed for? I think when we're at, you know, France's level of government spending, then, you know, the math probably means roughly that. I would say that, you know, government spending would be at France's level, I'm guessing, like, you know, five or seven years from now if this, if this scenario kind of comes to pass. And so I think we'll head there over time, but I think it's less a question of the percent of spending and how much goes to the employee versus goes to the government. And ultimately, what is the size of the total pie? So the bet here is that the pie, if done properly, can just increase multiples of what it is today. And thus, you know, it's just a win-win.

One question, I mean, it sounds like you're working on potential solutions post, which I'm very excited to read. Thank you. I'm interested to know your reflection on the messaging that's coming from the leaders of the AI labs, because they've outlined many sort of low probability, but, you know, potentially negative scenarios. You know, we have the white color work number. We've had many of these comments. from lab leaders, but I rarely hear them follow it up with, and the answer is print, print, print, or interest rates will save us, or unemployment insurance, or UBI, all of those solutions that I think people, it's funny because people are quoting your post being like, this is easily solved with this solution. It's like, okay, well, that's great, if we all agree.

And I think you might, some of the quotes, people are all over the place. But I'm wondering about your reflection on like the, the like the messaging from the labs around solutions versus pure focus on problems. I think it's a really interesting question and very interesting setup in that the labs are, on the one hand, you know, want to get the word out there. And so, you know, Dario especially has been the loudest here. There's a really good Axios article from last May where he's kind of sound of the alarm bells. People aren't really, he's like saying people are not listening. Obviously a lot has changed since then.

but they can't go so far as to say like, hey, if you put the pieces together, then this is how it's going to play out. I think it's too sort of damaging to sort of their reputations and like, you know, their ability to fundraise and things like that. And so I think it's other folks like ourselves that kind of have that duty to go and really start thinking that through. It seems like Anthropic is pretty engaged. Should that conversation really start happening? I think this is the year it needs to really start happening. And so I think they all kind of get it. And so it's just a question of like how do we as a society start moving in that direction? Yeah I think you know obviously there's there's I'm still processing part of the piece I agree with some of it I disagree with some of it

but what's really underrated is just like how useful this process of writing an article for a particular audience is like I disagree with a lot of you know something big is happening but it hit with a very different audience than machines of loving grace or the adolescent essence of AI or of machine intelligence. And there's pieces that are written for like, you know, AI, insiders, leaders, researchers. Then there's like the broader tech community. Then there's like everyday people. And you clearly hit the nail on the head with like speaking to the financial community.

And we see that in the market's not amazing results. But maybe it's worthwhile because we will get really great solutions and a better conversation around it. So I think in due time this discussion needed to be had. So thank you. What's an industry or job of the future that you could see emerging? I think, again, if we solve this, like everything related to sort of leisure is going to absolutely zoom. And those are going to be the biggest growth industries of the future, right? Like, what do humans want to do?

Total chess. Watch polo. Like a cloned horse play polo for sure. Yeah. So, you know, imagine humans have like the entire day to just enjoy themselves instead of having to work. Now, that is something I've been promised for 100 years. So I'm deeply skeptical. But this time is different.

I want it to be different. Let's bring on the leisure. Boom. I'm here for it. I'm here. Anything in your solutions, Doc, around reindustrialization? I mean, the frustration that somebody. people in tech that have been building in kind of hardware in the real world or trying to recruit

people that that are getting offers from social media companies or now labs or SaaS companies. You know, one of the problems of America in the last 20 years was that if you just wanted to make $100 million, you probably were much more likely to do that building enterprise software than building critical infrastructure or anything in the real world. So is that kind of new infrastructure and reindustrialization, like a potential landing point for people that had the 180K a year PM job that might be going away? It's a great question.

I think there's certainly going to be a lot more opportunity in those sectors, and I think we've done some pretty smart policy things that are moving us in that direction. but we're also, you know, just in a lot of ways so far behind China there, and doesn't AI affect kind of those jobs both for, you know, on the reindustrialization side, just like it does for writing code. And so that's where I think it will get quicker. I think over as a country, we're going to spend an awful lot more on that. And I think we're going to catch up.

But we're not, it's not clear that's going to be through just creating a bunch of additional jobs versus, you know, the ultimate thing we're seeing with AI period is just high agency people. who really know how to reuse the tools can just do the work of many, many people. And I think that trend applies in every industry to some extent. Yeah. What an exciting time. Thank you so much for taking the time. What's the next piece dropping?

Hopefully by the end of the week, but don't hold me to that. When you know that it could be hard for the follow-up to get as much reach as this one. That's kind of the way these things go. But now the pressure's on to really pay attention. Just don't have any sequel anxiety, anxiety. You'll be fine. We're excited to read it, and we'll talk to you soon. Yeah, great to meet you.

Have a great rest of your day. Thanks so much.