Alexa Binns 00:04

Earnest Sweat 00:13
UI is so great to have you on today. Thanks for being on. No problem, no problem. So during our prep conversation, I really enjoyed just hearing your global background, like being born in Seoul and raised in Budapest, and then later coming to the US for school. I was wondering, how did those experiences have really shaped you as a person, and then also as an investor?

Yuri Lee 00:45
Yeah, that’s a big question to start with. But yeah, I mean, obviously it shaped a ton of things that come to mind, though. One is just like the deep belief that talent can really come from anywhere, you know, all corners of the club, like all backgrounds, like all those things. And I think for me, like when I evaluate founders or GPS or just people in general, it’s a good reminder to think about what people have accomplished relative to where they’ve started. I think, you know, I think in the context of founders, for example, like, you know, a founder who started in a different country and came to the US is just going to have a different experience than somebody else who may have grown up in the US. So, like, things like that. And so I think about that a lot when I’m evaluating people. The other thing is, I think, like, it really did give me the love for technology. Like, I think technology is such a democratizing force growing up, like when I was a kid and when I was a teenager, most of my friends that I made were actually online, like through video games and through forums and things like that. And so it was just like, such a positive force in my life. And, you know, made it available for me to make friends anywhere. And when you look at founders today, like people can build anything with software, and AI more and more. And so just, I think I have, like, the super positive, I would say, like tilt or like perspective on, like, what technology can do for people in society, which I think you kind of need for venture anyway.

Alexa Binns 02:22
So based on that love of technology, does that translate into some of the areas that you focused on, specifically when you were in the VCC, or where you continue to like to focus? Do you see those areas of interest?

Yuri Lee 02:36
Yeah? Some Yes. Some No, I think so when I was at IVP, I spent time across everything. Like IVP is a generalist firm, but one of the areas that I spent a lot of time in was consumer, actually. And so, you know, I kind of alluded to some of my background in consumer. Personally, I also was a game developer before, and so I spent a lot of time, you know, with consumer founders, and then I think broadly, just like user experience, I think is something that it made me really appreciate and care about when investing. But at IVP, I mean, spent time across both application layers and just broad, like enterprise software as well.

Alexa Binns 03:19
So yeah, are you feeling a shift with the SaaS couple ups? A lot of people are sort of saying, Oh, I’ve always been a consumer too, or like, and we’re looking at the consumer now too. Or have you been noticing this trend? And you’re gonna say like, this, I emoji.

Yuri Lee 03:41
I think I actually feel like the cons, I think consumers are still pretty non consensus. I mean, maybe it’s because it’s coming back a little bit more, but from my conversations in the last, you know, whatever recent months, like everyone wants to do deep tech or whatever, whatever you want to call it, but you know, things that are adjacent to AI, but not software. So whether that be investing in, like, the picks and shovels, like, like, all the way down to like energy and power conductors, like all these, you know, all those sorts of like, adjacent physical industries, yeah,

Earnest Sweat 04:19
It’s fascinating every moment. I’ve been in this industry for the last almost dozen years, we find new four letter words like, oh, you can’t say consumer. Or you can’t say SaaS, now you can’t say when I was starting out, they’re like, Oh, you do vertical SaaS, Oh, you do verticalized. That’s so disgusting, but it’s funny, because we know things are cyclical, and you have to have conviction and kind of see where things are going and things are ever changing, especially with AI, the technological shift. So I’m curious from your seat and. As now, you’ve known the tricks and tips that you know VCs have done in the past. What is it like? How does that shape your view as an allocator now?

Yuri Lee 05:13
Yeah, I think for me, one of the biggest things is, I think a lot about the underlying portfolios and companies that are in venture books, probably more than the average LP. I mean, part of it is because I’m not as good at some of the things that probably more institutional LPS we’ve been doing for a long time are like portfolio construction and thinking about those sorts of things. But I spent a lot of time on, you know, portfolios. Like, I don’t just take marks or things as they are, right? Like, thinking about underlying things like, what is the quality of that business, like, you know, metrics, and how those might be relevant to one business but not not another, like, those sorts of things. And so evaluating portfolios in the like investing lens of like how I would as a growth investor has really helped me as an LP, yeah,

Alexa Binns 06:08
What was the sort of deciding factor for you moving from the VC side to the LP side? What are you doing now at your new job?

Yuri Lee 06:16
So for me, the move was really about building something so TMRS is a large institution, but we’re building something new within that institution, which is a really unique and privileged position to be in, where, you know, TMRS is a $50 billion fund, and so we’re large, but we’re not so large that our checks don’t matter. Or rather, our checks are large enough that they matter, but they’re not so large that we can only invest in, like, a, you know, a very small group of folks. And so that was really unique. And part of what we do is, you know, we are investing in funds, but they were also building out this CO invest slash direct program. And so getting to build that part out just sounded really fun and like a new challenge that I wanted to take on

Earnest Sweat 07:06
How did you approach the kind of like, you know, once you got the role, like, where do you even start? And the reason I asked that is, we have so many allocators who are listening, who are presented with starting a venture or private equity book. And I think, you know, your lessons learned could probably be really appreciated, totally.

Yuri Lee 07:41
So the high level, the high level mandate to like the context, that a little bit TMRS is a 50 billion, roughly $50 billion trust. Of that, about 3 billion of it is allocated towards venture and growth, and it’s a growing portfolio. So for contacts. TMRS historically had a very conservative portfolio construction. So like, even, like, up until, I didn’t 2010, or something, it was mostly fixed income. And so we’ve been growing private equity as a portion of the portfolio. And so 3 billion is sort of like the end state that we’re trying to get to on the venture and growth side. And so we have, you know, several 100 million to deploy into venture and growth each year, writing 10 to $100 million checks. And that was kind of like the high level mandate that we were given, like, hey, like, we need to. We’re growing the private equity portion and the venture and growth portion. On the fun side, what that actually looks like from a portfolio construction perspective. So there’s two sorts of buckets that we think about. One is the early stage side, and then the second is multi stage slash growth. The multi stage and growth is going to be larger checks, fewer managers. Early Stage is going to be smaller checks, more managers, and the growth side provides what I would consider like positive venture beta. So like most of you know, these multi stage managers aren’t going to be 10x funds, but hopefully you’re kind of capturing like, what is like, top quartile, like, good like, hopefully more reliable types of returns. And then the early stage side, you’re getting a little bit more variance, but hopefully you’re also being able to capture some of these, like, really outlier funds that are going to be super creative to the overall returns.

Alexa Binns 09:35
And for the earlier stage folks, a lot of the people listening in the show are emerging managers in fundraising. What’s the spiel like when you hop on a meeting with them? What are they going to hear from you? So that they

Yuri Lee 09:50
Can I come prepared? I think for us, like we are in this net new adding mode, right? Like we’re trying to have more early stage exposure. And so that’s, that’s one which not everyone is right. Like, I mean, when I talk to a lot of LP friends, there’s a lot of folks who aren’t adding dollars on ventures. The second thing is, we want to focus on the early stage side. We really want to focus on folks that are having outlier ideas. Like, I think right now there’s a lot of consensus in venture so, like, if you look at a lot of venture portfolios, like multiple managers are in lots of different ways, are in the same names. And so even though you have multiple managers, you’re actually getting exposure to the same companies, like, over and over. And so folks who have, like, a differentiated perspective. And then, therefore, if a differentiated portfolio is something that we’re really looking for, and then thirdly, like, the way that I evaluate managers and think about them is in the context of one, can they really articulate, like, the differentiation that they have? So whether that may be sourcing, picking or winning. Like, what is your sort of edge, and then how do you translate that into your fund strategy? So, like, I think about it, like, product market fit. Maybe this is because I was a venture investor before, but I think surprisingly, a lot of managers don’t have product market fit where the product that they’re selling doesn’t match the edge that they have. So, for example, like, if you have, if your edge is, you have, like, really great access to technical AI talent that’s young, and you’re raising, like, a $400 million fund, and you’re going to put a half of it into growth stage companies like that probably isn’t going to match, like, what you you know, what your edge is. And so that’s, that’s something that I think about a lot when, when evaluating managers,

Earnest Sweat 11:47
you mentioned the framework of sourcing, picking and winning. Yeah, I personally, I think that those three have their importance really depends on kind of like the edge of the person and who they are and what they do, but then also even just like where we are in eras. And so which of those three do you think are most important for the early stage managers to be looking at? And then what which three do you think are the most important for those kind of more established later stage firms, yeah,

Yuri Lee 12:26
So in the early stage, I do think sourcing or seeing the right opportunities just generally tends to be the most important. Like, if you’re just not seeing the right opportunities, you’re not going to get to invest and so excuse me, like that that is probably the most important. And then winning, to me, is just converting that access into ownership. And so probably those two, I would say, are more important than picking, I think maybe some early stages right? I don’t know if you guys would disagree with that, but it’s so often that, you know, people think, like, okay, like, this is like the best idea, or this is the best team. And then, like, a few years later, you find that your portfolio was very different than what you expected would be, like the great companies versus the not so successful companies. And also part of it there is, like an element of luck in it. So I think those two are probably the more important ones. And then for the multi stage or more established managers, I do think picking does end up becoming a lot more important. And you know you can definitely pick wrong in the growth stage, and if you pick wrong many, many times, then you know your portfolio isn’t going to be great. And also, like when you pick, like an art like, part of the art of picking is also being able to size correctly, right, like you’re, it’s, it’s there is like an element of winning and making sure you get the ownership that you want. But also, like being able to double down on things that you like, really believe in, and art you believe are going to have outside returns is a part of picking too. So I think that becomes more important as you get later down the funnel.

Alexa Binns 14:03
Now that you’re receiving these pitches, is there anything where you just realize, oh, man, GPS, don’t get my job like they are. So they’re just like coming in here hot, rattling off their strategy. Is there something that they’re kind of like missing, that you’re like, you know, like, what I need is actually x.

Yuri Lee 14:30
I don’t think there’s one unifying thing that people miss, like, oh, like, I see everyone misses XYZ. But I do think that in general, GPS tend to have, like, a relatively rehearsed pitch, I would say, and so, like, what that ends up doing is, over time, almost all pitches sound basically that, like, very similar where they’re, like, going out, okay, they’re. Saying, you know, first this is, like, my background, and then here’s my portfolio. And then, you know, this is how I think, what a mess and so, like, it ends up being, like, all sort of similar. And so what I end up having to look for is like, Okay, did this person say something, did they have a unique insight, or did they say something unique that was different than everyone else. So I would say, I would encourage more of approaching each conversation as like a different, as a different conversation and I think the other thing too is, for me, like I really care, to talk about the companies this is, this is my personal bias everyone else. But I really care to talk about the companies. Like, why did you invest? Like, how did you win that founder? Like, all these sorts of things. Because that tells me the most about how that person thinks about investing, more than some of the kind of, like, rattle off the facts part of it. But I think a lot of people tend to think it’s easier to just kind of index on, sort of the facts of what’s going on.

Earnest Sweat 16:04
Yeah, yeah, just kind of like going through the DDQ checklist and getting those answers. Are there any other questions or areas you’d like to really dig into that you feel like you get a real perspective on the differentiation, or if you want to really invest in this fund manager, yeah.

Yuri Lee 16:25
So I mean outside of the outside of the companies. So I mean maybe going back to that framework of sourcing, you know, picking and winning, there are, like, a few sort of differentiators that I that, like, I’ll look for in those individual areas. So for sourcing, for example, like, you know, does this person have, like, one differentiator could be, does this person have a proprietary network that they have access to that no one else has access to? So, like, that’s something that I’ll dig into with them, but then also through reference calls and understanding, like, where they are in the ecosystem. Another thing could be like, within sourcing. So, like, one is like, proprietary access, but another could be like, are you seeing the steel before everyone else?

Alexa Binns 19:31
So a lot of our listeners have not had an institutional fundraise. Could you give them a couple insights into the process, like, yeah, what’s going to be different working with a pension totally.

Yuri Lee 19:47
So pensions have some requirements that are set by, you know, state law, or just generally, like they’re governed by the like, state. It’s, you know, compliance and regulatory and these sorts of mandates. And so that creates some unique challenges on the legal side of it, where, you know, there might be side letters or things like that that are something just to be aware of. And then often, pensions will work with a partner to outsource some of the diligence. And part of it is outsourcing, but then also part of it is like auditing the work that you’re doing. And so often, we don’t do this for every manager, but often they’ll have an IDD partner and an odd partner who will independently, also sort of verify the work that we’re doing internally as a team, and so just being aware of, I guess, those three dynamics, the legal slash compliance side of it, and then the odd IDD dynamics, which just end up taking a little bit more time and are a little bit more complicated than maybe some of the other institutional investors out there or non institutional investors out there, is good to know

Earnest Sweat 20:58
UI Before we continue, for our listeners that may not know what is IDD and odd?

Yuri Lee 21:05
Oh, sure. So IDD just stands for investment due diligence, and odd stands for operational due diligence. So IDD is kind of what we like, the bread and butter of what we do. So all the things that I talked about of you know, how do you evaluate a fund manager? But then we’ll have a third party, sort of independently, be doing that alongside us. Again, like not every pension does this for every manager, but that is a you know process that exists. And then odd operational due diligence is basically making sure that the fund that you’re setting up is an entity that is set up for success that you know, can interact with institutions, whether that be, you know, controls around, how do you think about, you know, managing your cash, like, managing your organization? Like, do you have the right to cyber security? Like, have you thought about the risks you know that just come with operating a fund,

I wanted to learn that you mentioned it earlier that you also have part of the venture strategy as a co investment practice. Could you talk about how it fits within the overall venture strategy and kind of what the mandate is?

Yuri Lee 26:20
Yeah. So over time, our goal is to move towards 5050, funds and CO invest in such trucks. So that’s actually pretty, I would say that’s a pretty aggressive portfolio construction. But granted, it’s over time. It’s not necessarily all today. The purpose of CO investing in the portfolio, there’s a couple things. One is, it blends down fees, right? So that’s something that practically just helps with returns. The second is, we can double down on winners, where, I mean, a lot of venture portfolios, it is actually like there’s one or two companies driving the whole value. And so if you’re getting additional exposure to those that hopefully also drives returns. And then third is it allows us to be more offensive in terms of like points of view that we have on where our portfolio is lacking and filling those gaps. So if we think, hey, like we’re really missing this portion of AI, like we really have, we’re underexposed here, like, we can, we can additionally double down on some of those themes. And so that’s, I would say, those are the three things that, you know, we think about when co investing is great. The flip side of it is right, like, it’s more riskier. You’re trading sort of higher potential for returns, for higher risk that if things don’t go well, then you’re overexposed. But, you know, obviously we think about that in the confines of how big we write checks and things like that.

Alexa Binns 27:52
Yeah, well, and it sounds like you’re a team that’s uniquely qualified to do this. You know, so few allocators are in their swim lane when they’re picking individual deals. Yeah, that’s your training.

Yuri Lee 28:07
Yeah, yeah. And I think, you know, when I think about what, like, how we’re building, you know, the CO investment program, like, the ideal scenario that I tell GPS about is we would love to partner with the best GPS and then especially, because our our portfolio is going to be tilted more towards the early stage as those companies sort of grow up. We would love to know about them ahead of time and then be in a position to invest in them in the later, you know, in those later stages. And so it creates, like, a really nice, like symbiotic barbell approach, essentially, where we can double down on, like a lot of our early stage investors winners. And then the other thing too is, you know, coming from a growth investing seat, like no investing that you do into a company is feasible. If you learn about the company, then you have to make a decision in 24 hours, like those in growth. In the growth stage that’s like, not maybe an early stage you can sort of pull that. You can pull that off. But in growth stage, that’s often not the winning formula for for investing in the best companies, and so being proactive about learning the companies in our early stage, or actually, just generally, overall in our portfolio, having a point of view on, like, what is our most exciting pipeline of of those companies? Like, what would we want to invest in, and then being in a position to when they raise already, having done some of that work like that, I think that’s kind of like the best practice of what you would do in a regular growth investing environment that we want to try to bring here.

Alexa Binns 29:46
Yeah, it does. Does that then translate to what evaluation entry points you need your managers to be getting into what you know, recycling strategy. Do they have, do you sort of have a perfect fit or things you’re looking for that then make them a good co-investor partner?

Yuri Lee 30:10
I think we are relatively early in this journey, and so there we don’t have extreme likes, we don’t have guidelines to that level of detail yet. I think generally, it’s been companies that are there’s been kind of two flavors of companies, one which is in that, call it 500 to $3 billion valuation range, where it’s still in that basically early growth, where we’re taking on a little bit more risk. We’re going to write smaller checks here and really just lean on our partners and kind of the work that they’ve done to invest and then we’ve also done more of the like true late stage flavor. So you know, think like the open AI’s of the world, like those types of companies where, where you’re honestly just independently underwriting all these companies, right? You’re not necessarily saying, oh, because all worksheet fees are in a lot of these themes, and so you’re, you’re thinking about them as an independent sort of underwrites and and so there’s, there’s been multiple flavors of what we’ve done, and I think there’s multiple types of CO investors that can be really good partners to us.

Earnest Sweat 31:28
One question I always like to ask when people have decided to do kind of the CO investor strategy is, what do you feel that you can learn from previous renditions, whether you were on the GP side and working with LPs, and there’s always this thought of like, how do you make sure that you’re top of mind to actually know about these companies, and you know the adverse selection bias, all those things. How do you think about building a program that can get beyond those things and actually reach the goal?

Yuri Lee 32:36
Yeah, I mean, adverse selection is something we think about a lot like, why do we have this opportunity in front of us? I automatically assume, if it’s like a Series A and it’s, you know, available to us, I’m just by default, I’m assuming it’s, it’s not the best opportunity, because, like, those are often very, very competitive, there’s the one thing that sort of mitigates that is the time component of it. And so that’s why, you know, when I was talking about in the ideal scenario we want to get to know these companies ahead of time, is if, if we have a point of view that, hey, this company is really promising, or we’re really excited about it, and we let you know we work to communicate that with our managers, then there might be a way to get allocation in the series, be that, you know, otherwise we would not have had had opportunity, if it was an inbound so, like, generally, like, those types of opportunities, we want to think about how, how do we outbound? Or how do we proactively try to get access, versus, hey, like, there’s, you know, a few million left over. And then my question is, why? And then the other thing is, so, so the time component, I think that’s actually, I think that that’s the biggest sort of gap in terms of LPs being able to build co investment programs, is just when you’re reacting to everything inbound, the average selection is really bad and and you just don’t have time to evaluate. The second part of it is information. I think one thing that I’ve been surprised by on the LP side is just how much less information you have relative to and especially in venture where a lot of times you’re underwriting founders, the best founders, like they’re not trying to do like 10 LP calls as well, on top of the you know, investor calls that they’ve done. And so there’s, like, that sort of component of not having as much face time with founders.

Alexa Binns 35:18
I love your point that you’re like, it’s only going to be one or two names in each fund. But how do you sort of pick those out, given that early signals can be a little bit messy, and

Yuri Lee 35:53
yeah, I definitely don’t think it’s clear. I mean, if it was super clear, then it would be really easy to be a growth or to just be an investor in general, I don’t, I don’t think it’s super clear. I think it’s about finding ways to systematically track them. So for example, like, you know, one thing we’ll do is quarter over a quarter, when we’re getting investor updates from our early stage partners, constantly tracking, like, what is, what they state, as, you know, the most exciting company in their portfolio, and then how do those companies perform over time? So, like, basically, there’s no, there’s no real shortcuts here. Like, it’s the same thing that you guys do, and it’s the same thing that growth investors do, we’re trying to track those so that we can narrow it down to a list of a few companies that we’re excited about. It’s usually not going to be okay. There’s this one company and we know, because if we did know that, we would just invest then, right or we would try to find a way to invest right there, yeah.

Earnest Sweat 36:50
How is the consensus seeking at the earliest of stages, or how does it feel just from outsiders when I talk to family offices, or even international kind of like fund to funds? The US market is becoming more and more kind of party round-ish, how does that impact? Kind of, how do you think and diligence for your co-investor program?

Yuri Lee 37:17
There’s two things.

Yuri Lee 37:19
One is, if the, if it’s the case that it’s a very consensus company, then we are trying to get there at, like, the lower price, right? Like, that’s, that’s kind of what you’re solving for, is trying to get there at the lowest, lower price, get the most average possible, right? Like, that’s what the managers are solving for as well. And I would say honestly, for those types of rounds, it’s like where we’re trying to solve for managers, as opposed to necessarily getting co invest one, because CO invest often is not available but, to like you don’t really know how those consensus companies will shake out. You’re just trying to build a basket of, like, or good co-invest or good consensus companies. And so that’s, that’s, that’s, I guess, like, that’s how I think about it. And then on the

Yuri Lee 38:16
on the manager’s side. So we want

Yuri Lee 38:20
to have two types of managers. Want to have managers who do consensus, and then we want to have managers that have non consensus ideas. And you want to have exposure basically to both and those non consensus managers, you want them to have sort of like different edges of access that aren’t just what everyone else is going after. And you’re kind of compensating for that risk with lower valuations on those companies. So I think you have a manager profile that you know can cover both of those and then on, on the early stage, on the earliest stages, you’re kind of, most people are more programmatically co-investing in these companies, as opposed to trying to be super, like a super picker. I mean, the investors, the primary, like the investors themselves, are having a hard time picking here. We’re all, we’re not going to pretend that we’re going to know more than them to be a super picker in that sort of field. That was a little round about.

Earnest Sweat 39:21
But, no, no, no, that, no. I appreciate, first of all, the, you know, candidness of like, when you’re picking a consensus, like, batch, you want to get the best consensus, and it’s no guarantee that they’ll all, they’re all too big to fail. Like, I don’t think people talk about that as much. And then appreciate your perspective on like, all right, how does that world now impact what you look for in different managers, from the kind of archetype of differentiated, non consensus managers? Are there certain strategies you’ve been surprised you haven’t seen? More of

Yuri Lee 40:03
I mean, the thing about non consensus, that’s really hard, is it’s very, very hard to put it into any sort of bucket, right? Like, like, they’re outliers for a reason. So, yeah, I don’t think there’s been one type that I know . I’m surprised there’s not more of X or Y. I It’s the more like non consensus, you know, it is, the more I’m looking for how strong is their edge, or unique sort of insight into that market, or into that founder archetype, or, you know, whatever that is, so leaning more into that versus, oh, I’ve never just, I’ve never seen it before, like,

Alexa Binns 41:20
I would just love to see, like, the crystal ball UI approach of like, what is gonna happen to AI investments that are out now, like, you’ve been talking about these consensus names, and we don’t have that many growth investors on the show, And so it’s like, as early stage investors, where is this going? So that we are getting in at the right but like, what is left? But yeah, people should be investing at an early stage.

Yuri Lee 42:12
Yeah. This is such a hard question, because I feel like I’m humbled every month, like we’re so wrong, like, you just have to revisit your priors constantly. Like, when the AI wave was sort of first taking off, there was a very prevalent view that many investors, including myself, held that investing in the model companies was not good because those were not real businesses. You know, they weren’t going to have differentiation over time, and application layer companies were going to take the share of value, and fast forward to today, like, that’s pretty wrong. I guess the jury is still out, ultimately, but you know, it feels wrong, right? Most of the value seems to have accrued to a lot of these labs who have managed to go up to the application layer, pretty significantly.

Alexa Binns 43:04
Perplexity just advertised to me, like here, give us all your personal health data, and you’ve, yeah, like anthropic doing the lovable competitor overnight, totally,

Yuri Lee 43:17
and even within opening and anthropically. I mean, the narrative shifts, and you know what’s been happening today? Like it’s it’s pretty crazy to see how wrong, like, what seems so right in the moment can be. And so part of it is, I think we’re all like, knowing what you don’t know is, like, really important, and just constantly re examining your assumptions is something that I’ve been thinking about a lot, but when it comes to what, what we’re actually looking for in the growth investor lens, I mean, it just comes down to over the long term, can you sort of state and understand what are the enduring modes of this business? And I mean, there’s no that’s like, not like a magic formula answer. I do think that is the obvious answer, but it’s also still the, still the truest answer, yeah, yeah.

Earnest Sweat 44:12
Is there one kind of like for anybody who makes that GP to LP transition, one point of advice that you have for those individuals?

Yuri Lee 45:54
I think the biggest thing that I’ve realized personally is that when I was on the GP side, I was primarily doing outbound, right, like I was chasing founders. And now I’m on the receiving end of it, where I’m receiving a ton of you know, a ton of inbound, trying to say no to people and and figuring out what is like the right thing to do in a set of many choices, as opposed to before, when I was just trying to go out and find the right opportunities. And so it gave me a lot of empathy and appreciation for the founder side of the table as well, where, you know, I think they’re also in receiving tons and tons of imbalance from lots of GPS and trying to sift through and figure out, how are they different, and all those sorts of things. And so in that transition of GPT, LP, like, the biggest thing is just around empathy for the different parties and like, the different you know, why, why they’re motivated to do the do the actions that they’re doing, and kind of meeting them where they are, in that sort of part of the funnel, if that makes sense, you know. So that’s, that’s, that’s probably my biggest piece of advice.