The Internet of Apparel

Transcript

• Narration 0:07

  The Mr. Beacon podcast is sponsored by Wiliot, scaling IoT with battery free Bluetooth.

  
  

  Steve Statler 0:16

  So, welcome to the Mr. Beacon podcast. This week, we are delving into digital physical convergence, the Internet of apparel, sustainability twist on a very interesting project, which is, I think, gonna potentially yield some great opportunities in the world of apparel, some great opportunities to help save the planet, and certainly something that's very thought provoking. And for this discussion, we've got Dr. Kevin Dooley, who's, who's joining us in, in part of his role within as the Chief Scientist for the sustainability Consortium. So Kevin, welcome to the show.

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 1:06

  Thank you so much for having me.

  
  

  Steve Statler 1:09

  It's, it's a real pleasure. Can you maybe introduce the sustainability consortium first, and then we'll after that, we'll delve into a bit of a bit about your background. And then this, this project called wherever, which is really fascinating.

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 1:25

  Excellent. So a standard like consortium, we just achieved our 10th anniversary. And it's a joint effort between Arizona State University and University of Arkansas. And we were started a decade ago, in order to see what we could do to make consumer products more sustainable. And so the general notion was that up to that point, companies and brands had a portion of their product portfolio that they might designate as green under some type of environmental or social attribute. And that's a great first step. But our goal was really to look at all product categories, and all products sold in those categories and determine a way to make them more sustainable. And so we set out with about 100, corporate and NGO stakeholders, a number of other academic institutions. And first of all, did the materiality assessment on 100 different product categories like bananas, or computers, or cotton, cotton textiles, and from those social and environmental hotspots based on the science that we knew, then develop key performance indicators that then suppliers use to report their progress to their their retail consumers? And there have even been some breakouts of them sharing that information with the consumers themselves. And so we're most known for that development and stewardship of this the Walmart Sustainability Index. But our members have also been interested in now can we do something about those hotspots? And so a lot of our members, especially in the kind of durable goods, sectors, have expressed interest in various Circular Economy projects. And so that's kind of kind of how project wherever got initiated, because we saw there was a lot of potential interest amongst our members and other corporate and NGO and technology providers.

  
  

  Steve Statler 3:31

  Just to round out the TSC, the sustainability consortium, you've got some very significant members, you said there was over 100, even at the founding, can you name drop a few of the the players in that?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 3:47

  Well, so from a retail perspective, I mentioned that, you know, Walmart has been kind of our lead user. But more recently, in the last couple of years, we've had implementations by target, Amazon, sprouts, Kroger.

  
  

  Steve Statler 4:10

  Significant, very significant. So you have a broad net. And and this is not just sort of a post in a check for $1,000. This is a fairly significant commitment these companies make to participate. And just before we get into wherever, any kind of notable achievements that you can point to in terms of these hotspots that you talked about identifying and is there been any progress over the last decade?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 4:43

  So it's been about five years that it's been operating in the field. And so we're covering about a trillion dollars worth of product sales. So that's about 1/15 of the global retail trade. Okay, so we have a lot of potential economic impact. There's about 2500 suppliers that have participated. And we have seen that, first of all, there's been an improvement in the underlying scores. So most of the questions, most of the hotspots for any product manufacturer exists in their supply chain. So most of the KPIs address supply chain transparency and performance. And really, you can't really get concerned too much about performance until you have that first step of even having the transparency of knowing who your suppliers are, are they actually doing anything about GHGs, or water, or labor rights. And so we've seen those supply chain transparency scores increase from an average of about 30%. And now five years later, to about 45%. And we've also seen that those suppliers that have participated in a multiple years generally have higher scores. So it looks like it takes about two to three years for any large corporation or museums corporation to put in the measurement systems at the both their own factories and within their supply chain to begin to collect sustainability related data. And then you know, in terms of changes to product and process and whatnot, and packaging. About 85% of suppliers who report say that they've done something in the past year to basically improve their KPI score. And so that's kind of our theory of change. And so we see the suppliers are actually doing stuff directly linked to the KPIs. And again, it takes about two to three years, let's say to make a packaging change, right. So if you think about going through the design process, you've still got to include all the advertising for marketing purposes on there. If it's a new formulation, you might have to change suppliers change equipment. So we're getting a sense of what the feasible pace of sustainable change is in the corporate world.

  
  

  Steve Statler 7:03

  Very good. And then lastly, before we get into wherever, tell us a bit about your background. What do you do when you're not the Chief Scientist?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 7:15

  Well, so I'm a professor of supply chain management at Arizona State University. And kind of I was trained as industrial engineer at University of Illinois, taught for 10 years at University of Minnesota and then had been here at ASU for 22 years, have moved from my industrial engineering background, more to business and supply chain, and a lot of stuff around new product development. And a lot of my work with my work research isn't focused on sustainability. It's about supplier innovation, basically, how manufacturers can tap into their supply base for sources of innovation.

  
  

  Steve Statler 7:53

  Very cool. So wherever where did it come from? What are you trying to do?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 7:59

  So I have to credit a gentleman named John Atchison, who is the CEO of an app called stuffed her. stuffed her is a startup that has been, I think, has gotten some initial VC funding that had a very successful pilot launch with the UK closer, John Lewis. And they operate both a back end and front end system that will essentially allow people first of all to have a digital library of the things that they own. And then on top of that, get an immediate assessment of its resale value. And then essentially, have someone pick it up that night if they want and put money in their store account. And I know that the pilot with John Lewis, I think I know the numbers reliably, that about like a quarter of what John Lewis had sold over. I can't exactly remember the timeframe, maybe the last two or three years was returned in this particular pilot project. And so it shows that there's a pent up demand that people have for a channel that's convenient, and then give them some monetary renumeration. But I think most of all that convenience for product takeback of clothing.

  
  

  Steve Statler 9:21

  So the people buy the clothing, they wear it, and then they give it back to John Lewis.

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 9:28

  They were so stuffed her would run the tape back system and stuffed her would resell it in other distribution channels. And that information obviously would be used analytically by John Lewis. And this is another way of kind of, I think, generally retailers are interested in ways that they can remain. They can communicate on an ongoing basis with consumers. And so this is an example of that. And and John and his and his company are are a member of the Cte 100 group in the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, as is Arizona State University. And so that's how we got connected. And he came to us asking the question, what do we know about how long products are used and how often they're used. And in our work in sustainability consortium, we found a big knowledge gap there. And if you think about it, we can define the lifecycle of a consumer product. And we can identify 1000 plus distinct steps, you know, from the farm, or the forest, or the metal extraction, all the way to end of life and recycling, all the intricacies that we can model. And there's this thing in the middle called the consumer, and the use phase, and it's a big black box. And we have no idea really what goes on there. And, and, you know, for particular consumer behaviors around particular attributes. Yes, there have been lots of studies, so lots of studies of like, you know, cold water washing by consumers? Or, you know, do consumers turn the lights off in their house? Or do they, you know, unplugged their utilities to want, you know, not have passive electricity use. But for the most part, it's a black box. So that seemed intriguing, just as a scientist, like, Oh, really don't know very much. As we went and saw the reaction to this question. In the ce 100. Meeting in the Phoenix, there were all these retailers and brands and universities and service providers, technology providers, who were in the room, just super psyched about the question. And so we were intrigued anyway. But then when we saw that kind of interest amongst people across various different sectors and value chain positions were like, this is something hot, and so TSE offered to kind of facilitate a planning process through the calendar year 2018, we fell upon clothing as the category that most of the participants were interested in, received a grant from a foundation, so that we can begin to essentially do pilot demonstrations in 2019. So our interest is that we see that this is going to explode. With or without us. There's just all sorts of marketers and positive drivers, and initial investment in using digital technology to track clothing and attract products more generally. And we think that there are certain things that would be advantage to do in a pre competitive space, especially around standards to measure utilization analytics, and hopefully development of perhaps a benchmarking platform that brands and retailers and consumers can use to that incentivizes companies who want to design clothing that has superior longevity, but also superior utilization over its lifetime. Okay, so you're trying to extend one of the opportunities at least is to extend the life of products and to make them use more and, you know, we often Wiliot out when we kind of talk about

  
  

  Steve Statler 13:22

  building on the shoulders of what Amazon have done Amazon know you so well, they know. They know everything about what you browse, and then the conversion to buying and so forth. But what they don't know is do I actually use these things that I bought, this is the black hole that the black box that you that you referenced. So it seems like there's a real opportunity here to have people if not own the product longer than maybe this product has another life after, after the first ownership. Do you mean how practical is it for us to expect that companies whose motive is presumably to sell as much stuff as possible, to really well first of all support and then actually do anything about making these products last longer? If it means they're going to sell less stuff?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 14:24

  Yeah. So a couple of different answers to that. Maybe I could start and kind of summarize that from from my initial assessment of, of the activity in this domain. There are two main drivers. And whenever you look at kind of adoption of technology, sometimes it's not the technology itself that's being adopted, but rather there's there's larger trends that are going on that it gets swept up into. And so the first is is that we have been tracking him Torey in the supply chain with RFID tags and other technologies for a long time, that's a clear business proposition. Companies know the value of that and invest in it and are continuing to increase their investment in it. And so this is an extension of that inventory tracking, I think that those interested in that application are particularly interested in what happens and where it goes after its first life. So they want to make sure that the user knows, for example, proper recycling, or where they can take it to get donated and those types of things. And then they want to then make sure that that inventory comes back into a closed loop. So there's lots of money and, and business cases already for inventory tracking, this is an extension of it. But there, you know, there may or may not be applications in use, it's more about making sure that you know where the thing goes at the end of first life, then the other driver I see are essentially marketing opportunities. So there's, with most products and clothing included, there's not a natural opportunity to continue continue to communicate to consumer post sale. And both the brands and the retailers have interest in this particular application. In some cases, that may be you may consider it push marketing, right. And so it's basically marketing, maybe it's about similar products, maybe it's some kind of benefit that you get maybe a customized song list, for example, that you can download, because you're wearing a particular item. But I think it also goes to consumer instruction and even safety. So for example, I know this is outside of clothing, but I know a technology firm that's developing technology whereby it would monitor the number of pills in a pharmaceutical bottle, and were able to tell essentially, with the trigger being the cap opening, if the proper dosage was taken, if it had been forgotten, and so on, and then it communicate back to the consumer. So I think, you know, it's, on one hand, it's inventory tracking, and on the other hand, it's the marketing and consumer education. So I think that both of those applications then are going to drive the interest in tracking consumers, usage of products.

  
  

  Steve Statler 17:24

  And I want to come back to these points. But let's just get into a bit of the how we kind of talked about a little bit about what and why. How do you How are you tracking this? How are you instrumenting, the black box today with the project?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 17:43

  So in the consortium, you know, we don't have the capabilities to develop technology ourselves just on our expertise. And we have a tradition of of not essentially picking winners. So we don't say that paper is better than plastic or you know, whatnot. Because of course, we know as scientists that that answer is it depends. So what is the best technology? It depends. RHS does in, first of all, in a very short term, to be a champion for the opportunity, because we think the opportunity needs to get exposed, if there's going to be industry wide adoption. So part of our interest in the upcoming year is just to demonstrate the use case, so that we can begin to bring publicity and awareness from firms in the industry. But the second is to again, figure out how we should measure these things. And we think that that should be done in a pre competitive context. And so our experience and multi stakeholder facilitation, developing measurement systems is, you know, are interested in my obsession have kind of led me to this particular target of objectives?

  
  

  Steve Statler 19:03

  Well, you've got a really great picture, which I'm very tempted to reuse on your website that shows this, this, this product lifecycle, it would be good to just kind of talk through that cycle, I don't have it in your your head, but so the kind of the concepts here for maybe the experiment, or maybe on an ongoing basis is is what you have, let's let's say it's RFID. So you have a RFID tag that is presumably integrated at some point into the item of apparel, right? Generally these things get removed today they're on a cardboard tag, but but this because, for various reasons, privacy reasons and and so forth, but is the plan to put these tags On the apparel that certain subjects that participate in the wherever study have on all of their clothing what's, what's the idea?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 20:11

  Right. So maybe let me step back a little bit and kind of talk about the conceptual model. Yeah. That is maybe in the three year timeframe. So we conceive of three different dimensions that describe the state of a garment. The first that we normally think about is its physical state. And so we have design attributes, including information about like how the product was made, you know, was it was it sustained? Was the material sustainably sourced? Is there recycled content in it, as well as SKU level identification information about the physical or family of product, the make the pattern, the color, size, etc. So there's all that metadata that exists about the state of the garment at production. And then ideally, over time, you'd also like to have some way of measuring the physical integrity of the garment over time. And that will, you know, that eventually, will require some type of image recognition capability. But it's not as feasible given how often people take pictures of themselves. Then you have the you have the emotional state, which is a relationship between the consumer and the garment. And the reality is in clothing, we don't know whether physical integrity or emotional integrity is the main driver of people stopping to use their clothes. We have a sense in media and technology, that it's that emotional relationship, that it's no longer stylish, there's a new model out, it's not that the the cell phone is not operable anymore, right. But we don't know the answer to that the fundamental that fundamental question and clothing. So in the long run, if we had a way to measure through the way that consumers, for example, posted on social media about particular garments, the sentiment that they used and talking about the garment, in those posts, whatever measures that might be available, we have a second measure now of emotional integrity, which is also dynamic. The third is the physical location of the item, which infers its use state. But there are some complexities there. So we have to think about a garment as a piece of inventory that moves through different positions in the household. There's a storage area where it's dormant, there may be a long term storage area where you actually have to move it out of like my winter boots here in Phoenix, right to actually be used. There's in use that in use could be in the house, it could be outside of the house. And then there's what we often don't think of, there's the queuing system for maintenance, we can think about bringing laundry out, you know, to a laundromat, but there's just in our house, we've got the laundry room, there's a queue waiting to get washed, there's a queue waiting to get dried, there's even a queue waiting to get stored away. And until an inventory makes it until clothing makes it way through that system. It's not available for reuse. So this is one of the initial insights that we gained from thinking about the system in this model is that the amount of inventory clothing inventory that people have is directly related to the essentially the queue size and the throughput time of their laundering process. So in college, I own I own 30 T shirts. And it's because I only went to the laundromat once a month, so I had on 30 T shirts. So that's we don't often think about that as a reason why we own so many clothes. But that's a practical implication of thinking about clothing as as inventory. So there are a couple of different ways. You know, if we look at the dominant technologies that are likely to be used, which could be RFID. It could be RFID tags, but they're also no RFID threads. And then there's tags that convey digital information in different ways. So NFC tags, QR codes, and then I think we have Bluetooth devices that then also might embed other types of sensors. So we've thought for example, that motion sensors or temperature sensors might also have application to this use case. And they all they require different levels of consumer engagement, which means convenience. So I think that you know right now we have RFID hash tags in the inventory supply chain. They're used in the retail shop, as you mentioned. So from that sense, it makes it makes sense to extend RFID into the rest of the value chain, the it has the positive attribute that it doesn't require the consumer to engage the system, right, if the garment passes with an RFID tag within proximity of the reader, then you can record that event. The constraint is that readers are expensive. And so they make sense. On a truck, they make sense in a retail shop, they make sense in a distribution center. Today, they don't make sense at high scale in a home. And so they're you know, we look towards solutions that require consumer engagement. In the case of a QR code, or an NFC tag, your phone can read them. So you've got that convenience, but the consumer has to remember, to engage in the case of NFC, they've got to bring their phone, basically the contact with the tag, right, the distance is about the thickness of your phone. And then with the QR codes, you have more distance because you're using your camera, but you also have light constraints. So the QR codes don't work great in low light. And then the Bluetooth, as you know, and we've talked about, which which may be connected to a simple positional indicator or be linked to some other sensor the the constraint there has been the power source. So if you can come up with a solution that has a way to deal with that power source solution, and you can develop devices that are still environmentally benign. Because they will be thrown into landfill, they will be attempted to be recycled, you know, then that has the interesting attributes that it doesn't require the consumer to actively engage. But at the same time, it has a much longer potential range of have a level of precision around positional accuracy that you don't have with the others.

  
  

  Steve Statler 27:31

  So I've been describing this to people, rightly or wrongly as having the potential of being the Nielsen for the clothing industry, you know, their Nielsen studies for people that back in the world. days, when people used to watch TV, they were like the Bible were everywhere. And they would took a sample, they didn't watch everyone that watched the television, they had a sample audience and they instrumented that set top box, and then all of the television executives used to race to see the numbers. So is that a reasonable metaphor? Are you and in particular, are you seeing how big is the sample? Is this going to be kind of a study a moment in time you think where there'll be a few dozen people participating this? So do you see a bigger sample size? Or do you see this just being part of the way clothing is made? And you have permanent feedback from a whole range of different washing machines and social media apps that are constantly providing this information? Where do you see it? And how close is it to the this Nielsen idea?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 28:42

  A couple different answers are I think the Nielsen metaphor is perfect right on target. And the fact is that both a particular brand and the industry can learn a lot. with far less than 100% sample. There's, there's 10s of millions of opportunities to engage consumers, even if you only have 10% of consumers engaged in conversations about clothing. So regardless of where your sustainability stances, regardless of of how strongly you feel the need that are my main objective, all else doesn't matter is to sell more clothes. brands want to talk to consumers, because it is in fact a way to somewhere close. So this is a means to do that. So I think that for that reason, this will have a solid business argument. Even for companies that you've stayed, who's whose mission is to make new clothes and we get them sold. The other opportunity there is the contagion effect. So if you think about when a new product is released to market, you want to be able to predict its its demand. And so going into the release of a new SKU into the market. You've got your sales forecast from previous sales and when Don't you release it into the market, you've got your sales data on a daily basis or even real time basis, you've got social media buys that you can track. But you don't know if the clothings being used. And the thing about clothing is that if you don't wear it, then there's no potential for contagion between one consumer and another, there's no possibility of pure communication. Unless you wear it and take a picture of it, or you wear it outside the house, no one is going to know that you own that product, you're not signaling that you own the product. But if you do, then there's that potential for contagion and clothing, perhaps more than any other attribute has that potential for once those visual recognition and a real social context, then all of a sudden, I think I'd like to get that, right. And so if you had data about utilization, even in just the first four weeks of a release, it would seem that that could be really useful business information from a market forecast standpoint. And then also, if you think about the applications that can then engage both the company to consumer but also consumer to consumer, then you have the potential for buzz for micro influencing those other business opportunities. So in terms of the size, we're, we're one effort amongst maybe a half dozen that I know of, that are at kind of all the same stage of doing kind of laboratory pilot experiments. There are technology providers like eon that just yesterday announced the fashion connect effort, which is a very important initiative to standardize the metadata that will be collected on on tags. And they have brands, clients that they're working with, there are other technology providers, blue byte, that also have brands that they're working with. I've been aware of Cisco's efforts here ideos efforts here. And I think there are demonstrations in the level of dozens to maybe 100. Here on the university, I hope that we can hit 100 or 200 participants here in the fall, then I think next year, we're looking at the 1000s. And I think by that time, ideally, you'd have enough of a critical mass of clothing manufacturers, that you can begin to get some legitimacy towards both the business opportunity and the kind of pre competitive issues that make sense to collaborate on.

  
  

  Steve Statler 32:42

  Yeah, that's a fascinating, you just touched on something there. If you have, if you have competitors, and this is some sure nothing new for the sustainability consortium, you have a bunch of competitors are all collaborating, have you thought a little bit about the data issues in terms of a competitive access to this and be the privacy issues? I guess, if you've got 100 people in the study, and then they're like saying, I'm doing this for the greater good, I don't care if you know, how often I wash my underwear. But But is there? What are your thoughts on data ownership and privacy?

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 33:24

  I think it's critical. It's one of the reasons why we thought there was a role for us because we don't want we're afraid that industry, if they play alone here will not develop a shared privacy, stance and set of standards. Our belief is that we need to ensure that that happens, I'm not 100% sure that we need to make it happen. So part of part of this digital data may be embedded in a broader context. So for example, there's an initiative called the hub of all things in which people have an individual digital account of basically information that can be related to them. And then they're allowed to essentially enable external entities access to that information. So maybe that at a different technical level, the system privacy is is the that's where privacy is addressed. And certainly at the technical, the very technical level, you know, if you're talking the wires and connectors and stuff and waves, again, I think that's best handle that's great as best handled at that technical layer. I do think a, you're never going to develop a used corporate or industry measurement system if it is used for shaming. Right? So it has to be used to identify leaders and to allow leaders a way to legitimate name make claims about their leadership. And so that was that's kind of the principle. I don't know what the right answer is. But that's kind of the principle of how I would see kind of brand anonymity, even retailer and Ebody, user anonymity, that you have to be very careful about it being misused. Or you don't really want companies to be able to say, we're better than Company X, you know, because of this data. That's not I could see a system like that. But again, I think that we have experience with the Sustainability Index to know kind of what, what can be made public, what cannot be, what level of detail, etc, to make all the stakeholders happy.

  
  

  Steve Statler 35:49

  Very cool. Well, I am just so excited by what you're doing. I think it's really awesome. And I love the fact that it is, you know, you can see, you know, there's some great ideas which will make the planet better. Yeah, really extending the life of clothing, second use of clothing, but you think, no, this is never going to be this against people's interests, but you can see a real value for the participants to know. Okay, you know, I sold this thing, how often they wearing it? I mean, that's such an important question. And then, you know, many other ways that businesses can benefit. So this is exciting, because it really does seem like it's the concept of sustainable as well as it supporting environmental sustainability. And any major things that we could touch on, before we sign off, it seems like you've got some good momentum here.

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 36:46

  Well, again, thank you so much for your kind words. You know, I think that, in general, our, our life has been turned into information. One of the the interesting things I learned about this week is that there's a number of design firms that are being bought up by a bunch of consulting companies or other business entities who are in the information business. So I think there's a growing trend towards looking at products as information. This also links to, you know, our move to services eyes, servitors, right, so, so that we owning the product and the physical way, we purchased the service. And in that context, it's super important, right for the for the brand manufacturer or the service provider to know how the product is being used. So we see that with like the HP, you know, Inc, where in fact, the HP ink cartridge is communicating, right with the system to know when it needs to be refilled. So I think the general trend here is that, you know, IoT will enable information, and then there'll be all sorts of business value opportunities to make use of that information.

  
  

  Steve Statler 38:03

  Absolutely agree. Well, Kevin, it's been very exciting, real slow. glad that we got a chance to talk and I'm sure we'll be we'll be talking again, thanks for joining the show.

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 38:13

  Thank you good luck.

  
  

  Steve Statler 38:21

  I don't know if you got to look at the briefing notes. But we have this tradition on the show where we ask our guests what music they would take on a trip to Mars. And I was wondering if you've had a chance to think about that. Is music an important part of your life for

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 38:38

  a very important? Yes. Yeah, so that was an intriguing question. It would have been very difficult on the spot. But yes, I have some answers.

  
  

  Steve Statler 38:45

  Excellent. Well, let's get into it. Then. What's what are your top three.

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 38:52

  So first, I would choose, there's so many different rock albums that are so classic to choose. It's hard to do so. So I'm going to be selfish. And pick my own college rock band that we called the new originals, which was a name that we stole from the spinal tap movie. And we did 30 minute open jam called remove the water. And we had a bunch of electronic devices that we didn't know how to use and just flip the record switch on and went. And so it's one of those things where you look back and you say, I could never recreate this, but I'm glad that one moment in my life, you know, something emerged from our meanderings that was listen up or at least listenable amongst three or four people.

  
  

  Steve Statler 39:43

  That's really and

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 39:45

  then I would choose Max Richter's sleep. Okay, so, first of all, you know, sleep was composed to be listened to, as you slept through the night so I'm getting eight hours of music From one album, and I think it's the most, you know, for a long trip to Mars, you need some ambient music. So I choose Max Richter. And then I would practically as a third choice, choose some form of, of white noise for, for sleeping and, you know, background noises as I work, so maybe a recording of railroad tracks I know sounds

  
  

  Steve Statler 40:30

  amazing. So no, Brian Eno. Maybe you could sneak a bit of Brian Eno his ambient recordings in

  
  

  Dr. Kevin Dooley 40:37

  well, you know, with with modern technology we can take we can just stream it, you know, and I don't mind if it takes two hours to get there. So we'll have access to streaming services.

  
  

  Steve Statler 40:50

  Listen, very original nominations. They're very, very interesting. Thanks very much for those