Yet Another Value Podcast - Greystone Capital Management's Adam Wilk on $SYZ.TO resurgence following corporate overhaul

Episode Date: December 27, 2023

Adam Wilk, CFA, Founder and Portfolio Manager of Greystone Capital Management, LLC, joins the podcast to discuss his thesis on Sylogist (TSX: SYZ), provider of mission-critical SaaS solutions to over 2,000 public sector customers globally across the government, nonprofit, and education verticals. For more information about Greystone Capital Management, please visit: https://www.greystonevalue.com/ Sylogist write-up in Q1 2023 Letter: https://www.greystonevalue.com/_files/ugd/47fd79_4bc7a737390344ceb68d07367503b878.pdf Chapters: [0:00] Introduction + Episode sponsor: Alphasense [1:32] Overview of Sylogist (TSX: SYZ) and why Adam finds it interesting [9:00] $SYZ.TO strategic review and why pivoted the way they did [15:49] How $SYZ.TO has evolved over last few years [18:31] How $SYZ.TO management team is incentivized [21:41] How is $SYZ.TO beating larger competitors for business / how is transitioning from "on-premises" to cloud offering creating growth? / Pricing power [30:11] Microsoft partnership [34:28] Focus on nonprofit and government verticals; value proposition for these target customers / biggest competitor [38:36] Nonprofit space / Government ERPs [42:20] $SYZ.TO earnings, specifically on EBITDA [49:01] Thoughts on what CEO meant when he said "We're stepping on the gas for growth in 2024" on the Q3 call [52:36] $SYZ.TO valuation and final thoughts Today's episode is sponsored by: Alphasense This episode is brought to you by AlphaSense, the AI platform behind the world's biggest investment decisions. The right financial intelligence platform can make or break your quarter. AlphaSense is the #1 rated financial research solution by G2. With AI search technology and a library of premium content, you can stay ahead of key macroeconomic trends and accelerate your investment research efforts. AI capabilities, like Smart Synonyms and Sentiment Analysis, provide even deeper industry and company analysis. AlphaSense gives you the tools you need to provide better analysis for you and your clients. As a Yet Another Value Podcast listener, visit alpha-sense.com/fs today to beat FOMO and move faster than the market.

This episode is brought to you by Alpha Sense, the AI platform behind the world's biggest investment decisions. The right financial intelligence platform can make or break your quarter. Alpha Sense is the number one rated financial research solution by G2. With AI search technology and a library of premium content, you can stay ahead of key macroeconomic trends and accelerate your investment research efforts. AI capabilities like smart synonyms and sentiment analysis provide even deeper industry and company analysis. Alphasense gives you the tools you need to provide better analysis for you and your clients. As yet another value podcast listener, visit alpha dash sense.com slash fs today to beat

FOMO and move faster than the market. That's alpha dash sense.com slash FS. All right. Hello. Welcome to yet another value podcast. I'm your host, Andrew Walker. If you like this podcast, we'd mean a lot, if you had rate, subscribe, review, wherever you're watching or listening to it with me today.

I'm happy to have on for the second time. My friend, Adam, Woke, Adam, how's it going? Good. Thanks. Thanks for having me back. Hey, I'm excited. It's been too long. Both you and I were like, I've been like I should have Adam back. I don't know how it went this long. But happy to have you back. Before we dive into today's podcast, let's just start a quick disclaimer. Nothing on this podcast investing advice. That's always true. But particularly true today. We're going to be talking about a Canadian domiciled company on the smaller cap side. So people should keep just keep in mind those do carry extra wrists. Though this is a real company. You know, we've had some companies that were very binary recently. this is a real company here. So anyway, Adam, you've got a great write-up on your website. I think it was part of your Q3 letter as well. I can't remember. Right? No, this wasn't part of your Q3 letter, but you've got a great write-up on your website. The company you want to talk about today is syllogamous. The ticker is S-Y-Z on the Canadian line. And I'll just turn it over to you. What is syllogist, and why are they so interesting?

Yeah, thanks again. I don't have my Santa hat on today, but I'm going to gift your listeners with, or Mr. Market is going to gift your listeners with a really good opportunity. in the business. Podcasts over. We can no longer continue this podcast out through that. Yeah. So Cilogist is a public sector software business and we can get into the business a little bit more in depth in a minute. But the reason I find it interesting is because this is a really good business that normally wouldn't be available at the current valuation, given its fundamentals and what the company has undergone some significant changes over the last couple of years, including starting with running a strategic review, which led to a management change, a dividend

cut, a huge strategy shift, some M&A, and now a return to organic growth. And these changes are behind them now, and their recent performance has been excellent. So what we're left with today is a high-quality business that's being run to create shareholder value for the first time in company history, and it trades at both a cheap, absolute, and relative valuation. And the prior version of the business existed as kind of a crappy reseller of software before pivoting into delivering their own public sector software, which they obtained via M&A. And the prior management team's focus was to make acquisitions, harvest the cash flow, pay a large dividend while reinvesting nothing into the core business and completely

neglecting customer relationships. And their compensation was based on a percentage of free cash flow, which I actually don't think I've ever seen before. And that sort of led to the perfect example of show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome where they were doing nothing to drive shareholder value and the business probably had no reason to be public. And since 2020, some larger shareholders, it's not really an activist thing with some larger shareholders have voiced their concern and wanted to make some changes. And there were also some bids coming in for the business, just given its strength and quality and the, um,

value of these types of companies to strategic and financial acquires. And they make the long story short, they exited the strategic review with the mandate of we're going to actually bring in a good management team, we're going to return the business to growth, and we're going to try to drive value moving forward as opposed to just sell the business. And so since that time period, the companies transformed their business into a more durable, faster growing, more cloud software-focused company that's actually being driven by people who care about increasing the company's earnings power and valuation.

So the business itself, as I mentioned, is a public sector software business. And the sort of 10-K definition is they provide mission-critical software solutions to over 2,000 customers in three separate verticals. They've got a nonprofit vertical where they operate their syllogist mission segment, which is like nonprofit ERP, amongst some other things. They have a government segment where they cater to government organizations and smaller municipalities, and they have an education segment where they cater to schools and school districts.

And within these verticals, some of their solutions, as I mentioned, consists of things like ERP, CRM, fundraising, software education, administration, and then some payments products. And you can think of companies like Salesforce, Workday, BlackBaud, Tyler Technologies, when trying to sort of comp their product set. These guys still just operates in different end markets and a little bit smaller focus. And within the public sector space as opposed to enterprise, like Tyler goes after larger organizations and municipalities, BlackBot is a little bit bigger, obviously Salesforce and Workday as well.

But they're also in areas with less attention. And they cater to smaller organizations that typically haven't been served by these larger players. Today, those three segments make up about 85% of their revenue, with the rest kind of stemming from some legacy products. And 65 to 70% of their revenues are occurring between cloud subscriptions and maintenance and support with professional services, which is like software implementations and customizations filling in the gap. So the base of recurring software revenue should continue to move upward over time. And the company has a goal of shifting that mix to 80% software revenues and 20% project services or professional services over time. And importantly

here, and one of the things I liked about when studying this business was that their end markets mean less competition. Larger businesses or enterprise focus competitors aren't really well adapted to offer the customized solutions that they can. And they've done a nice job of wedging themselves in between some of these larger organizations like a Salesforce, like a Tyler, like a BlackBaud by providing really great support, lower pricing, and much more functionality and customization. So their products carry really high value props among their customer set, and they lead to really sticky relationships, and they serve a critical need to all their customers.

It's not just lip service when they say that. And one example would be maybe a nonprofit that requires advanced fund accounting and donor management software that kind of ties into the rest of their applications, which helps eliminate some of the manual processes, and they can connect things to their CRN, their email, their financials, or excuse me, their banking, and it helps with data input and storage and kind of ease of use. And it's important to note that a lot of their products are built on the back of the Microsoft Dynamics ecosystem, Dynamics 365, and that relationship and those dynamics provide a pretty decent moat in the area of the public sector space, which we can talk

about more. And they also have the ability to kind of tailor or customize those solutions to their customers. And, you know, in a high level, as I was saying earlier, these businesses like public sector and government software businesses make for great businesses. They have significant durability, economic resilience, high margins, customer, excuse me, customer stickiness and really strong cash flow profiles. And there's also a massive appetite for M&A. space. And you can take a look at Tyler Technologies in BlackBaud, who have kind of laid out the recipe for success in the industry, and they have ridiculous, you know, 10 and 20 year return profiles just by layering M&A on top of organic growth. So they serve as pretty decent case studies

for success. I'm certainly not comparing syllogist to those two companies, but it's a decent proxy. Are there decent proxies? And lastly, and I'll pass the mic, the company is now focused on building out there organic, recurring software revenues and sort of landing and expanding customers to drive that recurring revenue profile. And they've done a great job in the last three quarters have been record quarters and the sort of strategic shift that they made is paying off in a big way. And they're executed really well at this stage. That was a great overview. I'll try to dive into a few things. So I guess just to start, You covered, I did want to set this stage because I do think people, like, it is important to note the prior management team, the strategic and everything you did.

You cover the private management team's focus. I love that the adjusted free cash flow and then just not returning, putting anything back in the business. You know what they did, though? I'm surprised they paid on a dividend because if you're paid on adjusted free cash flow, like one of the things that a lot of companies would do is keep all the free cash flow, not invest in any capax, but use that free cash flow just to fund growth, right? So at least they were paying a dividend, like that has the recipe for not just cut to the bone, but also just growth at any cost, right? Because if they go buy a competitor at a 50 times free cash foot multiple, right? Like, they're still going to get paid. That's 2% increase. They're still going to get paid off that 2% increase.

So, yeah, I'm surprised, but I didn't figure that one out why they did that. And it was a, you know, the stock had drifted lower during 22. So it was a high, high yield they were paying out. But yeah, I couldn't figure that one out. It seems counterintuitive to just them trying to. make as much money as possible, but they're already overpaid, so. But I completely agree. So there are two things in the history I want to talk about. So you talked about the permanent, the first is the strategic review, right? Because in my history, when I see a strategic review,

a failed strategic review, and I step in, it's certainly not good, right? The reason it failed was because a bunch of buyers came in, they kind of looked under the covers and they said, oh, there are some issues here. We're not going to buy this company, right? And the issues of generally come back to help me. Now, obviously, this was a strategic. review that happened in late 2020. So this is over three years ago at this point. Business change new CEO, but it does kind of stick in my mind. This was a company that wanted to sell themselves and sell. So can you talk just a little bit more about the strategic review and why they pivoted to the way they pivoted? Sure. So, you know, given what I described about the characteristics of these

businesses, they make for very good and easy acquisition targets for PE and strategic, other strategic businesses, you can look at Tyler's track record and BlackBaud as well. In the case of syllogist, you kind of hit the nail on the head. There were some buyers around the time they're running the strategic review and they hired a really prominent M&A firm out of Chicago to help them out. And this company has a long history of getting businesses like Siljus sold. And they brought people to the table. And the fear was that once a company acquired syllogist, the RP firm that all the customers would walk out the door. Because when I say that the prior management team, they collected customer relationships, it can't be overstated how badly they did that.

And you can get a glimpse of that during the, if you listen to the company's Investor Day, which is the first one they held in early 23, I went in person. And the CEO of the Wood, he was talking about how the current management team inherited, what they inherited. And he was just talking about how bad it was, and how customers were literally, you know, to the point of walking out the door. And so they had to make a lot of changes to basically both appease their customers, but also to, I guess, to let people know that the business wasn't pulling apart to repair the public market reputation.

And they saw a significant opportunity to do so by remaining public and not selling the business. And there's a lot to unpack here. There's a reason why they brought in the CEO, Bill Wood. He's a 20-year software veteran. He's spearheaded two exits. One company he ran was purchased by Constellation Software. Another one was purchased by a private equity group.

So he's run this playbook before of organic growth and some M&A. And again, he's been in the software space for a while. And it was kind of coincidental because during the time that they were interested in pushing the prior management team out and running the strategic review to initially get the business sold, a larger shareholder who's still involved had been. part of this story for a while and I think they kind of wanted to wipe their hands with this thing and realize that, as I said before, the business had no reason being public. And so they were pushing for like a quicker outcome.

But during COVID, obviously the world changed and these massive shifts toward digitization of everything started to take place. And among syllogists and markets, you see this massive opportunity, number one, to transition a lot of these smaller businesses who either use no software. at all or are on maybe like a Microsoft legacy great planes or something along those lines, there's a massive opportunity to transition these businesses to a cloud-based system. And you can go through Tyler's recent calls and some of their operational efforts over the last couple of years.

And they talk all about this, about attacking that sort of white space and the opportunity there. They're in the middle of shifting all their revenues to more SaaS-based from on-premise. And that's taking place across the industry. And if you look among education, among nonprofit, among government, there are just these massive trends that are taking place, whether it's the reduced age of the workforce, whether it's the need for citizens to engage and parents to engage with their schools and governments in a digital way, whether it's just the growth of cloud-based platforms, payments, payments, products, anything that basically makes, allows people and businesses to operate digitally is just one of these massive sort of secular trends. that's causing a lot of growth in this area and actually has provided some secular tailwinds for the business to really grow into that. And so they were consulting with this M&A firm and they were talking to potential.

They brought in people like Bill to actually help give them some ideas. And they got to know him over time and realize that he would be a great fit to run the business based on what I just described. So it ended up being a combination of they needed to repair customer relationships in a big way, which they've since done. Their net promoter score has more than doubled and they have one of the highest among their comp set. And they also realize that there's a massive white space to transition a lot of their customers to the cloud, but also to maybe grow their sales and marketing efforts a bit

and try to grow the business overall. So a combination of those two things, I think, led them to believe that they could really like shift the business mix and transition it to something significant over time. And it's been working largely and, you know, kind of here we are today. And now a quick break to remind you that this episode is brought to exclusively buy AlphaSense, the AI platform behind the world's biggest investment decisions. AlphaSense gives you the tools you need to provide better analysis for you and your clients. As yet another value podcast listener, visit Alpha-dashcense.com slash FS today to beat FOMO and move faster than the market. That's alpha dash sense.com slash FS. If I could just yes and

everything you said, look, I'd encourage people to go flip through the Investor Day deck, But I'm looking at two particular things that I think really stand out. And like, I kind of think people should just keep this in their mind when they think through this opportunity and why this opportunity exists. Again, they paid out this huge dividend. They were this no growth dividend company that was kind of basically literally milking their software for all it was worth, right? So they cut the dividend.

And whenever you go from huge dividend payer to no dividend, that's always going to be create an interesting share return. But the two interesting things I think that really back everything you said, I'm kind of over NPS because I never see a company that's like, oh, our NPS sucks. Like every company, their NPS is always improving. But to me, the proof is in dollars, right? And the dollars to me are, A, I'm looking at slide 49, from March 2022 to this is March 2023, their net dollar retention rate goes from 87% to 106%.

So I think that speaks to investing by getting their customers comfortable. And then along the line of what you're saying, 2020, their EBITDA margin is 54% and their organic growth is negative 5%. So literally they're milking, running this, no reinvestment. super high cash flow, just milking it. By Q1, 2023, their organic growth is 21%, but their margins are down to 24%. So that is the definition of, hey, we're reinvesting into our product, right? We're hiring that sales and marketing team. We're taking care of our customers. We might have, I believe, they lowered prices for a few of their customers, but because of that, they're growing

again. So this is going from, we're milking the business for all that's worth, everything's cut to the bone to, hey, maybe a little lower margins in the short term, but we're going to create a sustainable growing company in the long term. And, you know, 25% margins. If you're growing 20%, that creates a lot of value real fast. Yeah, that's all great points. And, you know, part of the reason, or I'm sorry, there are a lot of moving parts here. And you can literally map the stop chart from 2020, give or take a few time periods where you can see what's happening as the market reacts to some of these changes that are taking place. And it's a lot to digest. If you're not in a crowd where it's worthwhile to evaluate and own a $160 million market cap

business, then you're probably not going to be paying attention. And there's, again, a lot of moving parts. There was a management change. There's a strategy shift. The dividend was cut. They made three acquisitions in a very short period of time. They're now growing their software base. They did an investor day.

They're changing the way they communicate. So it's taken, you know, it's been a few years. And the inflection of organic growth in software revenues has kind of just taken place over the last three and four quarters, but there are a lot of moving parts here. And I think we all try to identify, we find something we like that's trading at a cheap valuation. We all try to identify why that is. I think they're very clear and specific points here, where at least makes me think that, you know, I'm not missing anything. We mentioned the prior management team was incentivized on free cash flow and not free cash flow per share, just adjusted free cash flow.

And that really encouraged them to just, you know, cut all the catbacks, juice that cash flow number in the short term. Let's talk about just quickly, you know, you mentioned in, again, I'll include a link to your write-up in the show notes, but you mentioned in your write-up, this management team, the new management team, is incentivized to grow shareholder value, you think. So why don't we just quickly talk about how this management team's incentivized? Sure. So, look, I mean, my preference is to invest alongside owner operators. And that's for a number of reasons. In this case, the CEO and CFO are both external hires and they hadn't been with the business for a long period of time.

These are very net positive things because clearly it wasn't working with the prior management team and was, I kind of laughed through looking at the last management team's incentive structure, but the CEO has a very large options package, 500,000 total, 250K of which best, when the share price is a $10 Canadian, the other 250 best at $15 Canadian. The current stock price is $6.80, 75 cents, Canadian. And so he stands to do it very well if the stock does well. And I've gotten to know him over time, you know, take that with a grain of salt or how you will. But he's very focused on, he's maniacally focused on growing the business and making sure there's a successful outcome here.

I think his network and background mean that there's at least the possibility that the business could be acquired over time. And it would just have to, in conversations with management and some of the board, it would just have to be at a price much higher than where the stock trades today, given all that the business has accomplished and this really successful sort of turnaround of strategy shift. So, you know, he's told me he's on board to try to make a lot of money. And, you know, I can discount those comments, but I definitely appreciate that. And so if the stock price does well, minus dilution and they can grow their earnings power, I think everybody benefits.

And, you know, the CFO, there's been some small insider buying here and there. and the company has, I guess, in a positive way, because you don't always see this with companies, you know, sub 500 million, et cetera, but capital allocation has been really good. They've shown to be very shareholder friendly. They're super open with their communication. And those are all very positive signs. And so the owner-operator thing is, again, a big deal. But given the sort of comp package and how everyone stands to benefit moving for, I think I'm comfortable with it. And they're, you know, they're really incentivized to drive a wasn't about come here. And the only thing you didn't mention there, you were about to, and then I think you win a different point. They do have a share buyback program in place. In a Canadian company, it's an NCIB. I can't remember what that stands for.

But basically, the rules of Canada are different. You have to file NCIB. You have to, I think, report daily what your stock repurches are, and you have to kind of do it systematically. And they're hitting it. So, you know, whether, rightly or wrongly, they see value in the shares. And the CEO, hopefully with that huge stock option package is motivated to get the stock price up.

And right now, he thinks the best way to do that is spend some of their capital to deploy shares. Let me assume the most more. So we can dive into each of the verticals. But look, if I said, hey, Adam, SaaS, I've got a SaaS business. You could run it not investing into Salesforce, marketing anything for years and run it at 50% EBITDA margins, get tons and tons of cash flow. That's how sticky. That's how good this is. You mentioned when you were talking about competitors, Tyler, BlackBaud, Salesforce, a few others.

Like, these are big companies, right? So my question is just, this is a $300 million company, right? They were in maybe not the stress, but customers were trying to, were actively leaving, right? Organic growth touched almost negative 10% for a while. Customers were leaving. How is this? And now they're growing again or growing organically. How is this company winning in this vertical against, you know, if I, there's the old, no one ever got fired for buying IBM?

Right? If I was a administrator at a public school, I might just go with Tyler because, you know, Tyler's a big company and I can feel pretty comfortable. I'm not taking, risking my job here. I don't really have the incentives to go crazy. How does syllogist win in these markets? So the majority of their growth recently has come from their ill syllogist mission segment, which is a non-profit, ERP-related products. That's probably their fastest growing segment as well outside. Oh, that's not true. They have much. smaller segment of government that's growing really fast and some of the services as well. But most of the revenue at this stage and the bulk of growth has come from their nonprofit ERP. Once they sort of started to repair the customer relationships, like do things as simple as make themselves available with support. Or actually, you know what, I can take a step back. They didn't even have a support program for multiple years. I spent a lot of time. I also had to figure out if the business was falling apart,

before buying any. So I spent a lot of time with customers and former customers and, or I guess customers, because I didn't really talk to any formers, but they were basically telling me that for a very long period of time under the prior management team, they would need help. They would have some sort of support question, or product building question, and they couldn't even get anyone to answer the phone. So things like that are obviously low hanging through, and they spent a lot of time early on addressing that stuff. And you can hear the management team talk about how important that is in every presentation and every artist call they do and during the investor day. And it really can't be overstated.

It doesn't sound like something that would be significant and it also sounds like common sense. But in the nonprofit world, especially in the areas where still just operates, it's a very, very collegial. The environment, these people are colleagues. They have the same mission. They want to raise money. They want to do good things. They're operating together.

They're sharing best practices. They go to events together. They share vendor information. And so doing right by your customers means that the next five customers, customers that that customer talks to, gets the same sort of, I guess, endorsement that you're going to get from this one customer, or the same endorsement that the first customer gets that you have a good relationship with. So that's been really key.

They're also transitioning some of their legacy on-premise customers to the cloud, which has been a source of growth. And once their customers are on the platform, they're able to cross-sell, upsell them some additional features and functionality. Just can transition, like this on-premise customers to the cloud as a the source of growth. I haven't heard that being a source of growth before. I generally hear it like, you know, Franklin Covey.

They had a lot of on, I'll call it on-prem. It's not as well. Apple's apples apples. But they had, you know, you would go buy the Franklin Covey program and it would be $100,000 to buy it. And they transitioned to, hey, instead, you buy the subscriptions to Franklin Covey, and it's $33,000. But because you buy the subscription, it's all access. The churn

goes way down. People stay subscribed to it. So you increase the customer lifetime values. But, you know, the growth and the short term comes down, even though your profitability and your enterprise value should go up. How is transitioning from on-prem to cloud creating growth? Because I would think it kind creates the, it could create value. It should create value. But I would think it kind of create some of those headwinds that I just mentioned that Franklin Covey model. Yeah, no, you're right. I think it creates value. And maybe I misspoke there. It probably doesn't boost the top line

in check. You get the nail in the head. The revenue in the short term comes down. But the customer relationship becomes more sticky. The value prop is better between the two businesses, and I think the value goes out. So maybe I missed. No, no, no, no, I wasn't trying to call you out. I was just curious for my own, like, you know, if it's, hey, they were selling CDs for $20 a CD, and now they're selling software seats $20 per year, and it's our $25 for years, like, oh, that's pretty cool.

If you can get them into a SaaS and increase the revenue, it's pretty cool. No, no, again, it was not trying to call you out, just making it. Oh, no problem. No problem. The way I look at it too is we can get into this. There's a, the sort of qualitative due diligence that came back here is that there's also some significant untapped pricing power. And I mentioned lower pricing earlier on in my comments, but you talk to any one of facilities customers, even the ones who are under the prior management team's umbrella. And all of them will say, and this actually applies to Tyler's customers, BlackBot, etc. They could raise prices like 200% and we wouldn't go anywhere. That's how sticky these relationships can be. And so when you get someone on the platform for a longer period of time and you get them on the cloud-based system and they get wind of the new features and functionality and they are in a different sort of, I guess, billing system than over time. I'm sure prices can go off and they now built. I think it's 5% pricing increases per year on each

of their contracts. And they're typically between three to five years is what they go for. Some of them are a bit shorter. And so that'll be helpful over time. So maybe not a source of growth upfront, but at least something helpful. And then, look, I mean, the partnership with Microsoft really can't be overstated either. Microsoft has something like 10,000 nonprofit customers on their legacy great plain software. It's a VRP system. That was discontinued in 2019 or 2020, and they're giving up support for it in 24, 25 or something. So Microsoft is therefore pushing a lot of those customers to the cloud because they don't

to use them. However, the Dynamics 365, as I mentioned, is not fully customizable. So they're pushing these customers to Sillogist, who's been one of the nonprofit partners for them because a lot of their applications are built on top of Microsoft. So over the next five to 10 years, that push will end up being really material to Sillogist. And it serves as a bit of a soft boat, I think. And they reference this on the Q2 23 call. And this will help drive sales with pretty little incremental sales of marketing. And on that front, they've really beefed up their sales and marketing efforts from the past. Like, as I mentioned, they weren't reinvesting in the business, and they took the $11 or $12 million a year in annual cash flow, and they put that into R&D and sales and marketing.

The sales force, when I got it, or excuse me, when I started studying the business, before the prime management team got involved, the entire sales and marketing department was three people. And now it's somewhere around 16 or 17. And those efforts have largely been paying off, especially on the government side and especially on the education. side. And you'll also notice if you dig a little bit deeper in the business, they hired a chief revenue officer, I think at some point during 2022, somebody who has significant experience in space. And his entire mandate is to develop the channel partner strategy. And this is something that a lot of software companies use, even very, very big ones like Service Now is a good example,

where you can take someone who's there to promote your product and put shit into the hands of your potential customers. I certainly don't have to explain channel partners to your listeners, But over time, as that base grows, you hear them talk more and more about it in terms of channel partner like bookings or the increase in even like Microsoft generated bookings. You're getting them to talk about that more and more in every call as the channel takes off. And government and education, I'm sorry, government is a huge channel partner and network.

And so that's very significant. As those channel partners take off, it will actually have the benefit again of growing the sales base without those sales and marketing. investments, which they come with a little bit high of rest margin. And so there should be a little bit of a margin uplift from here, because as you've seen, like, rest margins have come down a bit. So I don't know if that answered the question, but those are last time of the immediate. It was a great.

I just want to go back to the Microsoft partnership real quick, because they definitely talk about a lot. And I'm sure you and I have seen like, you know, the famous penny stock thing, right? Where they're like, hey, we've got the partnership with choose your giant company here, right? It's like, yes, okay, you're partnered with Amazon in the sense, yes, you're selling your your crappy knockoff shoes on Amazon. Yeah, that's a partnership in the same way that Adam and I have a partnership in Microsoft because we use Microsoft for our email or something, you know?

But the partnership with Microsoft. I saw it. They talked about it a few times. And I was just curious, right? Like, again, maybe not all the products are different, but Tyler is way bigger than these guys, right? There's all these big companies. Microsoft, it sounds like they're discontinued some of the direct things here,

but Microsoft's a huge company. Microsoft's not going to exactly like seed. a business still just at current market cap is worth hundreds of million dollars. They're not going to see a hundred million dollar or two hundred million dollars. So I was just curious, like, how did that partnership develop and like what are the economics of it and what is Microsoft really doing for them? So just started working with Microsoft under the prior management team for some nonprofit software and this stems back to their days of being a legacy crappy software reseller.

Yeah. And then they realized that they were on the. wrong side of the table, and they wanted to capture some of the economics of owning it. So they but then went about it the wrong way. Again, under the prior management team, they just started buying a bunch of software companies to offer a public sector software. And so they have this relationship dating way back before even like Dynamics, 365 was a thing, and before the cloud became a thing. And they just been kind of entrenched with this, with this business for a while. And they, again, serve as a partner to Microsoft. So if Microsoft wants, look, I mean, Microsoft's

goal. I don't know the business well, so bear with me, but they're trying to build a global platform that can be used worldwide. That's what their products do. It's a much larger tam and market and they want to hit everybody, but they don't cater to specific needs of mom and pop nonprofit down the street, which still just does. So it served as a nice partnership for them over time where they could say, like, we want these people to use our features and functionality, but we don't really have, it's not going to move the needle for us to get a sales force here, try to capture these lower contract values. I thought originally like, all right, Microsoft is just going to eat these guys lunch

because they see like the trends that are taking place and they're just going to start Microsoft nonprofit cloud and that's going to be it. Yep. They actually benefit better from, they benefit more from partnering with still just because even if they were to create a nonprofit cloud-based system specifically for this market, it's the same approach that Dynamics is using. And so they're basically doing the same thing they would be doing if they wanted to go out on their own.

And they can enter into new markets with Syllogist and Microsoft benefits from all that growth as opposed to, I think, just grabbing a few dollars up front. And Siligist, I don't know the exact unit economics with Siligest pays a royalty to Microsoft for each basic ERP they sell. And then Microsoft takes a percentage of supplemental features that a customer decides,

want to use. So it's a very... I mean, that's 100% margin to Microsoft, pure margin. They're still, I'm sure, like, Sillogist is using Azure and that type of stuff for them as well. So this is just like almost bolt on for Microsoft is kind of what it is. Correct. Yeah. Just the rounds home the point that Microsoft actually helped commission one of their larger, syllogist's larger acquisitions in the nonprofit space because I think they wanted them to enhance their product and feature set. And Bill Wood has, you know, also been part of that relationship through his

software days and you know as a vast network which has been helpful so it's an interesting sort of intertwined if that's a word but I think it works out very well for both parties and large company is going to large company right but you'd have to imagine that that relationship does have like

it's not like they're going to switch to Tyler tomorrow right because what are they going to do follow all these people with these super sticky relations and be like hey you know I mean they can again large company get a large company but it seems like that would be pretty sticky because for all the reasons that it's sticky on a customer end. Okay, that's super interesting.

Let me see, what's my next question? Oh, there were two lines. And again, I'm going to include a link into Adam's write-up so people can go look at this. But there were two lines in your write-up that I thought were interesting and I kind of didn't fully understand. So I wanted to ask you about them. We've started to talk a little bit about this one, but I just want to make sure. This is a direct quote from your write-up. Legacy software and especially ERP vendors are priced out of syllogist market and can't capture all the use cases required to compete.

Can you just explain a little bit about that? Yeah, sure. So I think this goes back to, again, looking at the contract values. I don't have my notes in front of me on the exact details, but some of the contract values for still just start in like the low six-figure range. And if you look across the landscape, it seems like a hard thing to drive after if you're a larger business and you have to put sales and marketing boots on the ground to sell one of those contracts.

I could be wrong about that, but the feedback I got from competitors in the space was basically, we don't operate in this area because it doesn't move the needle for us or it's not worth it over time. And then the attention, if you go and listen to the Investor Day, there's a lot of focus that everybody on the management team,

every new member of the management team got to speak, including the chief technology officers, and she has spent a ton of time doing that, repairing in the customer relationships and also making sure that everybody has sort of the feature and products that that they need. And that takes a lot of time. It takes a lot of customization. It takes a lot of working with the customers. And that, for a larger business, it seems like that would be a lower return on time. And so when I talk about still just using Microsoft Dynamics and being able to customize things for a specific nonprofit or a government organization,

I think it really moves a needle there. And it's something that has, it's something that larger organizations like a Salesforce or a workday or even a Tyler in some markets just really hasn't, they really haven't taken a stab at. Like on the Muni side, for example, Silo just focuses on customers that, who live in populations with like a few hundred thousand people. And Tyler is obviously some of the biggest municipalities that exist. And I don't see that changing anytime soon. So in my view, that's provided a decent advantage just, and it's a lot of times what I see

with smaller companies who do operate in a niche. it's like they are insulated from competition a bit because of the area in which they operate and they're able to kind of be the leader in that space, just given the fact that, you know, there's smaller deals or lower contract values or more specific customers or there's not a whole like wide funnel land grab approach, if that makes sense. Along these lines, another quote that jumped out for me and your write up, although syllogist is not the cheapest solution and it's not attempting to be, I'd view their customers to be both budget conscious and ad hoc.

So the question that was kind of, what would be the cheapest solution here, right? Honestly, one of the things I was surprised, the cheapest solution would be not using software. And one of the things that I was surprised to hear when doing some work on the business and the customers were that a lot of these smaller nonprofits or even like kind of larger ones, they are sometimes using just very manual processes. This can be like an Excel spreadsheet where they keep track of their donor. information or their customer relationships or even their finances where they just might use equip bolts or something.

I can completely believe that. Yeah. So it's it's just the old, hey, the biggest competitor, and this might be being too facetious that the biggest competitor is not a competitor. It's just people like not using this or doing their own way. It's kind of like, hey, the biggest, our opportunity to upgrade people from paper and pen to actually saving these down online or something is kind of it. upgrading from Excel to actually using a CRM relationship.

Exactly. And I think that's part of the white space opportunity that they saw, like during the strategic community process, it became very evident that this was not just a one or two people are going to find value in our products. It was there's a whole subset of customers that we can go after here. Can I ask a question on nonprofit? So look, the business, it's not perfectly this, but I kind of thought of it as a third, a third, a third government education nonprofit, right?

It's not perfectly that, but that kind of comes out about right. On the nonprofit side, they sell to smaller nonprofits, right? So are smaller nonprofits growing? Because I could see, like, there's the nationalization of everything. And I could see how it's just like, hey, the nationalization of everything, more people are just donating to Gates Foundation, Robin Hood, United Way, and name like three or four other things and like all the money's going there. Or is it brag many more, more people are donating to more and more to really local charities? because if it's consolidating and nationalizing, that would be bad for them. It's fragmenting.

That would be fantastic for them. Do you know? Yeah, I don't. I wish I had specific data on this. The industry is very fragmented, as you mentioned. And I think, honestly, as the world gets bigger and you mentioned, like, there's larger nonprofit or donor umbrellas, like this one organization, the Gates thing, I think there are pockets of regional and local things that people really like to give back to instead of just

like a St. Jude, for example, I'm not a nonprofit, but you get. what I'm saying. And so I think the amount of organizations on its face is still a valuable thing. I don't know if the growth, I don't know if nonprofits are, you know, it's like a secular growth thing. I definitely think that they struggle mightily when the economy turns down and obviously people have less money and their donations go down and the grants get harder to come by. So it's a, it's probably a tough industry on its own. You know, I think a little bit of that is offset by some of the additional verticals that the company's entering into. The, The government side is just developed an ERP product for the government side that just exited beta.

It's growing like a weed. The education side, honestly, we can talk about that, but the opportunity in education cannot be overstayed yet. It is incredibly significant. But, yeah, it's a tough thing to kind of work through. All I took away from your side is, I think he said, I think he said Adam woke directly against donating to St. Jude. He said, terrible children with cancer. Government ERP, just a quick question of that because I asked about nonprofits earlier. Government ERP, when they sell a government ERP, like ERPs are some of the most notorious, stickiest, farthest things to move in and up.

When they've got this ERP product growing like weed, is that the same thing we just talked about where it's like, hey, it's not that they're taking it from SAP or someone else? It's that this government organization, and people forget governments are not monolith. Like, it's not New York City. It's New York City, DOE. it's in New York City like 15 things within the DOA. Is that selling an ERP to the ERP product that's where like we, is it selling to a government organization that just did not have an ERP or is it kind of going in and replacing SAP or whatever the equivalent of

government ERP is? It's replacing a manual system of some sort. Yeah. Not exactly booting a customer. Like I'll give you an example, although I don't know what they use exactly, but you probably heard of this. I'm from Delaware, I live an hour and a half. I live in PA now, but an hour and a half of a cell wave,

with a small beach town, Rohit, Dewey Beach, etc. They just re-hobos just revamped everything within the local municipality there and rebuilt the city hall, the headquarters, the police force, all the stuff. And so with that, I almost guarantee now everybody can do things digitally, pay parking tickets, sign up for things, get news. And I'm assuming they probably use Tyler or something, but I'm assuming that they upgraded their software. And that would be a decent example of, Like, it's a seasonal town, small population, but they don't use, they didn't use something previously. If you could see the way that everything was managed, and now they do, it's a function of just adding the system instead of, like, beating a competitor. Perfect. Okay. On the earnings,

so, you know, they report an adjusted EBITA number. As we talked about adjusted EBITA this year is pretty much flat over last year. I think that's fair to say they've grown a lot, but as we talked about, they've invested a lot back into the business. So, you know, the net of those kind of cancel each other out. My question on the Jose d'Ibada is it does strike me that a lot of their EBITDA is an ad back of amortization of intangibles. And, you know, I do think, as we said, this was, it's not the rolliest of roll-ups, but this is an acquisit. This has been assembled through acquisitions. They are trying to go out and do some more M&A. And when I just said, hey, Adam, I've got this company historically mismanaged, roll-up, microcap Canadian, and all of their EBITIs ad back of

amortization of intangibles, you'd probably like, well, okay, let's, uh, let's a purchase. So I just wanted to ask. And again, there is cash flow here. You've obviously talked to customers. I'm not trying to throw like huge red flags. It's an EBITDA ad back. How do you get comfort with that? And then I guess the other way to say it for me was it's an EBITDA ad back and the company's

growing like a weed and you're not seeing EBITA expanding or kind of leveraging. So we talked about why, but when do you think they get that leverage? Because I think the two combinations is what when people, I would guess most of my listeners, if they look at this, would say, oh, big ad backs, not inflecting on the EBITDA line, and that's actually what's going to cause them to walk away. It's a great find and question on your part. Look, I mean, I would love for Chapalize RD to come down, and there's also some other adbacks there.

I would say on the MNA front, they're very happy with their current product set. So I think I initially, the initial thesis you probably saw this in the write-up was that they could conduct accredit M&A at very favorable multiple. and that would significantly add the free cash flow per share. I estimated they could do, if they deployed like 50 million in additional capital, at the historical multiples, they did these three acquisitions under, which I think is like six and a half times at average. They could add like an incremental $60 million in equity value just on the multiple

or syllogist traits today, which is obviously very significant for a market capital of $170 or enterprise value of $170 million or something. However, in watching how the last few cores have unfolded, Management team has talked a lot about the deal pipeline increasing, but they haven't done anything. And then you hear them talk about being very happy with their product set. So I don't know if it's going to be as big of a factor moving forward, just the MNA in general. So that's probably either going to be put on hold or if another MAS municipal accounting system type acquisition comes out like, yes, let's definitely do it. But I'm not sure it's going to be a focus at this point just based on their comments and this sort of strategy.

So I'm not sure you'll see a lot of adbacks there moving forward. And I wouldn't, you asked me about this actually before a while ago. You said, I don't really like roll-ups. I think that was new. And I wouldn't call it that. They have made some acquisitions. But, yeah, no, I think that was just my takeaway when I first looked at it, like 30 seconds. As you said, that was initially the thesis.

But they haven't really been doing it. So, yeah. Yeah. If you look at the, if you look at some of management's comments, like the EBITDA number is pretty clean, absent what you mentioned. And I would like to see that number come down and thought it would by now if I'm if I'm being, you know, totally honest. You know, the timing, they actually increased the disclosures around it. So the timing on which they're making some of these investments and then how they capitalize it is pretty well laid out in the last call.

And, you know, I kind of got it more in-depth explanation from the CFO as well. They're set to see that number, that capitalized R&D number come down in 24. And again, they're happy with their product said. I would have liked to see it come down by now, but I think that number is going to look a little bit more clean as we move forward. And 24 and 25, when you talk about getting that leverage on the growth in the bottom line or cash flows, I think you're really going to see it there. You know, look, they've had an elevated level of sales and marketing and R&D, and given that

they're happy with their product set and given that their channel partner strategy and some of the Microsoft stuff should be really benefiting them moving forward, we will likely see those investments come down. So it's about four, it's about four and a half or five million each for sales and marketing and RD on an annual basis. That's up from like basically nothing under the prior management team. As the business shifts more toward recurring software revenue, I think you'll definitely see those numbers come down. And that will obviously have the effect of boosting margins. You know, in the event that the company has to, they could lower those investments now and generate, you know, additional five to seven million more in cash flow. And that would be very

helpful, you know, to do anything with. But I think you'll really start to see kind of the operating leverage kick in over time. And the sales cycles here are very long. And also the, you know, nonprofits have some of the longest sales cycles in the industry. And you'll also, if you take a look at the financials, you'll see now that the company's growth is being led by project services. And that encompasses a lot of things. But some of that capitalize R&D stuff as well, because they're developing new products and entering into new software pieces and new pieces of software and then they have to implement that software before the recurring revenue kicks in. So one of the complaints has been, I think we're talking to investors has just been this

is a professional services business or this is not mostly a SaaS business. Over time, those numbers are really going to inflect in the opposite direction. And you can even see now like when they've already flipped, right? There's the slide in their investor deck. It's gone from two thirds, there's one third to one third, two thirds. Yeah. So the point being, it's like it does take some time for that. that SaaS revenue to turn on. It's not immediate. And so that's where you really see some leverage

as well, again, as that revenue mixed shifts and as they continue growing, you know, strongly organically, I think, well, again, the last three quarters are record quarters. I think last quarter was like almost 20% organic growth in cloud subscription revenue. But yeah, I mean, I would be, you know, it's, I don't want to say cost for concern, but it will be a point of contention if that number, that even ad back number doesn't come down. So definitely a good catch on your part. and I don't think it shows any sort of like gaming of the number from where I'm sitting, but where it's expected to come down in 24, definitely. And now a quick break to remind you that this episode is brought to you exclusively by AlphaSense,

the AI platform behind the world's biggest investment decisions. AlphaSense gives you the tools you need to provide better analysis for you and your clients. As yet another value podcast listener, visit Alpha-Sense.com slash FS today to beat FOMO and move fast. than the market. That's alpha-sense.com slash fs. Some of that answer actually takes me nicely to my next question, just on the operating lining growth and everything. In the Q3 call, the CEO said, I believe the direct quote was we're stepping on the gas for growth in 2024. And now organic growth, again, the most recent quarter organic growth was over 20%, which I'd say you're already stepping out of

guess. But what is your interpretation of stepping on the gas? Does he mean, hey, we're investing more into sales and marketing so that we can grow even faster? Does he mean, hey, we're planning all the sales and marketing investment to finally like bear fruit and you're going to see that in the numbers where I think you've addressed the acquisitions while they'd like to. It doesn't seem like it's like the highest, highest of imminent priorities, if that makes sense. But how do you interpret that step on the gas line that he said in Q3? Yeah, it's hard to suss out. I think there will be some incremental investments in sales and marketing. Typically, since Bill has joined the the company, he's under promise and over-delivered. And I think I'm starting to get

sort of the cadence of his commentary and strategy and how he likes to do that because I think there's a world in which he can say, we're going to be growing above 20% for the next three to five years. But then, you know, they kind of walk that back to like mid-teens moving forward. And I don't see how that happens with all the initiatives they have in place if they're two smaller segments in Ed and above takeoff. And if the channel partner strategy, is successful, I don't, that doesn't work for me where they only grow at 15%. Having said that, I don't think he's, he inherited a business that had ruined its public market reputation and its relationship with customers.

And so I think he's being a bit careful in how he manages expectations, which I appreciate. There is an aspect of me that wants them to sit. You know, they took margins down a lot, even saying that they're going to remain at 30% and then they dipped a few quarters later and now they're kind of stuck, they're holding firm at this soft guided, maybe 25%. There's a part of me that wishes he would say, like, you know, we're coming down a little bit further. We see significant opportunities.

We're growing 20, 25, 30%. Here we go. And there was a call on the last question on the last call about, you know, can you guys grow faster than you're growing or when are you going to see that SaaS revenue really take off? I think they're just a bit conservative in what they want to say there. Not, you know, not defending them. I just think there's, again, there's not, if this works, there's not a world in which

that mid-teet, low-double digit to mid-teamber makes sense. And so when he says that, I think he means that as they move forward with the business, especially again in some of these newer verticals, they see these really significant opportunities and they go, maybe we should throw some more people at this. And they want to do it carefully and they want to do it slowly. But I think, again, there will be some incremental investments, just nothing like what we saw early on where they threw a significant amount of cash flow at it to really beef things up and attack some of this white space.

but you shouldn't see it increase a bit over time. They talked about adding people, but probably not to the extent that they did in 2021. It's just interesting, you know, one of the quotes he had, I think from the investor day where he said, hey, look, this was a rule of 40 business before we came in here. It was 50% EBITDA margins and, you know, negative 10% growth. So that's rule of 40.

We're still above a rule of 40 company, right? But now it's 20% gross with 25% EBITDA margins. You know, that's 45. Like, what a thing is basically come out and said, we could be growing faster in a lot of these areas, but our main focus is to take it slow and make sure that our stuff is working, our customers are happy, and they have what they need. And that's a bit frustrating because all of us, you know, every investor is like founding, you know, let's see 50. What's that 50%? Yeah. Let me. I think, I think that's a smart thing to do,

though, at least in the near term. Obviously, so look, this is a business, not so much in flux anymore, but things have changed, right? We just mentioned margins have come down a lot, Chris, gone up a lot, all that sort of stuff. How do you kind of look at fair value of the company here? Yeah. So, look, I mean, I think there's a fairly attractive IRR here just on current cash flow and growth that they have. You know, if we use kind of the Buffett metric of free cash flow yield plus pro. Obviously, we, you know, have to see top line translate to cash flow, the bottom line or cash flow. But I think the enterprise value today is somewhere around 170 million Canadian.

For this year, fiscal year 23, they should finish the year with 65-ish million in revenues and somewhere between 16 and a half, 17 million in adjusted EBITDA, I think 11, 12, and free cash flow. So that's, today's valuation is somewhere, I think it's less than 10 times, EBITDA and 13, 14 times free cash flow. That's on, you know, those are today's numbers. You have to kind of keep in mind the growth, the potential margin expansion here. if they're successful, the addition of new verticals, and they're also buying back stock,

which is a great thing for free cash flow per share. For 2024, you know, they've kind of soft-guided to mid-teens revenue growth with margins remaining stable, which means they probably generate somewhere between 75 million-ish revenues and 22 million in adjusted eat at, you know, obviously then it gets cheaper. In 2025 and beyond, I really think they can eclipse 85 million in revenues and do like 30 million EBITDA, especially as SaaS revenues bro. And, you know, that's five and a half times on today's enterprise value. Obviously, they have to execute. We have to get there. If they continue buying back stock, that would be great. If they make another acquisition, that's accruive. That will be significant. But I think this is a business that is still a bit

misunderstood. I think it's a much higher quality business than people give it credit for. I think with modest revenue growth over the next couple years and very slight, even to margin expansion, you can get to a price significantly higher than where the stock trades today. And so my base case is kind of encompassing those sort of things, which gets me to, you know, which gets me to a price close to 100% today if I'm using what I think is a fair multiple, which is somewhere around the market multiple 14 to 16 times. Which the CEO has less than two years to get to 1050 for his options to best. And you'd have to imagine, you know, you don't want it to be 10.51 when your options

best. You wanted to be higher. So like your fair value kind of speaks in line to what they thought he could do with those options when he was getting those options to us, I think would be a fair thing to say. Yeah. And I don't love the, this thing's going to rewrite six turns and that's how we're going to make our money. I don't, I don't love that part of it. And I love the double digit organic growth with some margin expansion and maybe a multiple kicker on top of it. Yeah, but, but the fact is that relevant that the comps at all trades at higher turns, despite having in some case is not as strong fundamentals. Certainly not saying it should trade in line with Tyler.

BlackBot has its own sort of issues, but it's re-rated really strongly this year. And every relevant M&A transaction I could find points to a significantly wide discount evaluation. Public market software businesses with syllogist's growth and margin profile trade at four times revenues and 15 times EVTA, small cap software, platform businesses trade for 14 or 15 times EBITDA, syllogist is at nine or nine and a half. And so, yeah, I mean, I think that that should at least be taken into account. I'll be honest, I wake up every day a little bit nervous that I'm going to see like

Sylogis is acquired for $10 Canadian and somebody stole the business, you know, out from under me. The company's generating cash. It has a clean balance sheet. You know, it's one of the most attractive M&A candidates just if you look across the industry. So I'm a little bit worried about that, honestly, because I think it would make sure a great target from somebody, but, and I know there's interest out there. So we're not going to wood, because I will tell you, like, I love that confidence.

I love the confidence of, hey, like, if this was acquired at a, call it 35% premium, I think they'd be stealing and I, like, they could take the shares over my cold dead body. Like, I love that competence. It shows the conviction and the level of working done it, but it also, it goes two ways, right? It's either like the person is just screaming right in the things up 20% year over year, over year or it's, hey, the business devolves into like a flea, a spectacular fireball orgy of a bad event and the stock's down 95% and they're like, oh, in hindsight, like, I kind of wish I had taken that. But I do love the confidence I see there. I just, we got to knock

on wood with that one. Well, look, I mean, in the interest of full disclosure, it's a large position for me. If that were to happen, clearly I would have to think very hard about parting place. You'd be wiping your tears away with a $100 bills. Yeah. Sure. There you go. this is great. And I guess just to your point, like one of the things that initially attracted me to this, and I think that it sounds like just at the management day, the Q3, it sounds like they want to build versus sell. But as you said, the CEO here has sold two companies, including one to Constellation, and who, this is a mosquito to Constellation. But I do think this would be kind of a natural fit inside of something in Constellation. So, you know, I think that's interesting. And I'd like that you didn't go straight to the Constellation. You've got a CEO who sold to Constellation. You've got a Canadian SaaS, public market, public focus SaaS. And you didn't mention Constellation once aside from that. All right.

Well, that's my mistake. I'm a Mark Leonard fan as much as the next guy. Yeah, I just say, it was good. I admire the restraining here. Cool. Well, Adam, this has been absolutely fantastic. Look, anyone who's interested more in Sillogist, I'm going to include a link to Adams write up on Sillogist, which is extensive,

and which I was obviously quoting from in some of the questions here. So I'd encourage you to go check that out, and you're going to be able to figure out how to reach Adam through all through the letter that I'm going to include in the notes and everything so Adam second time on we're going to have to make sure the third time doesn't take as long to get so absolutely thank you so much again for the invite really appreciate this is a long all right thanks man a quick disclaimer nothing on this podcast should be considered an investment advice guests or the host may have positions in any of the stocks mentioned during this podcast

please do your own work and consult a financial advisor thanks