Larissa Padden 00:06

Hello and welcome to Cogcast, Cognito’s podcast, where we talk to journalists and media pros on everything that’s happening in the world of media and PR. I’m Larissa Padden, your host and a former journalist turned PR professional.

 

Hi, Megan, thanks for being here today.

 

Megan Leonhardt 00:24

Thanks for having me.

 

Larissa Padden 00:26

So as I always start on every episode, I wanted to ask you about yourself, your background as a reporter, what you’re focused on now, and how you found your way to your current beat.

 

Megan Leonhardt 00:37

Ah, well, this is a not totally straight path, but it also doesn’t have too, too many curves in it. I was a J-school student, so I graduated with a degree in journalism. Go, E.W. Scripps School of Journalism! Shout out.

 

But I graduated, and I am originally from Ohio, near Cleveland. I realized that there wasn’t a ton of opportunities for jobs in poor little Ohio. So I moved out to New York pretty quickly after school and actually started in legal journalism.

 

So I was working with a startup, and it was a great first job. It taught me so many different skills that I still use today. In fact, I was just training one of my coworkers on how to find cases in Pacer the other day. So all those years later—I won’t say quite how many years, but all those years later, this is still coming back to be helpful.

 

It was interesting, though, because I never really thought I’d find myself in financial journalism. And I feel like I hear that refrain a lot from financial and business journalists, right?

 

Larissa Padden 01:34

So do I. Myself included.

 

Megan Leonhardt 01:38

Right. I feel like I was the classic very good in English and language arts and history and policy and things like that. I was terrible at the math aspect of it.

 

And what I found was, now that I cover economics and macroeconomics. P.S. I also definitely did my micro and macro econ classes as summer school classes, because I was definitely afraid I was going to fail them. But it serves me well, all these years later, again, that it worked out. But statistics ended up being something that I use day to day, and I was actually pretty good at it.

 

So I don’t think it’s one of those things where you have to be studying what you are ending up going into. And I’ve covered a lot in the sort of financial space. I covered a lot with financial advisors for many years. I did business journalism, and now, as I said, econ.

 

So very fun. I love what I do these days. I’m such a data nerd, so this is a wonderful fit for everything that I do. And it’s a culmination of so many different skills that I’ve learned over the years, and I’m able to kind of parlay that into the day to day.

 

Larissa Padden 02:41

Isn’t it funny how that works, especially with finance? You never thought you’d be in it, and it’s always the people that are bad at math. I am not ashamed to admit I still count on my fingers, and somehow I was a financial journalist for 10 years.

 

I’m really curious, did you have—when you were in school—an area that you thought you were going to cover as a reporter?

 

Megan Leonhardt 03:02

Well, I think because I went to school for magazine journalism, which you could still do kind of specialized education at that point, I thought I was going to be a food and travel writer. Doesn’t everyone want to go and become a food and travel writer and get paid to eat amazing things and travel everywhere? Turns out there’s not a lot of staff writing positions, particularly coming out of the Great Recession, that were very much hiring for that.

 

So I did have to pivot, and I do want to give a shout-out to so many of the professors and folks that really did help along the way, because I think they were very thoughtful in how you position yourself in the marketplace.  So I was really encouraged, I think, more so than many of the folks that kind of came up with me, to go into trades and to learn that business and do things in that area.

 

And for the first many years of my career, that’s where I was, and it was a really great place to be. When you end up sitting there and learning so much about an industry or a business or even a thematic kind of subject, when you’re talking to people who do this for a living, and trust me, they are not shy about telling you when you have it wrong.

 

Larissa Padden 04:14

Yeah, yeah. I always appreciate the sources that do that, though, because those are the ones I learn the most from. But the other thing I always tell people is “Take the job that is offered to you at the time. It doesn’t matter if you think you’re not interested in it, because you don’t know what you might find interesting.”

 

I started in finance and then moved to auto finance, which is even more specific, and I love the auto finance sector to this day. So I always tell young journalists, “Just don’t waste too much time looking for the perfect job. Just take a job being a reporter.”

 

Megan Leonhardt 04:43

Right. I think a lot of times finding a job in journalism is about persistence and a little bit of luck.

 

In my case, I wasn’t allowed to move up to New York, according to my parents, until I had secured a job. They did not want me being one of those kids that moves up, is working in a cafe as a barista and trying to get a full time job. So I had lots of friends who did that route, and they were moderately successful at it.

 

My parents didn’t have as much, you know, maybe it was that Midwest practicality, but they didn’t have as much faith that I was going to be able to pull that off. So I did get my job offered. It was really funny because, as I said, it was with a legal publication, and I don’t actually think they hired outside the tri-state area.

 

And so I turned in my application. I was very clear that I was living in Ohio at the time. It was on my resume and everything. I got past their extensive pre-qualification process. I think one of the ways that they were screening folks was actually taking part of the LSAT. And I thought, oh, I’m never going to get this job. I hated my com law class in college. So I was just like, yeah, this is not something I want to do. To your point about taking the job that’s offered to you.

 

And I get up, and I actually got an in-person interview. So I used all my frequent flyer miles that I had built up for a lifetime of my 21 years at that point, flew up to New York, very excited, bought myself a new power suit. I was, like, going to rock this interview. And I get to Union Square. That was their office. It was in this, like, beautiful loft. I sit down with the HR individual. She was lovely. She was probably one of the nicest HR folks I’ve ever worked with, then or since.

 

And we started the interview. And she’s like, “Okay. Well, I’m going to have you meet with the editor and all these folks.” And I said, “Okay, well, just so you know, I really have a hard stop around 5:30.” And she says, “Oh, sure, but why?” And I said, “Well, I have to catch my flight.” And she was like, “Flight? Are you flying home? Are you going on vacation?” And I said, “I don’t live in New York.” And she goes, “You’re kidding me.” And she goes riffling through and finds my resume, pulls it out, and she’s like, “Oh, my God, you live in Ohio.”

 

And it was just like that. And let me tell you, I get it now, living in New York for so many years. But it was kind of funny. And she was like, “Okay, well, I’m getting good vibes. So we’re going to continue with the interview process.” Everything went well.

 

After I got through talking with everyone, the sort of group huddled outside of the interview room, clearly talking about me. And they came back in, and they were like, “We’d love to offer you the job. We never do this, but we’d love to offer you the job. We can’t help with any moving costs or anything like that. But can you start in next week?” And I said, “Well, I’ve got to give two weeks’ notice, and I’ve got to find a place to live up here. But yes, I would love to take this job because it’s my dream to go do journalism in New York City.”

 

So it wasn’t my dream job. It wasn’t even close to being anything I thought I wanted to do. But it got me here. And at the same time, every job delivers so many different information skills and just things that you need in your day-to-day work that it ends up being really fruitful, even if the job ended up being something where I’m not pursuing legal journalism anymore. But gosh knows it helped me get other jobs along the way, too.

 

Larissa Padden 08:00

Right. And you have to start somewhere.

 

Megan Leonhardt 08:02

You have to start somewhere.

 

Larissa Padden 08:03

So one thing I noticed when I was looking up what you do at Barron’s is that you have multiple stories published on a single day. And maybe I’m naive. I thought the average was one a day. That’s what my quota was before I quit journalism.

 

So can you tell us a little bit about how that works? How many stories that you’re working on at any given time and how that impacts your reporting structure in terms of coming up with stories, meeting with sources, building stories?

 

Megan Leonhardt 08:29

Well, I think you caught me on a good day. I will say that my pace is erratic, and it drives some of my colleagues a little crazy because I do think that the goal is probably to produce about a story a day. We have some folks at Barron’s who produce five stories a day. We have some folks who produce a story a week. It really varies, and we have a lot of folks who are very concentrated in specific sectors and, of course, have the experience and knowledge to really back that up.

 

But I cover, as I said, economics, and so a lot of the time I am covering an economic release. And that obviously, depending on if we’re doing live coverage or not, ends up being multiple stories in a single day. If news breaks, for example, we’re having some legal cases that we’re covering at the moment. Whenever something is filed in the docket, you better believe that I have to be on that.

 

It just kind of depends. There’s sort of a strategy that I like to use where I probably have a plan to do a bit of a daily story, something that is hitting, is newsworthy. And then, of course, because it’s Barron’s, everything has to come with analysis. So it’s not just covering the news. It’s Barron’s take on whatever the news is and what this means for investors, what’s this meaning for the US economy, for the Fed, all of those things. We try to make sure that we’re providing that to our readers.

 

And then I kind of have a couple of medium-term stories. I sort of think of these as kind of weekly stories that I’m working on at any given time. And then there’s usually two or three long-term features, and those maybe cover stories for the magazine. Maybe they’re inside features. I usually am working on several chart-type of pieces where I’m looking at very specific pieces of data and blowing it out to try to figure out if this is part of the trend, if this is anomalies, things like that.

 

So we go very, very in-depth at Barron’s. I’m lucky enough that I get to really go nitty-gritty, and our readers are very interested in that. So I can write really, really wonky stuff, and it finds a home. And people email me, and they’re like, “I’m so glad you covered this.” And I’m like, “I’m so glad you read it.” It’s great in that respect.

 

So it is a little bit of a balancing act, right? I do think that I try to write more in the morning and then spend my afternoons, especially my late afternoons, doing a lot of my interviews and conversations. That tends to be just how my brain works. I’m a little bit fresher in the morning when it comes to coming up with creative leads. And the worst thing I’m very bad at is the headline or the kicker, things like that. I don’t know. My creative juices flow better in the morning, especially after a cup of coffee or two.

 

Larissa Padden 10:58

Well, speaking of the Fed and the economy, how is it being a reporter covering the economy in a government shutdown?

 

Megan Leonhardt 11:06

The last couple of weeks have been absolutely crazy. It’s been a weird kind of limbo period where I feel like it’s been a blessing. I’ve been able to cover many of those sort of longer-term trend pieces that I want to do that I never seem to have time because I’m covering the latest release. And then also a little bit worrisome because is the private data that we have on hand good enough to really compete with the sort of gold standard that we have from federal statistical agencies?

 

I mean, I think that the pandemic—pandemic, excuse me—the shutdown. Let’s go. I mean, the pandemic did this as well. But when we have these periods of uncertainty and things influx, the pandemic, the shutdown, I do actually feel like it proves how good the statistical agencies are at managing through kind of crises. So I am kind of having a bit more faith in them that they’ll be able to come through this and we’ll get some of that data that we’re missing.

 

Do I think that it’s going to be totally complete? No. I do think that we’re going to have to make do with maybe a more limited data set, some higher margins of error, things of that nature. But it is one of those situations where it’s been interesting. I don’t know that I want to go through another record-breaking shutdown anytime soon. But we all manage to keep busy, and that’s really the important thing at the end of the day.

 

Larissa Padden 12:28

Yeah. It’s funny you said pandemic because that’s what it reminded me of. I was still a reporter in the early days of the pandemic, but I was covering the debt markets, trying to talk to investors who are trying to interpret a market. They don’t know how it’s reacting to this global pandemic. So I would call my usual sources, and they were just like, “I can’t talk to you. I don’t have time to talk to you. I don’t even know what’s going on.”

 

Were you stressed about finding stories? How did this impact the way that you were kind of story mining?

 

Megan Leonhardt 12:54

I was a little concerned, I think, in the early days, particularly when we missed the first jobs report. But then it was interesting because when I started talking to my sources about what they were watching, they ended up becoming huge resources for me in learning about new data sources, some of which I knew and some of which were a little bit less familiar to me. And it was a lot of finding and figuring out what those benchmarks were. How do you read these new data sources to deliver accurate insights to our readers and try to put this into perspective?

 

I feel like, for example, ADP became such a big, important must-watch type of data release. And before this, I mean, I always watched ADP, but it was definitely a secondary by a long shot compared to the BLS jobs report. And I can’t tell you how many times I’ve written in stories about how ADP doesn’t accurately predict what we’re going to see in the monthly jobs’ reports. But it was interesting to sort of see a lot of folks step up to the plate, too.  We actually ended up getting a lot of firms say, “We have this internally, and we use this for our purposes. But if you’re interested in it, we’re happy to share it.”

 

So I think I started hearing from folks like Vanguard and others who actually have labor indicators based on who’s paying into their 401ks, which is kind of a really unique way to look at this. And I think this is getting a little bit at how we may need to reframe the conversation around statistical data in the 21st century.

 

Because traditionally, we’ve always really relied on survey data. Well, everyone’s a little busy these days—businesses, investors, regular old consumers. We’re getting inundated with surveys. I can’t tell you how many surveys I get on a regular but asking for my opinion surveys. And we notice that response rates are going down because people just don’t have time, nor do they really always have the inclination to respond to these surveys.

 

So how do we get the data in new ways that’s maybe more accurate, more reliable, and maybe even more timely than what we’ve been doing in the past? And I think this is a lesson for both investors, reporters, and even Fed officials.

 

Larissa Padden 15:15

That’s interesting, because we’ve told clients again and again, the number one thing that reporters want is data. And it sounds like this created a little bit of an opportunity for kind of “alternative data” to be utilized or discovered. And that would be interesting to our clients who are always trying to get their data in front of people.

 

Megan Leonhardt 15:33

100%. I find that the pitches and the information that I respond to more frequently is usually something around new data in the subject line. That almost guarantees that I will open your email. I may not like what I find once I do open it, but that’s a story for another day.

 

Larissa Padden 15:54

It’s funny, because now everything’s about the government shutdown. Before that, it was a big focus on jobs. Before that, tariffs and consumer spending. But is there a trend or a story within wages or housing or inflation or something that you feel like isn’t getting enough attention right now?

 

Megan Leonhardt 16:09

I think there are so many stories that are not getting enough attention. It’s interesting you mentioned all of those subjects. I feel like AI is actually just beating us all over the head at the moment.

 

Larissa Padden 16:20

AI fatigue.

 

Megan Leonhardt 16:20

What are the implications for the labor market of AI? What are we doing? How is this working? All of that good stuff. We’re all totally fascinated by it, myself included. I do play around with Gemini and other tools that we’re allowed to use at work. We do not use AI to write our stories. And that has been mandated.

 

Larissa Padden 16:41

Author updated.

 

Megan Leonhardt 16:41

Yes. And nor would I.

 

Larissa Padden 16:44

I think most reporters wouldn’t. I think we’re just writers.

 

Megan Leonhardt 16:48

We’re writers, but also you really do start playing around with it. And you realize how often it’s wrong that I don’t have time to go back and check someone else’s work. So I would just rather do it right the first time around.

 

In terms of stories that I think are kind of interesting, I really like consumer stories and consumer health stories. Financial health. Obviously, that’s leaning a little bit further back into my background. But I still find them to be utterly fascinating.

 

I also think that we need to get a better handle on what’s going on with small businesses. Again, it’s an area that I’ve written about a lot, and it continues to fascinate me. I find small business owners to be the most interesting and engaged folks you will ever spend time with. They are wonderful, but they’ve really been struggling over the last couple of years.

 

In fact, I would argue that the economic headwinds that consumers have faced have been worse for small businesses. We’ve sort of seen consumer sentiment and small business sentiment vary a bit this year. It’s been kind of volatile, but it hasn’t been great. And so I do wonder, when we have this sort of static economy that we’ve been in, what does that mean for the small businesses? And is that where the cracks are going to show up first if we do end up kind of in a situation like that?

 

Larissa Padden 18:02

Interesting. Your beat does have some kind of natural guidance to it in that it’s dictated a little bit by economic activity. And there’s a lot of sources that can talk about that and want to talk to reporters about that. So what do you look for in a source, and what makes it into your story when you talk to someone?

 

Megan Leonhardt 18:20

It depends on the story, I think. When I’m doing some of my daily stories, I’m looking for folks that can get to me pretty quickly. I need reactions quick. Because when we’re doing the consumer price index, when we’re doing the jobs report, those are live coverage files. And so I am rapidly trying to make my way through all of the data in the report and then also get reaction and bring in additional insight.

 

I think the deeper you can go in the analysis on the first take is super helpful. Sometimes I feel like I get folks who come to me, and they’re like, “CPI was great, and it’s a boon for investors.” I’m like, “Yeah, the market told me that 20 minutes ago.” So those can be less helpful. I appreciate the feedback always, but it is one of those situations where really fast analysis is what is truly useful.

 

When it comes to longer pieces, as I said, I do the sort of medium and long-term. And some of those long-term pieces are months in the making. And so I usually am talking with sources 60 days out from when I publish.

 

One story I was working on earlier this year was four months. And I kept having to tell people, “We’re talking now. I don’t have a due date for this. And I guarantee you that because it’s evergreen and we’re kind of a weekly news magazine in some respects, this may get pushed off the cover or it may get held. So just be aware that this is not coming out tomorrow, and I may come back to you for updates or things like that.”

 

Most sources are very generous about that, but I think there is a little bit of a frustration sometimes that can emerge. And so I would urge patience sometimes. It does tend to be a little bit. And I do try to be very clear when I’m talking to folks. “This is for today. This is for this week. This, I don’t know when it’s going to go up. It will go up, I promise. You’re not talking to me in vain, but it’s not immediate.”

 

Larissa Padden 20:13

That is an interesting thing I think we don’t talk to our clients enough about, or maybe we do and I don’t. But that reporter’s time is so valuable in terms of, you know, they’re trying to talk to as many people as possible while reporting all these stories and then move on the next day to the new thing. That they’re not trying to waste their own time or waste conversations that they have.

 

And stories do get scrapped sometime, but I think the majority of reporters try to figure out a way to use that elsewhere so that they’re not, you know, going out and starting from scratch also. And they didn’t just waste an hour of their time and somebody else’s time.

 

Megan Leonhardt 20:45

Exactly. It is tough. I’ve had to pivot on stories, but by and large, I feel like what I end up talking to a source about does make it into print somewhere. But it is tough. And as I said, I just urge a little bit of patience on those kind of things.

 

Larissa Padden 21:02

So this is the number one question that I ask that people love. Can you estimate for me how many pitches you get in a week?

 

Megan Leonhardt 21:09

I think I probably get… Well, my email count at this point on a day-to-day basis is over 100. And it’s funny because that’s not as high as it has been at other publications. So I sort of feel blessed in some respects that I am a little bit walled off in some cases.

 

But that said, some of that’s junk. But I would argue that on a day-to-day basis, I’m probably fielding 20 to 25 good pitches that I do need to respond to. And so times five. Or people who email me on Saturday and Sunday, God bless you all. Yes.

 

So it is a significant portion. I do think sometimes sifting through what is good and what I can never use. And I do get a weirdly strong amount—you can just guess by the stats there—of pitches that don’t apply to me. And sometimes I’m able to pass them on to colleagues, but a lot of times they’re really focused on things and beats that either I don’t cover anymore or I’ve never covered.

 

I can’t tell you how many gift guide emails I’m getting right now. That’s not—I’m so sorry to all of the gift guide emails, but I wish I could cover them. I wish I could accept the samples. My goodness. The best part, I think, about being an influencer is all the samples you get.

 

Larissa Padden 22:29

Free stuff, yes. So you kind of answered my next question, which is do you respond to pitches? But in those group of good pitches that you get in a week, what stands out to you? What gets you to respond?

 

Megan Leonhardt 22:43

Well, as I said, the idea of new data, fresh data, something of that nature in the headline is really helpful because I cover so much of the economic landscape. Outlooks are very useful to me. And then specifically, I guess when I talk about the number of pitches that I get, that’s not on a week or a day that I’m having an econ release.

 

So when I have a jobs report or a CPI, that number, even of good pitches, is really over 100. I do get inundated, especially in the hour or so after the pitch or after the announcement comes out of the data. So I think when it comes to the breaking news stuff, I do find it helpful for someone to put in the subject line, like, “This is my takeaway.” If you can come up with a nice catchy soundbite, that is always useful. I realize that this is 8:30 in the morning. Folks may have not had their coffee. So sometimes being creative, a little struggle.

 

And when it comes to longer-form things, I don’t get most of my stories from pitches that I receive. And I think that’s a little frustrating for folks to hear because it’s hard then. They’re like, “How do you get in front of you?” And a lot of times it is in the conversations that I have with folks. And I’m very happy to take meetings and talk. I do attend a lot of different events and roundtables to try to hear what people are saying.

 

Because it’s those sort of one-off aside comments that really tend to pique my interest because it’s not something that I’ve heard a thousand other places. And that’s really what I’m going for. I’m going for the contrarian, the kind of offbeat thing that then I can explore and turn into potentially a really big feature.

 

I mean, this is a lot of, too, what I do is I look at trends in data sets. I’m not getting sent data sets by a lot of folks. Not to say that I don’t get them. I do occasionally get them. But these are usually coming from academics. They’re coming from associations who are deep, deep in the weeds. And so for the average client, I’m not getting a 40-page Excel spreadsheet that I can really sink my teeth into.

 

Larissa Padden 24:53

Right. One thing that I tell clients, too, is that you’re going to be competing with so many other people they’re talking to saying the same thing. So how are you differentiating yourself? So sometimes it’s the way you deliver your message as well, especially when you’re doing a longer-form story where your writing can be a little more colorful.

 

Megan Leonhardt 25:08

Absolutely. And even the shorter pieces. I think color is incredibly important. Especially when we start getting into the age of AI and things like that.

 

I mean, I did have a good source of mine recently tell me that he’s been using AI to help him put together his points. And I’m like, “Yeah, I can tell. It sucks.” He was just like, “Oh.” He’s like, “But it’s great. It’s so easy.” I’m like, “Yeah, there’s a reason. It’s not good. I haven’t been quoting you of late because you’re not delivering anything that’s usable.” And so I think he got a little upset with me.

 

Larissa Padden 25:43

Well, maybe it’ll help in the future.

 

Megan Leonhardt 25:46

I hope so.

 

Larissa Padden 25:47

So Barron’s has a podcast. And you’ve hosted before. And you also have Barron’s Roundtable, a TV program. Can you tell me a little bit about the TV program? Because I know you’re a regular on there. And your thoughts just on the bigger evolution of new media and how so many publications have to have some form of multimedia. And third part, how does Barron’s differentiate what content goes where when there’s so many different mediums?

 

Megan Leonhardt 26:12

Oh, those are all good questions. So I do appear on the Barron’s Roundtable. It airs on Fox Business because remember that our parent company is News Corp. So there’s some synergies happening, corporate synergies happening there.

 

But the Roundtable is a very different experience than actually my day to day. I am there as both an economic reporter but also I moonlight as a markets and investing reporter. So I sometimes put on my stock hat and things like that. Or quite frankly, I get my colleagues to give me a little bit of a download before I go on TV and try to give me a little bit more background sometimes. I do a lot of my homework on that particular show because it is a little bit more outside of my area of expertise.

 

But for that, when it comes to TV, I think it’s not long-form. I think that’s the key takeaway. So everything has to be very snappy. It’s got to be pretty pithy. And you need to deliver something for an audience that is not an investing audience by nature per se.

 

So, yes, the Fox Business audience is a very educated, wonderful readers and viewers. But they don’t necessarily want the same level of in-depth reporting that I would bring to a regular Barron story. So some of it is, I would argue, like Barron’s light. And we break down very complicated topics sometimes to make it a little bit more understandable to the average investor, the average viewer.

 

When it comes to the podcast, it’s the exact opposite, if you will. So when I host, I usually end up bringing on some of my favorite economists, which is very fun. And we have really in-depth conversations. It’s very similar to some extent for our Q&As that we run in print. And those end up being 1800-word interviews. These are not your quippy, short Q&As. They are very, very hard-hitting. We really delve into things. We try to get some interesting nuggets on how they analyze and how you approach doing things.

 

So that is kind of a bit of both ends of the spectrum. And then I think my day-to-day writing kind of sits in between of those two.

 

Larissa Padden 28:15

Interesting. So last question, and you’ve been so generous with your time. Your podcast, the TV show, who would be your dream guest and why?

 

Megan Leonhardt 28:27

I really do like interviewing Fed officials and academics, which do sometimes go hand-in-hand. So I have been very lucky to interview some of the Federal Reserve officials that are currently serving.

 

I don’t actually think that I would like to do as much with Powell, Fed Chair Powell. He is leaving us, sadly, in May, and I can’t stress enough how difficult his job would be. But he’s also a very difficult interviewee. I’ve watched many of my colleagues and compatriots go up against Jay. And he really does stick to his script, and I admire that. But also it’s really tough for a journalist to try to break through someone who’s had that much amount of media training and also is very much aware that his message and his words can move markets.  So I think that is something that I’ll leave to folks that maybe are better prepared than I.

 

But I honestly just like talking to people, so I am always happy to have conversations with pretty much everyone. One of my favorite things is when I’m doing a big piece and I do have to like dive into sectors, field trips and going out and having those interactions with the small business owners, the consumers, the folks that are really on the ground and making the economy work, as you will, ends up being honestly sometimes the most rewarding.

 

Larissa Padden 29:50

Well, thank you so much for coming on, and hopefully you’ll come back one day.

 

Megan Leonhardt 29:53

Of course. No, thank you for having me. This has been very fun. We’ve gone very, very deep into all of this.