 Well, thanks for the opportunity to plug my book. It came out in October. It's not long, but the print is small. I think they're trying to save the trees. It came about because I got a telephone call from an acquisitions editor of another publisher. The publisher who accepted the proposal is Lexington Books. The other publisher, the acquisitions editor said he wanted to start a series in prominent business figures. He suggested people like Steve Jobs and Yves Saint Laurent and so on. And I told him they were still alive and I'd prefer not to be sued for libel, so I'd rather do somebody who's good and dead. And we settled on Andrew Carnegie. And I spent a couple of months, a spare time, writing the proposal, submitted it. He took it to the editorial board who killed the whole idea of the series. So being an economist and recognizing my error, I nevertheless took account of the sunk costs and I submitted the proposal to another publisher, Lexington, who immediately accepted it and sent me a contract. So that's why I wrote the book. In the process of researching for the proposal, I read the major biographies of Carnegie, James Bridge, 1903 Inside History of Carnegie Steel, Joseph Wall's 1970, Andrew Carnegie, David Nassau's 2006 Andrew Carnegie. And I was impressed with how economically ignorant the authors of those books were. They really couldn't appreciate Carnegie and other than his personal life. So those books are great to read if you want to know about all of his personal life. But if you want to know why he was an important figure in economics, read my book. As far as I know, it's the only book on Carnegie by a libertarian Austrian economist. I do also recommend you read Jonathan Hughes, The Vital Few. He has a chapter on Carnegie that's very informative, but in a more general form. He tries to place Carnegie in his context and his contributions to progress. My approach is to view Carnegie as an economic actor whose alertness to profit opportunities and his success in dealing with uncertainty in his profit-seeking efforts had positive and negative effects for economic coordination in the US economy in the 19th century and in the world economy also since he became the largest steelmaker in the world eventually. The first chapter of the book summarizes the main theories of entrepreneurship and ops for Israel Kursner's theory that entrepreneurship consists of being alert to profit opportunities that others don't see and taking actions that subsequently more closely coordinate the actions of all people participating in the market. The book is roughly chronological and it relates Carnegie's rise from a poverty stricken childhood in Scotland to becoming the majority partner in the largest steel manufacturer in the world and the merger of Carnegie company as it was at that time before, after Carnegie Steel. The merger with several other companies to form US Steel, the world's first billion dollar corporation. I also deal with Carnegie's philanthropic adventures which are interesting in themselves as you all know. Many of the attendees here participate in the TIAA-CREF retirement fund for college professors and Carnegie is the one that started that, among other things. He was successful because he was highly intelligent, he was ambitious, he was unscrupulous when he thought it was necessary and he had outstanding entrepreneurial talent. He also used or took advantage of political and governmental means to divert resources from other uses into those uses that were profitable for him and his partners. In other words he was an outstanding crony capitalist as well. Most notably he lobbied and bribed to maintain protective tariffs for iron and steel products throughout the 19th century. He did not institute those tariffs, he was not instrumental in getting them started, they started back at the beginning of this nation. But he worked very hard to sustain those tariffs high enough that they were basically prohibitive. He was also given that context. Within the context he was fiercely competitive with other companies and all of the companies he owned. He was very concentrated on cost cutting and innovation of the latest techniques in the producing the products that he produced. And he focused on producing the highest quality products that were technologically possible at the time. So the guy was a real mixture on the one hand what he did was pernicious because he diverted resources away from more uses that were more efficient in a cost sense into his own, into his own use of those. And he built that industry. The chapter in the book on labor relations on Carnegie is particularly different from the usual approach by labor friendly historians, especially when presenting and analyzing the homestead lockout and strike. Most historians look at that and tend to take a highly favorable union view. I do not do that. From contemporary accounts it seems to me that a lot of the motivation for the strike that occurred after the company's lockout was a result of mistaken views on the theory of value and on theories of pricing. The union people were truly in the tradition of Adam Smith and Ricardo, John Stuart Mill and believing that labor theory of value and labor theory of pricing. They were completely unaware of it just hadn't trickled down to them of the marginal revolution and the subjective theory of pricing. So what this did was it turned them into criminals. And for many of them it destroyed their lives and left them and their families destitute. Lastly, there's an irony in Carnegie's philanthropy. He had a key principle which he expressed in the gospel of wealth for why he was wanting to do philanthropy. And it was to do for others what he had done for himself. He wanted to help those who will help themselves and that's why he endowed libraries, colleges and universities, museums, concert halls, parks and so forth. His focus was he wanted to stimulate people like him to get up on their hind legs, be ambitious and make something of themselves. After his death, the people he chose to run his foundations, particularly the Carnegie Foundation of New York, turned it around 180 degrees and turned the foundation into a policy-originating institution dedicated to social engineering which he would have definitely not wanted done. He rose very quickly because he saw early that he needed a mentor, somebody that could teach him because he had four years of elementary school education and every other bed of his education was self-taught. So he attached himself very early to Thomas Scott who was at that time one of the key figures in the Pennsylvania Railroad and he worked for that railroad for 20 years, well 15 and we don't know exactly what Scott taught him because railroad historian Richard White has characterized Scott as quote not so much tainted by corruption as impregnated with it but if you read Carnegie's self-serving autobiography you will not learn any of that aspect of Thomas Scott. He praises Thomas Scott and yet the man that did the most to build his company, Henry Clay Frick, receives two small mentions in Carnegie's autobiography. Their relationship was one that was extremely interesting and I explore it thoroughly. Frick early on became a way in the in the 1880s became one of Carnegie's partners because Frick had the largest coal and coke manufacturing enterprise in the Pittsburgh area and eventually in the United States and Frick and he made it quite a team during the last 20 years or so of Carnegie's business activities but they came to clash with one another because Frick unlike Carnegie was a man of his word a man who was honest straightforward who told people what he would do and did it and Carnegie tended to change what he did as the opportunity presented itself if it was necessary. Well that's an outline of it. The publisher Lexington is offering it at a 30% discount here if you take one of the flyers away from this conference and that's the end of my flogging. Mark, thank you.