Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast where we talk with some of the brightest minds working in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein with Variety. The talk of Wall Street in recent years has been the rise of SPACs otherwise known as special purpose acquisition companies as an alternative to the traditional I p O. Well, there's no one better than today's guest to talk SPACs.
Harry Sloan has launched and completed more of them than anyone else, and one of them, DraftKings, may be the most successful one of the hundreds out there, having delivered four hundred and fifty return on investment. But SPACs are a tricky business to say the least, particularly in the media and entertainment industries, where Harry certainly knows a thing or two, having enjoyed a long career in Hollywood, is the CEO of MGM, so you better believe he's also
got some thoughts on that pending Amazon An acquisition. We'll be right back with Harry Sloan. Welcome back to the Strictly Business podcast where my guest is Harry Sloan. He's gone on from a successful Hollywood career to a second chapter. As a spack deal specialist both in and outside of the media business, I interviewed him on November four at
the annual Techtainment Conference at Loyola Law School. I want you to give your sense of what the spack marketplace is right now as we talk in early November, because when you look at the data, it looks at while undoubtedly saw an explosion in these deals, that burst was really contained of the first quarter. You could see the numbers have come down, although October seems to be yielding fresh activity. So walk us through what you're seeing with
the status this back market. Andrew Um, when we did DraftKings, we closed it in March of last year, in the middle of COVID March of there were about forties pacts. Today there's six Um. I think one thing has a lot to do with the other. I think success the DraftKings was the first big, very notice successful spac with the name brand, and I think that did trigger it. The six D spacts are looking for deals. Most of them won't find a deal. Many of them won't find
a deal. If they don't find a deal in two years, whatever amount of money they raised. In the case of the Draft kings back, we had four under million. The case of our last spact, which bot King Cobra works one seven billion. It all has to be returned to the investors, so the spact sponsor has two years now. Sometimes the deals are down in the eighteen months a last two years, find it company to acquire file the appropriate UH prison patients and disclosures that the SEC haven't approved.
Have the deal closed all in two years or money goes back. What do I think it's going to happen? With six hundred spects out there, A lot of them are not going to end well, uh, including the one that I think we're just talking about, which is the one acquiring the trump um agreement to launch uh social media or whatever they're actually trying to do. Well. We'll
get to Trump in a second. UM. What I'm curious though, is also it seems like correct me if I'm wrong, that there's been some regulatory scrutiny with the SEC starting to pay more attention people on the hill paying more attention. UM. Has that not had a chilling effect here as we look at the numbers and see that that big spike that deals from March seems to have petered out in subsequent months. Well, the reason they petered out has nothing
to do with the potential regulations. Potential regulations to to kicking in when the Biden administration took over, and also
as you alluded to the Senate. But the which you were showing on that chart, which is that there's so many fewer spacts right now being launched, was because there was way too much speculation going on in the spack world, and there was in order to have fifty or hundred spacks a month, the hunded I saw in one month, you have to have buyers, you have to have money to invest, and the banks were lending incredible amount of money to hedge funds. Hedge funds were investing it in spacts.
SPACs are all doing well, so they kept wanting to do that. It looked like easy money. But the more spacts there were, they more SPACs needed to find a deal. And when they actually find a deal, at that point, the investors in this back have the option of leaving their money in or taking it out. If they decided to leave it in, they actually have to come up with true capital as opposed to bank Yet anyway, there was crazy speculation going on there was other kinds of
speculation which came from the market being so overheated. That's why there's less SPACs. Also, you know, if you try to go after a company to acquire it and take a public and a spack and you've got ten others back competing, you start seeing out the company way. So it was the marketplace that has caused the SPAC speculation and the overheated market to slow down. The regulatory side
is another issue. And there's a bunch of lawyers here, um, and the congratulations Joe going to grade law school, Um, a lawyer point of view, the regulation, I think becomes interesting. What's going on the regulatory side is new SEC chairman. New SEC is appointed after Biden's elected, comes in at a time when there's a lot of concerns over spacts, the speculation I just talked about too much easy money
flowing around. If you remember in January and February, there was a lot of talk in the government about these retail trading brokers, robin Hood and all those stocks like games Stop and a m C that we're trading at crazy molecules. Because there was some exercise and democracy or some excuse for people's and stimulus checks or for whatever reason, craziness around retail trading. Retail investors started buying spects. That was all going on, and the SEC said, wait a minute,
we need to look at all of that. My view is that the SEC has announced several things that they want to look at with regardless of facts, none of which are the major issues they should be looking at. The SEC has said publicly, be aware of spects that have famous people. You know, there's a spect that the Shack has involved in. There's an expect that a Rod has involved in. There's fact that you know, be aware of that. Well, and what does that mean? Uh? The SEC has said we want to look at some very
complicated warrant accounting. Well, I mean we weren't accounting was very technical. All the lawyers and accounts they're looking at her thinking, okay, this is just paperwork. The real concern about SPACs is the trading that goes on in the SPAC shares itself based on rumors and you know, uninformative
announcements of deals that may or may not happen. And I couldn't have asked for a better example of what the SEC and and all the SEC lawyers need to think about, which has been demonstrated by this so called Trump's back. Um, all we've seen is a very general power point. There's almost nothing in there about That's back and what Trump's track record is and the other businesses and what's really in there. There's a promise that this spac is going to be able to launch social media
with with Trump. What does that mean? There's there's very there's no detail whatsoever yet that stock has a spack was training a ten dollars traded his eyes a hundred and seventy dollars. It's still fifty eight dollars a year, which is six x on where this back was trading when it was announced. Three hundred million shares traded the
first day, probably been five hundred million shares traded. Since this announcement or whatever it was, a league, twenty or thirty billion dollars has been invested in this stock at somewhere between fifty and hundred dollars a share. Now, if it doesn't work out, there's a lot of reasons that it might not work out. Not all of them do.
The stock goes back to ten and people lose that twenty billion dollars And I'm gonna guess whether it's Trump's supporters or whether it's just kids who are trading on these retail platforms. It's not a group of people who would be in any position to lose that kind of money. It's not Fidelity, Wellington Franklin Fund Capital Group, it's not these trillion dollar mutual funds. It's a lot of individuals, patriotic Americans who think they're doing something good for either
Trump for the Republicans. It's going to be a ship show if it falls apart. And that's the kind of thing the SEC should be looking at, not what they've announced so far. As far as Congress, we can get to that later if you want. Sure, Well, I guess what I'm wondering though, is given this frothy marketplace that you're describing, how does that impact your strategy, your approach.
You've just completed a seventh deal, but is you know, do you need to sort of sit back and wait till things calm down before you try an eighth or ninth. I definitely want to pay attention to the regulatory environment. I think all we have now out of the SEC ears two weeks about things they're looking at. There isn't anything they're looking at that would deter me or would defer those of you out there that are thinking about being involved in fact for wanting to do them. Um,
there's nothing going on. I'm other than they're looking into it in the Senate. Um, I don't smell that there's going to be regulations that make Trump that sorry, that makes sense, an audium slip that makes spects, um impossible. So no, I mean, I think we'll be okay. Um, I don't. I don't anticipate anything coming out of the regulatory side. I do anticipate a lot more sanity and less speculation amongst back investors, and therefore much less spects.
Will there be six hundred a year from now? No, will it be two? Will be a lot less, it will it'll be way less important than it is now. So let's go to the Congress side of this equation. Elizabeth Warren has been particularly out front. Um, certainly this is I feel like it's just the beginning in terms of the kind of scrutiny that's going to come from Capitol Hill. What do you think, Um, it's too early
to tell. Um, it's really more in the per view of the SEC to make sure that investors understand what they're getting involved in, which is a disclosure, which is like all the various documents, whether it's the S one which is an IPO document, or a SPOT which is
a merger, both are involved in this back. For those of you that are you know, looking at the technical side of this back begins as a regular way I p O and S one, and when it makes a deal to acquire company, it files an S four, which is a simple merger has to be voted on the shareholders. It's within those documents that the SEC has plenty of opportunity to make changes. But I don't anticipate changes they're gonna hurt that are gonna hurt legitimate, um honest SPAC sponsors.
As far as as far as the Congress is concerned, there's no reason right now to believe that there's any particular legislative action. Also, there's so much going on in other areas, you know, whether it's the build back America or whether it's the the infrastructure bail and means what the priorities in the in the Congress right now don't seem to be looking at regulating spects are really much
wall street regulation. God, it's interesting looking at your track record in the spack market because so many different kinds of companies. You started out with, you know, delivering WiFi, two airlines, the Indian satellite business, media plays. Uh, not surprising coming from you, but then you kind of went in some very interesting directions with sports betting, synthetic biology. What is it? You know, what is it in terms of what you look for in a company that makes
it a good spack target. Good question. Yeah, during the spack sterea, and I think maybe it's still the case today. There is a view among many people that companies are better off going public through this back process again by merging into US back as opposed to regular way I p O. You know, I don't feel that way. I think most deals are still better off going regular way.
I p O. If for no other reason that the spec sponsors we add friction, we take you a nice, healthy piece of the company for doing it, and if we're not adding credible value, it doesn't make sense to do that. Um, there are at least two categories that I would say that make more sense for a spect Let's let's talk about DraftKings. To start with DraftKings could not go public regular way, and it needed money. DraftKings could not go public regular way because on its own,
because its story would have been raised more money. Use it for marketing fandueling. DraftKings are being their brains out publicly. There's a view out there that just giving them more money is going to spend on marketing. They needed a different story. The story that made sense for them was a transformative acquisition to buy a company called sp Tech, which was their tech supplier, so they would be able
to save to the market. We're not going to compete on how much money we spend an advertising and marketing, how many commercials you guys all see right now on the on the World Series or on football. We're going to compete because we're gonna have the best products. We're
gonna have the best technology. We're gonna have in game betting, for example, where you know, if if I'm thinking of Aaron Rodgers right now, because the COVID bit of Aaron Rodgers, you know has a ball in the two minute drill, you can bet right during the game on whether or not he's gonna score a touchdown or a field goal. You can bet on on whether a kick to be successful, so products that would be good that how they were going to compete anyway. In order to do that, they
had to acquire sp tech. So what they were doing was two companies were going public at the same time. You can't do that as a regular way. I you know, you have to um, you have to have consolidated financials, you have to share operating history, you have to show the synergies. It would have taken your only way to take two companies public at the same time. In this case DraftKings and Specht thro uspact. Now basically this back just buy both companies, So a three way merger two
companies who want to get together. That makes sense in respect. The other one is what we did with Gego Synthetic Biology, and it's what we call a category of one company. So most companies are not category of one. Most company have several other businesses who compete with them. Whatever the industry is, whether it's automnosetails, whatever it is, there are many what you call cops comparables. So if you take a company public, you can value it based on its
performance against someone else. However, if you have a company, and this comes often often of the out of the tech world, which is we call category one. There is no one else doing what they're doing. There's no way to value them versus other companies in the market. Right if we were taking variety in public Andrew, we could value it against by Reporter, we could value against other publishing companies, of value against New York Times, Washington Post,
all these public companies, Synthetic Biology. The only company of scale out there is get Go Bioworks. So if you take it public regular way, the way a regular way i PO goes is the company goes down in the road show, it meets with investors, it sits down with Capital Group of Fidelity or Willington. It's been sporty five minutes going through its business and its valuation, and Thursday at four o'clock everybody has to share their car. Examput
comes by DAN. A spact doesn't work that way. The process of selling two investors a SPAC merger is much more involved. You go to the investors, there's no time limit, there's no forty five minute meeting. You can have as long a meeting as you want. You can have a follow up meeting, you can have a phone coll and
CFO DraftKings perfect example of this. When we took DraftKings public two years ago, there was there was only sports spending allowed in one state, New Jersey, but the Supreme Court had passed it had had invalidated the federal law which had prohibited sports betting and said no state by state can allow sports betting. So each state had to go through some kind of regulatory process. How long would that take? California, New York, Florida, Texas, the four biggest
states two years later, still don't have sports pidding. We may never have sports meeting in California. Depends on whether you think the influ onto the tribes who control betting and casinos are going to be able to prevent it. Florida it's the seminal of Youse. I mean, you don't know. Texas it's the it's the churches who are opposing it. So how does an investor decide two years ago, when only one state had sports betting, what was the value of a sports betting? How big is the business going
to be? We call the TAM total addressable market? How big a share is the draftings? So you needed someone in our case to put together projection. Okay, within one year six stays, here's one you think within two years of twelve stays. Here's what the business books of the maturity. You can't do that in a regular way i P. You can't make five year projections. You can't make one year projections because you take on liability. So in aspect you can provide much more information. You can give long
term projections. The investors don't have to believe them. They can say, you know what, let's have the CFO come in and see us. We think he's full of ship. We're not going to buy the stock. But you're able to go through a long process. And so for a company that's a category of one where it's a drafting or whether it's a game coincynthetic biology, or skills the company of skilled gaming, which is which is video games like the sports, but casually sports you can play against
other people for money. Those are companies. There's no other company like them. There's no cocks. They make sense to goose as back. We're going to take a quick break, but we'll be right back with Harry Sloan. And we're back with Harry Sloan, who's talking about spack deals. He's done out of his equal equity partner's outfit. Talking about the media business, you know, you are are far from alone in terms of people in the media world being
active in the spack space. We're seeing all sorts of activity from from people like uh uh tadd Bully, Joe I and Ello from CBS, gregma Fee from Liberty. What do you think it is about the media and entertainment space that makes it sort of spack friendly? Didn't know there's a lot of Kevin Mayer and Tom Staggs. Yeah, I think they've done I think they've done two SPACs. Todd just announced he's doing any vivid seats to think the Draft Kings may be invested in. Um. Yeah, Look,
I think SPACs are covering every aspect every industry. I mean there's a hundred biotech SPACs. A year ago there were no biotech spacts. Uh. SPACs have become the flavor of the month for biotech. Um, I think you haven't really become the flavor yet for entertainment. There's been a few deals. It's against my partner, Jeps, against him, my great partner for many years. Um. You know he has a background in entertainment. He was he ran CBS he ran Sony Pictures eleven years ago, and he had I
launched our first spac. We specifically said we were the first ones actually specifically said that we're targeting companies in the met We're all generalists, they're financial people, but we had both come out of the entertainment Industry's funny that we um. I was in my late fifties, he was in maybe his mid fifties. I've been running MGM at the time. He had been running something else, and and we had said to investors, we said, look, we'll find
a company, but we both run public companies. If something goes wrong, uh, you know, we could step in and run the company. And that was a terrible, terrible marketing approach because the companies we then want to acquire be worried, you know, would they with the founders and the and the CEOs lose their job because Jeff or I would actually we're trying to do it just to get a job for ourselves. So we got quickly off of that and never you know, even talked about it, nor haven't
jumped into any companies into the management. But we targeted media entertainment and what we said then this is two thousand eleven, we had said that traditional media entertainment, television, movies, cable telling, Asian satellite, all of that stuff, there was no great growth. The only growth in those days was going to be digital. It was one pot over two point. I don't know what it was. So we sent to
the investors and we raised that spect. We said what kind of deal you're looking for, and said, well, if it's in the US, there's nothing in traditional media that you could I p O, meaning that would have this kind of growth. So if we did something in the US, we would do something in what was then called new media digital media. However, if we're going to do traditional media, we'll do it outside the US and some of high growth market that hasn't been you know, over overbuilt already.
So we go to an emerging territory like an India or in Indonesia, and in those cases you could do satellite or cable, and ironically I've worked out that way. The first fact we did was a company called Globally Entertainment, which provided Wi Fi connections for airlines and content. So we bought the biggest beny that controlled content supply. The airlines had all the airlines and contract and a company that had the technology to provide Wi Fi via satellite.
So now you take WiFi by granted, you know, granted on airlines and you get all your movies that way. But ten years ago it was a very beginning business. So our first back, as we said, if we do something domestically this was mainly domestic, we would do something in new media. You couldn't get any more new media in two thousand and eleven. Then then WiFi of the airlines it's still rest very well established. Uh and technically if you're trying to sign on when you're on a flight.
And the second spectam we did actually we took a satellite TV company traditional media public but in India an emerging territory, so this traditional media is going to be a high growth emerging territory. In the US, it had to be new media. So it doesn't it doesn't sound as if you think, say, you know, SPACs could have a uniquele in reshaping a media and entertainment business that that seems to be going through some pretty big changes
right now. Um, you know, I think our next back, if we do one, um might look along those lines. I do think the cards are going to be reshuffled. I think there's gonna be some orphan companies that come out of these big mergers as they continue to go on. UM you know, an example would be the one of the great I p o s of this year was Warner Media was what was not word It was that Warner Music, which during the time Warner merger was an
orphaned asset. They didn't think much of you know, music industry in those days, and lend a lot and they bought it for like three billion dollars and they took a public this year for thirty billion dollars. You'd find something like that, an asset that out of one of these mergers that doesn't necessarily belong or you get a company like a T and T Time Warner where they're investing themselves, you know, Soldborner Media, for example, to Discovery.
There may be some opportunities. Those are also very very big deals, and you would need a very very big spac um and there are there aren't any right now. Are The biggest one was the one we had um Sore with one point seven billion. It did a fifteen billion dollar deal. As I may have mentioned earlier, the biggest one out there now is maybe a billion. They could do a five to ten billion our deal. Those big media deals could be bigger than that, so possible.
Particularly it's our aspect, which could probably raise a big enough fund to be able to do a bigger deal. It sounds like what you're describing with these potential orphans and the opportunities there spacks sort of step into the mold that private equity has been in previous years. They've they've been sort of the white knights that have rescued some distressed companies. Yeah, TPG came in and picked up
direct TV, right, Um, you're absolutely right. SPAC is somewhere between Late States private investment and I p O. So one thing that public investors don't like is these private companies,
especially in the tech world. Um, we saw this with with app Lovin, We saw it with Roadblocks recently, the last private round would be done in case the Roadblocks is like a four billion valuation by the time they did their I p O is forty, So in one year, the public investors had to pay forty billion dollars, whereas the private investors were investing in four and the public investors are saying, we need to get in sooner. Spac actually is a way to take those companies public sooner.
In the case of private equity, You're absolutely right, spack is an alternative. So if a company is looking to spin off an asset like Warner the Warner Music in those days, um or Direct to You was spinning off a q T, spinning off direct TV, they look at private equity, they look at selling it to TPG, as they did in this case, but they also look it's past. I'm also curious what you think of the fate that has uh the fallen MGM, which of course you used to run and now m Amazon could be scooping up.
Did you ever forst see that kind of acquisition When I was running MGM, I didn't see the tech companies, but they weren't in streaming because I I I only read MGM two through two thousand and ten. There was a period of time, though, I'm guessing it was about five or six years ago, seven years ago, when the tech companies came to Hollywood and they really did kick
the tires on MGM. They kicked tires on lions Gate, they the tires on Sony Pictures, a lot of the sort of you know, uh, standalone production and library companies. Apple was was in town. Amazon was in town. Google was in town. Microsoft. Remember, they all came through and for whatever reason, there were no deals. And I think what's happened is the more of these big platforms for streaming.
You know, So now you've got Apple and you've got this plus, you've got Netflix, and you've got Amazon Prime and you've got their amount of Plus and you've got Stars, and you know that there's a there's a shortage of content and if you don't have a historical library like Disney had, and even they didn't have enough, that's why they acquired Fox. You do need to look at the MGMs and Alliance Gates and the ponies, because there's just
not enough. There's not enough library, there's not enough bault, there's not enough deep library to fill the streaming platforms. So no, I didn't anticipate it when I was an MGM, was too early. I didn't see it take place when they kicked the tires five or six years ago and said no thanks. And I do see it being the
trend now. I mean, I I mean my opinion that the best TV library out there by far is CBS, and I don't know why Apple doesn't just buy that they or or or any or or Google if they decided to go back in streaming business, but they may not, or or Amazon. So I would I would think that, I would think Sony, I would think lions Gate all all our good ideas for them to acquire. And I think in two years you'll see one of those deals get done, maybe all of them with a tech cover. Yeah.
Now if Amazon gets turned down, I mean there's a possibility. The you know what happens with these mergers is those of you that I am I trust students. They're either assigned to the f TC, the Federal Trade Commission, or the d o J, the Department of Justice. And I think the Amazon acquisition of MGM is it f TC. And I think the FTC chairman did she write her master's, her doctoral thesis on breaking up Amazon. So and maybe
for that reason it's not there. Maybe I don't know where it is its d o J. But if that isn't allowed to take place, and I think it should, If that isn't allowed to take place, that would put a question mark around all this. But again, so nys TPS, lions Gate, MGM, you know, all of them should be consolidated into the big platforms. I don't see the big Standalon's so you see consolidation coming. No surprise there. What do you think of the so called streaming wars that
were enveloped in right now from Netflix on down? Uh? Did you ever foresee a time where the business would be in a position like this and and and how do you think it's going to play out? Uh? Well, did I ever think that the majority of people in the world would be watching all of their content on there, over the internet, whether whatever device, whether it's the computer
or whether it's the TV. I've only started thinking that probably when you started thinking that was just the last three or four years, when we realized that, you know, being able to watch shows whenever you wanted them without commercials, and all those advantages are just so clear. Um. I didn't think until the incredibly successful launch of Disney Plus that everybody would be doing it, or even then, everybody has to do it. Um, So I may have missed
that one. I wouldn't have anticipated it happening this fast and this fast all over the world. Is not just that these guys are cutting into the traditional networks ABC, CBS, NBC's audience, even though those players are off streaming. It's happening everywhere every one of the TV network stocks in the world, whether it's I t V and UK or Telesinko and Spain or anywhere in the world, every every traditional television, satellite, cable, everyone else's stocks just you know,
hurt um. So it's happened fast. Everywhere we're streaming has has taken over. You know, As far as what it would look like a what I anticipate what it would look like. I could not have anticipated the amount of new content. I could not have anticipated that we'd have a scenario now where Netflix is spending sixteen billion dollars alone every year on content. That's more than all four
networks combined, plus HBO and Showtime five years ago. And on top of that, Disney spending what ten or twelve billion, and Amazon spending ten billion, and Apple plus. I mean, it never could have anticipated that, you know, spending on production would go from fifteen billion to fifty or sixty
billion in the last several years. So you're you're well into this second career now in in spack Land, and I'm curious how you got here and what you learned in your Hollywood days that sort of led the way to where you are now. Well, look, I always like public companies, um my so called Hollywood days. I mean, the first company that we created and took to public was New World Entertainment five before most of these students
were born. That was a successful public stock. Uh and we sold it in nine eighty nine to run Proman. The next two sps broadcasting was TV Stations outside the US. Took that pub but sold it to KKR and Premier A two thousand five. And then I ran MGM, and I was working for private equity. And I can't blame it on private equity, but the company was so leveraged that when two thousand and eight came around in the financial crisis, you know, it had to be restructured. It
was a failure. Um and I didn't really like working for private equity. UM I did much better and I enjoyed it much more working at public companies. And uh So after MGM, it's now two thousand and ten. I'm you know, I think I was still chairman until the beginning of eleven or I forget what it was. But when I got through with that, I looked back at my career and said, I've had two public companies were
extremely successful. I've been in a private equity company that you know, it was really hard for me to constuate and wanted if I stayed there, would I have sold it for eight billion dollars to Amazon? I don't know, but it's not restructured like one point five so to me, Um, you know, I wasn't able to do what I would have liked to have done there. So then I hear
about SPACs in two thousand and ten. I'm told you could raise money on your good looks or on your on your traffic, on your track record, and uh, and buy a company. And I wanted to run another company I want to be involved in as another company. What were my options? I could dust up my resume and go to boards and you know, try and apply for a job. That's not very attractive. Um. I could try and buy a company, but the size company that I could afford to buy I didn't meet my appetite of
the kind of company I wanted to run. After MGM and SPS, A new world all that, and then I heard are these facts that you can raise write a bunch of cash and use that leverage it up. You could raise two three we raise too edit on our first one by a billion dollar company, and even wouldn't necessarily run up, but could have control over it. And that's what attracted me to it. It was looked at me to be the best options. And I like public markets.
I like public public markets because if investors don't like what you're doing, they sell your stock and they go away. UM. In private actor, if they don't like what you're doing, they sell the company right out from under you, or they fire you. I just don't think it's a management friendly UM model. I think it's a fair weather model. I think when things are going well, um, they're looking
to sell the company. When things aren't looking well, they're firing the management and looking to a dump the company. So I just, you know, public just much much more attractive to me to control public companies, where I think you get a fairersh jac from relatively docile institutional investors. Got it one year from now. I'm curious if we're talking again, Uh, do you expect to add X number of new spack deals to the marketplace or you're you're just tending to the seven you've got going uh, give
us a preview. UM. As far as planning the seven I have going, you know, some of them have been acquired at the moment, there's only that's the ones that are going to DraftKings. I'm I'm vice chairman, lead director Skills, I'm director Income the director. So there's only three that I have an ongoing role with. The others have either been merged into another company, or they've been sold or
or something happened different with the company. UM. I think personally, I think personally a year from now, I'm too old to be, you know, out doing a job as a as a chairman or a CEO. And when we rang the bill two weeks ago with Ginko, UM, that was the first time in thirty seven years that I was at chairman or CEO of public company. So I think it's gonna be words. UM, I think it's gonna be putting deals together. But I think I've seen my last
chairman and CEO. The last back which I was chairman and CEO is probably the last one you know that active. This has been another episode of Strictly Business. Tune in next week for another helping of scintillating conversation with media movers and shakers, and please make sure you subscribe to the podcast to hear future episodes. Also leave a review in Apple Podcasts and let us know how we're doing