 Hello and welcome to a brand new show for the market maker podcast and it's called the deal room. And if you're watching this recording on YouTube in a video format, you'll see peers is magically morphed into a slightly younger, slightly more handsome individual. And I'm joined nonetheless by Stephen. Stephen so perhaps Stephen before we begin and explain a little bit more about the topics we're going to talk about in this particular episode. Why don't you just give us a little bit about yourself your role amplify your background and then why why are we doing the deal room. Yeah sure thank you so much and that's very kind. That's fantastic. Yeah so, you know, my background, I went to I went to university and I didn't study finance or economics I did a social science, and I came out of it as many people do thinking, gosh, what, what do I do with my career what do I do next. I joined a bank. In fact I joined a bank in the M&A advisory team mergers and acquisitions, helping one company by another company will get sold to another company. Basically, I did that for a number of years before going on to start my own company, and recently last summer joining amplify, but quite frankly when I joined the bank, you know, spent all of my time in spreadsheets, and in steps in working long hours and working hard, but I never really got the time to go now into the dream out, let's actually think what does this all mean, you know so pretty long cell formulas, the relatively short context and strategy and the why. So I think the deal room this podcast that we're introducing today is really aligned with my deficiencies when I joined bank. And it's so much fun to start thinking, alright, this is what I do on the desk, if you were to join as an intern or if you were to join the graduate, and this is the context in a wider scheme. There's a lot of stuff in this podcast that overlaps with the Friday podcast that you'll be familiar with, but we're really going to zoom in on transactions on initial public offerings on strategy, more focused on companies than on markets. And this is something that we are doing cross amplify me as well. We're bringing this financial education cross markets across sales and trading, but also now into what we call the corporate finance space, which of course is a very attractive area for a lot of graduates so I'm delighted to be chatting to you, and I think we're going to have a lot of fun. Yeah, I'm excited because it's definitely an area where I just said to you offline a lot of these topics I have a relative superficial understanding and a lot of it is I see like the stock price reactions to a lot of M&A announcements and breaking news and rumors and hearsay, but actually getting into the deals themselves and the strategy and the why it's going to be really interesting for sure so yeah if you're new to the channel or certainly if you've been a subscriber for a while, remember to hit the bell icon to be notified so Steven's episodes be going out on Wednesday and appears and I absolutely as per normal, wrapping up the weekend global markets on a Friday as well and I know Steven you've got a couple of industry speakers in the pipeline as well that hopefully we can get on to the Wednesday show. You know I'm relatively competitive so if we can get more listener numbers on Wednesday than Friday. Okay cool well look just a quick summary of the three topics we're going to cover, and then we'll dive into the first one so we're going to look at an FT article actually we saw the other day which was that private equity groups are increasingly selling shares in portfolio companies at a discount to the price in which they went public and I think the current macro environment of course is very key and we can talk about valuations on the back of that. So that's the first one will jump into but then we'll also look at Microsoft's purchase of Activision. Will they all won't that happen, the EU saying yes the UK saying no and what's the next steps and why. And then one of the biggest deals of the week. We put a poll out actually in fact on the Amplify me linked in account, and it was asking about the Chevron acquisition of PDC energy. It's a $6.3 billion deal so pretty chunky. And essentially they're going long on oil and gas irrespective of a lot of the critics obviously on the ESG side of things and I know that's definitely fits very nicely into your, your startup background as well in that ESG space and perhaps kick us off then tell us a little bit more about this PE situation and and why they're looking to to get out and not max out their investment in the current climate. Yeah, this is this is a really good one and we're going to give you a little bit of context and we're going to talk about two companies. This is Blackstone, which is a major US based private equity firm, private equity firm is, as many of you know, a funds investment funds, whether plan is to buy the company, hold it, improve it and then sell it for more at the end of it, and sell it on their investments. Now Blackstone back in 2019 bought a majority stake in a company that many of you might have heard of called Bumble. Bumble is a dating app. It was very well hyped back in 2019 and that's it, what a valuation of about $3 billion of not much revenue. In 2019, when Blackstone made a majority investment. And now what these private equity firms are intending to do is hold the company and then seek an exit event. They want to return the capital to their shareholders they want to recycle the capital that they put in, you can receive a return on investment. And one of the ways that they can get an exit event is taking a private company public. And this is what happened in February 2021. And 2021 as you know it was a boom year for IPOs more than double any other year in history, everyone was IPOing, you know, everything was being IPOed. So, February 2021 on Blackstone arranged the IPO of Bumble the initial public offering listing on the New York Stock Exchange. It absolutely flew. So the share price that Bank has decided was $43 per share, valuing the company at about $8 billion. On the first day of trading, that share price was up at about $80. So think about that, think about that day one pop. You know, we remember 2021 you know that was that was us sitting under lockdown getting excited about making money off the stock market, and a lot of people did on day one. So Blackstone likely, well Blackstone had a lock up period. So they couldn't take advantage of that day one pop, because they needed to hold their majority stake for at least 180 days after the initial public offer. Is that quite common 180 is like a common duration. Yeah, 90 or 180. Some some ideas don't have that lock up period when based at the direct listing which was quite controversial where the significant holders could sell directly to the public. Let's come under quite a lot of criticism recently, but anyway, so Blackstone, you know, on paper, they're making a great deal of money. Remember their initial investment was at $3 billion, it IPOed at $8 billion, share price rose and it was trading at $14 billion as a market capitalization period. Everyone's happy on paper. And in fact, six months after we did sell down quite a lot of their stake and started to return that capital. Cycle on two years, and Blackstone still own upwards of 50% of Bumble, right. You know, but the Bumble share price has gone from, you know, $76 at the end of day one to about $20. And it's actually now trading at $16 a share. Think about that. So that's a massive, you know, and we know we know the story, right. We won boom years, lots of money. 2022 market came off 2023, you know, tech, you know, loss making once exciting companies, their share prices are really, really rock bottom. But the problem for a company like Blackstone for private equity fund like Blackstone is they need to recycle their capital. These investors are not what we would call evergreen investors. They don't hold this, you know, this company forever. Their fund cycles are five to seven years. So BlackRock who made that investment in 2019, look like Blackstone sorry, look like it was going to be a blockbuster. You know, it's made a little bit of money. Now in 2023, they're like, all right, we've got to sell down. We've got to get some of our money back. And we've got to return it to our fund investors, or we've got to use it again on investment. And this is really, really interesting, because, you know, March 2023, when Blackstone sold this additional stake in Bumble. You know, only it made, you know, $300 million of a 10% stake, valuing the company of $3 billion, exactly what it valued it at in 2019. So these guys are now starting to have to take haircuts or big losses, at least not gains on their, you know, on their sell downs post IPO. And this is a trend that's happening, not just with Blackstone, Blackstone and Bumble is a great example. This is a trend that's happening across private equity. We call these follow-ons. So selling your shares post IPO in order to receive your return on investment. 2022, fairly any follow-ons happen because the market was so depressed. 2023, you know, private equity investors are kind of figuring, all right, we have to sell. We might not be where we want them to be. Returns are going to be lower, but we need to recycle that capital in order to be able to return funds to shareholders. So it's a very interesting dynamic that takes an industry like private equity and frames it against the public markets and what's going on and what you, you know, what you talk about on Friday morning as well. So it's a fascinating story. I was just kind of thinking about the atmosphere. If I was the owner of Bumble and it was like day one, couple months in, everyone's passing you on the back. It's like, go and do your thing. And then I can imagine how volatile those relationships must be because in the pursuit of profit, which is quite focused and concentrated at PE firm. I mean, that must be a double-edged sword, the access to capital, but then the consequence of when this situation might unfold. Yeah, it's a really interesting one and just a little bit of a background on the founder of Bumble. So Whitney Wolfe heard on IPA, she was the wealthiest self-made female founder in the country in the US, because her 12% stake was worth one over a billion dollars, just like that. But we had a lock-up period as well. You know, she was suddenly feeling very wealthy. She had a lock-up period as well. And in this recent discounted share sale, this follow-on that happened in March, which Blackstone took a bit of a haircut on. And he also sold some shares. And oh, yeah, you know, we're not, you know, she's not going to be, you know, struggling financially. But that sudden, you know, you're only a billionaire on paper when you're when you're when you're company IPOs. And because that share price has come off from 76 down to 16 today, suddenly, you know, she's a lot, you know, she's maybe not in the headlines quite so much as being this amazing, you know, female founder. Yeah, and then interesting on the market side that I remember when I used to work on an equity desk, we used to track the filings of when the CEO, the CFO or any board member starts selling down shares. Alarm bells would go off and that day they'd get hit because there'd be even though, like you say, sensible perhaps to realize some of that wealth, but it's got to be done in such an engineered way as to manage it now stock price. Yeah, and this has been a real, a really common tale in the kind of 2021 PIC IPO bubble, you know, so I mentioned Coinbase and the direct listing. That is basically the early investors of Coinbase, you know, getting out the top of a frothy market on IPO and selling to, you know, retail investors that are a bit hyped about Coinbase because they know what it is. You know, Peloton in a very, very similar thing. And you know, there's a lot of criticism for the CEO, you know, caching out basically on the expectation that the tech bubble can't last forever. As an individual, maybe it makes sense. But as a, as a story, you know, you know, sitting on the other side of the desk, it doesn't look great when the founder starts to basically fix it, the company that they're running, lack of faith lack of confidence. I wonder if there's some sort of data study where you could go back and look over economic kind of macro cycles and then look at deal kind of from a P perspective, the exit timings that they have when they try to do that. What I mean is if you're an investor, for example, when you're trying to time different things, any flags that you could look for to determine when movement is going to happen in terms of the ownership of the company and like you said, I mean, that's a really, really good. There's a really good thing to think about. And it also comes back to the kind of fundamental logic of private equity. You know, the way that the way that you're going to make money, the way that you look at the way that private equity firms look at companies that they might want to acquire, you've got, you can, you can increase your bottom line your profit by maximizing your revenue, a kind of growth story, or by controlling and cutting costs, which has been the kind of heartland of private equity for so many years. Private equity hasn't historically been chasing after growth stories, growth investor, you know, they're not chasing after these kind of fast growing tech names, chasing after relatively boring, quite badly run, often real companies which they think that they can turn around and exit at a premium. So this move from the likes of Blackstone into cyclical, frothy names that might well align with what you were just saying is quite new. Yeah, and there's a suggestion that it doesn't necessarily fit with the business model, traditional private equity, which just likes to kind of nail cost, fine synergies, boost your top line, boost your bottom line, lever up. Yeah. Money's too good to turn, turn away on the growth story in 2021. You remember it was just going, going. And, you know, another fundamental part of private equity is this concept of leverage, you know, you borrow, you know, you, you, you buy a company with debt in order for your equity check to be lower. And then upon exit, you can receive a bigger, you know, bigger multiple of your money. But with these growth stories, I was just looking at the Bumble financials, you know, they're still losing $120 million a year. They're still lending against that. So the check that Blackstone wrote would have been a 100% equity check back in 2019. So they're not using the secret source of leverage that has been the heartland of the business model of private equity. So it does, you know, and yeah, as you said, we're all kind of chasing the money. And even private equity was chasing the money and chasing the growth stories in 2019, 2018, 2020. So the careers aspect of this. So part of that transition then listing to be a public company involving an investor bank on the advisory side for the IPO. What, having you work in that environment, obviously going, it's been almost accelerated because of COVID, but going from like, absolutely boom time to then interest rates rising at the steepest incline almost in the history of US markets. And the consequence that's had on deal making the environment. Like, and then the big job cuts that we've seen in investment banking divisions, what does actually feel like working as a relative junior member like an analyst or associate when you're in that good time, and then shifting within like an 18 month window almost to the other time. It's a really good question and I think that you are insulated from the downside when you're young. So I remember the first job I got my team was fired within six months. And that team walked out with their sort of stuff, as you would do, you know, kind of layman brother style, because that team wasn't making enough money and it was post 2008 crisis, you know, cross controls, etc. I just got funneled to a different emanating funnel to a different desk and I kind of thought nothing of it. But if you are that if you're a rainmaker, if you're a, you know, director or a managing director, you're quite an expensive employee that's used to a decent bonus, and things start to kale off. In 2008 2009, 2021 2022, then you are going to be you're going to be worried a for your job and be the ability to get another job. Because you're not cheap. And it's likely that other phones are going to be cutting back as well. So this is actually why you know and you talk about a lot on on the other podcast. This is why the likes of, you know, the major banks kind of prefer more stable revenue streams, the wealth management, the asset management, the retail banking, etc. Because this stuff is super volatile. And when there's volatility, there are job cuts. Okay, well let's move let's move on and talk and I've got two other areas to touch on so Microsoft $69 billion purchase of Activision. It's been the headlines quite a lot and I know it's something that you're engaging a group of students that we had just last week about asking them for some of the deal rationale around it but yeah explain to me what's what's the latest going on there. Yeah, so this is a fascinating story so back in January 2020 it feels like a long time ago, back in January 2020 Microsoft announced blockbuster acquisition of division Blizzard, famous for all of duty, not that I would know. So for $69 billion, which is, you know, a very punch evaluation on a on a premium asset that wasn't, you know, that's not, you know, that's not generating a great deal of profit but it was seen as kind of a relatively logical move for a company that wanted to focus on high margin, gaming, online gaming activities. And obviously there's complementarity there, you know Microsoft has Xbox they have the Xbox game pass, you know, you know, slip in the Activision suite of games, and you've got a pretty nice potential revenue synergy on your hands. The market was kind of, you know, feeling pretty good about it, Microsoft share price wobbled around and Activision shot up because it was a nice premium. Fast forward a year, and the deal hasn't completed. So one thing to note is when a deal is announced, that's not when the deal is completed. So, so there's often years between announcement and completion, and we're still right in the thick of it at the moment. So one of the centers, I'm really fascinated by this story, is it all centers on three female regulators, Sarah Cardell, head of the UK competition markets authority, Linda Khan, the head of the US FTC trade commission, and Mark grief, probably pronouncing it wrong. Vestige, Vestige, the EU competition commissioner. And these three incredibly powerful people are in charge of making sure that markets operates in a way that is beneficial to the end consumer. So they are all about restricting monopoly power all about making sure that there is significant competition to avoid pricing power and price gouging and all of these kinds of things. And the story goes that in the last 10 to 15 years, these organizations have been pretty limp, and they've let a few things go through that maybe they should have taken a closer look at. And now, Microsoft and Activision this deal has become the kind of the central focal points of this tightening or increased focus or increased scrutiny on the regulatory environments relating to these types of mega deals. So, the first bloke came out a few weeks ago from Sarah Cardell, the UK CMA, locking the deal. It's quite a big thing, 69 billion deal, you know, Microsoft one of the biggest companies in the world. Lock the deal based on the threat of monopoly power within online cloud computing into the in the future. So, not at the moment, it's not as if my division Microsoft's only have an 80% market share in a particular market. It's what happens in the future, if there's this incredibly well capitalized, well funded mega company like Microsoft, getting involved in a relatively nascent industry. So they blocked it based on forward looking concerns, right. The lawyers would have a filled day trying to disprove that forecasting surely. Yeah, and you know Microsoft were incredibly upset with it with this they called it highly speculative. And then my favorite one was Bobby Kotick, he's the, he's the CEO of Activision who obviously wants his deal to go through. He said, you know, the UK thinks it's going to be the new Silicon Valley but it but it's actually death valley. You know this is the least competitive thing with the possibly have happened. And then he said we will reassess our growth plans for the UK, despite all its rhetoric, the UK is clearly closed for business. Really hard words he's he's been pretty upset. But then fast forward a couple of months, and the EU competition commissioner, commissioner, he's usually pretty hard on this kind of stuff. And pass the deal, said David Greenlight. There's a really, really interesting about turn, you know, kind of flying in the face of the UK CMA. Yeah, I thought post Brexit that's supposed to be the opposite, the opposite way around. You're absolutely right. And it actually showed, you know, is in the UK CMA is an important body because there's a lot of business that goes on, you know in the UK. But the EU is where it's really at in Europe. So the fact that the EU commissioner said all right we're going to green light it. And the reason why the green, the green lighted it was because of a 10 year commitment by Microsoft and Activision that they will sell their titles to rival consoles rival online, found computing companies. Sarah Cardella the UK CMA didn't like it. Didn't think that that was good enough, but the EU competition commissioner said okay that's fine we're going to green light it. 39 countries have green lighted it, including China. The UK is the only company that hasn't. It is likely that Linda Khan at the FTC is going to try and block it. She's taking a really kind of severe stance. She is probably reeling that she's only been commissioner for for 18 months but from past mistakes relating to Facebook acquiring Instagram and then WhatsApp and the FTC not really doing enough. So they're being very very harsh on tech companies. That's not to say by the way that if the FTC rejects this acquisition. Their rejection can still be blocked and the acquisition can still go through. As you said there's a lot of legal battles that can be done it can be overturned from a legislature perspective in the US government. So it's not like the FTC has got ultimate power, but they certainly have a pretty, you know, significant stick that they can wield. So maybe I've been watching too much succession. Could I come in as as a Microsoft person blow up the deal. Is there a set period of time. So presumably the Activision share prices come down from its initial announcement highs for the reasons that the deals in jeopardy to some degree. So is there a time limit where I'm kind of committed but then I'm no longer committed the deal is off, but then I can resubmit a bit at a lower price. Yeah, it's a it's a really interesting one. So there are certainly kind of exclusivity periods and time periods subject to regulatory clearance and that would be a you know maybe a 24 month window regulatory date with a potential extension due to different circumstances. One way that you could potentially pull out and start again is if there is a material change in the circumstances of the target business. So if the target business suddenly says all right by the way our numbers are numbers of phony. We've had a bit of an accounting issue over here. You know, those are the types of things that may get Microsoft to reassess their position back to the table with a lower deal. You know, it's super messy. You wouldn't want to do it and you'd hope that Microsoft would have done all of its due diligence. You're absolutely right, you know, as things drag on you know if this goes on any longer, you know, Microsoft have got a pretty stable company with a pretty stable strategy, and they still want this asset, but things change and strategy changes and markets change. So yeah, in strategy changes and you said this last week to me, the generative AI buzz is so piping hot right now. That business is just booming and people it's kind of like it was it's AI now it was the metaverse. It was crypto. It's like we go through these like bubble cycles it feels like. So could they redeploy $70 billion into something where they could absolutely get multiple times more. Yeah, it's a chunky number and what what what if I'm so fascinating about these types of transactions is most as a rule if both companies are listed stock market. The big company that acquires a small company once they announced the acquisition big company share price drops on the small company share prices price rise. The short of the small companies share price rises because the acquirer is paying a premium. And therefore if the deal goes through, they get premium to the share price that they've gone at the moment. So activation share price, when the EU cleared the deal, activation share price shot up by almost 10% Microsoft went down. That's not big moves. That might be because look, you know, what do investors one does one return on their investment return on their capital. They want to see dividends they want to see share buybacks. They want to see cash cow businesses that they're going to churn through capital that are going to create loads of cash flow. And they're also going to want the hype and the hype is AI. So you're you're absolutely right. I don't see this deal going away. But it's interesting strategic. I love the way that Microsoft is so big that they can announce I think it was 70 billion was it in their repurchase plan, then the last quarterly earnings so that they're doing 70 billion to every share repurchase whilst still pursuing a 70 billion acquisition whilst parking what 10 odd billion in open AI. So these are these are mind blowing numbers and just, you know, the big the big tech companies are just unbelievable in terms of the amount of cash that they generate and the growth rates. Obviously that's something that you said to talk about on Friday. Yeah. All right, well, let's let's take on to the final one, which is a bit different, I guess, because we've kind of taught P we talk tech talk good old fashioned resource names, which being chevron to acquire PDC energy in the 70 billion dollar deal so perhaps a little bit about the deal rationale first. Why she will be pursuing something of that nature and then, and then a little bit about the ESG critics and how they play into this, this story. Yeah, so so just as I was taking a look at this transaction I just jumped into Chevron's financials. The last time you look today boiling oil and gas major companies financials, it is staggering. So just give you a few stats it which might kind of lead you to the deal rationale. So in 2022. They generated 35 billion dollars net income six month most profitable company in the US. That's up from 15 billion the year before. That's due to oil prices right oil and gas prices. So from that 35 billion they declared 11 billion dollars of dividends 11.3 billion dollars of sharing purchases, and their cash on a balance sheet grew from 5 billion to 18 billion. All in one year. If that's not a pump a year. So what is, you know, usually revenue growth and revenue growth was over 50%. So, you know, these are, you know, type revenue growth numbers, we all know why it happens, but suddenly Chevron sitting on five touch. And it is thinking to itself. All right, what do I do with it. You know, I've got my dividend plan, which I've announced to the market I've got my shared purchase plan which I've announced the market. What else can I do. And this acquisition in part is fueled by desire to utilize cash in. Now, Chevron, just in terms of the duration out beyond the cash Chevron has been and US or majors in general have been slightly taken to task by the US government and by Biden to basically continue to invest in US shale gas and oil production. You know, there were dips in 2022, slightly concerning drop off in investments in 2022. And, you know, the US wants to be and is energy self sufficient. So Chevron, as a, you know, as a direct result but Chevron has been looking for assets in the US for a long time, and quite frankly buying PDC, acquiring it a 14% premium. It's a super complimentary business. It increases their reserves increases their hours of production a day in a market, the US, but they really really want to stay and grow in. In fact, they've been selling assets from from different countries. So slightly more risky slightly more geopolitically sensitive countries, and they're funneling this money back into the US, which kind of makes sense. Although I caveat that by saying, again, Chevron share price on the announcement of transaction went down, PDC's. So it's really interesting it's not like this is a bumper deal where all the market are just thinking gosh, Chevron here we go. We love it. Stop prices are going to go up. The sensible deal. It feels like a good use of cash, but it's not going to blow anyone away. I love the crossover here with politics because you mentioned Biden then I remember when Biden was campaigning a lot of it was about this green policy agenda. You're coming on the back of Trump where it was like shale boom US superpower, we're back in business. And then so the obvious stance to take that as opposition and Biden at that time is like talk about green, then here we are. Now, like you said, you've a lack of investment because of the macro conditions. That's then become concerning because there's a lot of employment, as well as the idea about self sufficiency and production and the loss of power given the size of Russian oil and Saudi oil. And here we are making it favorable as possible to make the US great again. Yeah, energy and barrels of oil still control. Yeah, so much geopolitically from a markets perspective and from a company perspective we still can't get beyond that. And from a, if I was an investor into Chevron I'd be investing based on mash flow and based on, you know, a regular dividend stream is you've got this, you know, you've got this product that you know is going to run out at some point is going to be and therefore, as an investor I want to see more that more cash flow. Actually investments you know so it bought a company last year called the renewable energy group 3.1 billion. It's interesting how markets react to that because you know this seems like a, you know, an aligned transaction to green agendas and to ESG environment social ratings and things like that. But often these uses of capital, as seen as quite speculative, you know, often loss making in the first instance, and it kind of punts on the unknown future when investors in these types of companies like dividend streams. It's going to be interesting dynamic, you know, what percentage of Chevron's cash budget, should it be aligning to renewable energy product projects, which kind of will be the future, but they're not the today. And what percentage should be alright I want to, I want to get more shale oil out of the ground in the Permian Basin. Putting you a little bit on the spot but I know the ESG is your area is there any of the super majors. So your Exxon Chevron type, but including Europeans. Let's throw total energies and Shell. Is there any of those from an ESG perspective that as the front runner at the moment from that would fit within that category, better, they're better positioned at this point in time. It's a really, it's a really good question I haven't looked at the latest ESG ratings is always being considered that Shell has been a kind of a leader in terms of investment and strategic thoughts from an oil major perspective. And this might have guessed the US companies are laggards Exxon and Chevron do not invest nearly as much as the other as BP and and Shell. The other way of thinking about it is which one is the biggest green washer. The relationship between what they talk about and what they do, you know, BP's been very famous for talking in extremely good game, but doing next to nothing. So, you know, you would almost rather be a Chevron where, where you're like we know what we do, you know it's digging all out the ground, we know it's declaring dividends. You know, we might put a nice add that out every so often, but we know what we're all about relative to, you know, to a BP that, you know, that pulls itself beyond petroleum, but still generates 90 plus percent of its revenue from gas. So it's a really interesting area. Yeah, cool. Well, let's wrap it up there for this first kind of deal room episode but look hopefully everyone found that super insightful. That's certainly I did and there's going to be lots more of these conversations will try and pick three topics around the corporate finance space. But where I share this podcast is a few different places, one of which is on the Amphi me LinkedIn page. If you just drop a comment on there. Certainly, if there's any questions on anything that Steven and I talk about, or if there's anything you want to hear more about, and you can definitely incorporate some of the career elements into this as well as talking about the deals and themselves for sure. Just drop a comment. Absolutely more than happy to bring the community in as much as possible. We're not yet quite at the O2 level where we can do live podcasts with an audience just yet. We'll shoot for that for next year. But yeah, thanks very much, Steven. Thanks everyone for listening and see you next week. Thanks.