Nick: Hi, everyone. Welcome back to another episode of Reinventing Finance. Today I have the great pleasure to invite Randel Bennett with me. Randel, how are you this fine morning on your neck of the woods?

Randel: I'm doing well. It's a beautiful day here in Chicago. It's shaping up to be clear, sunny skies and not too hot at about 80 degrees, which I think is around 17, 18 degrees Celsius, if I have those numbers right.

Nickt: Randel, it's a pleasure to have you here. Thank you so much for your time. I'm excited for this conversation. Why don't you just briefly introduce yourself and your company, Qixent? What is it that you and your guys do?

Randel: Yeah, absolutely. So my name obviously is Randel. My background is in insurance. I spent my entire career in insurance product design and product development. And so we did, at Qixent, we formed a company that helps bring new ideas into the market. So the goal is to find people with insurance ideas, find people that have expertise in adjacencies to insurance, and when they come in with this idea, be the ones to help them, guide them through, get them from an idea into a product, into profit.

Nick: How does that look in practice? What's the process kind of looking, appreciating that things might be different, but what would be like an ideal process?

Randel: Yeah. Yeah. So from a company that already has their, that's not brand new, right? So if it's a brand new company, the founders that we're working with in a very early stage, the first thing that we're typically doing is getting them their basic corporate insurance needs. So we're getting them DNO, we're getting them liability coverage, cyber risk, and we're getting them on their feet with that coverage that they need. Then we would talk them through how to think about insurance concepts and insurance ideas. And then we walk them through kind of launching the product and launching something in partnership with a, as a basic appointed agent and selling existing insurance. That's a very simple step, early stage. Ideally we're coming in with a client that already has an existing business and is ready to go. And they've been thinking about launching insurance now as an inclusion to their existing revenue stream. And so when they want to add in insurance, we come in, we look at the idea of the different ideas that they have. We validate the ideas that they have, we bring in additional ideas, we provide feasibility studies. Once we have that direction, then we go in and we source insurance, insurance partnerships through either carriers, through risk capacity bearers and distributors, and we get the idea out into the market. Once it's been approved, once we have these things lined up, then we're starting to sell. And that's when the exciting parts happen for our clients.

Nick: This, this is really interesting. Because I was just kind of checking, there seemed to be like a bunch of traditional business models kind of baked in. And I would just be interested on, on what your normal kind of commercial model would be. When you kind of said startup, it sounded like a insurance startup, insurance broker or agent for startups, where you would normally get a commission. The other thing sounds like organizing or in the, in the UK, you have something like appointed representative where you rent someone else's license. If you, do you have your own license or do you connect with partners?

Randel: It's a great question. So yes, you've, you've, you're, you're clearly very knowledgeable in this space because that is exactly the case. We do have our own license. We have as Qixent, we have a subsidiary that is an independent agent that is licensed across the US that can sell property and casualty insurance. And so typically at a very early stage, we're just getting them the, the insurance coverage that they need as a very ground based. So we take that, that subsidiary and we use it to create kind of a proving ground for a new company to come in because as you know, a lot of insurance company, a lot of insurance companies as partners, they want to understand that you understand insurance because it is highly regulated, especially here in the US it is very technical. And so they don't want to give you kind of an appointment, they don't want to do a partnership and be your very first ones. So that way you can cause a lot of damage and create a lot of chaos kind of within that partnership. So what we do is we have these partnerships already and we bring them to you and we create a proving ground that allows you to sell insurance products and gets that knowledge base going on day one. So yeah, you're absolutely right.

Nick: And do you start off in, so we have kind of insurance startups, are your, who are your other clients? Do you work with rather with others like MGAs, brokers, insurers, or are these like the non-traditional retailer wanting to add that product or, you know, whatever floats their boats?

Randel: Yeah, absolutely. So that's exactly the case. So we have non-traditional insurance providers, right, that are not in the insurance industry, but have an insurance adjacency. We also have MGAs as clients and we also have County Mutuals or mutual companies as clients. The County Mutuals I think are really interesting. County Mutuals for years have been focused on their very small niche, their pocket, right? In the U.S. you could have one state like Idaho or Wisconsin with a County Mutual that was focused in its niche and its region. It's a bit of a moat that surrounded it because there was no one that was going to be able to reach them. Now, obviously with the internet, with everything that has blown up, with the wide reach of all of these large carriers, County Mutuals are finding themselves at a position where that moat is starting to shrink and starting to kind of evaporate. And so now they're looking for new ways to innovate, new ways to grow, new ways to find these efficiencies and those become our clients as well when we're trying to help them bring their tech stack up to date, bring their processes and procedures up to date.

Nick: And just kind of before we finish, what kind of assets do you provide? So you have knowledge, connections, licenses. Do you have your own, I don't know, marketeers, product designers, actuaries, or do you have your own technology stack? You know, how far do you know TPAs? I mean, there's depending on the product, you know, there is, I love when people kind of say, oh, insurance is a purely digital product. I was like, I don't know. I mean, not sure that's the case. I mean, I don't think, I think credit is a purely digital product, but insurance requires, you know, some, especially in case of claims. So just kind of thinking about what, where you would say we bring that in-house or where you would say, depending on the case, we can orchestrate.

Randel: So the case of orchestration happens for TPAs. That is not something that we do in-house. And then I would say the technology stack, that's also something that we don't do in-house, but we have strong partnerships within the TPA stack that allows us to deploy relatively quickly and low costs. So we try to de-risk the startup cost for these new initiatives, right? So a lot of challenges is how much cash outlay am I going to have to put out before we start seeing a return. We start trying to de-risk a lot of that in time and in capital cost, right? As you talk about background and what it takes, I'll tell you a story. So this is not the first company that I've co-founded, that I've been on a co-founder at least for. When I was, when I first got my start, it was out of Allstate in the US, which is obviously a very large company. And when I was there, I really found that I enjoyed it. I loved insurance. I decided I want to stick to it. And I said to myself, one day I'm going to start an insurance company that's going to do things a little bit different. I thought that maybe it would be when I was like in my fifties, in my sixties, I had no idea. What ended up happening as I kind of bounced my way up and started moving up and I'm running a product team, was I got reached out to by a man that eventually became my co-founder. One of my co-founders, he was the CEO of, he was starting a company that was focused on the Hispanic buyer in the US. And so what he was focused on was that his background was incredibly smart, MBA, brilliant, came to the US as an immigrant and all of his friends and families from South America and from, and from where he lived would reach out to him and he would act as the de facto insurance agent. And what he realized was that it was incredibly hard for people who speak Spanish and prefer to speak Spanish to do business, to get insurance here in the US. And so he wanted to fix that. At the same time, I was looking around saying, Oh, Hispanic buyers are typically, are typically under, have lower claims, frequency and severity than the rest of our, than the rest of our buyers. We don't know why we have some hypotheses, but it, it all reflects on kind of the idea of what they're willing to just take care of and, and, and, and do on their own versus reporting as a claim became the hypothesis that we're building around. And so we jump on, we jump on the phone, we get together, eventually join up on the team. We build a product that is focused on the Hispanic buyer. It doesn't have fees when it comes to not being licensed in the US, having a foreign driver's license. It doesn't have fees in regards to buy here, pay here, doesn't have fees in terms of reinstatement fees. None of these fees that are typically gouging and approaching this to make the product as cheap as possible. We decided not to use, and we made it a digital first language in Spanish from the start to be able to jump, to be able to go through. We're building, we're building it's built. It's ready to go. We've designed this product, we launch, and now it's time to start selling. What I realized in that moment is I'm not very good at selling insurance in Spanish. That is not my forte. And so it became this kind of approach where I thought it probably for the best, if I go and you all still build and go and do your thing. At that moment, I had a decision and I didn't know really where to go. It was stay here, try to sell them in Spanish, go off, try to find something to do. Had no idea what to do, but I decided, you know what, I'll go. You all go be great. Yesterday, I got an announcement that they have raised $10 million of the Series A. So I'm still very proud of them and the shares that I'm a part of there. And now today I have gone off to become a kind of Qixent in order to help do the same thing over and over and repeat for those that come through.

Nick: That's amazing. Understood. So you, yeah, you're an orchestrator, incubator, and you bring different assets to bear. And I think at the end of the day, that's also necessary because not every team requires all the same services, right? I recently spoke to someone who said he stumbled into a life insurance license. Apparently you do. They were building life insurance software. They managed to buy a runoff license and they use it also for product innovation. What he mentioned, and this is actually the same for us, there is a huge amount of failures when you're launching new products, right? And I mean, duh, if you knew, you wouldn't launch a product in the first place. But it's really a long tail kind of thing. How do you, in your business model, protect yourself against the failures, especially when working with startups who might not be able to pay as high fees, but then you get a percentage of nothing?

Randel: Great question. So our approach here is to really focus on when we can say no, right? We have to be really, really honest with ourselves and with our clients to say, hey, this idea is not scalable or is scalable. And then it becomes a very rough approach in our business model. What is our bare minimum? What can't we do this for? What would taking this...

Nick: What is your bare minimum? Can you share that?

Randel: I can't go into too much detail, but what I will say is that if we do a project that has an hourly fee basis, then we are looking at somewhere starting around $625 an hour. That we believe is very competitive for the amount of expertise that we have in our team here in the US. If you go off to hire someone that would be one of the bigger firms like Accenture, one of these greater firms, it's going to have a much higher starting hourly rate than what we're going to bring into play. From there, we're able to negotiate down. We have some wiggle room, but there is a point where we can say, no, this is not enough. This isn't going to be... This requires much more work. And a lot of times that we can have this honest conversation with our clients, they appreciate as long as we come back with that answer quickly, I think it saves a lot of us time. And so that's where I think fundamentally where it starts is saying, yes, no, here's why.

Nick: What are the top three, or let's put it differently, and I'm going a little bit off script here, but I've had a customer or prospect ask me, okay, I want to... Do you answer questions like, okay, where do I gain new customers in 2025 or is it more round products? So what are the top three projects that you're currently working on or would love to work on? Because I thought... And the more concrete, the more interesting, because I thought the question that you've raised about let's build a product for Hispanics in Spanish with all the normal fees that are not really... That's punitive for this particular target group. I think that creates a clear package. So anything kind of concrete and ideally one level down than what you would get from your Accenture or McKinsey slides.

Randel: Of course. So how familiar are you with name, image, and likeness? This idea...

Nick: Assume that I'm not at all.

Randel: Okay. Okay. So the idea being that if you're an athlete, if you're a celebrity, if you have... If your name, your image, your likeness has value in and of itself, maybe you have a giant social media, a giant social media following, and just by the mere fact of you tweeting or blogging or posting about something interesting is going to give it traction. That would imply that you have name, image, and likeness value, NIL for short. Here in the US, NIL has been a very big topic for non-professional athletes. So our college and university system, these have big sports teams around them. They have NIL deals around the star players. One of our clients that we have is looking at trying to capture those student athletes that have this NIL value and being able to mitigate the risk of devaluing their NIL. So for example, if you're a college soccer star in Europe, I know you all refer to it as football. If you're a college soccer star and you have a social media following of around 200k... You might have a very local NIL deal that says at these businesses, you will do commercials, you'll do social media posts around them. That creates a lot of risks, cybersecurity, that creates a lot of risks when it comes to personal liability and personal injury, these kinds of risks that develop around. So this client is trying to tailor products specifically for that athlete, recognizing that they're both very young and both have a very high likelihood of prosperity going down the road, and that this value becomes their primary and only asset. So trying to protect that product is what we're trying to build there.

Nick: Cool. I was thinking you were going into building insurance products around influencers. Let's say you have an influencer around dogs and you place dog insurance around it. We were discussing this recently with someone where you can then get into less comparative product but also need to... In Germany, for example, it might be mandatory to have liability insurance for dogs. And so you need to figure out, how do I switch someone who already has insurance who doesn't want to have an alternative quote? So I thought you were going in that direction. But yeah, that's super exciting. And do you have two more or something? Because I think these things, if I'm at all the gauge of what our listeners and viewers like, it's like this stuff. That's what really brightens up my day much more than frameworks. But we can also go into frameworks if you think that that is a good...

Randel: No, no, no. I'll give you two more. So another client that we have that we were successful with was this client that was looking at homeowner risk. So in California, you have wildfires that are happening more and more frequently. And so what they were doing was they were building a product, a tech stack, that was actually going to allow consumers to come in and see what their wildfire risk was, to see what their hazard risk were. And so what they wanted to do was they wanted to take this wildfire risk, show people what they needed to do to mitigate some of this risk, which now in the state of California allows them for an insurance discount. So what we helped them do was to build the insurance frameworks around this product. And what they've gone on to do is now allow this technology to be sold to insurance companies in order to allow insurance companies to help identify and give these discounts as required by the state of California. So they've turned that from almost nothing in data services and inbound into a million dollar contracts with one of the largest insurers in the state of California in order to provide this service. So that's another client that we're working with in that regard.

Randel: And then a third that I would say as an example, it's a client that has safety risk technology. So what they do is they have computer vision, they have wearable devices in order to come inside of a business, small business, large business, bottling plants, manufacturing, hard services that they're working on. They're able to look into the business, take videos, take data measurements, take all of this information, encapsulate it into a risk score and identify where there's risky behaviors that may lead to higher risk of muscular or skeletal injuries identify ways to remedy those risks and then package this for insurance companies to provide discounts and better understanding of their workers' compensation policies inside.

Nick: Awesome, awesome. And that's what I mean. I think there's so much cool stuff to just kind of combine, to orchestrate. I would say one of the key things that we found when we're looking at, let's say, also an insurtech wave, which kind of is not as hot as it was three, four years ago, but I think distribution costs is what a lot of people have just hugely underestimated. And I think it's like that saying, first time founders, they focus on product, second time founders focus on distribution, right? And I think it's just distribution is king, especially in a product which is so ephemeral and has so much trust element to it to kind of counter whatever information asymmetry are involved in that. You mentioned in your initial, I was saying that you kind of help validate a product. Do you have some examples of what that would mean, some best practices of how to validate demand?

Randel: Yeah, absolutely. So first thing that we do is we will come in and kind of build out a table of ideas, right? So a lot of our clients that come in, they have an idea in place and what they wanna do. They also don't know insurance as deeply as we do. So when they say coverages, they're not thinking of traditional insurance coverages that are highly digestible by an existing partner. So what we do is we'll take what is their idea, turn it into the actual digestible existing approaches that we have and present it back to them and say, this is what we're looking at. Once we align that this is true, yes, no, kind of, once we get all of that ironed out, we'll take it and we'll do some soft touches. We'll do outreach to clients and other clients, other customers and say, hey, we're researching this. We're looking into that. Is this something that you would be interested in? We'll kind of gauge the temperature before this needs to go public. And then once we have some idea of yes, we think that this applies to this market, here's the TAM, here's the TAM, SAM, SOM, the total addressable market, the serviceable market, the attainable markets around it. Here's the ideas that we have. We present this back. And as a collective decision with the client, we say, is this worth pursuing? Is this not worth pursuing? And why? So that becomes the kind of early stage approach of us understanding what the market is and is this a feasible solution that we should work after?

Nick: How long does that normally take, that phase? Or can you-

Randel: About four weeks. Yeah. Yeah. It's very short. Our goal is to be nimble. I've been at larger reinsurance companies in the past, one of them being one of the largest reinsurance companies in the world. And what we often saw was death by a thousand cuts is what we called it, where you would have an idea and we'd have, yes, no, maybe, maybe, maybe, but it would go on for six, seven months. And by then, especially when they're early stage, those six, seven months are a death sentence. So our goal is to try to get this done quickly and make sure that we're not spending time researching, we're instead spending time working and getting stuff done.

Nick: I think that makes perfect sense. And it's easier said than done, but I understand this death by a thousand cuts or to say, let's just have another round of presentation and what ifs, and before even, I mean, even established insurance companies just sometimes just go to your distribution partner and say, hey guys, what's missing? It could be sometimes as easy as that. When we're kind of looking, so this sounded a lot like smaller companies. If you're kind of looking back to your Allstate days and it doesn't have to be Allstate, but just synonymous of big, right? Yes. If you could, what would be three initiatives or something that you would recommend or push forward where you think, and I'll leave you the choice of whether it has the biggest commercial impact or whether that's just something that just makes sense, just three things that you would love to work on and think that would move this organization forward.

Randel: Yeah, I'm gonna focus really on one that I think that everything kind of stems from. Here in the US, I think insurance has been a cost plus approach to pricing, meaning we have actuarial costs, we add on an additional percentage, that nominal percentage is our profit and this is the price that we charge. And I think that this is the entire problem that we see stemming from profitability, stemming from spending on advertising, stemming into our distribution approach. This is the entire problem with our industry that we have today. And what I mean by that is that if you're doing cost plus, there's no room for innovation and there's nothing that you can do. Insurance in the US has become the largest television advertiser in the country, meaning before it was consumer goods, it was alcohol, it was automotive, now insurance. And every insurance commercial here in the US is save money, save time, easy to make a switch. What are we doing? As an industry, what are we doing? All it's done is created this race to the bottom. It's created this expectation for consumers that insurance should be less expensive, that it should be easy to get and that it shouldn't take, it shouldn't be much for me to cancel and move away. It's created this problem where we have a profitability issue and it's raised the prices for every insurance policy across the industry when it comes to consumers. And I don't see a way out of it. I don't see a way out of it in this first place as we keep going down this approach. The latest numbers say that in another five to 10 years that the insurance prices in California along the West Coast will be 500% more expensive than it is today. This is the latest predictions showing that we just have massive amounts of rate inadequacy. And still we're running these advertisements that say spend less. What needs to happen with insurance is that we need to find a way to add more value and generate more value for our consumers. We need to find ways to show them that spending more and spending the appropriate amount is necessary where it calls for it. Because with that approach, what can happen is we can start to get to some point where we're not facing this all-around cost. Now I'll give you a more definitive example. As people get older and acquire more assets, they are more and more likely to want to buy insurance. They're more and more likely to have more assets to be insured, but they also become more and more responsible overall. So an 18-year-old as a driver, as an owner is less responsible than a 45-year-old. They also have less assets. So as their value and their willingness to pay goes up, their actual costs decrease relative to the dollar amount per asset value. This inverse relationship is being kind of capped by our cost plus approach, saying that, hey, we can only do cost plus a percentage. If we were able to do this as a value base, we were able to charge someone who is more willing to pay a higher amount because of that willingness, then we would be able to give someone a discount who is not willing to pay because they don't have as much assets to be able to go below cost on those. We would be able to have more growth and steady and supporting kind of lines of business and pricing. And that would be the thing that I am most excited about working on here at Qixent and what we're trying to do and affecting across. But if I had the pen and I had the approach at Allstate or one of these bigger carriers, that would be my top priority, is trying to affect change to go from cost plus to going into value-based pricing.

Nick: But you would then, because I think that is one of the biggest differences between European and the US, that you have to file those rates, right? So it's a much slower process when I'm looking at, you can, you know, we can adjust, we can do dynamic pricing.

Randel: On the surface here in the US, what I just said sounds impossible or it sounds daunting for the next 20 years. Anyone in their car that's listening to this as they're dropping their kids off on their way to school is gonna say, oh, well, that's a brilliant idea. Sure, Randel, but that's just not feasible. I understand that that's not in the market today, but there is approaches to do that. There are approaches, there are different ways that you can do this without it being restrictive to the cost. And that's one of the things that we're focused on at Qixent. Our entire goal is to do something that is much more embedded. That's why we like clients that are insurance adjacent because insurance can then be a single piece in the middle while all of these additional services around it are being offered. And those additional services can be priced around value as opposed to the core insurance piece that's in the middle that's being offered is being offered at cost. So you're absolutely right. The insurance part is going to take a long time to overcome. They have to be filed. Rates rules and forms all have to be approved, but there are ways and techniques that you can do that offer services that are built out around the insurance line that allow it to be much more value-based price.

Nick: Yeah, over here we would call this like normal assistant services, right? Which you then kind of bolt on and you merge these products together and then, yeah, understood. I'm just, do you think everyone says, you know, our customer behavior is changing, daddy, daddy, da, and then they'll kind of go, no, everyone, you know, become like, insurance should become like Amazon. Yeah, I'm just kind of like as a shortened one. How much do you feel that change in customer behavior from let's say other interactions with retail, consumer goods, travel, maybe even neobanking is directly applicable to insurance? And if so, which ones, and if not, why?

Randel: Yeah, I think that insurance behavior has changed. I think there's an expectation, but I don't think that it's in the ways that I hear people talking about it. I think there's an expectation, a bigger expectation for transparency. People have information at their fingertips. People are able to Google and search and look for things. And there's this expectation of what value are you bringing insurance product? What is it that you are doing? Insurance behavior around insurance, I think has been, or consumer behavior around insurance, excuse me, for years has been avoiding the use of it, avoiding filing a claim. How do we prevent ourselves from doing that? So if I'm avoiding filing a claim, but I'm paying for insurance, then what is the value of this insurance? And I think that question is top of mind for consumers more today than it was yesterday. That's where I think it has actually changed. And I think insurance companies haven't responded to that change very well. They haven't responded by saying, here's the value that we bring. They haven't responded by saying, why you should make sure you're always paying on time. Here's why having insurance is useful and helpful. They've kind of leaned into still, well, this is the mandatory requirement and here's how it helps. That's for consumers. For businesses, insurance has gotten very well at using services to enhance the insurance products that they're selling. They're coming in, they're providing value on a day-to-day, saying, here's where safety risks, hazards are for you, for your employees. Here's where your business is at risk of cybersecurity. They've done an excellent job of coming in and identifying it. So at B2B level, at commercial lines, excellent. But at consumer, personal lines, challenge. They haven't answered the call when it comes to questions about where's the value.

Nick: If we are, if we try to look a little bit ahead, do you see disruption or a step change or an acceleration of evolution? I've been 10 years in the insurtech wave and it's like innovation disruption. They've kind of gotten a bit of a stale taste for me. They've just haven't delivered on the promise that were ingrained in those terms. But for the sake of it, what kind of step changes or disruptors would you think insurance executives or insurance entrepreneurs should take note of in the coming years?

Randel: That's something that we think about too as well. I think disruption was a combative word that I don't think should have been used. It was a very insurtech 1.0 exactly to your point. I do think that where the change has been affected has been a lot more client facing, right? So for years, at least in the US for the entirety, I think that insurance has been a product centric approach looking at the product and saying, here's the changes that I need to make. Here's the changes that I can make because it's so very technical and so very understanding. I think that a lot of .com was focused on customer, client centric approach of developing products. And I think that when insurtech 1.0 came in and said, here's the changes we need to make, lemonade in the US, Esurance here in the US, some of these old school startups that happen were focused on the customer centric product development cycle as opposed to being product centric. They were saying, how do we make this product more attainable for our customer? What changes do we need to make here? There's a lot more, we can't do that, but we can do this, which I think helped change the insurance development cycle here in the US already. So it went from no, no, no to, okay, maybe if we can do this, this, that, and the other. So I do think there's been a strong, a much stronger response to that.

Randel: Going forward, looking further and beyond, I think there's going to be a lot more liability that's focused on of the producer and of the producer than there will be of the consumer. Meaning that auto insurance in 20 years may disappear from what we're looking at because we know all of these manufacturers now are looking into insurance, offering their own consumer liability product for auto insurance. And that may make it so that you don't need a private passenger auto policy anymore, that this is all manufacturer, especially if we get to a point where there's a lot more autonomous vehicles, or there's a lot more shared vehicles, there's a lot less personal auto ownership, personal auto policy may disappear in the next 20 to 50 years.

Nick: Yeah. Considering, I mean, and just conscious of time, and I think we could just go on and on and on, but is there like a topic or an aspect of what you're working on, what you like to talk about that we haven't touched that you would just kind of like to share before we wrap up?

Randel: What we've been working on that I think is really interesting is just like I said at the start, and I'll double click on this and double down on it, is the idea of de-risking startups, de-risking a go-to-market. You have a new idea, how can we get it into the market as well growing the lessons today without having the capital expenditure, without having the risk on the startups that you see with a new business, and with a new initiative, and with a new project? And so that's where our company comes in, and that's what we always like to focus on and like to work on. You have this brilliant idea, you need to get it into market, you need to start learning how to do it today, you don't have the time, you don't have the resources to devote entirely to this, and you don't want it to disrupt your core business. That's what we like working on, that's where we come in and we can say, we can fit this into a model and into an approach that allows additional revenue, profitable revenue, that is built for the long run, that is built for sustainability and built for profits. That's the projects always that we like to focus on and like where we like to go.

Nick: Perfect. Randel, this was really a true pleasure, really exciting, love what you're doing, I think it's very timely and will remain to be so in the future. And really glad that we were able to connect through this medium. I mean, that's what these podcasts, for anyone listening, that's what these are for me, right? It's to connect and sometimes, you know, across the Atlantic and understanding what's happening on other necks of the world. So thank you so much for your insights and your straight talk. And this was one of the more enjoyable conversations that I've had doing this. So thank you so much and all the best.

Randel: Thank you, Nick. It's wonderful to be here. Thank you for having me.

Nick: Cool, bye.

Randel: Bye!