 Howdy friends. Good to see you all again. I have a lot to get through in this presentation but before I do I want to tell you a brief story. So many of the folks in this room who have and I do genuinely appreciate this because I know this comes from a place of love and that that means a lot to me. But many of you have asked me over the last few months how are you doing, know how are you really doing and I just want to say I am the happiest I have been in a very long time. It has been a wonderful experience. Thank you. Yeah, I really like new things. I like building new things. I like launching new things. One of the things we'll be talking about today. And I did have, I admittedly had a very rough time leaving Moz, which is a company that I built for 17 years, you know, first with my mom and then with many of the team members that you know today. And obviously I was very emotional to leave Moz behind and had a rough day back in February. But the next day, the next day I had a little over 2,000 emails in a brand new inbox. They were all real emails. They were all from you and people like you and they said things like I have a career because of you and my kids went to college because of you. And SEO Moz saved my marriage and 100 other things, which I think there was some exaggeration there. Let's not lie. But you can't have that experience of spending the next, I think it took me 12 days to reply to all those emails. You can't have an experience of spending almost two weeks replying to people who say those kinds of things without reflecting and saying you know what? That was a good thing. That was a good thing. And I'm proud of this company and I'm proud of all the people who continue the great work at Moz and a huge thank you to all of you who do that. It means the world to me that you keep helping to make SEO and web marketing more transparent. Thank you. All right. So let's talk about launches. As a marketer, as an entrepreneur, obviously I do a lot of launching. I advise a lot of startups who do launching and I have done many launches myself, including one a few hours ago. So when I talk about marketing launches, I mean all sorts of things. I guarantee you are doing one of them right now. I could mean new content, blog posts and guides and white papers and what have you. A new product offerings. You've got a new tool or a new physical or digital service. You have announcements. You are hiring a new person. Something's changing about your business. You are now called iHob. Or a new campaign. You're targeting a new audience or telling a new story or shifting your brand's messaging. So yes, if Bloomberg launches a blockchain explained content guide, absolutely that counts. If Cyrus Shepherd does his new Google SEO success factors, totally counts. That's a launch. Yeah, that counts. New logo. It's a launch. Fortnite is coming to switch. That counts. New book. Kim Scott's on a radical candor. Yes, absolutely. A new launch. There's a new adventure game. Look really pretty. So I put it in here. Obviously that counts. Why do these launches matter so much? Why are launches so important? I think as marketers we have this sort of fundamental understanding of this issue, but it's because to human beings often what is new is better than what is best. Every day on Twitter, every day on Facebook, on LinkedIn, on YouTube, new stuff is getting shared. It is often not the best stuff. It's often not even the best version of the thing that it is. But it is getting far more attention and awareness and eyeballs because it is merely new. New is a chance to tell a story. And it turns out that launch headlines actually linger long after the nuance of the launch, the actual thing is forgotten. So if you, for example, might think Volkswagen, what do I think about Volkswagen? Some sort of scandal didn't Germany just throw their CEO in prison? If only we did that to corrupt CEOs here in America, how great would that be? But Tesla, I mean, the thing that always pops into my head when I think of Tesla is, aren't they like the most awarded car ever? I think they're not any more actually, but they were for a long time. And that for a very short period of time, maybe a couple years, but that is what sticks in my head. The nuance of the matter is forgotten. The launch sticks in my head. The announcement sticks in my head. Great launches also earn future investment. So it turns out for many of us, and this is frustrating as a marketer, I know, I have been there that if you do a great job with the launch, a lot of your other sins will be forgotten. A lot of your other sins will be glossed over. Oh, it didn't actually move the needle in a huge way. But clearly, you're a great marketer because you helped make that launch very, very successful. The spike gets the attention of executives, clients, managers, teams. So why is it that most launches fail? Well, I spent a bunch of time analyzing a good number, which you'll see in the presentation, and also talking to a lot of folks, many entrepreneurs and many marketers about their own launches. In fact, that's that's a big thing that I've been doing for for product research for SparkToro. And I found these five, these five big consistent things. That's what I want to share with you today. First one, misaligned expectations. Oh, I also have another request. Could someone who is backstage bring my water bottle and I will trade you for Dana's. Or I could just drink Dana's either way. I'll drink Dana's. It's fine, right? She's gonna yell at me. Yeah, it's fine, Rand. Yeah, it's fine, Rand. Thank you, Dana. So there are things that a launch can do and a thing that launches cannot do many things that launches cannot do. And if you don't realize these things, or if the people who are asking you to do this work don't realize them, you can be in big trouble. So a launch can help you get in front of a new audience. It can tell the story of the launch and help you position and brand, right? It can earn amplification. One of the things that launches are best at is earning amplification from people who love to share new things, which most of us in this room are those people. It can drive people who already have interest in what you're doing to take action, already have interest. Launches cannot create an audience from nothing. Cannot. They cannot control the story. Once a launch happens, the story changes on its own. The public, the consumers of that story will change it. They can't earn amplification from anyone and everyone. That's impossible. And expecting it is also problematic. And it cannot create or force demand. You cannot create demand from a launch. You can merely create demand from those who are already interested in that launch. And I think a big problem, especially many entrepreneurs have, but certainly I think marketers are held to this ridiculous standard as well, is that you are the way that we have been cultured to think about launches is you get your oldest, baldest, whitest dude in your blackest turtleneck and you stand on a stage and everyone loses their mind. I don't think that's how, that is not how 99.99% of launches go. It's not even how 1% of launches should go. What we should be doing are asking questions like what are the business goals of this launch? Right? What numbers are going to be used to measure that launch? What are the targets, the actual, the actual numeric targets from those numbers? What's the plan? The launch plan? And what do we do if we miss? Right? So everybody should be in on this together. That means the executives who design the strategy and who want the launch to happen. That means the marketers who are going to do it. That means the people who are creating the product whether that's engineers or designers or whoever. So I'm very lucky. It's only two of us who have to agree on these things right now, just me and Casey for Spark Toro. And so we came up with this idea that, okay, we saw clout die and we thought to ourselves, well, clout was never all that great anyway. And could we do something very small just for Twitter, where we could accurately put together that find the true influence of a Twitter account, not just follower count or some mashed up metric, but something that actually correlated well to influence scores. And so we came up with this. Well, first off, you can see what I did here. This is priming the pump. Right? This is a tweet that says like, hey, we've we've baited this 290 some odd people replied to this and sent me an email. Those people, I think many of you are in the room today, baited it. Thank you very much. And then gave us a bunch of feedback, which we then use to iterate on. And of course, those those people are also people who will help amplify. And so, you know, when we when we launched this thing, we had numeric goals. When we launched this thing 90 minutes ago, we had numeric goals, right? 2000. Oh, that's our goal for connections in the first week and 5000 visitors in the first week. And unfortunately, I think we we actually passed the first one. And so Twitter shut us off about 30 minutes ago, because they don't believe that anyone could be that popular with a new tool for Twitter anymore, which is very annoying. I think Casey's working on getting this back. But you know, the fundamental idea, and I'm going to talk about this in a minute. So I don't mean this in a purely self promotional way. I think this is important for marketers. So you might be familiar with my wife, Geraldine, who runs this Twitter account called everywhereist. And this Twitter account, you'll notice has 72,508 followers as of this morning. And the tweets that she sends regularly have more impressions regularly reach a larger audience than this account, which is my account at Rand Fish, which has 413,619 followers 5.2 ish times as many. So follower count is a terrible metric to tell us who who when they send a tweet will reach a broader audience with their account. And this is the problem that that we wanted to solve. And I think it's also a problem that marketers deeply need to understand, which we'll we'll talk about one of the other problems. I think it's probably not problem number four. Ideally, in the best scenario types of worlds, you want a launch that creates what I'm what I'm going to call the new normal, the new normal being higher than what the old normal was. So one of the things that, you know, we did in this case was we had we had the spark to our website, it was getting a few hundred visits a day. We launched when we initially launched trending, which is the tool that sort of a tech meme for marketers, you can see that it got a lot of attention. But then the new normal after that is about three times the old normal, because people are coming and visiting trending and paying attention to that right. So we set these we set these metrics, we had these numeric targets, we had our launch plan, we knew what we were going to do if it failed. And then we executed on that. And as a result, we can see, I mean, this is a very, very mild level of what you might call success. But for our little two person startup, it works. It's good enough. Number two is hard, because especially if you are in the consulting and services world, you cannot always control who's on your team. In fact, for many of you, who might be at the individual contributor level, rather than the management leadership level, you can't control who you work with either. And, and that's hard. But I hope that by diagnosing some of these issues, by understanding them, you know how they influence launches, successor failure. I have a request, please don't take a screenshot of this slide or a photo of this slide and say that I meant these things authentically. I am merely going to poke fun at what you will normally hear a lot of people talk about. They say things like the best teams are made up of the smartest people, work hard, and they consistently meet their deadlines, have vast knowledge and deep experience are relentless in their pursuit of perfection. Sounds like a automobile advertisement. And that's bullshit. That that is not what any peer reviewed research study has ever found about the best teams. I know you're thinking to yourself, Rand, I believe there are A players and B players. And my response to that is, I wish there were any research to suggest you are correct about that. You go find it, send it to me, I would love to look at it. Right now, the best research we have on teams performing in over the last 10, 20 years has come from a number of university studies, and actually from a number of tech companies, most most potently and most in depth from Google, who commissioned a huge long scale seven year study to look at which teams perform best. This was called Project Aristotle, if you're interested in looking at the research. And what they found is the best teams feel comfortable crying in front of each other. I'm serious. They are teams where the people would say, I know that I won't be judged harshly or unfairly by my fellow teammates. They are teams where people say they bolster each other's weaknesses, and they compound each other's strengths. They are made up of diverse people. I mean that in all the facets who share core values. Thus far, best research we have on teams that outperform other teams is this. These elements. And I think, speaking of Kim Scott's radical candor, right, this fits perfectly with this model. We are, we want leaders who build teams where we are challenging them directly, but we care personally about one another. And I want to try and illustrate this a little more specifically. So let's imagine you are on a team. I bet you've been on teams. I know I've been on teams where this is the case. I'm scared to make a mistake. Because if something goes wrong, I'm going to need someone else to blame because if I take the blame, I could be in trouble. I could be out of a job. I could lose respect in my organization. I'd better stay quiet or they'll think I'm not a team player. So I don't bring up criticism of other people or projects or ideas either. And as a result, the only person in any given room who believes in the work that's being done is the highest paid person, the manager, the leader. I've been on both sides of this. I have been the, I've been the hippo that drove to this. It's no good. I've been the team member who felt this way and didn't think he could speak up. That sucks too. Instead, instead, we want environments where people here get openly rewarded. Not, not it's okay. They are openly rewarded for admitting weaknesses. You, engineer, told me that this was too much work and that you couldn't do it or that you were nervous that if we did it in this way, it wouldn't work right. And you didn't think that you could pull it together. And I say to you, thank you for doing that. And I recognize you publicly in front of the rest of the team for being someone who's willing to challenge assumptions and willing to admit when something is over their head. If I mess up, my team will help me learn how to improve, not judge me, help me. I should speak up so that my concerns can be addressed. Oh my God, how great is it to be on a team like that? Right? We all believe in this product, whatever we're doing, this launch and in each other. Get a team like this and you have something special, something that researchers have generally termed psychological safety. I hate reading slides, but I'm just going to read a tiny bit because it's relatively important. So a group culture that Harvard Business School Professor Amy Edmondson defines as a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking. Psychological safety is a sense of confidence that the team will not embarrass, reject, or punish someone for speaking up. Here's what's crazy. What's crazy is how many people in Project Aristotle were certain that things like grades, right, that the grades you got in school or the quality of the school that you got your computer science degree from or how good a program you were as measured by a bunch of the tests that Google has internally or the individual work that you could contribute to a project as measured by sort of lines of meaningful code, right, all these kinds of things, those would be the predictors of successful teams and they were not. In fact they didn't even correlate well enough to be statistically significant. This did. You tell me what's going on here, right? This is us saying we can get a bunch of people together who are not the highest quality individuals at doing their work and when they work together if they feel this feeling of psychological safety they are statistically more likely to have better outcomes than people who are superb at their jobs. What? Teams are weird. Teams are weird. Okay, another big problem. Many, many teams and companies incorrectly reverse these two things. They get people who are poor culture fits but are, you know, productive individuals good at their actual tactical work and they try and work with them. I know you have people on your teams like this, right? You try and work with them to try and upgrade their, hey, you know, you need to be more sensitive in social situations. You need to understand that when you say these things to this person you're gonna, you know, you're making them feel this bad way. You need to, you know, step up your game when it comes to how you present information, how you talk to other people, how you relate to them and that is way harder than upgrading someone's skills. All of us started somewhere in digital marketing. I started by googling SEO and going to the search engine watch forums of Danny Sullivan's, right? And then posting questions like, hey, what does, should I put the title, should I put my keywords in the title tag two times or three times? I'm serious. This is the kinds of questions. You can go back and find the old Rand Fish account and you will see that is the kinds of questions that I asked back in those days. And we all started somewhere, but our skills get much better. Our social fit, our cultural fit, tends not to. And unfortunately what we really should be doing is taking people who are great culture fits and upgrading their skills and letting people go who are poor culture fits even if they have great skills. So I mentioned diversity. I won't spend a ton of time on it other than to say you can't find a whole lot of things that are better correlated with performance in small companies in little ones. And this is diversity of all kinds. So diversity of background, diversity of gender, diversity of how you think of what kinds of skills you have of where you've been and where you've worked in the past of age, all of them undeniably correlated. And I think many people ask why? Why is it? Why is that the case? Because boy, when I get together with people who are much older than me or much younger than me, my God, the Internet is just filled with like apparently the one thing that's totally cool to do is to say people the younger than me are terrible in all these ways. That seems to be very popular on the Internet, right? But this diversity creates an environment that is less comfortable, doesn't feel quite as comfortable and that discomfort apparently is actually the cause of why performance improves because we are more careful and more thoughtful and we make better, do better work. So great teams do share some things, right? Core values, things like ideals in people and practices, what we aspire to, what we would refuse to do, even if it brought us much greater financial success and beliefs like who should we hire and promote and why? What qualities or actions would cause us not to hire or to actually fire somebody? And what kind of workplace do we want to build? If you share these things and you have that diversity inside your organization, some magical things start to happen. The wrong process. All right, I'm going to show you, I'll show you too and then I'll present another one. Dainy, your water is excellent, thank you. Traditional launch, traditional launch, execs have an idea, right? Creators in the company or the organization or contracted, they build the idea, marketers launch the idea and successes based on whether the idea hits the executive's goals. I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, oh, Rand is going to trash on this. He thinks this is terrible. No, I don't. I think this is just fine. I think there are a lot of big companies who have a tremendous amount of success doing this. In fact, I will share one with you now. This is Domino's Pizza and they had absolutely one of the most successful marketing campaign launches in the history of consumer product goods and in fact, in American business in the last 10, 15 years. I'll tell you what they did and I'll show you the results. What Domino's did is they basically got this new CEO. This was 2006, 2005, something around there. I think this product marketing campaign was launched in 0708. They basically said, our pizza is terrible, people think it tastes like garbage, but they use us because we are very convenient and we are located everywhere and we have fast, good delivery and the pizza arrives hot. So we've got the logistics down, but our core product is awful. And in order to change this, we are going to do something that almost no company ever does, which is we are going to build. We're not only going to actually change the product, we are also going to launch a marketing campaign that is centered around this idea that our pizza was terrible. We are going to literally tell consumers, we understand that the food you were eating that we made tasted worse than cardboard. I'm not kidding. This is their marketing director, Karen Kaiser, who was featured in some of their ads with text where she read tweets that people had said about their pizza like, worst excuse for pizza I've ever had. And many worse things. And do you see next to that? This is a chart of stock performance. Domino's beats Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon. Only Netflix actually had higher stock performance growth over this period, from when they launched this campaign, I think 2009 or 2010, something like that, and over the next eight years. All right. One quick caveat. I have a good friend and actually one of my investors, whose kid's middle school project, I can't remember his name, but his middle school project was to taste test all of the pizza brands in Seattle. And so they ordered pizza from like eight different pizza, so not all, but eight different pizza places. Domino's ranked eighth. So I want to be clear. It could be that it is massively upgraded. This does not mean I am urging you to go out and try Domino's. Seattle has many wonderful pizza places. Big Mario's on the hill is quite excellent in fact. But this process, this big classic process, this is definitely not right for everyone. And that's why things like Eric Reese's MVP process have come out and been very, very popular and adopted by many organizations. This idea that creators go identify a market problem and then they design and build a solution that requires the least amount of effort to get to a V1, like something that actually solves that problem. And then they launch the solution, they iterate on it until it's good enough. This is called product market fit. And then they hire more marketers and they try and scale the thing. And this process can also be awesome. Absolutely awesome. If you are someone like rival IQ, now when rival IQ came out six years ago, five or six years ago, right, no one really knew who they were. They could release a V1 and get a few marketers. And even if people sort of thought the first version was a little crappy, they'd give them feedback and then iterate. They had a long runway because nobody knew them yet. So if you're launching to a purely early adopter audience or a very tiny audience or nearly non-existent audience that's just inside your network, great. But MVPs can really hurt a brand's reputation. How many of you were here for Moz Analytics in 2013? Just a few. OK, just a few. I think I have maybe only made one other mistake in my career at the magnitude of this product. It was just an awful, awful, idea, conceptually, right? I had this idea that, oh, you know what, in the future, no one will specialize in web marketing. There won't be SEOs and social media marketers and content marketers. We'll all do all the jobs. You can't build a product based on a theory of where the market's going to go, Rand. That's not how software works, anyway. But when we launched this, one of the things that we had is what I've termed, well, we Moz, right? One of the things that definitely lasted for a few years was this MVP hangover. The MVP hangover is this idea that the association with the initial thing that came out is so strong that you don't think about the brand in any other way other than, oh, they released that crappy little thing. But there's an alternative. There's something in the middle of these two processes that I want to share with you that has been working very well for me and for a bunch of other organizations. I don't think I was, certainly, not the first person to do it this way. Maybe one of the first people to draw a little graph and call it something. But the exceptional, viable product. So the EVP is basically saying, before we publicly launch, we are going to be better than anything else out in the market or so good that people find it hard to ignore us. And you do this because you have an audience that's paying attention to you and you cannot afford the brand hangover of an MVP. And so this process looks something like this. You identify a market problem, marketers, creators, customers, execs agree on the problem to product story that resonates. You design a high-quality MVP or you design an MVP solution. And then you make that private. You show that to a few people. I assume there's probably lots of people in this room who were testers, alpha testers, beta testers of two products I work on at the end of my career at Moz, a keyword explorer and link explorer, right? And those people played with those products for 100 days plus before we ever launched the thing, before we thought this is good enough. This is now good enough. Once customers are ecstatic about it, right? Once they're like, oh, man, I want to share this with my friends. This is really good. I want to get it out there. Then you go and actually launch the thing. And this process can be adapted to tiny teams or small projects inside giant teams too, right? You identify that problem that your launch is solving. You craft the problem to product story that resonates. You build that private MVP and show it to a limited audience. You iterate. And when your audience loves it, great. Now you're ready to launch. You can do this with content. You can do this with link building campaigns, with PR campaigns. There's a lot of options. This is probably overkill if you have a big well-oiled machine. Yes, that's a real ad that Domino's ran. But for a lot of scaling and mid-sized organizations, this is sort of just right. And what I'm going to urge you to do is choose the right one depending on your organization, right? So you're a big brand, right? You've got a big marketing team with a bunch of historic success. Great. Go for that traditional. You're relatively unknown. You have a tiny audience you're launching to. A poor initial reception doesn't really harm you and it'll give you time data rate. Wonderful. MVP is for you. And EVP, you're in the middle of those two things. Right? This is an option. Number four, your story sucks. Story does not resonate. So stories, I know many of you have seen Kindra Hall present and she does wonderful presentations on stories. I think she would be proud of me for matching the decor and my slide colors with my shirt. I'm not 100% sure about that. But stories build memories far better than features or benefits. So you've probably heard this classic, like, oh, talk about how your product or your launch benefits your customer, not the features that it has. Even better than that, tell a great story. Great stories make for great launches. So classic story format, right? We're all familiar with. You've got your settings and your characters. You have your tension and conflict and the results in a climax and there's some resolution and then there's a new normal, right? Things have changed. There's this new normal. And this fits beautifully. So most launches fit this model quite well, right? Before things were like this, it was a problem for these reasons. Our launch is the solution. Things are better now. Here's how. Awesome. And I think a lot of great launches that we have all seen tell a story that fits in exactly like this. So, you know, again, not a huge fan of telling the features based stories, right? Our highway, what is this? Highway light truck tires. Their tread also has spies. No, that can't be right. Sipes. A sip. I know what a sip is. No, I have no idea. Benefits over features tend to do better, right? Benefits like, okay, got it. This tire is built for rugged, outdoor. You know, it's gonna be snowy and muddy and I need this. And better than any of those are emotions. And if you can tie your launch into an emotional trigger, you tend to do far better. This is hard. This is hard to do. I have struggled, especially in the, well, I make software for web marketers. Let me see what emotions that sort of triggers. But, right, it should fit right there. It should fit in the, it was a problem. The problem should trigger that emotional, right? Anger or sadness or nostalgia or frustration, right? And the resolution should trigger that positive emotion that, oh, things are better now. I can be calm about this. This problem is gone, right? So when we launched Link Explorer, one of the things, admittedly I was not there for the final launch, but I worked with the team right up until launch, even after I left. And one of the things that I thought that Moz did that was really great was to copy the sort of Domino's Pizza strategy of saying like, yes, open site explorer was terrible. We were really sorry about that. We were ashamed of that for a long time and it sucked. And now here is this new thing and it is way better and let's compare it against, you know, literally against Majestic and Semrash and AA Traffs, right? And you should do the same thing, right? And we'll call out the fact that we were not as good as those folks for a long time. Number five, you needed to reach an audience that you did not reach. So for most organizations, this is where, this is a lot of the time where marketing comes in. We often don't even get to participate in a lot of these things until, okay, we've got it already. Now you market or launch it for us. What? That's crazy. Bring in people at the very end. It's sort of like, and from the SEO world, right? Okay, our website is done. Now SEO it for us. Through you, man. That's not fair at all. How do you? But we have to, right? Because that's just how it is. Okay, so it can be very hard to reach your target. Let's say, for example, that I, Casey and I totally change direction. We decide SparkToro is gonna make, we're gonna do lighting design. We're creating some fancy new lights. In order to make these lights work, you know, we're gonna need to reach some interior designers. That's who sells lights, right? So I did a search on LinkedIn. And I know one person who knows one person in interior design. Well, that kind of sucks. I don't, that's gonna be hard for me, right? Oof. But let's change the story. Even with a huge publishing platform, most of your audience is probably gonna ignore your launches. So this is, this is Ma's back when we were, what year is this? I think this is, yeah, 2013. Okay, so we're doing some launches. 3.4 million visits per month, on average. Totally respectable, ton of traffic. If I could get, back in 2013, if I could get 10,000 people to pay attention to a launch we did, I was thrilled. 10,000 people, I mean, it's not that hard. You would think these are relatively engaged audience. New, my friend. No, it is insanely hard to get an audience, even when they've already captured to pay attention. And I think that's okay, right? Because a lot of times, when people talk about themselves, we have learned, well, especially companies, we have learned and been trained to tune out, which is why we need trusted sources to tell the stories for us. And so Indirect is the way to go, right? This is the classic PR process. There's your organization, and there's people in publications that your audience pays attention to, and that they will hopefully reach your target audience. And if you can get the launch in front of those people, they will reach the people that you need to reach. Great. Except this is hard. It's really hard. This is why link building, one of the reasons why link building and content marketing outreach in PR are so difficult. I think it's one of the reasons why people like Lisa Myers have so much success when they find an innovation, when they're able to be creative in this space. One, discovering the right publications, people and sources is just difficult on its own, just the discovery process. This is what I've been watching a lot of people do, and many of you have sent me your spreadsheets and been like, yeah, this is how I try and figure out who people pay attention to in the interior design space. And I go, oh my God, are you kidding me? Three weeks of work and an Excel spreadsheet and a bunch of manual look-ups, that's crazy. That's like SEO in 2002. And then two, selecting the right targets for the pitch, and three, crafting a message that actually earns the amplification that you want. So I wish I had an awesome thing to share with you here. Like I wish, I mean, obviously this is a product that SparkToro is eventually trying to solve, right? But I wish that I had this like, okay, we can help you discover the right sources, but I don't, I don't. The people I've seen who are best at this, it is a lot of manual Googling and searching across social networks and running surveys to their audience, and it is manual and time consuming and unfortunately still necessary, right? There are a few tools in a few places that can help. Some people like BuzzSumo and BuzzStream for some aspects of this. Some other folks have found tools like FollowerWon, because especially for Twitter to be useful. A few other places, but it's just hard, right? I do have a little bit, a very quick, very tactical tip for selecting good targets. I saw some people who are working on projects like this, use this and I thought it was quite genius, which is. They would search for, you know, lighting design sites, colon, the site that they wanted to get featured on. And they would use the tools to identify only the tools button inside Google Search to identify only people from the past year and then they would, whoops, and then they would ID the authors of those pieces of content because those are people who are at the publication they wanna reach, are still there because they've written something recently, most likely to be best sources for the pitch. On the earning amplification side, I would urge you not to get too obsessed with the outreach email and messaging. I think that a lot of the optimization attempts that happen in this space happen right there. And I think that misses the bigger picture. My best tip, the thing that I've seen work best for a bunch of these launches, I'll show you an example is when you are earning amplification, do something that makes the people who you wanna reach care deeply, resonate emotionally with the story about what you're doing. So, in fact, I recommend looking for exactly this phrasing. I rarely cover X, but this is different. If you can get there, if you can get to the aha, this person who rarely covers X, but they will think that our thing is different, now you're onto something, right? And, you know, Uda Health, right? They had their pick of investors, they chose VC firms with senior female partners, they raised this round, you can see why that resonates and is worthy of amplification by a large group of people who might not ordinarily care if a healthcare company got funding, right? So, I am urging you to improve the launch story. The story, not just the outreach and the messaging and the email. My last tip for you, before you build it, before you launch it, before you reach out, have a great answer to the question, who will help amplify this and why? If you do that before you build, you are set up for vastly more success than if you don't. Thank you so much. Thank you.