 Hello, good afternoon. My name is Philip Preston and I'd like to welcome you to today's webinar Express. What the brain reveals about your marketing messages hosted by CIM Southwest. Before we get started, I'd just like to go over a few things so you know how the event will work and how to participate. The presentation will last for approximately 30 to 35 minutes, followed by a short 10 minute Q&A session. You'll be able to post any questions you have by typing into the Ask the Question chat box in the Q&A panel, which you'll see on the right hand side of your screen, if watching on a laptop or across the top, if you're watching on a tablet or phone. You can send in your questions at any time during the presentation and will attempt to answer as many as we can during the Q&A session at the end. If you want to share your thoughts on social media, you can use the hashtag CIM Events. The webinar has been recorded and we will share a link to the recording with you over the next few days. You'll also be emailed a short feedback survey after the event, which would love you to complete. It will only take a few minutes and all survey responses are anonymous, so please do let us know your thoughts. Okay, now I'd like to hand you over to Katie Hart, who is our guest speaker today. Katie. Good afternoon. Thank you very much for that introduction, Philip. So I'm going to spend the next 30 or 35 minutes talking to you about a relatively new branch of marketing called neuromarketing. It's emerging, it's been around for about 20 years, but it's only really now starting to gain in popularity. Neuromarketing arises from the knowledge that we have that something like 85% of what goes into making decisions is subconscious. So that means if we ask our customers why they behave the way they do, at best they can only give us something like 15% of the reasons why they're behaving the way they are, why they've made the decisions they have, why they've selected the product or the brand that they did. So 85% of what goes into that decision is unknown to them. So with the best of intentions they are not able to share that with us. So this is why we end up with some of the strange results like the infamous Pepsi Coke challenge where people were asked to take a blind taste test. And time and time again when these are carried out, people report that they prefer the flavour of Pepsi. And yet people go on continually to buy more Coca-Cola than they do Pepsi. Neuroscience can start to answer these questions and this is where neuromarketing gets exciting because what we can do actually is interrogate that 85% that the customer themselves are not aware of. We can use physiological measures and responses to understand what's going on at a level which that customer doesn't know about themselves. And some of these can be really quite minute changes. A few years ago Google changed the colour of the blue in the links that are brought up in their search engine menus. And it was only a fractional change. You may not even have noticed it. They had 41 shades of blue they chose from and they attribute the fact they slightly changed the shade of that blue to an increase of $200 million per year annual revenue. So it's a tiny change but they can have massive impacts. So this got us thinking and in particular I was approached by an organisation called Spotler who do a lot of marketing automation and they wanted to understand actually what was going on inside the brains of their customers. So as a lot of marketing departments do they were creating landing pages. They were sending out a lot of emails and they wanted to understand what was going on inside the brains of the people who are receiving them. So actually if we could do that what would we learn? What would we see going on? So that's what I'm going to talk to you about for a few moments now. The research that we did we wanted to make sure we were testing actually the layout and not the content. So when we designed the experiment we had to make sure that we were applying the same content in every different case. Otherwise what we would be measuring was the brains response to the content rather than the way that content was presented. We knew we wanted to target mainly marketing professionals so we also wanted to find a topic which would be equally relevant and equally interesting to a large number of marketing professionals. Now if we'd done the research on something like artificial intelligence it may have been that some marketeers would have found that really interesting and others would not. So again we wanted to try and find something that we thought would be quite uniform across all the people we were researching. So we chose GDPR. I don't know if that's equally exciting or equally unexciting across the board but we thought at least it was something that everybody would be familiar with and it would have some content which would resonate with everybody. We also needed to make sure we mixed up the order that people saw the different formats in because again the brain registers things differently when it sees it for the first time as opposed to seeing the same content presented maybe for the seventh time or the twelfth time. So by mixing the order up we knew that actually what we were going to get across the board would be the brains response to that particular layout. We also alongside the research carried out a sort of conventional survey so when subjects had finished we asked them the usual questions you would do in market research. So this was the trial really of how the neuro marketing responses would sit alongside responses received from the survey. We have also subsequently gone on to do some split tests as well so real live scenarios A B testing if you like of how people would perform based on the findings of this research. And finally we needed to make sure that we were selecting the most appropriate format of technology in order to do this. The technology we used is something called electro encephalography or EEG. It's a format which is used a lot within neuroscience. On balance it offers a lot of merits but as you can see from the example here in the laboratory situation it is not easy to apply. It can take something like 25 to 30 minutes to actually get one of these sets installed properly. And obviously the wires do limit us in terms of the environments that we would actually be able to conduct the research. Thankfully though due to developments in technology it's now possible to have remote access headsets such as this one you can see James wearing here. These adopt exactly the same technology. They have a number of sensors that are positioned in specific points on the brain. And what they do is they record the electrical activity that is going on in the brain in the region just underneath where the sensor is. So it's all about reading those electrical impulses which is the way the brain communicates. When we use an EEG machine we get material that looks like this. So you can see down the left hand side of the chart there's a number of codes. And each of those codes corresponds to a particular sensor on the headset. So each one of those tells me what is going on in that particular region of the brain. The codes will mean something so AF3 at the top there is the anterior frontal cortex. So that's the bit right at the front part of the decision making process. We also used as part of the research is some markers which enable us to very easily determine what particular layout somebody was looking at when their brain gave us this response. Because the brain will give us almost instant response. It's literally microseconds before the brain will present you with its view on what it's seeing. So we needed to make sure that we were capturing exactly the moment where somebody moved on to the next format that we were showing them in the research. So again you can see here the red markers indicate the different points at which people were exposed to different marketing materials. Well we were actually measuring with six key metrics. So each of the sensors that you've just seen measures the activity under a particular part of what's going on under the brain. But it's not working in isolation. So with something like the anterior frontal cortex. We need to be looking at what's going on in two senses because it's very often the relationship between the two that gives us a sense of whether what they're seeing is viewed positively or negatively or how they are regarding it. So we actually use a lot of algorithms which take and compute the information from those 14 senses and turn them into something that's much more meaningful and useful for us. And these were the six metrics that we chose to measure in this instance. So firstly engagement how actively were they involved in what they were seeing how engaged were they their level of interest. This is quite a simple choice of are they interested in what they see do they like it or are they experiencing a version are they actually switched off and turning away from it. Focus measures how easy it was for them so are they using fixed focus are they really focusing a lot of their mental capacity on what they're seeing. Or is their focus split so have they got divided attention. Excitement is a very physiological measure it's a sort of arousal it's a measure that gives us a sense of whether they are physically interested in what it is they're looking at. Stress is a measure of comfort over challenge so is it easy for them do they like what they're seeing is it quite accessible or not. And then relaxation gives us a sense of how easy it is for the brain to recover or switch off or move on from what it has seen. So in some instances that's viewed as how easy it is for the brain to forget and to absorb the next piece of information instead. Just to quickly run through the numbers we had in this piece of research 19 different web page layouts that we tested nine different email formats. So if you want to feel sorry for somebody today feel sorry for the subjects who looked at 28 different presentations of the same GDPR content. We researched over 10 days and in that time we managed to engage 14 companies and in total we had 87 subjects who came forward to take part. Of those subjects we got an almost 50 50 split so we had 42 of them were female and 45 of them were male. And we also asked them to give us some basic demographic information about their role in their company so their seniority and whether they were a marketing professional or not. So we again could split all this information down and interrogate it based on those terms. All in all though that meant we had a huge number of metrics over 700,000 metrics that we could then interpret and measure. So I want to just go through with you what we discovered. Firstly if we start by the results of the survey so this survey is actually what the customers reported to us as they as they conducted the research. So this is your conventional market research that may have been carried out. If we ask people which website layout they could recall 39% of them referred to one which included a video. So that's really high recall rates. The second one in terms of recall was a format which had social figures on them so the social media icons and data in terms of usage. But that was only nearly 14% so that's a tremendous drop from the 39% which the video managed to achieve in terms of recall. And the third most popular one was one which was presented on a dark background. So three very different styles there. These were the easiest that subjects could recall. If we asked people what they liked so what was most aesthetically pleasing which ones did they like. Again the dark background and the video came out as being most popular. So what I wanted to do then is accept that this is what the customers are telling us but let's go and have a look actually at what the brain information was revealing to us. Firstly looking at the video, yes this was good. People as they were looking at formats which contained video did score very highly in terms of excitement. But what I was surprised by is they also scored very low for engagement and interest. So when I went into it in a bit more detail I started to look at actually what was going on. Nearly 38% of people didn't watch any of the videos. So although their brain registered it as being exciting when they saw it on the web layout format they didn't actually use it. They didn't actually click on the arrow and watch the video at all. So it's amazing that we get that spike of interest but it doesn't convert us into action. It doesn't motivate us to actually watch that video. 33% of people watched some of one of the videos. Now there were three different formats where they could have watched a video. So some watched that 33% watched some of only one of them. And that was an average of 22 seconds from a 1 minute 46 second video. So again they didn't really watch that much. 28% watched one all the way to the end. And some watched more than one. Now the interesting thing here is that the males among the group who watched more than one tended to only watch it for a few seconds. And this was almost as if it was just to verify it was the same video they had already seen before. However the females tended to watch it all the way through again. They watched it for completion. They went the whole way through 1 minute 46 seconds again and in some instances even for a third time. So there are some real fans of GDPR out there. Or at least some people who very diligently follow the instructions. If we look at the response to the black background this was one of the most interesting responses we achieved. Because again it's called really high for engagement and focus. And yet at the same time it was very low for excitement. So although this captured people's attention it grabbed them. It attracted their attention and their focus. They were not split. They were held by this format but they were not excited. And I think when I say that what I need to actually suggest is that this was an alternative format we provided. And this simple change of moving the call to action from the bottom right hand side of the text to the bottom left hand side of the text created very different responses. So again it's back to what I was saying about how small changes can make a really big difference. These then created an incredibly high score for stress. So these were not pleasant for people to look at once that box had moved over to the left hand side. It was very low for relaxation though. So this was not something that people easily moved on from. It was not something that was easy for them to forget or to recover from. So I think all in all that meant it was memorable and it explains to me why they were able to recall it so clearly. But it doesn't necessarily convert into action when it comes to applying them in split test situations. If we move on to what happened with the different emails styles again starting with the survey. The email that most people could recall was one which contained a gift image in it. Now there is a big caveat to that because we were travelling around the country. We were presenting this on our own equipment and so the gift was already pre-installed onto the laptops. Most of us when we're carrying out marketing if we're sending out emails which contain gifts they will be blocked if we're sending those out to people who are using outlook in particular. So a lot of B2B marketing cases they will be blocked. People will not be able to see that image so although it came out extremely high on the research for us that may not reflect a real world situation. The second most popular format for emails that people could recall is one that we called the zigzag. So the text was on the left hand side with an image on the right and then underneath that it swapped over with the image on the left and the text on the right. And so it went on so it sort of went in zigzag down the page. But again a very significant drop there although 12% of people could recall it. It's nothing like the 36% who recalled the gift. And outlook was the third most recalled format. When we then went in to look at the responses from within the brains we had one email format which scored highest for four of the six metrics. It scored highest for engagement, interest, focus and excitement. So these are all positive scores that we would absolutely want to see going on inside the brain of somebody we're communicating with. And I'm afraid to say it was the standard outlook format which achieved the highest for all four of those. So again this was something that we went on to research in the split test that we carried out afterwards. And the split test absolutely verified this that people do still respond best to some of these standard formats rather than the more intricate designs that we may create. If we turn this round instead of starting with the surveys I'm now going to start by looking at what we actually learnt by starting inside the brains. So if we start from the results, the data that we achieved obviously as I say we broke it down into a number of different categories and a number of different demographics. But across the board if we looked at all of them put together what we found is that the most positive design for the web page layout achieved the highest score of all of them for excitement. Very high score for engagement again which is what we'd really like to see. Very high focus so it held their attention they weren't distracted and also mid high in terms of interest and relaxation. And again this is the design which achieved all of those results which is perhaps not as extravagant as we may expect in terms of some of the web page layouts that we create. So we again included this in on the split test and found we got very high conversion rates by using this particular design. So people would be very open to providing their email addresses and to clicking on the button to access a download from using this particular design template. One of the things we particularly looked at was the use of images of people because very often it's a tool that we're told to use time and time again. We hear the phrase people buy from people. It's all about creating connections and rapport. So I just want to talk to you for a couple of moments about the responses we got inside people's brains when we created images which showed people. So there were three different formats that we used. One showed an image of a lady, one showed an image of a gentleman and one showed an image of a group of people. So again those were the only things which changed and what we found when we asked people which of these they could recall having seen we had quite an unreliable response. So some did manage to recall that they had seen both the female and the male and the group. However, a number of the subjects only reported seeing either the male and the group or the female and the group. And what I found particularly interesting about that is that actually nine times more people recalled seeing the male and a group than recalled seeing the female and a group. And I thought this was really interesting. So again I wanted to go back and look at what was going on inside people's brains as they were actually viewing these images to see what that would tell us about how they had responded this way. What we learnt is that the image of the female created the most stressful response across the board. So although we might think she's accessible and welcoming she was not. The brain responded with the highest levels of stress of all the options we provided it with. Conversely the image of the male topped the interest metric. So this was an image that people felt comfortable with. They actually liked that image. Now I think one thing we need to be particularly mindful here is about the body language which is involved in these images because neither of them have particularly positive body language and the body language is something which we do pick up on very quickly as a cue and it's definitely something that the brain registers at that 85% subconscious level. Even though overtly we may not be aware of it. So I think the difference in body language between the two became really quite apparent as did just small things like the fact that the female shirt doesn't really stand out. She isn't really as noticeable as the male is. So do be mindful if you are including images of people because again these small changes matter. One other point of note about using images containing people is the use of an image with a group. Now I see lots of images such as the one that we used here in the research and I completely understand why we use them because we are encouraged, required. We know it's good practice to try and be representative. We want to demonstrate that we believe in diversity and inclusion and that we want to engage with a wide range of potential employees or customers, whatever that may be. However, when we use an image such as this which contains a group of people what goes on in the brain is really quite alarming because with this instance the brain produced the lowest response of all of them for focus. So I feel as though by putting an image like this in the brain is drawn to the presence of people and looking at those people and actually then the marketing message what we are trying to convey is almost completely lost. So we need to be very aware of when and how we are using these images because if we sit them alongside key marketing messages those messages will not land. They will not be well received within the brain. Just a few other lessons that we learned during the course of this research that I want to share with you. Because people were wearing these headsets while they were carrying out the research we then left them wearing the headsets while they completed the survey at the end of it. What was really interesting were two observations from that. Firstly, surveys are stressful. Although we as marketeers want to know as much as we can about our customers and what their preferences are as much insight as we can get into their lives the brain does not enjoy completing surveys. They are stressful and it goes into a stress response which starts to shut down some of its functionality. So we do need to consider really carefully when and how we use such surveys. The other thing which was really beautiful to see is that when somebody was asked the question about which of the for instance web layouts they preferred or they liked most or which they could remember as they were completing the survey. So maybe they were preferring the one which had that group of people image that I just showed you. When they were inputting that information into the survey about having recalled that one their brain pattern was replicating the pattern it created when they were first exposed to that image. So what I'm saying is that the preferences the responses they created in their brain electronically when that first image was presented to them they recreate that when they are recalling that image. So it's literally conjuring up in your mind that image. And I think that's a really insightful start to understanding how brands are created and how those associations are built in the brain because it's those pathways which get repeated those patterns which become familiar which starts to create all the associations that we have within brands. The second lesson we learned we put some broken links in. So occasionally people would click on a link and there would be no serviceable link there that link would actually be broken. And what we found again the brain goes into a very stressed response under those circumstances. So it creates a frustration it raises the emotional tension within the brain. And what we also noticed that's particularly interesting is once they have shut down that error message or that box and gone back to the research those levels of frustration and stress did not drop. So they carried on throughout as they started to look at the next version or two of different layouts. So although we think it's a minor blip actually it does create a very lasting response within the brain. The third one was looking at the use of pop-ups. So again we created a pop-up on one of the web layout formats and it was lovely to see the activity in that anterior frontal cortex in that decision-making part when somebody had decided they'd reached the end of looking at a particular version and they wanted to move on to the next when they couldn't because a pop-up literally popped up onto their screen it created a moment of indecision. And in that moment of indecision we have tremendous power because we can direct their attention we can regain their focus and put it where we want it to because the brain was almost floundering at that stage it had a split second where it was there for the taking so pop-ups can be extremely powerful if they are used effectively in an instance like that. Another lesson that we learnt I just want to share with you as part of the research we asked all of the subjects if they would be comfortable for us to take their photograph as they were carrying out the research just for us to use on social media and in presentations such as this one and most people said yes there was one particular lady who did hesitate for a split second before she said yes and when she said yes she sort of composed herself and said yes, yeah, yeah that's fine, that's no problem at all this however is what was going on inside her brain as she said that so from the moment of me saying would you be okay if I just take your photograph for use on social media her brain went into absolute overload of activity for just a few moments few seconds before she then regained control and it settled back down again and we got the response of yes, yes that's fine, no problem at all and conversely we had one gentleman who as he completed the research reached for his cup of coffee to take a swig of that so I thought I'd share with you the response that was going on in his brain as he took a swig of that impactful cup of coffee so I want to just use these although they are interesting and amusing in some cases I want to share them with you to show that these are capturing all of what is going on these are physiological responses that customers cannot control they cannot hide this they can't influence the responses that these physiological measures give out so that is why neuro marketing is so intense and so powerful because we are not only able to access that 85% of subconscious knowledge but it comes clean and raw in a way that most market research just doesn't to conclude then we gain a lot of information by observing and looking at what customers do and looking at how they behave and looking at the way they respond and I think from the images you can see here we got a broad range of responses from frustration and boredom through to excitement and surprise and elation in one case all of this is conveyed and it's very visible but it's nothing like as informative as actually navigating their subconscious response and seeing what's going on behind those eyes behind the scenes so if we want to understand our customers and what's going on genuinely inside their buying head their buying brain we now have the tools and the resources to enable us to access that information for the first time so provided my contact details there if anybody wants to find out more about this sort of topic if anybody wants to follow me please do if not I'm more than happy to answer any questions which may have come up so Katie I'm going to start with the questions which came in early on during the presentation the first one was when you were talking about algorithms are the algorithms subjective or objective or learnt over time? The algorithms in terms of the sensors that we use and how we create the algorithms they are devised using far more sophisticated technology than the EEG machine so we usually use things called fMRI technology so the MRI scanners that you probably associate with hospitals in a functional version of that we can actually see to minute detail which region of the brain is activated by particular tasks or particular information so what has happened is people have mapped the activity within brains in immense detail using fMRI scanners and then translated that into what we use in the EEG headsets so the algorithms that are created are our best understanding of what is likely to be people's responses what their representation is of what is going on in their brain if their brain is active in that particular area in that particular region so we are still learning about it it is still evolving and as we get more insights and more technology then we are able to refine that a lot more sophisticatedly Thanks Katie again this question came in about 10 minutes into your presentation so those two the websites were they recording seeing the site or the information on it they were doing what we call free recall so we were not saying here is a layout do you remember seeing this we were just giving them free recall saying so which layouts do you remember seeing so it was not about the website it was about the different layouts that they were presented with So why do people say they prefer Pepsi but continue to buy Coca Cola Yeah there are two main answers to that the first one is our brain is almost hardwired it seems to be an evolutionary basis in our brain that we respond very positively to sweet things and to sweet flavours and I imagine that was part of our sort of survival historically so when we are given something which is very sweet we respond positively to it and typically with the Pepsi Coke challenge the Pepsi is considered the more sweet of the two and because we were only presenting people with small sample sizes i.e. they don't get to drink the whole can they only have small volumes to use as part of the taste test people said they felt better about that one they responded more positively to that one however when you look at what goes on when people are making the decision for themselves there's a whole different array of activity which goes on inside the brain so for a start the amygdala becomes very active and this is the part of the brain which we associate with emotions and the emotional association with Coca Cola was much stronger than the emotional association was with Pepsi the other area that we saw lit up was the hippocampus which is where a lot of our memories are formed and created so if you give people a blind taste test they will prefer the Pepsi because that is the sweeter one and they've got nothing else to base it on apart from that flavour whereas if you give people knowledge about what they are actually trying then much more of this emotional association and the nostalgia and the memories come into play in that buying decision which is where Coca Cola holds the trump cards I've got a couple of questions here about popups I get that it's a good way of directing attention I don't have a choice as a viewer but what impact does it have on frustration level and action taken any learnings on what popups work versus don't and similar question could you provide an example of a popup being used effectively to generate a conversation or further disarm action from the consumer so in the research that I'm talking to you about we only had one format which included a popup so I'm afraid I can't give you information about which what works best as a popup over what doesn't what we did find though was that popups didn't create the same legacy in the brain that those broken links did so where broken links created frustration and stress which didn't then dissipate with broken link with the popups rather when people saw those and we were able to divert their attention once that had been completed the action had been completed or once they had then close the popup and left that webpage there didn't seem to be any legacy effect that carried on in terms of their approach to the next layout that they were looking at so popups yes they can be great they need to be very clean and easy because you've got a split second to capture the attention to capture that focus within the brain so you need to make sure that what you're providing is very accessible not lots of text make it really clean and easy for the brain to digest and then make that decision there's a couple of related questions here again with neuro marketing one incredibly interesting and useful how can we make sure this information isn't abused by big corporations second question how do we know that finance research like this are more reliable than our existing sources great good questions thank you we do know and as I say we after conducting this research we then did some live A B testing so some split tests where we put these into real world situations for Spotler with some of the information that they wanted people to access on their website what we've learnt not just in this research but what the neuro marketing marketing industry knows is that these responses become a much more accurate predictor of future behaviour than the conventional formats that we have been relying on previously and I think if you look at the numbers of people who carry out very diligent market research and then do work launches only to find that product is not successfully taken in by the marketplace that customers don't respond to it in the way that they have been led to believe we can see that there is a disparity here and because these are using physiological responses we can remove so many of the biases and the skews that we've always had to try and minimise before yes there is a big question mark about the ethics of this and at the moment there is nobody really moderating what's going on in neuro marketing which is scary the reputable neuro marketing organisations there's a number that I know of who have refused to work with particular industries in some instances they may be tobacco industries or things like that but at the moment it does seem to be down to individual integrity I suppose I think there is a huge need for the industry to provide some code of conduct some standard of ethics because as you say the potential is there for the large corporations to really capitalise on this and I think that's where we cross the line between as marketeers being able to influence people and it becomes more about manipulating people so yes I'm afraid it's not good news on that front at the moment there is a big amount of work to be done so is there something that the market research society is looking at it is yeah I mean it's they've been aware of it for a while I'm I don't know actually what their involvement is and how they are approaching that but I know there are some organisations both here and in the states as well who are probably ahead of us quite a bit in terms of the extent to which neuro marketing is used and adopted regularly there are conversations and groups who are discussing that and they bring in a lot of the academic research as well because that's where most of the technology is and most of the discoverers that we are being made sit within the academic world and it's really how we can provide a sense of what is useful outside of that academic world without it then becoming manipulative. So I'll just go three or four more questions then before we finish so does a stress response necessarily mean a customer won't convert being stressed about GDPR could be useful for example. None of these responses in isolation are enough for us to be able to make that decision so we are very much looking at the factors together so for instance the stress response is one about comfort over challenge and it's the ability for them to be able to glean the information that they want how accessible it was rather than them being in a physiologically stressed state so the the terms aren't always particularly helpful I understand that yes in terms of GDPR we need a degree of anxiety perhaps better than stress in order to motivate people and in order to to make it a priority within people's minds but yeah in terms of the metrics that we were measuring that's not what stress was actually measuring. Regarding the email formats was there a difference between the age demographics and which format was preferred? We didn't split things up by age we did blink things up by seniority so I think you can probably infer a degree of age from that so we people were split into director executive manager or intern and we did find a very big difference so the more senior people were much more comfortable and responded much more favorably to the outlook format whereas the ones I would interpret as being the younger ones so particularly the interns didn't engage with the outlook format in the same way at all so when you look at what's going on inside the brain there is a comfort there is a familiarity for the senior people who have been exposed to outlook for a considerable time longer in many instances than some of the people who are younger and new are into the B2B environment. Can I ask you one more question but before I do could you just flip back to the slide with your contact details. One or two people have asked to see that again, thank you. You're welcome. So there's a couple of people who have also asked would you recommend any books or any literature on neuro marketing for marketing practice and anything that you've come across. Yeah there's lots I mean as I say this is emerging this is exciting stuff you will suddenly find there's a lot of this about now you're aware of it and starting to look probably one of the best to start with is a book called Influence by a gentleman called Robert Caldini and he talks about the psychology of persuasion and the power of persuasion so that's a good start point there's also one called Biology which is B-U-Y O-L-O-G-Y which is by Martin Lindstrom and that gives some great examples of how this is used and some of the large organizations that he's worked with as well so yeah those are a couple just to throw at you but I'm more than happy to provide more if people want particular details. I think that's all the time we got for questions today so thank you once again Katie there are some great questions and some really insightful answers. Okay so that's all we have time for our Q&A session today and again I'd just like to say thank you to Katie for today's presentation to CIM South West for organizing events and a thank you to you for attending we hope you found it interesting and worthwhile our next webinar Express Quarters Communications is on Thursday the 22nd of October at 1pm hosted by the CIM Construction Industry Group. You'll find it listed on the events page on the CIM website we can find out more information and register for the session. Once again you'll shortly be receiving a survey on today's event and we'd really appreciate it if you could provide your feedback. On behalf of CIM thank you very much for joining us and we hope you enjoy the rest of your day goodbye