131: From the Archives – Greg Cooper

Greg Cooper is Chair of financial services giants Perpetual and Colonial First State, but is perhaps best known for his role as the Chief Executive Officer for Schroder Investment Management in Australia. In this interview from late 2019, only weeks before COVID-19 broke out, we spoke with Greg about whether public markets are broken, the state of active management and his interest in the venture capital space, topics that are still very much alive today. Enjoy the show! 

__________

Follow the Investment Innovation Institute [i3] on Linkedin
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Explore our library of insights from leading institutional investors at [i3] Insights

 __________

Greg Cooper podcast overview:

1:00 Starting out in actuarial studies
3:00 Focussing on Japanese equities
4:00 Compared to 1986, Japanese equities are still at the same level
5:00 What were some of the highlights of your career at Schroders?
6:50 We've moved on from strategic asset allocation
7:55 As a CEO, don't be afraid of what others think and try to draw out ideas
9:35 Are public markets broken?
11:00 Not having a well-developed VC industry means that a lot of good ideas get starved of capital and eventually go offshore
11:30 Will that change when the effect of QE goes away?
15:00 No investor is entirely passive.
16:30 Passive rose, because active had too large a share, but you can't have a 100 per cent passive investment market
17:30 Will value-style investing come back?
21:30 You have an interest in fintech and hold a board position at OpenInvest?
25:00 Joining the TCorp board and chairing the investment committee

Full Transcription of Episode 131:

Wouter Klijn  01:12

I'm here today with Greg Cooper. Greg, welcome to the podcast. 

Greg Cooper

Thanks, Wouter.

Wouter Klijn

So can you tell me a little bit about how you started in the asset management industry. We had some former guests on there that started with, you know, creating banks at eight. What were you doing at eight? 

Greg Cooper   01:26

I certainly wasn't creating banks. Probably more surfing and and that kind of stuff up on the beaches and the Central Coast than anything. I mean, my career in investment really started in the latter stages of high school. I was at one stage looking at becoming an accountant. And then my maths teacher at the time had said, Have you thought about actuarial studies? I didn't even know what one was at that point in time, and, you know, and so I looked it up, and things kind of sort of went from there so that, I suppose that was the real genesis of things year 11 and 12 at high school. 

Wouter Klijn  01:59

So how do you transition from an actuary training to an investment career?

 Greg Cooper  02:04

So I mean, I started out in the more traditional actuarial fields. I was working for Taos Perrin the time as a defined benefit actuary, and it was at the point in time, I was in the early 90s when the SG was just coming into play defined benefit plans, some were being wound down, but there was a lot of work to do in the DB space, but as SG kind of kicked in. Then there was a whole pile of, you know, actuarial work to do around, you know, justifying minimum contribution levels and so forth. And then, you know, one day, one of the investment guys had come over to in the investment asset consulting area, come over and asked me if I was interested in doing some research. And it was on Managed futures at the time. And, and I kind of said, I said yes. And and started doing and I really enjoyed it. And that was kind of the first foray into investment consulting. And so sort of from starting out in the actuarial field, I was lucky enough to get off at a roll up in Hong Kong with with towers. And I sort of took the view that the traditional actuarial work was, was, was a good mainstay, but was not likely to be a growth engine. And moving into the investment space was, was a lot more interesting, and it also worked from a commercial perspective.Wouter Klijn  03:15

Yeah, did you ended up doing anything with those managed futures research?

Greg Cooper  03:19

Well, apart from it was kind of the early stages of hedge funds, I guess. And it was at the point where saying, you know, alternatives kind of had a place in a portfolio that was, that was the primary emphasis of the research. So, you know, it's interesting. And obviously, you know, alternatives nowadays have become a much bigger, much bigger part. But back then, it was really just looking at that small hedge fund, like type diversifying characteristics and see whether they fit it in a portfolio.

Wouter Klijn  03:44

Yeah. And then from there, you went to Schroeder's and started doing Japanese equities. Why Japanese equities?

Greg Cooper  03:51

Yeah, good question. It was really partly as a function of the role that was there at the time and Schroeder's. I come out of asset consulting, I was much more interested in working in the asset management side of things, the role, while it was in Japanese equities, it was much more about the product side of things. So it was more like being in charge of the business, of running an asset management sort of sub strategy, if you like, rather than specifically worrying about, you know, Japanese equities or European equities. But it was very interesting, because at that point in time, Schroeder's was the biggest manager of Japanese equities. You know, you were just coming out of the 90s, which had been a bit of a lost decade, but, but in the latter part of the 90s, you know, Japan had taken off with the likes of SoftBank and so forth. So, you know, there was this real kind of boom happening, and it was just a really interesting time to be involved in, in in the markets, but particularly

Wouter Klijn  04:48

in Japan. Yeah, any views on Japanese equities today?

Greg Cooper  04:51

Well, it hasn't been a terribly good investment since that time. I remember one day sitting with one of the team, and he said, he said, Oh, you know, he said. I started in Japanese equities in 1986 and the markets pretty much at the same level it is was then. And I think we're always say the same now, so, but it's, you know, it's a very interesting case study in what happens in a deflationary environment. And, you know, when assets get overvalued, you know, you can have everyone thinks that equities kind of go and, you know, 10 years in equities, you'll make your money, but you'll make money.

Wouter Klijn  05:21

I was just about to say, Did I just hear you say that equities don't go up always. That's right,

Greg Cooper  05:25

so, you know, and it's a fantastic case study, but also one, I mean, sort of investment aside, it's a good one to think about, that, you know, despite, you know, the economic criteria not looking that good. You know, the social cohesion in Japan, everything else is held together very well. And so, you know, life isn't all about just economics. There's more to it than that. Sorry, all the economists.

Wouter Klijn  05:49

So you spent almost 20 years at Reuters, climbed up to be the CEO of the Australian business, and also had a global distribution role. What are some of the highlights you look back on your career. And also, do you have any tips for aspiring CEOs,

Greg Cooper  06:06

I suppose, in terms of highlights, you know, it was just, it was fantastic, and still is fantastic being involved in, in in sort of the dynamism that is the whole investment marketplace. I mean, in particular, just look at, I mean, not just Australia, look globally, but certainly in Australia, you know, the rate of change that's taken place with funds. And, you know, back in the late 90s, early 2000s you know, there was obviously a much larger number of very, very small funds. And you look at where we've come to now, I'm having conversations about internalising and, you know, financing specific assets, and you know, the size of the asset pools and so forth. So I would say, you know, over that whole span, it's just been a very exciting time, and I think that will continue. It's no less exciting looking forward than it has been in the past. But just the sheer growth of the industry has been fantastic terms of some particular highlights. I mean, I always quite enjoyed standing back and looking at sort of the way the industry was was developing, and coming up with suggestions for maybe how things could be done better, or where, you know, the industry had adopted certain practices that I didn't think were the right sorts of practices, and it was much more fun kind of standing back and trying to point those out and offer suggestions for better ways forward, rather than just joining the chorus of sales people out there.

Wouter Klijn  07:21

Can you give an example of that?

Greg Cooper  07:23

I mean, the key one that you know, and I write a lot of research papers around this, is the i concept of around, sort of objective Based Investing, and the idea that benchmarks and the whole strategic asset allocation process, which we've grown up with in the 80s, didn't always work. And you had in Japan is a great case in point, you know, a fixed, strategic asset allocation with a large exposure to equities through the 90s in Japan killed you. And so you know that that, to me is, you know, it's resonated very well in the industry, and I think it's a key part of sort of thinking about how to do things differently. And so, you know, sort of, it's not to say that strategic asset allocation is that that style of investing is bad. It's just to say that I think we've moved on from there, and there and there are better ways to think about this, and there's some consequences that come from that, and that's worth bearing

Wouter Klijn  08:07

in mind, the consequences. Yeah, so in your answer, it sort of shows that you, you've always been quite keen on fostering a culture where it's open for discussion, and there's pretty much no topic of debate. Why is that so important to

Greg Cooper  08:21

my mind. You know, we work in an industry where there are lots of really intelligent people, and no single person has all the right answers. So the more you can foster debate, and the best way to foster that debate is to have a fairly transparent and open culture, then ultimately you get a better outcome. And it might be sort of painful in the near term to hear, you know, if your particular idea shouted down or what you're doing, you know isn't you know doesn't resonate with everyone, but I think fundamentally, it gives you much better outcomes, and when, when people are, you know, more open, transparent, and in particular, prepared to bear criticism to their ideas. That's how you that's how you drive change and move things forward. So you asked about sort of tips for aspiring sort of CEOs, and that would be, you know, a very clear one to me is, don't be afraid of what others think and try and draw out that. And certainly don't create a culture where you know yours or a small number of views preside. You want to create a culture where you hear right through an organisation, because then, particularly today, like the world's changing so much, sometimes the best ideas come from, you know, some of your really junior people who are right at the coalface. So you want to, you want to make sure those ideas get aired and have as much resonances, you know, some of the more experienced ones.

Wouter Klijn  09:36

Yeah. So is that a matter of staying competitive, or is it also more generating sustainability within a business that you can see risks or potential challenges coming that are further ahead.

Greg Cooper  09:47

I think it's both. I think, you know, this industry is nothing if not cyclical. We see markets are very cyclical. You know, performance of asset managers is very cyclical. You know, the active industry is probably having a pretty hard time. Of it at the moment, I see that as a very cyclical outcome, and I just think that if you're not open to, you know, sort of change happening, then you know, particularly when times are good, and that's often the time when it's hardest to make changes in an organisation, because everything seems to be going well, but that is often and always the most dangerous time when everything's going really well, because you tend not to see the risk. So just trying to, yeah, it's not to say you get it right all the time, definitely not, and it's difficult, absolutely. But at least, you know, keep your eyes open.

Wouter Klijn  10:30

So one of these big topics we've recently spoken about is the functioning of the public markets. And we see that more companies stay longer private. There seems to be a bit of a challenge in raising capital through the public markets. What is your view on that? I think you have a bit of an idea that maybe the public markets aren't where

Greg Cooper  10:50

they used. Yeah, look, I think I wouldn't say the public markets are broken, but, but I do think there are some real issues in the way public markets are functioning. And if one goes back and sort of says, Well, what was the point of a public market? It was to allow capital to be held in the hands of a very, very heterogeneous group of individuals, and for new capital formation to happen. The way the broader investment market has changed is you've got a smaller number of very large holders, and almost by definition, those holders end up becoming more passive in their equity holdings. They have to become much more active in a governance sense to compensate, but they become much more passive in terms of their equity holding, just because they have to be so I think that that has changed the way you know public markets function, and will continue to change them. And at the same time, you know whether it's regulation or other things sort of driving, you know how new capital gets formed, people are more prepared to sort of keep their companies private and accept some of these large investors because they just don't need to go to the public markets. And the private markets tend to give them a bit more flexibility. So I think that's changing the whole dynamics of it. Where I see a real danger is in the smaller end of the corporate capital formation process, where how do new ideas get funded? And I think in other jurisdictions, particularly in the US, where they have a really well formed venture capital industry, we don't have that. And I think there's a danger in Australia that not having a well formed, or even a barely call it embryonic VC type industry means that there'll be lots of good ideas that get starved of capital and potentially go offshore, and that's bad in the long term for the economy, and bad certainly for those funds in the long term.

Wouter Klijn  12:38

So to what degree is this also the influence of quantitative easing, because you could make the argument that, well, it's easier to raise capital from the private markets when capital is so cheap, but once that goes away, then perhaps the public markets start functioning, and the way they should be, well, there's

Greg Cooper  12:54

certainly more capital around. There's no question about just given what's happening in terms of QE. But but whether we have QE or not, you will still have larger asset pools. So in a relative sense, you know, you just have to look at the Australian market. You know, the top 10 asset pools, you know, represent a significant chunk of the Australian equity market. So that feature occurs no matter what, with or without QE. So I think, I think QE has pumped, yes, more capital in the system. But I wouldn't blame QE for where we are. And I don't mean blame in a negative sense. I mean it's just where we are is a function of the rise of large asset pools. And that's that's not a bad thing by any stretch. It probably leads to, you know, better overall capital allocation decisions, because they've been made more professionally, rather than by, you know, a vast number of more amateurs, but, but it does have that consequence of potentially, certainly in Australia, starving the more junior end of the market of capital. The other

Wouter Klijn  13:54

consequences is that there's more money flowing into passive and you've did some research around how this could potentially also distort markets, especially the public markets, where they come up with all sorts of different flavours of essentially similar indices, but it also then channels potentially funds to, particularly a couple of companies that occur often in certain indices, and basically get funding on the basis of that, rather than of their fundamentals. Yeah.

Greg Cooper  14:21

So I thought, like any, any capital allocation process that's rules based is prone to, prone to some form of danger. So if you just keep following those rules blithely, and the whole, remember, the whole point of passive was about allocating, you know, in a in a certain way, a market cap weighted sense, across the broader economy, almost. And it works when you've got very large and diverse equity markets, but gradually, as the proportion that is passive becomes larger and larger, and indeed, in fact, in certain markets like Australia, where they're sort of more concentrated, that can have a consequence that it starts to distort certain companies in the way that they're weighted. In the indices. And then, I think the rise of passive as a sub. Don't use the word asset class, but, but where you get, like, you know, sort of a passive exposure to a certain thematic that then overweights the companies with no real bearing on their economic impact, and and you just get this weight of money. And then the other passive money comes in and has to allocate more to it, because to it because it's got a higher weight. And so you can end up with a with a disproportionate allocation in certain companies. And you've seen that, I think, in some of the tech names and even some of the dividend payers, whenever a thematic comes through, it gets a lot of money, and then, by definition, those companies get pushed up in price and get overvalued.

Wouter Klijn  15:42

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I can remember that at one stage I saw there was a sushi ETF coming out, and I was wondering if that's really a product The world needs. Yeah.

Greg Cooper  15:51

I mean, those are, those are marketing concepts. You know, the idea is that passive was meant to be low cost exposure to a broader group of investments. And I think that's been sort of slightly skewed when you start talking about real flavour of the month passive strategies.

Wouter Klijn  16:04

So the other argument for passive investing is that it's simple. It simplifies the investment process, and often, when there's too much complexity in a portfolio, it's hard to keep track of it all and also to basically communicate it to stakeholders. How do you look at complexity? Are we giving up too much by just having passive strategies?

Greg Cooper  16:24

Look and passive has a very good place in some portfolios. And bear in mind that actually the bigger investors, as we just talked about, have virtually no choice but to hold passive or quasi passive exposures. The point that I would make about passive is that no investor is truly passive. You have money coming in if you're in your accumulation phase. You have money going out if you're in a decumulation phase. So you have to manage the cash flows and where you allocate capital to and take it from. Shouldn't be entirely a passive decision. You should have some view on where you know what price you're paying for assets you know, and particularly when you're allocating amongst equities, bonds, property, cash, whatever you should have some bearing. So you can't be entirely passive, I think, in a total portfolio context, and even where you are, those big passive holders have to take a much more active role in a governance sense. So, you know, to me, passive is just, you know, it's a it's a simple way of implementing a certain part of your investment strategy, but it's not your investment strategy. It's just a way of implementing a piece of the investment strategy, and as long as you bear the total portfolio in mind and your objectives and all that kind of stuff, passive has a has a place to play in that, but it's but it's not the answer to everything.

Wouter Klijn  17:40

So you're not concerned about the predictions that I think it is by 2021 we will see more money in passive than in active,

Greg Cooper  17:46

Not at all. And I think, again, I would, I would sort of come back to the point about markets being somewhat cyclical. And I think the passive will rise just because active, you know, probably had proportionately too larger share. But there's a point where passive can't, you know, you can't have 100% passive, or the markets don't function. So, you know, and whether that, I don't know whether that numbers, you know, 40, 5060, whatever. And I kind of almost, you know, it's not that relevant, because we'll never get to really high levels, just because something will happen that causes a change and the cyclicality will kick in.

Wouter Klijn  18:21

Yeah, you mentioned that cyclicality, looking at investment styles, value hasn't worked for probably the past decade. What are your thoughts around that? Is that something that is structural, or is that cyclical?

Greg Cooper  18:33

You can make an argument for both. I mean, I've seen plenty of arguments about it being structural just because of the way value is defined. And I think, you know, if we think about value in a, you know, sort of booked value context, or, you know, or in businesses which, have, you know, high tangible assets and low intangibles, then certainly there's this, you know, that's, you know, there's a change that's taken place in markets where intangibles are now, you know, of extreme importance. And so how you define value, I think, has probably changed over the course of that, but, but, you know, value as an investment philosophy is, you know, a very sensible strategy buy things that are cheap. I mean, like, it kind of makes intuitive sense, and I don't think that will ever go away. I'd be far more concerned about buy things that are expensive, things that are cheap, but values also had, you know, it's had long periods where it doesn't work again. That's the cyclicality of markets, yeah,

Wouter Klijn  19:28

but it is within these big technology companies, where there's so much depending on the IP that arguably, it is harder to value what an IP is actually worth and when it's at a discount

Greg Cooper  19:38

or not. So I agree. I think that's the issue. Is, is the definition of value, and how do you how do you place a value on certain of these organisations? Is the more difficult thing, but also too. I mean, I think certainly at the moment, markets have gotten a bit carried away. And whether it's QE or, you know, the some of the passive bits that we talked about, or just sort of momentum. Generally encouraging more investors to invest in it's could be a whole combination of things, but it's quite clearly that there are some levels of what I would call exuberance in certain parts of the marketplace. And while that hurts in a value context, you know, value is always going to be or any investment style hurts the most at its peak or at its trough. I should say, you know when the when the alternative is at its peak, that's, that's the point of

Wouter Klijn  20:27

maximum pain. So do you think that the process of value can be adjusted to reflect the current market conditions, or do you get very quickly to a point where you basically have style drift? I think I'd

Greg Cooper  20:40

be very careful about saying current market conditions, because, because that that I think does infer style drift, I think it's more about, you know, making value work for the nature of markets, and recognising that the term of value, and particularly getting this rise of intangibles on the balance sheet requires maybe a bit of a different way of thinking. But I'm sure there's plenty of value managers have already all over that and captured it, and some of these things probably still look really expensive. So, yeah, I think, I think again, styles are cyclical, and value and quality in particular. You know, if I had to have a bias in my portfolio, would be slight advice to value and quality than I would be to certainly to momentum.

Wouter Klijn  21:17

So one of the things that you, you're interested in is more in this private market aspect. Can you tell us a little bit about what you're

Greg Cooper  21:24

doing there? Well, it really comes back to the whole sort of VC space, and how do you encourage better capital formation? And particularly, as I said, in Australia, I think you know, you've got a well established VC market in the in the States, potentially, sort of, as the assets have grown in that space, probably, you know, managers charging too much for the for the service, much like, sort of what happened, I think, in private equity. But in Australia, we don't have it. And I just think that there's, there's really something that can be done. And where you've got a small number of large asset pools, you know, we really should be looking for ways to allocate capital to that space and try and generate some sort of venture capital ecosystem, albeit without necessarily, you know, I think this is our chance to kind of invent that space without imposing, you know, a more traditional third party fee model over the top.

Wouter Klijn  22:16

Now, one of the activities you do is, you're a director of a FinTech company. One of them is open invest. What is your interest there in this particular space?

Greg Cooper  22:26

So that was much more specific in the asset management space, and we talked about some of the issues that active asset managers, or just asset managers generally, were facing, and the rise of large asset pools, particularly in Australia, making the institutional market less of a source of funds for them, but at the same time in the, you know, what I'd call, sort of the retail and wholesale markets, you've seen this, this real explosion in SMSFs and and so forth. And I would say, actually, a large amount of professional or non professionally invested assets. And so the idea behind open invest is to have a simple mechanism through which people can allocate to a diversified portfolio and get a lot of the benefits that come from a more traditional portfolio structure, but build it very cheaply. You know, one of the things that gets me is when I look, sort of, you know, all the regulation, other things that have had gone on in Australia, in the retail marketplace, Royal Commission and so forth. You know, the cost to member hasn't really gone down. And it's like, well, you know, surely we can build things, particularly with technology, that deliver professionally managed portfolios to individuals at a much cheaper cost. And that's, that's the concept behind open investor.

Wouter Klijn  23:38

It's an interesting model, because I think it shows what a lot of FinTech companies trying to do, in the sense that you have sort of a traditional model, where you have a distribution platform, you have the asset manager space, but then there's elements incorporated of social media, like features, so you can like things, you can share things. In essence, what is happening there is that you try to create communities around certain products or services. Is that sort of what interests you, or is it more directly coming from? 

Greg Cooper  24:09

Yes. So the point to me is really about, you know, simple, well designed portfolios being delivered to the general public in a relatively cheap format. And I think that's, you know, we were great at creating themes, and, you know, charging, you know, probably excessive fees for that as an industry to individual consumers and trying to stir up, you know, momentum around those particular themes or concepts, whereas actually, what I think we really should be doing, particularly with a more fiduciary type of mindset, is simple, you know, typical balance type portfolios that are well diversified and well structured and delivering them at a pretty reasonable fee, and that's the concept. And you know, with that, you need to have things like content layer. That sort of give you all of the right sort of behavioural impact with your customers and so forth, and deliver the messages out there in the right way. But the real premise is you have to do all that sort of stuff to deliver a simple, well diversified, professionally managed portfolio at a cheap cost.

Wouter Klijn  25:17

Yeah, absolutely. But I was also thinking about that struggle for getting people's attention, and it can be very powerful to have something that's just sitting on your phone, and you can talk to other people, and you basically can go there without necessarily having to invest in a fund. You just you can just check up on it. That must be a very powerful

Greg Cooper  25:36

feature, I think. So, yeah. I mean clearly that, you know social media, more generally, is changing the whole way in which consumers interact with each other, way in which they interact with third parties, and that will continue. People come up with new ways of delivering content to the end customer. You know, things like web 3.0 and things blockchain and so forth, could even mean that, you know, some platforms are no longer the right delivery mechanism for for all sorts of content, because it becomes much more individual to individual. But I but, yeah, I mean, I think what you're seeing is an explosion in the way people want to interact. And definitely have to look at my kids, you know, they spend an awful lot of time looking at their phones and interacting through their phones, and it's just, it's the norm. Yes.

Wouter Klijn  26:23

So you just mentioned the fiduciary side as well, and you've joined the asset owner side as well with T Corp. Can you tell me a little bit about how you came to T Corp and what your role is there? Yeah.

Greg Cooper  26:35

So I've joined New South Wales Treasury Corporation as a non Executive Director. I was lucky enough to get approached by them in my sort of last few months at Schroeder's, when it was, you know, all very public that I was retiring from executive life, and I think it just turned out to be a good fit. I mean, T Corp is a fantastic organisation that's going through some pretty fundamental changes, particularly in the investment model as a result, you know, of the merger between what was workcovers, now I care state super and the original T Corp portfolios. And now it's, you know, looking at a an asset size in excess of $100 billion and needs to be managed in that form. So it's a really exciting time to be there. The team's been built out. It's, it's, it's a great role. So as well as being a non exec, I'm also chair of the board Investment Committee.

Wouter Klijn  27:29

Yeah, the executive team seem to have a real drive to build us out into a global quality asset management firm, coming from sort of that more sleepy government organisation, probably. But yeah, I probably but, yeah, I probably wouldn't

Greg Cooper  27:41

describe it necessarily as sleepy, but, but certainly quieter, and the asset size was significantly smaller if you go back five years. And I just think that that, you know, we've seen a pretty fundamental change in their business, or driven by the right sort of economics and and that's a great time to be there and be involved in the transition. There's also, you know, it's a very interesting business, Teik court, because it's also the government's debt issuing authority. So it's got a very large, you know, issuance side to the to the balance sheet as well. So it's a fundamentally different organisation to most asset owners in that you've got, you know, these two fairly large parts to the business.

Wouter Klijn  28:22

So it took a while to get your head around all the different moving parts. I would say some of it,

Greg Cooper  28:26

you're still getting your head around. You always are. But I think, you know, that's the that's the great thing about, you know, these sorts of roles and the challenges. And, you know, particularly in moving from a third party asset manager to an asset owner, there's, you'll learn new things all the time, yeah.

Wouter Klijn  28:40

So what else is on the agenda for you? So you have directorships? Can we see you at any other roles?

Greg Cooper  28:49

Well, I think in terms of sort of building out a portfolio, you'll see me pop up, I suspect, in one or two other places, as in a non executive or advisory type capacity, as well as that, I've got some personal business interests with the family, which, which keep us occupied for a little bit of the time. And as I said that, you know, the whole thing we talked about in terms of the venture capital space is something that interests me in terms of helping, you know, build out that ecosystem in Australia. And I think, you know, it's, it's a, it's a really exciting time in my career to be involved in a whole range of different things, rather than, you know, sort of singly in one sort of more commercial type arrangement.

Wouter Klijn  29:30

Yeah, yeah. Excellent. Well, Greg, thank you very much for your time. It was good speaking to you.

 Greg Cooper  29:36

Thanks, Wouter, that's great.