Jack Sharry: Thanks everyone, and welcome. Thanks for joining us today on our next episode of wealth tech on deck. Today we’re going to speak with someone who has helped and continues to help more firms construct unified managed households are you a major platforms than anyone in the industry? I’m speaking with my friend and colleague, Martin Cowley, who is the VP of product at LifeYield. Martin, welcome to wealthtech on deck, thank you, Jack, it’s good to be here. As background for our audience. And Martin will fill us in some more. He works with our tech product, and operational teams that many of the nation’s largest wealth management firms, he helps clients in determining the most efficient and effective ways to help investors and advisors improve outcomes by leveraging the confluence of human and digital advice. So today, we’re going to talk about the lessons learned because Martin’s been at this for 12 years or more building out what a UMH is becoming, because it’s definitely a work in progress across the industry. So let’s start by describing what you do and working with the variety of folks, whether they’re wealth managers, asset managers, insurance and annuity companies, platform providers. But actually, before we start talking about what you do with them, it might be useful for our audience to have a full appreciation, frankly, you are the one and only person I know in the industry that’s really built this stuff. What is the UMH was a look like what are the components at a high level just start we can drill down in a little bit. But when he described it at a high level, what’s the UMH?
Martin Cowley: Sure. So unified manage household, it’s really involved working on a group of accounts together in a coordinated fashion. And that’s not necessarily a new concept, because people have had a bunch of accounts. So over the years, people often accumulate them by accident, they may have switched advisors, and not consolidated assets, they may have 401k’s they may have other types of retirement accounts, IRAs, Roth’s etc. So you end up kind of with a hodgepodge of different accounts that are often left with whatever was in them in the first place, and they’ve grown at different rates. So it’s really that lack of coordination. That is what led to the idea of a UMH.
Jack Sharry: If I could, Martin, let me underscore that word coordination. That’ll get us to our next question, which is, what do you do with the folks that you work with the inside folks at the platforms, maybe if you underscore that coordination aspect, and then I’m sure that will translate or lead into what you do with the folks that you work with at the the likes of Morgan Stanley or Ameriprise or Sei, or a lot of the firms that you work with on a day to day basis. So describe how important that coordination is. And some of the challenges too.
Martin Cowley: So I’d say that the grouping of accounts is one aspect of your UMH. That’s kind of the fundamental requirement that you have a group of accounts that you can work with, it’s the M part of UMH that’s somewhat new and not as well defined as the rest of it. So everybody knows what a group of accounts looks like, everybody knows that they have a group of accounts. But actually managing that group of accounts is the part that’s new. And lots of people are trying to do it in different ways. So what we mean by coordination is, I as an investor might have a particular level of risk, I might have some goals in mind that I want to use my assets for in the future, I may have a risk tolerance, that I want to stay within certain bounds. So you really have to look at all of those accounts together in a holistic way rather than managing them piecemeal. And certainly you don’t want to ideally be investing and then letting them run for years on end without kind of resetting at some point and looking at them as a whole.
Jack Sharry: So if I may interject, Martin in a few comment, you know, the typical household is, we will know, you see these accounts millions of literally every day. And there’s a lot of different stuff and a lot of different places managed with their own particular asset allocation by account. But there’s no holistic view. And ultimately, to do a unified managed household, you really have to have a holistic view and fill our audience in. But it starts with risk. And that necessarily means as you adjust risk, you adjust it need to factor in tax and try to figure out ways to do a tax efficiently. But we need to talk about how that works. Because I know it starts with risk, and it leads to tax and then leads to a bunch of other things. But we will focus in on that so people can get an appreciation how one how important risk is which we all intuitively understand. But then what do you do about it? How do you make sure you do it in a tax efficient way because they they’re two sides of the same coin.
Martin Cowley: Really, the tax efficiency part is the is the tricky part. And some of the challenge also is in the history of the way in which account management developed. You think about going and opening an investment account. You’re often and lead through a risk tolerance questionnaire, to gauge through a varying number of questions what your appetite for risk is or your aversion to risk. And ultimately, that has led you to an asset allocation or perhaps to a basket of securities or funds or whatever the product might be that specific to that account. And then that level of risk for that account might be maintained over time through rebalancing and other methods. But for an investor, your level of risk is really your own level of risk. It’s not your account risk. So when we talk about a unified, managed household, we’re talking about combining all of those assets across the accounts and gauging risk for the investor across their various assets, rather than looking at them as silos. Now, that opens up a few opportunities when you’re working with different accounts, because different accounts have different tax treatment, if you think about a brokerage account, where you’re paying taxes on bond yield, as it arrives, and same thing for dividends. If you sell an appreciated stock position, then you’re realizing again, that could be taxed differently depending on how long you’ve held it. And also, you’ve got opportunities to sell things at a loss and build up a loss carried forward to offset future gains. So that’s the characteristics of a taxable account. And then it’s very different for a tax qualified account, like an IRA or a Roth IRA, for an IRA, you’re putting in pre tax money to start and then that’s, that’s growing, you’re still getting all of the appreciation, dividends, bond yield, etc, that you have in a brokerage account, but you’re not paying any taxes on it, until you eventually withdraw. So that leads to a very different picture around how things behave in a qualified account or tax qualified account, versus how they behave in a taxable account. So the coordination that we look at making a UMHB or collection of accounts tax efficient, is all about taking advantage of those different tax treatments, and taking advantage of the way individual asset classes behave, and trying to place them in the right account. So you can make the most of the characteristics of both the investment and the account that it’s residing in.
Jack Sharry: So I’m going to translate some of this into very simple English, because the stuff you deal with is sophisticated, and but just to make sure our audience is with us on what you’re doing. First a high level and then I’d like to have you go into the sort of the deeper, deeper level and what you do and how you do it with some of our some of the clients that you work with. But essentially, your, your, their asset allocations by account typically is what you’ll see. And then there are, of course, the inherent tax treatments as those are as things get bought and sold and adjusted. And markets change and circumstances change and draw draw down as money is withdrawn and so on. But then when you put them all together, and that’s really a lot of what the image is about is bringing it together because you can get a better outcome. And as you all know, because you you were there at the inception, we did a study with Ernst & Young, they looked at our methodology, and basically looked at what it takes to do it across the household, and you can improve outcome by a third. So that sounds pretty good. How do you how do you do that a lot of it comes from taxes, you all know and love to help have you amplify that. But by bringing it together, it creates the opportunity for asset consolidation, also comment on some of the scoring that we’ve done and the tax efficient score the you know, the tax alpha we generate through asset location. By bringing it all together, you’re necessarily going to make some adjustments to get a true household level asset allocation that creates typically tax events. So you want to be smart about that. And then over time, you want to quantify that. So you can kind of determine the next best action or the next best trade to make these are all things you’ve developed. Big talk about that and how that all applies when you go into a firm and you work with them literally for years to work these through given legacy systems and other software that you need to interface with maybe just talk about all that as that how do you work with firms? What do you learn along the way? How do you make it real?
Martin Cowley: Yes, that’s a short question with a long answer. So Rewinding back to the beginning of LifeYield, we knew that there was a benefit from coordinating accounts from a tax efficiency perspective. And as you pointed out that Ernst & Young study that we did early on, and the way we started was by building a user interface. Building an algorithmic engine behind the scenes had a lot of freedom, in terms of using all of these various tactics we have for better tax management across a household. And when I talk about the tactics, things like optimizing asset location is a big one and asset location is all about trying to minimize the tax drag. So when I’ve got a bond or an equity position If I’ve got dividend yield, I’ve got various components of something’s total return, and it gets taxed differently. And it causes what we call tax drag. So the difference between the pre tax return and the after tax return is what we refer to as tax drag. So we’re always trying to minimize that. That’s one of the big benefits of UMH. So early on, we thought that we could completely reorganize a multi account investment portfolio to put optimal location in place, minimize the tax drag, boost the after tax return, and everybody’s happy. And that’s really one of the big benefits. But then reality hits, and you have smees, you have you amaze. So you have accounts that are being managed individually. And they’re not necessarily being managed in such a way that they’re aware of the other accounts around them. But sometimes true when all of the accounts are held by the same firm and managed by the same firm, it’s very common, when people have the situation that I mentioned earlier, where they’ve accumulated accounts over time with different advisors, and they’ve got these different accounts scattered around the place. So it’s that per account management has been probably the, it’s probably the biggest obstacle to true UMH drew coordination through management at the household level. So we moved away from our user interface that was very much a UNH rebalancing and withdrawal tool with the algorithmic engine behind it, we pretty much detached the UI from that. And we found it was going to be an awful lot more effective for our clients to be able to plug some of our UMH content into their existing UIs. So you’re essentially meeting people where they are, rather than having them make a big change a big upheaval. So that the user experience part was one aspect of that, wanting to make sure that we could kind of infuse these existing workflows that were that people were used to, with some awareness of UMH, it could be as simple I mean, a really simple example, is just being aware of wash sales across accounts, if I sell something at a loss in a taxable account, and I’ve purchased the same thing, in any other account, taxable or not, within the last 30 days, then I can’t count that taxable loss on my tax return. It’s a wash sale condition. So that’s an example of something that’s really simple when you see the whole household to be able to detect certain things and then provide a benefit. In that case, by not suggesting losses that violate yourself.
Jack Sharry: In a lot of ways Martin would love to have you expand on this, we you and I, probably pretty much everyone on this podcast grew up in an industry that was single account, single product focused, single tech focused. And soon as you start to think about how to bring it all together, you got to consider a lot of things risk, task, tax, and cost and wash sales and asset location. And you have the whole dynamic of multi account, we’ll talk a little bit about that if you would, because you basically, you and our colleague, Paul Samuelson, figured out how to do what you need to do. And together, you guys developed our algorithms around dealing with it, because you have to consider lots of really, we don’t need to get in the nooks and crannies today. But there’s lots of nooks and crannies in there that you need to be mindful of because they produce alpha. And then also if you would talk about how we determine that was critically important to quantify the benefits, because it’s so hard to explain what we’re doing. So what if you would address all that?
Martin Cowley: Yeah. So in terms of the account centric part, one common thing that we have to deal with is, is SMAs and UMAs. So when you think about a household and some level of risk, we tend to take drift as a proxy for risk. So there’s other systems, other workflows that our clients already have around arriving at an asset allocation for a client. And a lot of our clients have started moving towards a household view. Because it’s kind of a natural workflow. When you think about it, when you think about somebody running a financial plan for one of their clients, then that’s household level, by definition, you never really run a financial plan for one account, you always run it holistically, looking at all of the anticipated spending expenses in retirement, when they’re going to retire, what their social security payments are going to look like. What does their investment portfolio look like now? What do they expect to contribute to different types of accounts, and so forth. So planning happens at the household level. And then there’s a bit of a gap between the end of planning and what actually gets implemented in the accounts. Accounts are still very much managed in a somewhat siloed way when you think about the types of products that go into them. So we’ve been careful to stay away from the risk part. We’re not doing a risk evaluation. We’re not helping people arrive at an asset allocation. We’re not taking over that part. of the process. So, by the time LifeYield is engaged in a workflow for a client, then that asset allocation has already been selected based on the client’s risk level. And then it’s down to us to say, here’s the best way to implement it, given the accounts that the client has. There’s a lot of variables there, around the size of people’s accounts, the type of their accounts, the investments that are currently in those accounts, and other things, such as the client’s tax rates. There’s a lot of variables that go into it. But then when you when you do that mapping, that translation from what comes out of planning, and then actually gets implemented in those accounts. That’s where the challenge comes when you think about the fact that, in some cases, advisors are selecting investments for their clients they’re working through and saying, Well, you need to have X amount of US large cap, this is my currently recommended us large cap fund. So we’re going to put you in this, or an a different advisor might do something else. Sometimes they may say, Well, you need to have 60-40 mix, I’ve got this unified managed account program. And here’s a model that gives you a 60-40 mix. So I’m going to put you in that managed account. So what we’ve had to do, I mentioned early on that we were assuming full control of all of the cells, and then generally category level by suggestions. So advisors could still pick the recommendations make the recommendations that they wanted, we’ve moved now to recognizing that we’ve got to meet not just the users where they’re at, but also the systems, clients have a big investment in systems that are often account centric, and they all are trying to move in the UNH direction. So they can coordinate accounts and have that overlay view. So over the last six or seven years, in particular, we’ve added a lot of functionality for that we can be aware of the models that individual accounts can be assigned. And we can help with that recommendation. So it’s like an easy button, you just press the button within our clients user interface. And we can go through and say, Well, based on optimal location, trying to meet your target allocation, at the same time as minimizing your tax drag. Here’s the set of model assignments we suggest. So maybe account number one has model six, count number two has model three, and so forth. And then those, the beauty of that is that the downstream systems, so the SMA systems, they don’t know anything happened, they’re just running as normal, they had a model assigned, they’re being run everyday correcting drift, investing cash, everything stays pretty much the same. But you’ve then added this UMA overlay on top of existing processes with minimal disruption. And it’s that minimal disruption is really what we’ve been striving for, to help move in this direction.
Jack Sharry: So far, we’ve described the easy part of what we do, which is the accumulation asset location, the allocation in that dynamic between location and allocation. So that’s the easy part. Right?
Martin Cowley: We quantify the benefit of, of that with a score easy may not be the word but yeah, right.
Jack Sharry: I’m saying it’s someone who just in that it ain’t easy. It’s hard, and requires very sophisticated algorithms, which Martin in fairness is just scratching the surface, his depth of understanding and knowledge is, goes far deeper, but we’ll put that aside for now. That’s the going up the hill. Now we got to figure out how to draw down how to withdraw. That’s when it gets really complicated, as you will know. So if you would describe what maybe some lessons learned or things you know, on the accumulation side that might be useful for our audience, and throw in Social Security, just keep it really complex, because that’s another element of an income, distribution, intelligent withdrawal schema. So talk about that just, again, at a high level for now, just so the lessons learned some of the things you know, to be important as you talk about withdrawal.
Martin Cowley: Sure. And I mean, as you will know, Jack, withdrawals are kind of where we started. Yes. So what we found when we were first working on withdrawals, people have accumulated a bunch of assets, and they’re either well organized, or they’re not, that’s a pretty wide spectrum. So the challenge initially was how do you turn those assets into an income stream, just looking at the portfolio. So with that assumption, you are matrix kind of a given it’s, we’re assuming that we’ve got those accounts in one place, or they’re at least manageable together, and you you know about them, and you can coordinate them. So the initial challenge was, how do we turn that into an income stream that supplements whatever other income somebody has in retirement? It was very portfolio centric, initially. Now some of the methods that we’ve got some of the techniques we’ve got trying to draw down an investment portfolio in such a way that you give up as little as possible in tax one of the big ones. Well, I guess the two biggest ones, or maybe there are three biggest ones. So the three The biggest ones, I’d say, asset location is minimizing that tax drag so that you’re not emptying your account overnight, you’re drawing them down over time. So you still want to have advantage of the tax characteristics of the investments and the accounts in which they’re located. So asset location is just as important during the accumulation when you’re drawing that portfolio down as it is at any other time. And we found that it was one of the methods that translated really well to accumulation. So whereas we started with withdrawals as our primary focus, some of the methods that we adopted for withdrawals ended up being applicable to accumulation to, so we kind of moved them into that part of the lifecycle for an investment portfolio. That’s how we really got into accumulation. Another couple of items that are really important their tax management in terms of gain realization, gain or loss realization in taxable accounts, and also the sequence of withdrawals. So should you pull from taxable accounts, you might have a required minimum distribution from an IRA that you need to take initially, before you then follow order of withdrawals on the remaining accounts. So there are some of those techniques that we built early on, which when you put them all together, they’re pretty complicated. And this is just when you’re looking at the withdrawal of an investment portfolio without thinking about anything else. So this is with static tax rates, or assumed tax rates, assumed capital market assumptions, how you anticipate the various asset classes are going to behave in the future, when you start adding other components of somebody’s retirement income, then the number of permutations and the number of considerations really explodes. So you think about Social Security, when you claim Social Security is going to have impact on how much of a benefit you get and how much of a benefit your spouse eventually gets when you pass away, and they switch to survivor benefits. So there are various methods that you can use in exploring the different types of filing strategies that somebody might have, that have a big impact on kind of foundational income that you have in retirement, we look at Social Security as foundational, you know, you’re gonna get it to some degree or other. So it’s kind of a given. And then you build on top of that, when you consider how much of my intended spending and any gap I have between income from rental properties, and whatever else I might have, in the works post retirement, how much of a gap do I have that I need to fill. And if I have a gap that I need to fill, that’s where a withdrawal from an investment portfolio comes into play. There’s an awful lot of plates spinning, when you’re trying to get the balance right between that income gap and making portfolio withdrawals using these various techniques that we have, because they’re all kind of mutually dependent on each other. So that’s a challenge in itself, but then translating that into the types of products that users might have in the various accounts. If I’ve got SMAs and UMAs that are being managed against models, then that adds a complication. If I’ve got a household where some managed accounts exist, some fully discretionary accounts exist where the advisor can pretty much control the whole thing that leads to opportunities to eke out a little bit of extra tax efficiency on the way down as you draw those portfolios down.
Jack Sharry: Sure. So Martin, if I could summarize what we’ve talked about so far, basically, during accumulation, risk and tax are two sides of the same coin, you gotta manage risk. That’s kind of where we all start in this business. But now we’re talking at the household level. So there’s that level of complexity and really important, because you want different accounts with different tax treatments. So as you make adjustments, you necessarily cause a tax event. So creating tax alpha is critically important on the accumulation side. And then when you flip over to the D cumulation, or intelligent withdrawal side, still need to keep asset location in mind terms is because you’re not drawing down all at once, you’re typically drawing it down over time. So you want to keep that portfolio in line. Also, you want to be as you’re drawing down, again, doing it as tax efficiently as you’ve described as you go so that you can extend or increase income over time. So that’s the two sides and I’m way oversimplifying, but just making sure our audience still is following with us. One of the things that that I know occurs love to have you comment on is that, as you’re working with firms, as you’re working with the folks responsible for the technology and the product and the operations and how all that comes together was something I think you must be surprised by No, I am and that is you play the role of sort of consultant coach counselor on how you put all this stuff together, including stuff we don’t offer, but rather we connect with so you have an understanding of that and often you’re in that role. So describe that because it’s I think it’s really become a hallmark Have LifeYield As a company, as we really get UMH in particular really get you UMH. And then a lot of the role you play is that of coaching counselor. So talk about that, if you would.
Martin Cowley: Yeah, there’s a lot of listening involved, a lot of time spent understanding existing workflows and existing systems. The challenge with putting a UMH in place is that everybody’s situation is different. All of our clients have different systems in place, they look at the investment process in slightly different ways. Even the definition of UMH may be different in terms of what people really mean, when they say, Oh, we want to go and work at the household level, we want to have some kind of household level offering that can be drastically different when you when we ask our firms, our clients, what do you mean, when you want to move to householding? What does that mean to you? And you could ask two different clients or 10 different clients, and you’d get 10 different answers. And a lot of that is based on their perception of household and also where they’re at in terms of existing systems and how much control they have over those systems, whether they’re in house. And they’ve got a lot more control versus third party systems where they’re subject to another company’s roadmap. So I’d say when we go in, and when we’re starting to work with the client on UNH, we have to spend a lot of time looking at the systems they have understanding the workflows that they have, and then getting a feel for where do they want to go in terms of UMH, what’s the perception of UMH, we can offer advice there, because we’ve seen this in so many different places, there’s a lot of common threads that aren’t obvious to the clients that we’re dealing with. Because they’re aware of their own workflows. They’re not necessarily aware of others. So the benefit that we add is that we’ve seen a lot of things. We’ve seen a lot of variations on a theme. So we understand from our background at Upstream technologies, CheckFree and Fiserv. Have we we know very well, how SMAs and new amaze operate, that really gives us a leg up on understanding the challenges with moving to a young age what’s possible and what’s not, or what’s possible in a long term versus a short term. Everything from that to the other types of product that that people use, how hands on are the advisors? Do they work in a rep as pm type model? Do they have full discretion? What kind of compliance requirements do they have at the account level or at the household level? So the list goes on. But there’s there’s a lot of considerations that span a variety of topics that we we’ve seen at least a dozen permutations, there’s probably more. So I see our job as being to identify the common threads, as I said, and then help chart a path. And it’s often a roadmap for our clients that we’re helping them to establish.
Jack Sharry: Right, right. Yeah, just as a template where you’re saying where one of our clients result of a series of mergers and acquisitions over many years. And last time, I heard they have 16 different trading systems. And so all the work that you do for accumulation and decumulation. Not only do you need to make recommendations that make sense from a risk and tax standpoint, but you also have to factor in their different rules for the trading, you’re seeing all the way through. So whether it’s having an understanding a thorough understanding, as you do with the various planning tools that are in the marketplace, data aggregation, certainly the stuff that LifeYield does all the stuff around risk, because we work with different risk approaches at different firms, whether it’s called Aladdin, or it’s called Riskalyze, or it’s called whatever it’s called the tax piece. Of course, we all do. And that kind of all ultimately flows through tax in whatever recommendation, whether it’s accumulation or withdrawal. And then in the decumulation, back to the trading, which is we didn’t get into it today for another time. But rebalancing is the flip side of decumulation, you gotta get the rebalancing at the household level without the individual count level. And I know that you can accommodate individual rebalances as well, you have to factor in all this stuff. And then translate that into a quantifiable benefit. Because everything we just talked about is way too complicated for most, if not all advisors, and certainly for clients so that I have more money, that part people do understand, and they liked that part. So anyway, I share that as a summary for what Martin has described, he can go far deeper and longer on all this and that’s what he does day to day. But for our audience just give you a sense, this is the level of complexity of a true UMH from our standpoint, so our time grows nine, Martin, we are a little bit overtime, but I’m thrilled that we have been able to cover what we’ve covered. So I’m gonna go right to my last and final question, which is always my favorite each week away from your day job of which you are consumes at least 40. If that 80 hours a week. What do you do outside of work that people might find interesting or fun? I know a little bit about the background here. You do a lots of interesting things. So I’m not sure what you’re going to choose to share with our audience. But what do you do outside of work that people might find interesting or surprising?
Martin Cowley: Well, probably the longest standing thing I’ve done and you know all about this. But music specifically classical music is something that I’ve done since I was six years old. My mother was a church organist in a suburb of London. And she kind of roped me into the choir. There’s a big choral tradition in the UK, if you’ve ever watched, if you watched Will and Kate’s wedding at Westminster Abbey, or you watched Harry and Megan at St. George’s, Chapel, Windsor, that kind of thing is all over the UK, there’s a lot of cathedrals that have have a choral tradition that dates back hundreds of years and a lot of cases. So it’s less prevalent here. Probably the closest is, if you think about St. Thomas’s Fifth Avenue in New York City, they have a similar model. But anyway, I was roped into singing at age six, and I kind of stuck with it, it became a habit. There’s an awful lot of music that’s been written for that format by pretty much every classical composer you can imagine. So it’s pretty rewarding. And I’ve also when I was 11 years old, I think I started playing classical guitar and got pretty good at that over the years. But it sounded good in theory, somebody knowing singing guitar, but although I enjoyed it, it was somewhat unfortunate that I took the classical path for both because that meant that I’d never done the two together. And it wasn’t a particularly cool thing to be doing. When I was at school, going off to choir practice, and playing my classical guitar. But later on, I look at it now is one of the most unique things that I’ve done. I was singing it, just to cathedral, and later on Norwich Cathedral in the UK, which if you look them up, they’re spectacular buildings. Wonderful acoustic, you’re singing there every day, different repertoire every day. So it was a real challenge musically. And I still do some of that around Boston, I’ll still sing in Boston, you went to a concert.
Jack Sharry: My wife and I were fortunate enough to hear you in concert, and I had a hunch you’d be good, because you’re good at whatever you do. But you kind of blew us away. He really was spectacular. And of course the setting just adds even more to it. It was beautiful chapel and wonderful choir. And we were most impressed. And I shouldn’t say surprised. But there was just wow, I had no idea. So it was really wonderful.
Martin Cowley: Yeah, it is kind of unusual, because you don’t see it as much over here. But around Boston as there’s quite a lot going on. And it’s nice to still be able to do that it. It reminds me of some of the things that I did back in back in London back in UK cathedrals a similar standard over here, which is really good to just keep the cobwebs at bay still keep the pipes working. The thing that hasn’t necessarily helped me with this, I’m still pretty bad at singing and guitar at the same time. There’s really no classical music that involves that. So I’ve had to learn how to strum I’ve had to learn the Travis picking. I’ve had to learn guitar chords, which you don’t do when your finger picking a piece of classical music. You’ve no idea what the chords are most the time, but I have started trying to fit them together. And very much a novice back to square one, but I’m working on it.
Jack Sharry: Great. Well, this has been a real pleasure Martin. I knew much of what we described discussed but this has been a pleasure to hear it updated we both are so busy and I’ve been in different parts of New England throughout much of the past couple years so good to be engaged at least via zoom kind of thing. So for our audience if you enjoyed our podcast please rate review and subscribe and or share what we’re doing here at well deck on deck. We’d love to have you join us. We’re available where ever you get your podcasts. Martin thanks for this has been a lot of fun, really enjoyed our conversation and looking forward to the next one. Thanks.
Martin Cowley: Thanks, Jack. Appreciate it.