 I feel like there's this moment in time right now where there's an insurgent voice about design thinking, leanness, adaptiveness, agility, responsiveness, and then there's legacy that is resistant to that for whatever reason. What is the conflict there? Why isn't this mode of thinking the dominant mode of thinking right now? What's holding us back? Efficiency. Efficiency. I mean, it is interesting. The New York Times was started a few years ago, Six Sigma is over, it's time for design thinking. I gave a speech at an innovation conference about the difference between Six Sigma and design thinking. Those are the two, I think, extreme of the past ten years of business. Six Sigma is all about reduction of any redundancy, any inefficiency, and then you have design thinking that by definition is inefficient because you insert risk and emotion and intuition is the key word inside the system that is fighting for efficiency. And this is really where the contrasts arrive. And then there is the risk implication, how much you are willing to risk. And the bigger is the risk, the more difficult it is to drive design thinking inside the organization. I've been talking to design schools a lot about that, like are you training people ready to be in the business world and handle the other side of what goes on? And that you can make a beautiful prototype and sketch, but can you sell it? Can you back it? Can you do a business model? Can you produce it? Well, and as a designer, sooner or later you're going to run into a business person. Sooner or later you're going to need financing, you're going to need legal, you're going to need all those things, and a designer commando school is not prepared for that. That's the biggest frustration that we've heard from young designers when we took over DWR four years ago, they'd say, you know, we can't get our product to market. We can sketch it. We can prototype it. And we would love to bring it in, but you look around here in order to add another table we have to take one out. And so we've said, you know, how can we work with them and help them to figure out how to commercialize their products just like you're talking about? And we're doing something that John and I came up with probably over a scotch, but is to partner a young designer with an established designer. And we said, well, who's the most established designer we work with? It's Jens Rism. He's 97 years old. And we're partnering Chris Hardy with him, who's a, you know, late 20s designer from Atlanta. And what they're doing together is going to be magic. I mean, it's just really incredible. And so Jens has the classic touch to the furniture, and Chris is bringing in wire management and what the technology aspects of a new desk might be like and melding those two together. And that's fun to see it, you know, come to be. When you actually face a situation where you need to sell how much design will impact, I'll show you a little thing I'm just facing, you know, all the water enhancers like Mio and the sun and everything. So if you look at the shelf right now, there's 80 like this or look the same rather than stuff. And our company wants to relate on that. So we want to issue quickly. And we created a beautiful, really different design that takes all the aspects completely differently, but it's going to take another year. Okay. So here's like, we have a little crisis, okay, which we need to sell how much design will differentiate and make an impact, okay, versus doing something, go to market on something existing like everybody else. And this is for me the moment of truth, you know, when you need to sell how much design really matters. You have to get away from that quarterly quarter to quarter rights. Quarter to quarter kills design. Quarter, not only design, most new product, it kills. Yeah, I mean, that mentality kills it. You can budget quarter to quarter, you can budget design, you can budget some failure, but the problem is designers, when they're trying to be different, I think as a disaster, you don't try to be different. You try to solve an issue. We find the designers are out there. Yeah, right, these designers, there's so much ego that they forget about the purpose of the job and they're designing for themselves and they may go to market because that's their dream and Julio Cappellini may pick them up and they're going to sell four pieces in their lifetime and end up on a bread line, whereas if they were to listen to somebody and take what they are and be the talent that they have and solve a problem and then work with someone to make it so that people could buy it, they actually have a business. So either design is great on its own, there's artists in the world that needs more artists. In terms of designing a product you're going to use, that's really, really hard and you can't aspire to be different, you have to aspire to be useful and to solve a problem. For us, we're very focused on creating a space for innovation and design to coexist. So whether it's makers markets or manufacturing space that's adaptable, we have MakerBot as a tenant with their manufacturing in Brooklyn and they're growing very rapidly. And when you talk to their marketing people, they'll talk about Holiday 14 as this critical moment for them in terms of their product meeting the market. But Holiday 13 has 10x what they thought it would do. And so I think as we look at real estate and look at the space and look at design, we look at creating this opportunity for innovation to exist and we plan quarter to quarter. And so we say how do we set aside a piece because we believe that design is at the center of making us more profitable. So in order to do that, we need to create a space for design and creativity to live freely while we are responsible to our investment plan. And so that's the key is you need a portfolio of initiatives. You can't just do out there ideas that may or may not. We need a real portfolio strategy around this stuff to drive big businesses.