 And on that note, I'm curious about recruitment, you know, how do you recruit the young designers? Margaret was talking about recruiting our teens yesterday at the Teen Design Fair. But how do you, you know... I was at the maternity ward at one of the hospitals. I'm kidding, I'm kidding. Get him early. Get him early. But the recruiting thing is, it's pretty fascinating. I mean, I think that there are so many contexts where formal training is so critical to doing a job well. And yet I see over and over again young designers growing up native to digital experiences and coming with perspectives that are born out of that experience and not through formal training. And I've seen it work pretty well both ways. And I think actually the combination is really fascinating. You get somebody who's gone through a highly rigorous traditional even graphic design training who then takes on interaction and design coding. And then, you know, we have a designer at Facebook who has been a working freelance interaction designer since he was 12 years old. And, you know, on day one had more work experience than most of the people at the company. And I am, you know, not in a position to say that that isn't kind of an amazing thing because he's an incredibly mature individual who brings like a ton of experience to it. So I think that is one of the things that's most interesting. You know, how do you continue to bring appreciation for design as a craft and design education and marry that with the reality that, like, expectations and needs, at least in the digital context, are changing pretty rapidly? I can certainly relate to the significant amount of time spent recruiting, like if we use that specific word. And the, I mean, one reason for that is we've found while it is a lot of work we're much more successful and we seek out the people that we choose rather than waiting for them to come to us, just sort of operationally not a good use of anyone's time to look through a lot of things that mostly don't fit. But when we're looking at people, it seems that there are sort of three metathemes that probably describe the team. One are people who show predisposition to make things and get them out in the world, whatever that means. They're just compelled to, sometimes they're, sometimes the artifacts don't even look like design. Sometimes they're just great writers that write all the time, constantly writing, constantly sharing that. That's interesting. Sometimes they're making products. They're actually making small business ideas and getting them out in the world all the time. There's a whole variety of stuff, but this predisposition to make things and share it. The second which is related is the kind of self-awareness that leads them to educate themselves or know how best they learn. And so the people may have very, you know, seek very formal education. They may do lots of self-education they learn by doing, but the people who are aware of their own learning style and then engage with those things. It's not about formal education or not. It's much more individual than that. And the third one is really the, probably the hardest one, which is really taste. I think those others are sort of so, there's so much sort of logic that I can use to explain those other ones. And the third one is that last, like, sparkle desk part. Does this feel right? And sometimes it's almost like cultural taste. Does this feel right for the company culture? And sometimes it's just the output taste. Does that, wow, they consistently have beautifully, like, beautiful finesse around their typography. And there's just something there that isn't, that's beyond learnable. And like, when you get those three things together, that's okay. If I were to yes in on that, I would say taste or instincts. You can see it in a designer's sense that something in their world experience. So, you know, when you talk about the predosition and make things, or self-awareness is usually drawn, I just look at people who have lots of worldly experience, right? They've traveled. They've, you were there at that particular time, so I knew that that must have been an interesting time for them. I always ask about their personal work for some reason. And for some reason, we rarely get to satisfy 100% of this tenacity in the day job. And so somehow, if that intersects with passion, I always discover something that they're doing on the side, right? Oh, yeah, I print make or, you know, I screen print t-shirts. Oh, tell me why, right? And through that passion, something's driving them in that self-starter curiosity way. I have a hard, I have a biggest challenge is to tell other leaders that are non-designers what makes designers tick. And the greatest hire is someone who's constantly curious. They're great problem solvers. It just happens to express itself differently. So great hires have always been curious people. And when they fall in love with problems rather than solutions, that always, and that's hard to tease out in a first meeting. I think it's a very good point. And as this topic relates to the fashion industry, I would say, that notion of collaboration makes me really think about how successful fashion companies build their design enterprise around community of designers. And I think that leads to a more nuanced discussion perhaps that we've been having about designers at the business table and creative leadership. I think there are people within the design enterprise for whom it's really critical to be at that table. And in a way, in the fashion system, it's critical for them to have a kind of equilibrium between this art and science, to have a place at the table where they're discussing what worked last season or they're discussing what they're seeing in the marketplace and they're infusing it into the studio. But in fashion, I can say specifically in fashion, it's critical for certain designers to not have that burden and to not even be distracted by it. Because there is an artistry, and this is where the art comes in, there is an artistry work that we depend on in the best designers where in a sense, it's not even about problems and solutions, it's about the shape of something or the texture of something or a new way to create a scene in something or a new way to address a hyper-functional object like a suit or a suit jacket. But I've seen that there is a very delicate balance between sort of the artistic burden of a designer in the fashion system, a creative director in the fashion system and a chief merchant. They all need to have a certain sensibility for design and they all have relative engagement with the business and that engagement has to be purposeful and I think is a really delicate thing. I think there's just something really interesting, really a lot of themes to all of our stuff. The three parts of design I always like to kind of hang on to are thinking, making, feeling are the three things and depending on our industry, the hierarchy of how those three balls come together and also as we kind of advance in our careers, how those three balls interact really come. But I think one thing that's really interesting is that the part I usually about design I get most excited about is the feeling part. Like the reason like why do I care or the craft kind of goes that way. But for that feeling part, I think it's about anything that is successful. That's the one thing that creating that emotional connection is that and I think for designers who understand that and can make that happen, that for me is where the magic happens.