Jensen Huang's Moat Is Dead. But He Has A Plan

Growth Newsletter: https://levelingup.beehiiv.com/subscribe Need marketing help? Visit: https://www.singlegrain.com/ and https://npdigital.com/Want to recruit great marketers? Find them here: https://marketingschool.io/hire Eric brings Peter Diamandis's take that Nvidia's greatest moat, CUDA, is leaking now that AI can port code to any chip, and why Jensen bought Mellanox years ago to own the interconnect instead. They debate the three moats that survive: speed of reinvention, capital velocity and brand. Neil keeps brand, drops capital after Harry Stebbings' three rounds in three weeks, and adds talent density, showing six of the top ten companies come from the Bay Area. Then Meta Muse: the $14B Scale bet Neil admits he would never have made, Eric's bot Doodoo picking his wardrobe, and Muse plus Jev sorting 116,000 followers for $3.30. It ends on the personality test that explains the show. A sharp episode on what still protects a business. Key takeaways◾Your moat lasts until the next one; speed of reinvention is the durable edge◾AI shoppers still buy brands, because people tell them what status looks like◾Neil waits for proof, then bets big; Zuckerberg bet first and won Chapters00:00 Nvidia's CUDA moat is leaking02:29 Neil: brand is a moat, capital isn't03:35 Harry Stebbings: three rounds in three weeks05:07 Six of the top 10 companies come from the Bay07:02 The three moats that survive09:13 Neil: AI shoppers still care about brand11:46 Meta Muse and Scale's $14B bet12:16 Doodoo picks Eric's wardrobe13:04 Muse + Jev sort 116K followers for $3.3014:29 Neil's influential followers15:43 Why Neil waits for proof, then bets big18:11 Why this podcast works: persist vs change19:03 The personality test: 99% vs 1%20:50 Empathy at work

• 0:00Speaker 00

  Finding customer information shouldn't mean digging through emails, call notes and spreadsheets. HubSpot Starter Plan brings all of those details together, so it's easier to track what's happening with every deal and what to do next. It pulls information from calls and emails. Then it gets to work, logging and summarizing them. Right after your call ends, HubSpot pulls next steps from your call notes and drafts suggested follow-ups. And it stays up to date for you, so you can build demand, win more deals and spend less time on repetitive work. Your records, insights and next steps are ready for you to act on. And you don't have to miss a beat searching for any of it. Try the Starter Plan for $10 a month. Learn more at hubspot.com. So I want, because we're kind of talking about SpaceX a little bit, another good company that probably has a little more bozos than Nvidia, but doesn't have a lot of bozos would be Nvidia, right?

• 0:43Speaker 00

  And so Nvidia is the most valuable company in the world, but Jensen has maintained this amazing culture throughout his career, right? So I wanted to bring something up. This is from Peter Diamandis over here. So do you see my screen?

• 0:57Speaker 01

  No. Yeah, now I do.

• 0:59Speaker 00

  Okay, great. So, um, right now Nvidia's greatest moat is CUDA, right? CUDA is their, it's one of their programming layers, right? Basically what it does is it translates the code into instructions that Nvidia's chips can run at blazing speed. But the problem with that, that moat now, Neil, is it's being eroded because now you can just go to an AI and say, hey, take my AI code and compile it to run fast on this AMD chip. Hence you see AMD is rising up, you know, Intel's rising up, you see cerebrus, you know, coming out of nowhere, right? And then there's like jalapenos coming out from OpenAI, you have the tensor processing chips, tensor processing units from Google. Frigging training is coming out from Amazon. So all these things, right?

• 1:41Speaker 00

  So chips are becoming, you know, have always been competitive, but CUDA was really Nvidia's moat. What am I saying right now? The most valuable moat on earth is leaking, right? So it's like, okay, well CUDA as a, this inference time moat is dead. Okay? So here's the thing. Nvidia Jensen already knew this, right? So that's why he bought this company Melanox for $7 billion in 2019 to own High-Speed Interconnect. So if you want to run 100,000 or a million GPUs as one coherent machine, you still have to buy Nvidia at the end of the day, right? So the quote here is, your moat is only good until the next moat. And Jensen is, is moving Nvidia's moat very intelligently, right? So here's my point with all this. The, the durable advantage is the metabolic rate of the organization. And AI is the fastest rate, the fastest way to raise it.

• 2:25Speaker 00

  So this is from Peter Diamandis, and he says there's only three modes left, okay? So the three modes left today, Neil, would be, um, is your, it's your rate of, of being able to change. That's one of them. Brand, he's arguing is another one. And then capital velocity is another one. Okay, I'm gonna repeat that. So, um, really number one is speed of reinvention, right? So the question is no longer who has the best moat, it's really how fast you can reinvent yourself. Number two is capital velocity. So which shows about the balance sheets of the hyperscalers, the way they're spending right now. And then number three, he's saying to a lesser extent actually would be brand, right? So we can agree or disagree with this, we can actually react to this.

• 3:03Speaker 01

  I think brand is definitely in there. Capital velocity, like how much money can you spend and how much money do you have? You know, I don't know how much of a moat that is because there's so much money out there. I listened to Harry Stebbings, you know, the 20 VC. And he's telling me how crazy venture, he's like, he's like, this, uh, let's see if I can actually pay the clip. I saw this morning, or was it yesterday? It was actually, it was really crazy. And I don't know Harry personally, I messaged him a few times and he's messaged me. But I don't think he's full of crap, just being honest. Watch, listen to this.

• 3:37Speaker 00

  Put it closer to the mic.

• 3:38Speaker 02

  Time to cool BS on what is happening in venture right now. Every venture investor knows the truth, which is this game has completely been ruined by three rounds in three weeks. One company I met this morning raised at $150 million price. Then a week later it raised at a $500 million price. Then a week later it raised at a $1.5 billion price. It is still three people with an idea. By the way, there's another company that I met today. First round was at $3.5 billion. Then because of the oversubscriptions, too many people wanting to invest in it at that ridiculous first price. It's now raising at a $5.5 billion price. This is very standard. I sit down with my team yesterday and you know what they say?

• 4:23Speaker 02

  They say, hey, trouble is, we just can't find a company that is raising under $100 million. That is not the price, that is the round. This is absolutely ludicrous. That's not a new normal. That's not healthy, that's not cool, that's just froth. It's hype and it's bad for the ecosystem. Now, the question is, what are you doing this time? You have to play the game on the field.

• 4:50Speaker 01

  So, but, um, but yeah, dude, you just, I think there's access to tons of capital. I do think it's brand, I do think it's speed to adaption. And if I had to pick a third one, and it's kind of related to speed to adoption, it is actually talent. Like how good of a talent pool you have. Because your talent pool affects, if you have capital, what you do with your products, do they learn from the mistakes? Do they leverage the latest technology? And I was listening to one of the guys who created some sort of semiconductor company, he's retired, he was on CNBC the other day. And he was talking about the Fortune 10. Do you know how many companies from the Fortune 10 are from San Francisco, Eric?

• 5:33Speaker 01

  If you had a guess?

• 5:35Speaker 00

  Almost all of them.

• 5:36Speaker 01

  Uh, let's see if I can pull it up. Can you see my screen?

• 5:40Speaker 00

  Yep, there you go. So, okay, Nvidia, Apple.

• 5:43Speaker 01

  Nvidia, Apple's two, Google's number three, Microsoft.

• 5:46Speaker 00

  Microsoft, Amazon, Seattle.

• 5:48Speaker 01

  Uh huh. Uh, I don't, Taiwan Semiconductor, I'm assuming that's Taiwan. Meta is four, Broadcom is, uh, five, Tesla's number six, right? Did I count it right? Three, four, five, six.

• 5:59Speaker 00

  Yep.

• 5:59Speaker 01

  Yeah, six out of 10 come from the Bay. I'm not talking about the United States, I'm talking, well, technically it's Fortune 10, so they're all from the United, but I'm not talking about California. I'm talking about the Bay area, right? Like, you know, everyone's just like, oh, Tesla's moving out of California, they're going to Texas. Did you know since Tesla has moved out of California into Texas as their headquarters, they actually employ more people in California now than they did prior to them leaving California as a state, quote unquote? Right? And a lot of this headquarters stuff is just more tax and political stuff. And I'm not saying they're right or wrong, this is not the conversation for that. It's just more so, the talent pool in Northern California is amazing.

• 6:42Speaker 01

  And a lot of it has to do with, that's where a lot of tech was originally set up. They have a lot of major universities and people there have a massive risk, uh, massive appetite for risk. And you also have a very high concentration of amazing engineers, product people. And yeah, the ecosystem has just built, like, I just don't see the Bay going anywhere, no matter what happens to the state of California. Just look at Chamak, I'm moving to Nevada, all the way to, hey, I'm staying in San Francisco and not going to Texas or Nevada, I'm staying in San Francisco and I just raised some money.

• 7:17Speaker 00

  Frictionless Growth Marketing hosted by Sonya Thompson is brought to you by the HubSpot Podcast Network, the audio destination for business professionals. Frictionless Growth Marketing hosted by Sonya Thompson shows how modern brands grow by removing the friction in their marketing and customer experience that pushes customers away every single day, often without leaders even realizing it. Each episode delivers practical insights, real brand examples and conversations with marketing leaders, showing brands how to win with the new rules of growth, identity-driven marketing, cultural relevance and frictionless customer experiences. Listen to Frictionless Growth Marketing wherever you get your podcasts.

• 7:52Speaker 01

  From Salesforce.

• 7:53Speaker 00

  Real quick, if you want to acquire customers faster and more efficiently this year with the latest strategies and tactics, then check out Single Grain.com. That is my ad agency, again, www.SingleGrain.com. Check it out. And if it seems like a fit, we'll get in touch and help you with a free marketing plan. Yep. Well, there's two of the four from the All In Podcast that are in Texas now, but the other two looks like there's, there's staying. We'll see what happens. I mean, we have, we have this election coming up, right? By the way, have still never voted in my life, but, um, anyway. So let me, let me add this real quick. So let me, let me come back to this moat piece. Do you see my screen?

• 8:29Speaker 01

  Yeah, one speed reinvention, is that what you're highlighting?

• 8:32Speaker 00

  So the three modes that survive, okay, so speed of reinvention, right? So I just want to read this part. So the question is no longer who has the best mode? It's those who are reinventing themselves faster than anybody else. Jensen is moving from CUDA to interconnect, which is what we just talked about. Elon is shifting Tesla from manufacturing cars to offering robo taxi services and robots as well. While SpaceX goes from rockets to Starlink to orbital compute. The durable advantage is the organization's metabolic rate. And AI is the fastest way to raise it. So again, the durable advantage is metabolic rate of an organization and AI is the fastest way to raise it. So what I would say here is, I kind of, the speed of reinvention is one piece. And I think that does tie in with the talent density piece that you're talking about, because you can build, you can, you can find great talent in North Cal. But the, the type of culture that you build, the talent density within your own company, that's something that you can, you can like drive on your own, right?

• 9:17Speaker 00

  Because Elon, like Tesla or SpaceX are very much driven from Elon's intensity at the top, right? Same thing with Jensen's intensity at the top as well. So I think those two in my mind kind of go hand in hand. Now, to your point, capital velocity over here, so, you know, um, you know, we're not talking about access to compute. Anyone can rent an H100, which is a Nvidia chip. Not scaling ability, the moat is that Microsoft, Google and Amazon and Meta can pay for hundreds of billions of dollars of GPUs immediately out of cash flow and already have customers to fill them. So they have distribution and they have the capital velocity from their cash flows. And the hyperscale is just a financing system, it's a real estate game. The oil analogy is exact, a liquid global oil market didn't hurt OPEC because the moat was having the oil in the first place, right?

• 10:00Speaker 00

  And so, um, I think a little different than the ecosystem that we were just talking about. And then he thinks that brand is a third smaller moat, right? So brand still holds up, like if you're buying an Hermes bag, um, like, you know, Louis Vuitton, Dior or whatever, those things stand out certainly. But the future of AI, and maybe we should talk about this, is automatically transacting your purchases of toothpaste or paper towels. And it doesn't care about your brand, it cares about the cost, ingredients and the thousands of online reviews that it consumes. I don't know if I completely agree with that, because if you're so, so smart as an AI machine, you should be able to infer what people see as status and brand, just by seeing what people talk about on like Reddit, for example, or, or even through the reviews.

• 10:38Speaker 01

  Yeah, so the reason I disagree with his part on the brand side is consumers actually care for brand names. We work with a lot of the luxury, uh, brands out there, like we work with LVMH. Uh, and we work with a lot of other popular like handbag companies that, you know, everyone dreams to have. Uh, and what I'll tell you is, if AI just goes and purchases purses for people, I'm just gonna use that as an example. I know he did carve out luxury handbags there.

• 11:08Speaker 01

  You're going to have people being like, I don't want to wear this coach bag. I prefer a Chanel bag. It makes me look better. The same goes with toothpaste. I know he gave example of it's just toothpaste is just toothpaste. It meets the requirements. Some people like me have sensitive teeth. I know I'm a small example, but I use Sensodyne and I've been using Sensodyne for ages. If it's not Sensodyne, I would just be pissed off. What I believe is going to happen with AI and agentic commerce, it's going to understand the patterns that you as an individual make and learn from it. And then from there, adapt and do more of the things it knows you likes, because then you would just be pissed off. But on the flip side, when you're looking at agentic commerce,

• 11:53Speaker 01

  it's it's about how much data can these guys gather from you before they go and start transacting? And this is why I believe Amazon cut off Muse. I don't know if you saw that.

• 12:03Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 12:04Speaker 01

  But this is a perfect example. Facebook paid, uh, what 13, 14 billion dollars for that MIT kid?

• 12:11Speaker 00

  Scale?

• 12:12Speaker 01

  Scale. There you go. I forgot his name.

• 12:14Speaker 00

  Alexander Wang.

• 12:15Speaker 01

  Alexander Wang. And then people were making fun of him, being like they overpaid. I'll be honest, I was like, how the heck would you spend that much money paying this kid for a company? And you're not really generating the revenue or anything of that. But look at what they did with Muse. I would, I'll be the first to say I was wrong. If they actually can keep going with Muse, I think that's going to change Facebook's business. And I think that's a bigger business than what they're doing with the social network. I don't think Muse would be as successful if they didn't have that distribution channel. Um, but now, because Alexander Wang, I don't know if you knew, he's the one who's in charge of it all. And they're making fun of him that he was wearing a deer t-shirt with deer crocs. Who the heck cares what he's wearing?

• 12:58Speaker 00

  He can wear whatever he wants.

• 13:00Speaker 01

  Yes, the stock price went up by a market cap of $200 billion. Would you pay 13, 14 billion dollars for a $200 billion game? I'm pretty sure everyone would. And that is what happened.

• 13:11Speaker 00

  I always thought it was gonna work because he's one of my people. So I actually genuinely thought it would work. Now, I thought it was like a, like, it was gonna be tough, but it worked, right? Because they actually have a very strong model. Now, you look at the products that they're releasing now because they're in physical game. To Neil's point, with Muse, the one thing that they have is distribution. I'm gonna show you something on my screen right now. I don't know if I showed you this last week, Neil. But to your point, they have the data, right? And so if I pull up my, my screen over here, so, um, Neil, did I show you this the other day? It's, it's coming up right here. So, um, okay. So here's what I did with Meta Muse, right? And I'm doing this inside of WhatsApp. So this is my, my, my bot called Dudu, right? You can see up here. So anyway, I asked Dudu. Yeah, I don't have tats, but like, it, it basically was like, hey, I was like, hey, I want you to look at my Instagram.

• 13:53Speaker 00

  I want you to understand my style and I want you to understand how we can, what other pieces we can add to the wardrobe, right? Now, am I dressed like this? No. But I'm glad it looks like this guy's pretty good looking. You know what I'm saying? So like this, right?

• 14:03Speaker 01

  The coloring actually works for you. But if you go to the first picture, that one, no, no, go back to the first one. That reminds me of the Twitch founder. Do you know who I'm talking about?

• 14:09Speaker 00

  This guy?

• 14:10Speaker 01

  Uh, what is it?

• 14:11Speaker 00

  Justin, Justin Khan.

• 14:12Speaker 01

  Justin Khan, the very first picture. You should wear all black. It looks good.

• 14:16Speaker 00

  Yeah, so like this actually looks good on me, right? And I'm like, this is actually a pretty good look. And, you know, it, it mostly resembles me, you know, and like, this is not bad either, right?

• 14:24Speaker 01

  I don't like the blue. I like the all black look. You should do all the black look and either green's not bad.

• 14:29Speaker 00

  Yeah, these are bad. Like, this is good style, right? I'm just saying, if you have it, it's connected to your Instagram. And you know what I did yesterday, Neil? And this is why Muse plus Jev is insane, right? I was like, hey, you know what? I want you to look at all 116,000 of my followers. Tell me all the influential and powerful people that follow you, right? I was like, there'll be all the people that are in travel service, luxury service. Tell me all the people that own an agency at these, these employee sizes over here and use Jev to classify, right? And it's literally classifying right now. I was like, hey, how much is it gonna cost to classify 116,000 of these? $3.30, right? How long is it gonna take? 20 minutes, right? I'm like, sounds good. And then, and then, you know, I, I tried to take it one step further because remember there's like these other, um, these people that have paid like Marriott and like United for these employee plans.

• 15:12Speaker 00

  And I'm like, hey, can you, can you email all the people that work at United and Marriott? And can you classify only the people that are at this level? I could, could I, can I, can I reach out to see if I can buy like a plan, right? You can't do that. But it won't, it won't let you do that. So I just want to see how far I can push it. But I'm just saying that it has all the data. I was like, by the way, one more, Neil, I'll say, hey, um, look at all these people over here, uh, that we follow on, uh, from a marketing standpoint. I want to see all their offers. I want to see all their hooks. And then you use Jev to classify it. $2.15, right? That is the power of having something like Meta and then combining it with something like a Jev, which we can talk about. But to Neil's point again, like, um, I do care about the brand because I did ask Muse to buy me a bunch of tennis stuff from on.com. So I do care about the brand because other people talk about it. So.

• 15:54Speaker 01

  Dude, so my team had, uh, they did something similar for my followers, okay? Uh, they were just like, you know, you have quite a few, few influential business people that follow you. I'm like, I don't think so. They're like, dude, they're like, how often do you actually log on to social media? I was like, yeah, good point. I don't log on that often. Uh, so my team ended up using AI. They spun out a report. I don't have it in front of me, but they're telling me like people like Mr. Wonderful, you know, from like Shark Tank. And I'm like, I don't know. And they were giving on and on. And there's a lot of successful, rich people and quite a few billionaires who are following. I'm like, I would have never guessed. But, you know, you could do so much with AI. And because Meta is connected to their own ecosystem, it's much easier because you have access to the data. Um, but I had a question for you, actually, two things.

• 16:39Speaker 01

  Uh, well, first one is, is you should actually buy some of those clothes. They actually look good. I like them. Um, and then the second one is going back to their purchase of the $13 billion, right? Or 14, whatever it was of that Alexander Wang's company, Scale.

• 16:56Speaker 01

  You know me, all right? You already know I wouldn't do it, right? Why don't you think I would place big bets like that on my business?

• 17:05Speaker 00

  I, I, my opinion here is your personality, the way it is, is once you see it working, you're all in. That's how I, I've always seen you. Like, for example, there's microcosm. I'll share, I'll share some stories here, right? In an unsure environment, right? When I go to the blackjack table, Neil was sitting, he was only watching me play. He didn't want to play because there's nothing sure there. It was pure gambling, right? Um, and, and here's the thing, but once he saw something working from like a marketing standpoint, right? Instantly, he, he takes the bet from, let's say, you know, $5,000 a month to hundreds of thousands of dollars a month, right? Once he's in and he sees the pattern working, he's all in and he bets hard.

• 17:42Speaker 01

  Eric's right on that. The other thing about my personality that's a little bit different than Eric's personality, and neither is right or wrong, because if you look at Mark Zuckerberg, I don't think he has my personality by any means. Uh, and he's way more successful. And look at what he did with Scale and turned that into Muse. I am a very, would you agree with the statement, Eric? I'm a very value buyer, a value spender. I look at, I, I'm very financially motivated. If I was born again and put in a different role, I think I would fit in really well with private equity, um, the hedge fund space, anything financials with numbers like that, because that's just how my brain works. I can't get out of this rat trap.

• 18:23Speaker 01

  Uh, I put in a dollar. I need to know economically how I'm gonna make more money right away on the arbitrage. With Scale, Mark may have had the vision for Muse, but to me, and Eric knows me well, I would look at that as too uncertain. I like testing the water, like he said, or seeing someone else test it. And then when I know it works, I will go all in. But I'm not the one who's willing to test it with a $13 billion sum. Now granted, $13 billion for Mark isn't as much money, but it is still a significant portion of Facebook's market cap. Because it's, it's just a lot amount of cash and stock, right? Um, for anyone to make that size of a bet.

• 19:03Speaker 00

  Well, let me give you a thought on that. And then I'll, I'll talk about kind of, um, the microcosm of this podcast that AI spotted, right? Which actually relates to your, your demeanor overall. But, you know, at, at the time when he did this transaction, it was a year ago. I mean, Facebook was a, you know, let's say 1.5, I don't know, even two, two trillion dollar company. So still, the, the argument that I read from, from a writer, like a tech writer was like, look, if this works out, like they, they need to go into AI. And if this bet works out, like it's a drop in the bucket. But if they don't make this bet and they're behind on AI right now, because remember, keep in mind, he sacked like a bunch of people, um, that what, where it wasn't working on the AI side, right? Like, it was like an existential thing. And, you know, good, good for him that it worked out. But let me bring back, bring us back to this podcast real quick. So, um, a while back, I had asked, um, one of the agents to identify what the patterns were from this podcast.

• 19:48Speaker 00

  And I was looking at you, Neil, and I was looking at me. And it's like, there, there's, there's two reasons why this podcast really works. One is Neil's personality. One is because Neil talks about what will persist, right? I talk about what will change. So there's, those are two fundamentally different things. And then also when Neil took that personality test, I still remember Neil. When it comes to internally motivated, meaning that I'm like intrinsically motivated, right? To just grow, I'm 99%. Neil's is 1%, right? Which means he's money motivated, right? Which is not a bad thing. I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing. Like, there's no, by the way, guys, there's no right or wrong way to make money, as long as you're not hurting people.

• 20:21Speaker 01

  Repeat, repeat, go back. I was curious because I didn't look at either of our test results. I think I just sent you my link and didn't even read mine.

• 20:28Speaker 00

  Let me tell you why your, yours was so perfect, okay? And I, I still remember this, okay? So let's start first. I'm gonna slow down my pace a little bit here. Okay? So on my personality test, there's this trait known as internally motivated, okay? So this is someone that just wants to get better, right? And isn't motivated by outside forces such as money. My, I'm 99% on that, okay? When you look at Neil's, which his test doesn't exist anymore, so it's just only in my head now, but his is 1%, right? And I actually, we actually have a mutual friend that's also 1% as well, which means that he's actually money driven, right? Um, and there's no-

• 21:04Speaker 01

  Is that what 1% means? 1% means you're money driven?

• 21:07Speaker 00

  Yeah, 1% is like, you're not entirely, like, if you talk about like personal growth and all these things, like, you'll just like glaze over, right? But if I talk to you about money, you're like, oh, tell me more, right? Yeah, but here's the thing, Neil, on toughness, 99%, okay? And I, I know Neil to be a very tough person, like just the way he works with, with people. And not, he's not trying to be tough just to be tough. It's just, he's just trying to get things done, right? Neil's also very detail oriented. I think it's gotta be like 90, 99% plus. And so those are, and also Neil and I get along really well because our practicalities both 95% plus, right? Um, now, when it comes to like things like, you know, uh, nurturing and, and empathy, neither of us are high on that, right? But I'll say this one thing, Neil, the good thing about both of us is we're both very helpful people.

• 21:51Speaker 00

  So like, if you start crying, I'll give you a box of tissues, right? That's about it, though. So.

• 21:57Speaker 01

  Yeah, it, it's, it's tough. Um, I do think we do have some sympathy and empathy if there's really bad things that happen, like people getting sick or whatnot. But outside of that, in work, I don't think I at least, I, I can't say it for you, but I don't have too much empathy sadly.

• 22:15Speaker 00

  Well, some, someone, I mean, my, mine's is not that high, but someone, here, here's what I'll say, right? Like, just because you sort of score low on empathy and we can move on to the next topic after this, but like, someone died recently, right? For, uh, let's say a, a loved one. And like, you know, I just found myself naturally like doing all these things, right? And I think you're the same way too. So it's not to say that, you know, I, I think in work, if you have uh, too much empathy, I think that's probably for a different role. I think as an executive, you can't, you probably can't have too much because you're moving so quickly. Um, and you're just trying to get things done, right? And so I think it's, uh, some people can disagree with that, but that, that's what I think at least. All right. Well, anyway, guys, that's it for today and we will see you tomorrow.