Is it fair to say that something like industry dive is almost like the Craigslist, and I say this as a compliment in the sense that it had, you know, Craigslist had all these different categories, and then, you know, other businesses took different parts of those categories, like Airbnb took listings and then went so much deeper and then built a massive business. And for example, there might have been like a logistics diver, supply chain diver, something you took that category and almost made an industry dive within, you know, just logistics or supply chain where you now cover all these subcategories and your omni-channel and you built a data business on top of it. Do you think that analogy holds?

Not really. I mean, I think the better sort of analogy for industry dive is more like a morning brew type business. I mean, ultimately, industry dive at its core function is a newsletter business. That's why the predominance of what people identify with industry dive. And what they've done is they've sort of templated a very easy format to copy across a lot of verticals. The way they approach media is very different than the way we approach media. Like, we go deep. Like, we are we are we we have the expensive work of actually doing a lot of a ton of original reporting, breaking news, trying to be the first to cover a topic, provided a lot of intelligent insights and into a vertical. Whereas industry dives model is to basically provide a summary that someone and a busy executive that's in an industry can read and consume and potentially a couple minutes and be caught up with all the major stories of the day. That model is frankly easier and cheaper to execute than a deep sort of core journalism model. It doesn't mean it's wrong. And frankly, from a financial standpoint, industry dives business model is more scalable. Frankly, it's a more venture backable from a scale model because it's a templated business that you can scale between multiple, you know, hundreds of verticals potentially. And that's why, you know, it fetched a very high valuation by informal when it was originally purchased because it is a model that could scale between potentially hundreds of verticals. Our model is quite different. Our model fits more of a traditional media journalism model where we we know a topic very deeply and we're providing a lot of sort of deep level of context about that topic, but also individual sort of products, which include podcasts, the newsletters and stuff. But frankly, I say this often is that like if if I'm an aspiring entrepreneur, you don't have to go create original content, frankly, there are entrepreneurs in supply chain that if that take our content and repurpose it in a very easy way to digest it, you know, these are very small businesses with two or three people. And frankly, I've been very successful doing so they can find advertising against it. You know, there are media executives that would say that's not fair. You're ripping off our content. I'm not one of those that believes that. Frankly, I admire them for doing that kind of effort because what I do is a lot of very expensive and hard work and they're created in a derivative product that they benefit off of it. It's not a zero sum game. Some executives will treat it a zero sum game. I don't think of it as that way. But it is interesting how those models can scale quicker and faster and easier and cheaper than frankly, what

we do. Yeah, but it is very interesting. And so the model that you've done going very deep omni channel, et cetera, as you described, but could you imagine I'm just looking at it as your dive right now, you know, automotive agriculture, banking, bio pharma, like a freight ways for every kind of every sector, basically, like, is the model.

You need big sectors. Could you take our model and replicate it in every sector, potentially, but the scale of what you would achieve there would be quite different. You could do it in construction and build building. You could do it in farming and ag. And there's a number of media companies to serve these because these are big industries where you can have 20, 30 reporters, 40 non different topics in this industry. The model works really well when you sort of diversify outside one core industry. And we see it. I mean, construction, there's a number of construction media companies that are very successful. There's a number of ag companies that are very successful. And it's also very hard for those ag and construction media companies, you know, to go into topics that is not in construction or ag because their team is built to sort of serve these audiences. And you don't typically see a lot of diversity of content in these these very specific media verticals. What you do see those companies do, very similar to what we've done at Freightways, is they go out and create other types of products that serve that same audience. And that's probably the best return on investment because it's much harder to go build up a media, let's say that a construction media business wanted to move into supply chain or Freight to really compete against us and to provide deep level of information and become relevant in the sort of supply chain sphere, that would take an enormous amount of budget to hire reporters and really go out and execute that. We're already there. The market does not suggest that it's big enough to have multiple players of scale. Therefore, they're better off sort of staying in their world. Just like if I tried to enter the construction reporting industry, it would take an enormous amount of resources to go build that, whereas versus me investing in my own sort of vehicle and vertical and putting stuff together. Industry dives models different. It works really well with what you've described going after multiple verticals. It's really hard to replicate what we do in different verticals. Right,

you'd have to spend a lot. So the reason why someone wouldn't want to do in your industry is because you're already there. And my assumption is that in other industries, there aren't businesses who are as deep or as advanced as what you've done in supply chain, like in construction, for example. And so someone who has the money to invest could co-founder hire a joint venture with the right reporters or right expertise, provide the capital and the media expertise. I'm curious, if there was a clone of you, for example, who wasn't working on freight waves, but had the same expertise, could you almost have an incubator and say, hey, we're going to do a freight waves for construction, find the right team, put them together for Ag, etc. Or is it actually there is a freight waves for every industry already? There's certainly vertical media.

Construction has a vertical media business. And Zonda is sort of the vertical media provider in the construction issues, a couple others that are there. So it's not to say that these don't exist. And like there were supply chain media businesses before we came along. It wasn't as if we were the first and only to do this. We did it different. We focused on the part of the market that was sort of high cadence, high frequency. A lot of the big issues in media is that a lot of these businesses came from print cycles, where the journalists only sort of understand putting stuff together and having it published, you know, maybe write an article and it's published a month later. That's a very different sort of cadence than running a breaking news business that provides real time information. So you certainly could do that in other industries. You would want a larger degree of volatility. You would want a lot of things happening, whether it's regulatory changes. You want a big audience and a big enough market that's not sleepy and sort of stagnant. Logistics is an enormously dynamic industry. A lot of volatility. Our model works really well here. It would be very difficult to take an industry that's sort of sleepy and boring and isn't a lot of changes in it, whether it's technology changes or regulatory changes or economic changes. It'd be difficult to pull off what we do and sort of replicate that in a sort of stagnant industry. It just would because of the model doesn't work well. Our model works really well where you're on breaking news. A lot of stuff's happening. There's a lot of participants and the market is incredibly volatile. Whether it's price changes, economic changes, technology inflexes, a lot of regulatory conversation. The advantage we have in supply chains is so big and there's so many topics that are constantly happening that it makes sense. You know, I own another media business that I've talked about that is involved in the aviation and marine business. Now, I could pull off and I plan to, now we've spun off the Freightways media business, plan to develop content, B2B content and aviation. It is a very large industry, massively fragmented going through big technology changes, big regulatory issues are facing it. It's an inflection point in terms of a lot of new tech and investment is going to completely change the way the airline industry and aviation industry works over the next couple decades. It has an enormous amount of sort of stories that should be told. I could execute a Freightways of aviation and I plan on doing that. I own another part of that business is involved in recreation and marine, which is building boats. It's a harder industry to think about a B2B business. It's not to say that there isn't B2B interests there. It's just it's a different kind of industry than say the aviation industry, which has a lot more volatility.

Yeah, that's very interesting. Getting closer to my world, I'm curious how you would think about AI in that same like, you know, our friends at Blockworks have built this great vertical media business for crypto, omni-channel, etc. And I'm curious if there's a similar opportunity to do so in AI or if that's

too abstract or how do you think about that? No, I think it's actually, I mean, look, I think crypto has volatility. You know, one of the things that is enabled Freightways to be successful and also very much like crypto industry is crypto is an incredibly volatile industry. It's a very fragmented industry. It's a frontier industry going through an enormous amount of changes, whether it's regulatory stories, new participants, you know, the boom and bust cycle of individual businesses. It is a captivating concept in many ways. And so it naturally lends itself to a Freightway style media business. You can build what we've built into crypto because it has all the things that you would want as a formula. In AI, I think also you've got it's a it's a frontier industry. It's going through an enormous amount of changes. There's a lot of personalities to it. There's a lot of big companies are interested in it, but nobody really knows what to do with it just yet or how it'll work or what all means. And it captivates a broader public. So I think AI would be an incredibly easy industry to sort of start a media business. And so from my standpoint, it's absolutely something interesting. And if I knew something about pharmaceuticals or biotech, I could make the same arguments. So there are industries, I'm not to suggest that Freightways and supply chain is the only industry far from it. I'm just suggesting that there you have to pick your industries that you're going to sort of attack this, these issues in and sort of a to build a business.