This is Dan Kaples and welcome to today's online podcast edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind, and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every single day on your favorite podcast platform.
Yeah.
I don't think there's any question the American Way is in jeopardy. But how do we preserve it? How do we strengthen at different points of view on that? You know mine, but really happy to have our friend Ross Kaminski join us now from a fifty k a way where he does a great show each and every day. And Ross, I think it would be an understatement to say you are ferociously opposed to the Trump tariffs. So thank you for being with us to talk about all that, and welcome back to the show.
Well, thank you, And I just would like to start by saying how much I love your opening.
Oh thank you?
Yeah, no, it's so fabulous.
It gets me fired up every day. Yeah sure, but thank you.
I feel like, you know, like getting ready to run up the steps like Rocky or you.
Can just to chat with you.
Well that's the whole idea. Now, your station was just named Station of the Year. On Saturday nights. So we're going to light some candles and send some flowers because when Craig and I were named Show of the Year, I think that was the year they ended the show, but my memory may be tricking me.
But yeah, yeah, so I know what's that.
It's a fickle industry.
Oh yeah, no, listen, come on. None of us is entitled to a single minute on air. So grateful for every day that we get. Absolutely But my friend, I know you to be a very smart guy and a very smart financial guy. So tell folks why you are so opposed to the Trump tariffs.
Okay, let me first start for those who maybe don't hear me very much by saying that I probably agree with eighty or ninety percent of Donald Trump's policies, and part of what frustrates me so much right now is I think he's risking all of that with this trade war stuff. The other thing I I'd say is Donald Trump has identified an actual problem in that other markets, other countries do things to prevent American products from getting in and it's a legit issue, and I'm grateful that
he's paying attention to it. The problem comes because I deeply believe, and because Trump has been saying this for forty years, that his primary goal with tariffs is not as negotiating leverage to get other countries to do that, although he would be happy with that, it would he would be pleased if other countries said we're going to lower our trade barriers.
He would take that as something of a win.
But he really believes that the use of tariffs can help reindustrialize America, make America richer.
And that is just a weird kind.
Of economic alchemy that has been disproven for two hundred years, every place that's been tried, every time it's tried, and people seem to forget that the primary victims of tariffs are not the producers in the other.
Countries that are trying to sell us this stuff. It is bad for them.
But the primary victims of tariffs are American consumers who face higher prices and fewer choices and probably a recession.
And I know a lot of smart people share your concerns. If President Trump was with us, as you know, his counter to that would be, well, wait a second, ross, I'm trying to accomplish a lot of different things with that. But part of it, yeah, is I want this to be a big source of revenue for the US, so we can then do things like no tax on tips and other tax relief to the working class, and we can have other big tax cuts across the board. So where do you think that's all flawed?
I think that is an insane, ridiculous, mathematically impossible argument because the tariffs are paid by Americans.
They're not paid by foreigners.
Even if if the foreigners did pay did pay them, then the prices of our stuff would go up. But the bottom line is the tariffs are paid by Americans, so it's just taxation in one form or another.
So since there's not going to be more money.
There's not going to be sort of Biden style money printing, and thank goodness, there won't be. What will happen is if Americans are still buying foreign stuff and paying the tariffs, and then all that stuff is more expensive than it used to be, then we will have less money to buy other things that could be made in America. There will then be less demand for other things. Then sales taxes will drop, businesses will fire employees, income tax revenue will drop, the deficit will.
Get worse, and there won't be any.
Room for cutting any any taxes, none of that stuff that his minions are out there saying is going to work.
Dan now Ross, I think the if is the key words you use there, right, because, as you know, President Trump would say, yeah, if our people are then still buying as much from these foreign countries.
But but of course, as.
You know, a big part of his rationale is that no, these these terroriffs, these taxes on incoming goods will then cause manufacturing to grow again in America, make more at home, and then people will be able to get you know, those affordable products while strengthening America, strengthening American employment, strengthening the American tax base, et cetera.
So right, where is he wrong on that?
So where he's wrong is he's trying to have it both ways. He and Peter Navarro and other people like that say two things at the same time. They say, terifts are going to push people to buy American and tariff's are going to raise six or seven hundred billion dollars a year.
Well, which is it.
They're only going to raise a lot of money if they're not buying American and which case, you haven't achieved that goal. And if they are buying American, then they won't raise the money, and then you won't have achieved that goal. So you can't try to do both at the same time. You can do one or the other. And the fact that they keep saying that they're going to try to do both shows either that they're pretty dumb when it comes to economics, or they assume we're
pretty dumb when it comes to economics. The other thing i'd say, Dan, in response to the last part of what you said, there's absolutely no reason to think that anything that starts being made here that is currently being made somewhere else will be less expensive. When it's being made here, It's going to be anywhere from a little bit more expensive to a lot more expensive, and we are all going to be poorer because we won't be able to afford to buy what we used to buy.
Well, let me challenge that assumption first, and that is, if that assumes at this point just a lack of American ingenuity, innovation, etc. That would then reduce costs. I understand, our labor costs are always going to be higher, right, which is another reason I think to be very concerned about that the current status quo, because in a lot of ways we're just you know, fueling at this point, kind of this slave labor around the rest of the world.
But coming back to domestic purchases because it hits most people right who are just understandably very sensitive to those price points. But I think your view and I understand the logic behind it, but I don't think it takes into account American innovation and true free market competition, which I know you'd be a great champion of, you know, and in America then okay, you know, if we want people to buy American, we're going to have to to
compete price wise, quality wise, et cetera. And then I think historically Americans have shown that they do a pretty darn good job of innovating to accomplish that.
So I think it could play out the way that you say we and in fact I will I will agree with you in a certain sense here. I frequently remind listeners that when you're buying stocks, most of the time, you're not really betting on the politicians. You are betting on the incredible entrepreneurial spirit and creativity of.
American business owners and creators.
And I think of that in the sense that I had a lot of friends, conservative friends who refused to buy stocks when Obama was present because they thought nothing good could possibly happen while that guy was president. And it turned out there was a massive stock market rally and they all missed it, and it was because they didn't think that a good thing could happen when someone like that was present.
So we got to separate those things.
So I will grant you that it is that I'm always willing to bet on American ingenuity. The issue is that the timeframes don't match. So I had a guest on my show today who is VP of the biggest technology trade association in the world, and what he said was Trump is trying to push manufacturing technology. Manufacturing to change in a year or two in a way that will require, if you were lucky, five years, but probably
more like ten. And so that's the problem, right, So let's say we could get to what you're talking about with Americans making the stuff instead of it being made in China in ten years.
Now.
I still don't actually buy your argument that we could make.
It cheaper, but let's just say you could.
What about for the next five years when the iPhone that you would like to buy instead of being one thousand dollars, because if tariffs's fifteen hundred dollars, you're either not going to buy it or you will buy it and you'll have five hundred dollars less for other things. It's all economically bad and my take is that the risk and the cost is not worth the gain. Also, we only have what four point two percent on employment? Where are all these workers going to come from?
Hey, can you do another segment? Because there are two or three points there. I have some respectful disagreement on it, and i'd like to follow up with you on. But then i'd also like your take on the bigger question, which is and I don't mean this in the pejorative, but you know you've mentioned minions, and I think I detect a certain tone. I think you're truly very upset about this. And so the question that i'd ask you to come back and answer is do you really think
these guys and gals are idiots? Do you think Trump and his team are just really dumb? And because if you're right, then that's the way they're acting and I don't think they're that at all. Rosskominski kind enough to join us, we'll come back get his take on that. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
I'm really happy to have Ross Komensky with us. Does a great show over on our sister station eight fifty KOA. And we have a much different approach to President Trump's current tariff plan. And I use that broadly because the plan includes more than that, obviously, but Ross very opposed, and we've done a segment together already you can pick off the pod on that, and we've gone into some of the specifics. I, on the other hand, I think
that right now the status quo is unacceptable. I think that we're on a path that's on SoC sustainable and I do trust Trump. I think he's earned that trust on economic matters, and I respect the fact he's willing to endure some pain politically to try to write the ship.
So that's where we resume our conversation and Ross, as we set the table for those who just joined us, I think I understand you correctly that if this was a relatively short term play to get leverage to cut some deals, etc. You wouldn't have the same level of concern.
You believe though, that this is not that.
It's instead the president looking to put in place Tariff's long term as a source of revenue and for the other purposes, he stated, And you believe that that's going to be disastrous. Is that a fair summary?
That is a fair summary. And just one other really random thing. I will buy you a beer if you can tell me the name of the band or musician for the bumper music that the song coming into the segment that Ryan just played.
I'm going to have to.
Buy my own beer, my friend. I don't recognize most what he plays, but.
It sounds good.
Yeah, it was.
It's h Dave Davis of the Kinks, the less famous Kink's brother.
It's a Kinks song, but it was Dave's song. Sorry, and it's my favorite band.
And I've never heard that played a bumper music, so I just loved it.
Yeah, I didn't know any of those brothers are famous.
But no, I'll tell you, thirty or so years on air, I don't know. I've never seen anybody a fraction as good as Ryan when it comes to music. But hey, let me ask you, my friend, and you know, I know we disagree on some specific points. I want to follow up with you on, and I want to start with one of them, but then I really want to get to what your fix would be, because if you're new to the show or the area, Ross isn't one
of these guys who criticizes Trump on everything. As he started the show with, you probably support what percent of Trump's policies eighty to ninety okay, And so I do want to get to what your fix would be. But let me ask you the there are so many reasons why in concept I like what in Trump's doing. And one of those is something I know you care deeply about, which is national security. And you know, whether it's a
prescription drugs, which right now we import. I think it's almost eighty or ninety percent of into this country, whether it's Ammo, whether it's steel, whether it's lots of other things. We're depending on other nations, including to a disturbing extent, China. For what about the national security benefit of what he's doing.
So I think that China is a special case, and I think it deserves its own conversation that we can have or or not. But I would separate China from all of our other major trading partners. I would not and do not want to be reliant on China for anything really important. I think it's dumb how reliant we are on China for pharmaceutical precursors, for rare earth minerals
and and some other things. I would not be upset with being pretty reliant for those things on our allies, on Japan, on Korea, on Canada and Mexico and so on, all this stuff. And there's just a very fundamental concept in economics of comparative advantage that we shouldn't try to make everything ourselves, even things that are very important. There are some of them that we should not try to
make ourselves. But I wouldn't be reliant on a country that is sort of drifting from competitor to enemy for things we have to have.
And then obviously it gets more complex from there, and there's obviously an area of common ground when it comes to China. So to a certain extent, you know you would support aggressive tariffs on China. I assume I know that you're aware that President Trump, I think it was an eighteen levied some pretty significant tariffs on China that have been very effective to a point, and Biden even
I think, continued most of those. But what do you do then about because obviously communists cheat and China cheating and learning a lot of stuff now through Vietnam and maybe some other countries as well. So if you're in Trump shoes, how do you address all that without doing something broader than just China.
Well, this is why these people get elected and have these very difficult jobs.
These are the hardest questions.
And you said, you know, I, you know, you assume I'd be in favor of very aggressive tariffs on China.
I don't know that that's true.
We have to be very surgical about this, and we have to remember that Americans, Americans buy an immense amount of stuff from China.
But normally, when.
You have the conversation in an environment like this where you know, we're on the radio, when we're and we talk about lots of things, it's not a nerdy Econ show that you and I do every day, although I'm nerdier than you are on Econ sometimes. But Americans think of the stuff that's coming from China. They think about tennis, se use, tupperware, you know, final goods, cheap stuff that
you're buying and using yourself. But an enormous percent I think Somewhere around half of stuff that we buy from China is stuff that American companies use to make other things. And if you start tariffing that stuff, then you make the inputs to American companies more expensive. And that's very bad for the American companies and for American consumers.
And that's why this is so difficult.
But why couldn't that stuff also be made here? Well?
It could, but the question is could it be made? Okay, So give you an example. I was listening to a guy this morning on one of the financial news networks I forget which one, and a very very well respected technology analyst tech stock analyst, and he said, based on his own homework, he said, iPhone that is largely assembled in China that you buy for one thousand dollars, if it were to be made in America.
Would cost you three thousand dollars.
Now, I don't know about you, Dan, and there's not a sarcastic comment. I absolutely would not pay three thousand dollars for an iPhone, which would mean I'd just keep my old phone for a long time until it's useless, and then I'd find something else. For the people who do pay three thousand then they have two thousand dollars less to buy other things?
Right, But doesn't that ignore the secret sauce of America? Right?
And this isn't cheerleading. We've seen it in Natch, the secret sauce, which is free market competition in a market this big, a population this big and well educated where yeah,
that's what it might be today. But then you turn free market competition loose on that ingenuity, et cetera, and you'll never be able to make it as cheaply as China right where they're probably using slave labor to make it, which is another big concern, But you're going to make in roads there, which leads to another question, Rouss, can you do another segment?
Sure?
Because I'd love to know is the status quo acceptable? And what would your fix be?
Us, as a smart guy thinks a lot about this stuff, we obviously disagree, but really interesting what his solution would be Around the Dan Capitlis Show.
You're listening to the Dan Kapliss Show podcast, what is.
Your reaction and what is the impact on your cans?
You work them to spending more on defense, which they are agreeing to finally, but how can they do that when their economies are crashing, and they are now No.
No, no, no, no no, Their economies are not crashing. The markets are reacting. No, their economies are not crashing. Their markets are reacting to a dramatic change in the global order in terms of trade. And so what happens is pretty straightforward. If you're a company and you make a bunch of your products in China and all of a sudden, shareholders are people that play the stock market realize that it's going to cost a lot more to produce.
In China, your stock is going to go down.
But ultimately, the markets as long as as long as they know what the rules are going to be moving forward, and as long as that sentence and you can staying where you're going to be, the markets will adjust businesses around the world, including in trade and global trade.
They just need to know what the rules are.
Once they know what the rules are, they will adjust to those rules.
Hey, Rosskominsky, our guest right now, does a great show over an eight to fifty ka nine to new iconic time slot held for many years by Mike Rosen kind enough to join us. We disagree about the let's call it the Trump tariff plan at this point. I think there's much more involved in that. We've had a very detailed conversation over the last three segments. We won't rehash here, but Ross really appreciates you staying around because I want to get to kind of this seminal question of Okay,
we disagree, but what would your solution be? Because I know that we both want the same thing in the end, We want a healthy, thriving, secure, prospering America, and we disagree right now about whether Trump's approach is more likely to get us there than others.
But what would your fix be?
That's a great question, I think.
I think what's so difficult about this conversation about tariffs in particular is that people tend to focus only on the barriers that a tariff imposed by the US would put on a foreign product coming into the US, and we only tend to think about, well, what does that mean for the foreign producer that he or they or she whatever.
Won't sell as much stuff to us.
What we forget is actually the more important part, and the more important part is that by imposing those tariffs, depend and the reaction to a tariff could be anything from a small increasing price to a large increasing price to a complete unavailability of the product.
Right.
For example, Jaguar range Rover just announced they're not going to bring any more range Rovers into the United States for the time being.
That's kind of an extreme, an extreme.
Case, so it could be a March Gary Creek tomorrow.
There needs you, right exactly, So there needs to be some focus on the fact that what the tariffs do is increase costs and reduce choices for American consumers and American businesses.
So you know, I'm president of the Bad Analogy Club.
So what this is like is Trump is pointing a rhetorical gun at a trading partner and says, if you don't do what I want, I'm gonna shoot you. But he's got his hand in front of the barrel, and so the trading partner knows that if Trump actually pulls the trigger, the bullet will go through the hand and hit the trading partner and hurt him or kill them or whatever, but not without putting a big hole in Trump's own hand.
And that's what makes this difficult.
So I think, more often than not, I think that the cost to the American consumer, which doesn't go talk to about isn't talked about enough is larger and more important than the potential benefits to American producers of getting the other guys to open their markets.
What do we do about it?
Look, I don't think it's crazy for Trump to threaten tariffs and maybe even briefly impose tariffs to try to get them to back down. But that's not what he's doing, and he said over and over and over that his goal is to keep tariffs in place. I don't think it's a bad gambit if that's all it was, to say we're going to tearriff you until you lower, and then see how the game theory plays out. It's basically a game of chicken. But it's not what he's doing.
So what else could you do? There are other ways to put pressure, but you know, put make it difficult or expensive for tourists from some country to come here, or for students to come here.
There are a lot of different things you could do. But the other thing that folks forget about.
They think, well, we're gonna put tariffs into the other guys, they're going to have to lower. But the other guys have this same problem that our politicians have, which is that there are basis of political power that are highly concentrated and highly organized industrial labor unions, farmers for example. So think about from the perspective of the French or the Canadians. The Canadians, right, they've got big tariffs on
our dairy and they have a big dairy industry. So you've got several thousand dairy farmers in Canada who are well organized and contribute a lot of money to a political action committee. And if the politicians don't do what they want, they're going to run all these ads that they're going to contribute to primaries and beat all these guys.
And so they get the tariffs put in, and the tariffs, you know, harm every Canadian to the tune of I'm just going to make up a number thirty dollars a year while benefiting the dairy industry one hundred million dollars a year again, whatever the number is. And it's not that easy for Trump to just tell the Canadians you need to lower your tariffs, because they've got their own domestic politics to deal with, in addition to the domestic politics of not wanting to look like you're being pushed
around by Donald Trump. So all of this is harder than most people think, right, But aren't.
We at the point right now where Americans can't be subsidizing these foreign politicians and their domestic political concerns? And russ I love your analogy here for this reason, because, yes, for President Trump to accomplish what he needs to to benefit the American people.
Long term, there will be pain. There will be.
Political pain to him, which he's suffering right now, there will be pain to America. But isn't it true over the course of American history and world history that there has to be almost always some pain endured in order to take on and solve major problems which are causing us great harm, whether you compare it to a war scenario, which I know is different in material ways, But but
isn't that almost always the pattern? There's no painless way to take on and defeat these big problems we have right now.
So yes, and no, I think many people, including probably you, right now, are overstating the degree of the problem. It is a real problem that foreign countries block American producers from selling some stuff into these various countries. But how big a problem is it? We have four point two percent on employment that's actually higher than it was. We have faster economic growth than any other Western industrialized nation.
We have a higher standard of living than any other Western industrialized nation.
So yes, we could be doing a little better.
But so many people, including Trump, are selling this as if we're doing really badly, and we're not. And I do think that's important. And I think that the goal that you're describing, you know, making you didn't say make everything, but.
Make lots of stuff here.
Is somewhere between difficult and impossible, but more importantly, it's not desirable.
Well, and Russ, I understand that your view would be and there's no silver bullet, but that these tariffs aren't the solution to this. But obviously we're on an unsustainable debt and deficit trajectory. I think that in terms of the separation between you know, the financial haves and having more and the haves not have nots in America, I think is unsustainable, you know, politically and in terms of national coherence and national unity, I think that national security.
But how would has help?
Well?
I think the point here is that the more we can rebuild US manufacturing, right, because I mean, everybody knows the stats, right, US manufacturing has really been not completely gutted, but substantially reduced since nineteen seventy nine. And these manufacturing jobs, they tend to pay better, they tend to be more stable, they tend to create other jobs that you know, it would benefit this nation. I think in lots of ways to have a much more stable, larger manufacturing base in America.
I couldn't disagree more. I couldn't disagree more.
Wells most of the areas where we have outsourced, where we've outsourced, manufacturing is not the high value stuff, right.
We manufacture an immense.
Amount of stuff in America more than ever, and our share of global manufacturing it did decline in the early part of the rise of China, just like every Western nation lost some manufacturing to China, and then it's been stabler up since then.
We manufacture a lot. I don't want us to.
Make T shirts and sneakers here, and where are you going to get the workers?
And here's the other thing.
I think that whatever manufacturing does come, an immense amount of it is actually going to be done by automation and not by people, which would be actually better, right, don't I think chasing all these manufacturing jobs just doesn't make sense.
But I think where you get to workers as you shift them out of the T shirt manufacturing and you shift them into these manufacturing jobs which average about one hundred and two thousand dollars a year with the benefits package and everything else. But Ross, can you do another segment or I know you've been generous with.
Your time just for you, I will Danne.
Okay, thank you, my friend. We'll be back with Ross Kominski. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
And now back to the Dan Kapla Show podcast.
Wow.
So glad to have Ross Kominski with us. Does a great show nine to noon on eight to fifty KOA. We generally disagree a specifics and more broadly on what President Trump is doing right now with the tariffs, but so great to have Ross's perspective and appreciate you being so generous with your time.
Ross.
In our last segment together, I really want to zero in on a couple of things.
Sounds to me.
Tell me if I'm wrong that you're saying that you're okay with the status quo right now, You're okay with these trade deficits overall, you think America is doing really well. You mess with this and is anything substantial you would do right now to address the trade deficits?
Okay, So I think you just put words in my mouth that were the exact opposite of all what I said a few minutes ago, Right, I said that it is I said Donald Trump has identified a legitimate problem with other countries having tariffs and other non tariff barriers against our products, and I'm glad he's trying to do something about it. And if that's all he were trying to do, I would probably reach your same conclusion, at
least at first, before we see how the game plays out. Hey, let's give it a try and see how the game plays out. But that's not really what he's trying to do when he's imposing tariff levels that go way.
Beyond that and are going to cause a lot of pain.
The other thing that he's doing by stopping and starting and stopping and starting, is he is injecting so much uncertainty into the economy that I personally think a recession is coming even if you back, because who's gonna make multi billion dollar plans based on a guy who can change his mind five minutes later. So no, I don't think everything's perfect, but I also don't think we're doing we're doing badly. I would try to get these other
places to open markets. Frankly, I don't have the answers on everything we could try to do to get them to open markets. I would try it, but again, what Donald Trump is doing is not primarily about that.
Well, and I think that is a great way to bring this full circle and wrap up this last segment that we have about two or three minutes in, because I disagree with your premise that this is a very long term play for him, rather than leverage to kind of reset the deals across the world that matter most now. Neither of us can know for sure right We're gonna find out together, but I do believe that's his play right now. It'll turn out to be a brilliant one.
It will accomplish a lot, and he and the GOP and the country will soar. But we'll find out together on that. But Russ, my final question is, and I know you you're a very thoughtful guy. You think a lot about all of these issues. You're not just any kind of Trump hater, But do you really think these
guys and girls are stupid in the administration? I mean, because if you're right about how disastrous this is, it would be a historically kind of biblically stupid, well biblically strong word, it would be a historically stupid move, and that has not been his history.
So I think it depends on the person.
I think there are you and I well know from our overall experience during COVID society has experienced during COVID that just because somebody is an expert or has a fabulous degree from somewhere doesn't mean they're right, and definitely doesn't mean they're telling you the truth. Now, I do think there is something to be said for somebody who studied something at a great school, and all that I do.
I have a little bit of faith and experts. But I think Peter Navarro in particular, even though he has a Harvard PhD, is a blight on this country, and he is either incredibly ignorant of history and economic theory, but not just the theory right the actual practice and what's happened during trade wars, or he's lying to everybody. A lot of the other people who are out there talking about this stuff in a positive way, I just think they're good soldiers. I think they either don't know
one way or another, or they don't care. It's my job to support the president. I'll go say what he wants me to say. So I think it's some combination of all that.
You really don't think Trump's doing this because of Peter Navarro, Right, He's not going to bet as president or see in the country on that.
I mean, Mark, the whole bunch of them.
But but isn't it when you talk about everybody with the degrees and everything. Trump's degree is from the University of real life, and he's had a lot of success personally, a lot of success in his first term financially. So what is it that would make you think that suddenly he would do something as disastrous as you believe this is going to be.
So Peter Navarro is the symptom, not the cause.
Trump hired Peter Navarro and has Peter Navarro around him because Navarro confirms what.
Trump has long believed.
Trump has long been an opponent of free trade, going back at least forty years.
So this is not new. This is why Dan, five.
Or six weeks ago, for the first time in my fifteen years on radio, I went on my radio show and told listeners. I have never been more convinced in my entire life that the stock market is going down. And I am selling stocks, and you know I used to be a professional trader, right, so first time in fifteen years I did that because I knew that Trump is not doing this to even out trade balances. By the way, to answer your previous question, I don't care about trade deficits.
There irrelevant.
Peter Navarro is Lee is confirmation bias for Trump eating him down a.
Very dangerous path.
And yes, Trump is pretty good at real estate, but he doesn't know economics.
And Ross's you know the music means we're done.
But I think Trump there have been a lot of examples of Trump doing things that really smart people thought would fail and he then succeeded.
And I know we both want this country to succeed, and indeed we do.
Thank you for being with us today. Love your show nine to noon on eight to fifty k Awa. Please do check out Ross's show if you don't already, look forward to the next conversation.
My friend, Thanks for having me, Thank you you take care of Thank you Ryan, Thank you, Kelly