Latest / Alternative Exit / Alternative Exit #66 | Returns & Purpose on a Level Playing Field | Monarch's Katie & Michael

Transcript

Alternative Exit #66 | Returns & Purpose on a Level Playing Field | Monarch's Katie & Michael · Alternative Exit

• Andy Farquharson: Hello everybody and welcome back to the Alternative Exit. Today we've got a new special format. This is the first time we're doing a double interview, bringing together two leaders from Monarch Investment Partners. So offering a rare dual perspective to explore how capital leadership and ownership come together into practice. And so our first guest today is Katie Kimball. So Katie comes from a capital markets and investor relationship background. helping to connect institutional capital with these new ownership models and also impact investing. So Katie, welcome. And Michael McKinley, he brings deep experience in structuring and executing these transactions to employee ownership, working closely with management, management teams and the employees through these ownership transitions. together they've formed Monarch Investment Partners, which is an investment firm focused on supporting management buyouts and transitions to employee ownership, partnering with all the leadership and the teams to create these long-term sustainable ownership structures, which every listener to this podcast knows and loves. So guys, thank you very much for joining the Alternative Exit. Katie Kimble: Thank you for having us. Andy Farquharson: Awesome. So like as I mentioned, this is the first ever double episode and it feels particularly fitting given the nature of what you guys do and especially something that Michael mentioned on the pre-call is that something that's quite rare in a partnership is that when you guys sort of thought about getting into business together, you did a personality test. Often in the like what they try to do is you try to find people on the opposite sides of those personality tests. So your weaknesses are matched by their strengths. but you guys almost had the exact same personality profile. How does that show up for you guys on a daily basis? Katie Kimble: Yeah, great question. I'll jump in first and then Michael can certainly chime in as well. You know, it's interesting because I think when you look at the personalities and a lot of personalities and employee ownership do tend to be fairly similar in terms of their values and kind of how they show up in that role. But we do have complementary skill sets. So that's what the personality test isn't measuring. And that's what's really valuable in coming together and that we are very aligned from a personality and values and vision point of view. in kind of this long-term mission to create more employee owners and how that feels for us, but really bringing kind of complementary skill sets to the table to make that happen effectively. Andy Farquharson: Michael, you're on mute at the moment. There we go. Michael McGinley: You know, I used to work as an audio engineer. You never guess, but so Katie's right. It's so interesting to find someone and it gets to back up, you know, as part of a, you know, prior firm, they did some very deep testing about personality types. And so it had a lot of extensive testing on that. And it came back that I think I had the Katie Kimble: No. Andy Farquharson: Hahaha! Michael McGinley: the most rare personality type according to this one particular test, which was interesting because I worked with a number of partners across a different spectrum. To then be in conversation and find out that she had the same rare personality type. It was two diamonds in a rough that feel like we can communicate and we understand the values and the way that that we interact together, I think there's a level of understanding that makes a lot of sense. But coming from different backgrounds where there really wasn't a lot of overlap. And so she's exactly right that the skill set is very complimentary. And so it makes it nice to go through the day when we're able to communicate well, but then focus on our individual strengths to be more complimentary. Andy Farquharson: Yeah, fantastic. It does sound like from a skills perspective, symbolic relationship. So that's awesome. So Katie, like coming to you, we know that there's often a perception that employee ownership and external capital don't normally fit well together. Not so much in the US, but definitely sort of in other parts of the world. mean, how does Monarch look to be able to bridge that gap? And while you're going through that, you can sort of help us understand a little bit more about the space that Monarch plays in. Katie Kimble: Yeah, absolutely. And it's such a good question because that's kind of what started Monarch, if you look back as to really where we started this conversation. And I've spent so much of my career in the traditional alternative investing space, different platforms, and seeing funds get raised for different purposes and different types of investments. And when I came to the employee ownership world about five years ago, scratching my head saying, how come there's really no external capital here? Why are these two worlds kind of operating very independently? know, and Michael and I started batting around that idea of what are the biggest inhibitors to growth of employee ownership, particularly in the US, but more broadly. And part of it was that access to capital. Andy Farquharson: Mm-hmm. Katie Kimble: I think there's a couple of reasons for that. One, there's a perceived complexity behind employee ownership transactions. And so if you're not really in the weeds of knowing kind of the nuanced structure, how to make sure these plans are set up to be long-term and sustainable, it's no different than learning any other skill or any other asset class. but it does kind of keep some market participants at bay because of that perception. And so part of what we're trying to do is change that and normalize this and grow the capital market for employee ownership transactions, know, partially through awareness, partially through education and partially through proving that this model can work, bringing external capital and, you know. Employer ownership is great. It's for those like-minded sellers who really care about legacy and continuity and preserving their companies and their communities and helping their employees. But to fund that, know, at least in an ESOP transaction, which is primarily what Monarch focuses on, you really need a benevolent seller who can fund that transaction themselves. without Andy Farquharson: Yeah. Katie Kimble: that access to external capital, seller really needs to be able to transition out of their company over five or 10 years. Most sellers don't come to the table with that kind of time horizon or risk appetite to do that. And so you're relying on this benevolence that exists in this small ecosystem, but to grow the ecosystem, you really need more capital behind that so that it's applicable and relevant for a wider group of sellers. Andy Farquharson: Mm-hmm. Okay and what are the sort of styles and style of transactions which Monarch is looking to support? Michael McGinley: Thank Katie Kimble: Yeah, so we're focused primarily on 100 % employee owned or ESAP transitions. So companies that are going from either founder owned or whomever the owner might be transitioning to 100 % employee ownership. So we use the ESOP structure here in the US. There's a lot of tax benefits that support that that really help from an underwriting perspective and getting comfortable with the risk profile and the cashflow coverage. There are other models in the US. There's the EOT, there's the worker co-op. Monarch is not as focused on those. As you mentioned in Michael's background, he's got deep expertise in the ESOP space. And so we're sticking true to the model that we know and that we think works best from a modeling and underwriting perspective. Andy Farquharson: And Michael, like a lot of, when we do hear from the investors that are coming into the space, we do see that like investing in ESOP reduces their risk, like from that alignment of incentives that's actually created through the organization. I how do you see ESOPs coming to life? Or coming to life within your organization? Michael McGinley: great question. But you're right. I I think the bottom line really is this alignment of incentives. And there isn't really a lot of data going back that's been public about how well they have performed. And we're starting to get more benchmark data to see this. But what tends to happen is that over time, employees, as they're communicated the value of what they are receiving and this equity participation, and they're supported by a management team that is transparent and open and reinforces this alignment. That they start to understand this relationship between their job and the value that they're creating and then the benefit that they receive from that. And then as that cycle starts to perpetuate itself, it really starts to take off. And what we see is that it takes about three years to really start to see a difference in people's. behavior and in the economics of the company's performance. But then over time, that tends to compound. And we're starting to get a lot of good data now about enhanced revenue generation, margin improvement, reduction in sick time, all kinds of benefits to productivity of the business in that relationship. it does start with that alignment of incentives and repeated communication. Andy Farquharson: Yeah. Well, yeah, let's sort of double click on that a little bit. Like it's a repeated communication has been one, like communication alone is not just going to help people understand that they're now owners. So yeah, what are some of those actions that, that, that you help these companies take to really feel and take advantage of that, of that ownership structure? Michael McGinley: Great question. know, it's something that when you start a job, you're typically told, here's your hourly wage and here are your benefits and here's what's expected of you. Here's when you're supposed to be here, you know, things like that. Most people actually don't really understand financial statements. They don't really understand the economics of business and how it works. They might be very good at their job, but it's... Nobody ever takes the time to help them see the bigger picture the way an owner would. And so you're really training everyone at every level, how the business works, how business in general works, how financial statements work, what those financial metrics mean, how they relate to your personal life. And so it can seem a little bit bewildering sometimes for management to realize that they have to start sometimes with Andy Farquharson: Mm-hmm. Michael McGinley: explaining what an income statement is or what a balance sheet is and what that may mean for that individual and how that individual statement is so that they can start to relate and understand. But over time, what we know is that people will manage their behavior to the data that they're given feedback on. And so if the management team communicates what's valuable in terms of measurable behaviors, people will adjust their behavior to that. And it can be different for different businesses. But that's a big part of that communication to reinforce the behaviors that you want. Andy Farquharson: Yeah. Okay. And how do you like, you talk about sort of education and like giving people access to data and how do you, how have you been helping these organizations to turn that education and access to data into action? Michael McGinley: A lot of that can be open book. So sharing something in the financial statements, might be profit, it might be revenue, it might be some data that's relevant to your job that you have control of. And so I think it's transparency at some level in a business, that the more relevant information you give employees, the better they can attune their behavior to the output you desire. Andy Farquharson: you Okay, really cool. So I want to take it back a little bit, Stefan, a little bit earlier in your process at the moment. So when you think about when you're going to underwrite a case, mean, Katie, this may be more onto your side of the fence, but how much of these performance improvements that you're going to be taking from employee ownership, how much of that is baked into the case? Or are you just relying purely based on the sort of financial performance of the company? Katie Kimble: Yeah, I mean, as with most underwriters, we're going to look at what the base case looks like and then model in some upside and some downside. And our base case models are always just assuming the business operates at status quo. Maybe there's some level of growth built in based on the industry that they operate within or within specific dynamics in the macroeconomic environment. But we're always going to assume kind of a pretty conservative case to start with. then. Andy Farquharson: We'll Katie Kimble: layering, what does that mean if we do get some of those productivity enhancements and or revenue enhancements, or maybe there's additional growth beyond what we envisioned. But that's really kind of saved for the upside model and what we think we could get. But we always want to underwrite very conservatively, making sure that these businesses are durable on their own, that they can withstand a downturn. No, and that kind of goes to the buy box that you were asking about earlier, Andy, and what do we really look for? And, you know, we're not looking for startup businesses that don't have any measurable operating history. need to see how companies have performed at least over the last 10 or 15 years, right? So these are businesses that have been able to survive other economic shocks, other macro events. You know, we want to understand what happens. How did the management team lead through those events? And that all goes into our underwriting process as well. Andy Farquharson: Okay, so it sounds like as part of that sort of pre-deal diligence, you're both being involved. Like it sounds like, cause a of this is sort of looking into Michael's purview as well. So what does that role for you, Michael, look like when you're going into to evaluate whether or not this company is going to be able to thrive in an employee-owned environment? What does that look like for you? Michael McGinley: That's a really great question. So for us, we're not a private equity firm. So we're not coming in and laying people off or trying to change a culture or put in new executives. But that means that we're working with the management team that's in place. And so we're going to spend extra time on the front end, really understanding the tenure of the people that are there, their ability to lead the organization. the depth of the relationships that they have with their customers, with their subordinates, with their suppliers. Because what we don't want to do is we don't want to invest into a business that's in the middle of a management change at the same time that we're putting on a lot of leverage and changing the ownership structure of a business. And so it's really important to the value of the business. Andy Farquharson: Mm-hmm. Michael McGinley: that the owner or ownership group is investing in the next generation of management prior to going to market. We'll increase the value of the business significantly and it will increase our ability to finance that transaction into an ESOP because we know that management team is going to be there during the life of our financing, has experience doing it, has demonstrated that level of success and that we can come in and support. Andy Farquharson: Okay. Michael McGinley: And so there is a lot of diligence on the management team itself as part of our transaction. Andy Farquharson: Yeah. Do many of these, like when you're doing your diligence, you get access to go beyond the management team and speak to the frontline? Michael McGinley: Great question. That's a tricky one because once the word gets out that the business is for sale, that can have meaningful impacts to employees, to supplier and customer relationships. the rumor mill starts that the business is up for market, that communication can get away from. Andy Farquharson: Yeah. Michael McGinley: and giving us access to interviewing people is a bit of a wild card potentially. And so what I really love is when a business owner starts that conversation years in advance and says, 10 years from now, I'm going to sell my business, but I'm going to sell it to a trust for you. And I'm not going to sell it to a third party or something like that. And so what's up? Andy Farquharson: Hmm. How many of those owners do you find? How many of those owners do you speak to? Michael McGinley: I think two in my career. And I went to work for one of them. So that is unusual. And so being in a position to talk to frontline workers as part of a sale is a bit of a risk. Obviously we like it, but that business owner needs to be very comfortable with that communication and be out in front of it to mitigate that. Katie Kimble: No. Andy Farquharson: you Yeah, yeah, no, it's you really want that right environment like you before hand, but I mean, did I, did I hear you correct that you'll sometimes spend some time working with these management teams to set up the right frameworks for them prior to you guys looking to doing a transaction? Michael McGinley: It's not something that Monarch does. But if we talk to an owner and we start to evaluate the value of the business and we start talking about a transition and we realize that there's still work that needs to be done on the management team, it will be worth it to that business and to that owner usually to step back from the process and solidify those parts that need additional work before coming back to market. Andy Farquharson: Okay. Michael McGinley: not something that we'll do. There are a lot of professionals that can help with this. But putting in that time and effort before you go to market to make sure that the management team is tenured, has a good performance history, and isn't in the middle of a major transition will add value and put more dollars in that seller's pocket. Andy Farquharson: The space that you're playing in with part of the capital allocators supporting the employee ownership movement has been growing exponentially over the past couple of years. With the leaders like APIS and Heritage and a few others in the space, which your name is now a part of that same group. But how do you guys differ in terms of... both sort of from a buy box, from a pre-deal perspective, and then sort of the post-deal support. Katie Kimble: It's really good question and we're excited to see this industry grow. And so we hope that there will be many others that follow as well. It's also a little bit humbling and exciting to hear that our names now in that mix because those are really well known and we look up to and admire Apec and Heritage and what they've been able to do for the industry. And they've got a really solid story as well in terms of how they're helping. low-income workers. If I had to say the major difference, we're probably a little bit broader in terms of our scope. We're not primarily focused just on low and moderate-income workers. We really think an ESOP can be a great exit option for a lot more businesses than it is today. And those businesses take a variety of size, function, industry, et cetera. Andy Farquharson: Mm-hmm. Katie Kimble: That being said, we do want to have a meaningful impact. And so we're very focused on how many people we can impact and what that materiality is to their wealth creation and financial inclusion prospects. you know, we, I think, not I think, I know part of our goal is stewardship, and I think others in the industry feel the same way. That's where I was going with the I think. You know, I think this group of us that are kind of, I hope is the tip of the iceberg in growing this industry, I think we all feel this sense of obligation to do things the right way and come up with best practices and come up with formats that. do right by employees, do right by investors, and it's a win-win for everyone. In the past, you've seen some folks come in and be fairly extractive and abusive to the structure. And we come at this one very, like I said in the beginning, I think it was before we turned the recording on, but we're not trying to sacrifice returns for impact. We really want to prove that both can coexist and it doesn't have to be a compromise one way or the other. And so to do that, we want to build a playbook that others can follow. And I think we take that stewardship mindset very seriously. Andy Farquharson: Okay, really cool. moving that to that, sort of pre transaction, like obviously that's what identifies a little bit more of the types of companies. I mean, can you can you share about the sort of the size of companies and so that you guys are looking to target? Is there any geographic focus? Katie Kimble: Yeah, great question. So we are looking for companies with a minimum of $5 million of EBITDA, of free cashflow effectively. We'll go up to about $15 million of EBITDA. And so pretty wide range within there. Geographically agnostic within the US, the ESOP is a structure focused on the United States. Doesn't mean a future fund might not be focused on other geographies or areas or of impact, but for now the US is our primary focus, geographically agnostic within the United States, industry agnostic as well, although we always like to remind people that an ESOP is a retirement plan and so it has to be a good industry that would be a prudent investment for a retirement plan, you know, and one where we can get comfortable underwriting the cash flows of that business to make sure that the leveraged buyout model really works. Andy Farquharson: Katie, what are some of those industries that are immediate no-go for you, that aren't gonna be a fit for a retirement? Katie Kimble: Yeah, nothing's an immediate no-go. I would say everything. There's always nuances within every industry. That being said, our fund is really focused on making sure we do good and create good headlines. And so we're fairly limited or probably will not invest in things that would be considered to do harm to people. So what you might traditionally call kind of your sin industries for folks. the immediate no, there's some interesting nuances here in the United States. There's a lot of cannabis opportunity. We're probably not going to invest in that, although I do think it's a good opportunity. It's just not the right fit for Monarch at the moment. Industries that are heavily project-based are very cyclical, where it's hard to have visibility into what their revenue profile is going to look like long term. It can be a little bit more challenging, not impossible. Again, there's nuances to every industry. But kind of at a broad brush, that's the... Andy Farquharson: Yeah, very cool. Yeah, thanks for sharing that. I think I can understand that that buy a box and that target super helpful for our for our listeners. But Michael coming to you for sort of the in terms of how Monarch presents itself to support sort of at the post transaction. Yeah, if you could just share a little bit about sort of how that how you help and and how it differs from from other other firms out there today. Michael McGinley: so I actually wrote a book on this and the genesis of that. Andy Farquharson: And you've got plenty of answers ready. Michael McGinley: That's great. Well, but the reason being that there really wasn't any material out there about once you become employee owned, how do you manage that? What does that mean? What are your responsibilities? And so often you have investment bankers that will help with the transition. And then once that sale is completed, they receive a fee. Maybe they call you later just to check in or stay friends, but really not. involved in the business after the transaction. But for most people, being ESOP-owned isn't something that they've ever encountered or learned about how to do. And so they don't really have that support. And somebody who's there holding their hand along the way with the checklist that says, you know, each month, here are the things that you need to be doing. Here are the changes that you need to be making internally. Here's how you implement these programs. You follow the right regulatory There's banking and insurance and board requirements and different tax forms that you might not have ever had to fill out before. And so there's a laundry list of business administrative activities that have to be done. And what's also interesting is now you have a new shareholder. It's a trustee. That trustee of that ESOP trust is legally the shareholder of the business. Andy Farquharson: Mm-hmm. Michael McGinley: And so there's a lot of relationship building and communication that needs to go along with that too. And so there are a lot of unique dynamics that I've been through in my career and I've seen best practices and I've seen where it's not been handled well. And so having that playbook as the day one, how are we gonna implement best practices and communication and make sure that everybody knows what they're supposed to be doing and when they're supposed to do it. I think as part of the benefit that we bring to the table is not just financing, but also that ability to help shepherd you through the best practices to get the best outcome. Andy Farquharson: Yeah, I'm sure I'm sure it's going to be something valuable for people. There aren't there aren't many manuals. You've written your book with one manual, but yeah. Michael McGinley: then you'll have to change. Which is why I wrote it because I went through a transaction and the business owner said, you know, I've talked to you every Friday for two years through this process. And now we've transitioned to employee ownership. I don't know what I'm doing. I, and I, there's no manual that tells me what to do. And so I started doing some research and confirmed that. And so felt like the industry needed that, you know, some kind of a checklist and ability to tell people. Andy Farquharson: Yeah. Michael McGinley: Now that you're ESOP-owned, what do do? Andy Farquharson: Okay. So going to the other end, all the way to the other end of the spectrum, mean, you guys sort of, you talked about obviously being very much mission aligned together. And also sort of you've talked a lot about being very focused on like the double bottom line. Like you've got to be making sure that you're delivering returns and also sort of having that positive impact on the community. Michael McGinley: And. Andy Farquharson: mean, how do you guys measure your success as Monarch and how do you then communicate that back to your LPs? Katie Kimble: It's interesting because when we set out, we didn't call ourselves an impact fund necessarily, even though we are very mission aligned. But we did have a set of metrics that we were looking at of what does success mean to us? And it's the number of new employee owners that we're creating. It's how much wealth are we targeting to create for them? It's how many jobs are we keeping rooted in local communities? And what's the economic impact of that? Things like that. And so. That all goes back to our LPs in, in no reporting, but bigger picture, you know, it's, it's about. finding partners and particularly LPs that believe in that same mission. so, you know, I think some of them might bucket us as an impact manager now. And I would venture to say we are, but, you know, to us, it didn't really start out as we need to fit a certain bucket. It's like, what's our mission and how do we do good in this world based on the skillsets that we have? And how do we fill this void in the market that we see in a way that we can go to everyone? Michael McGinley: And what's exciting to do is that we get to put returns and purpose on a level playing field. And so we have to generate good returns to get investors to perpetuate this, to do more of this. There has to be a market benchmark that we're meeting and exceeding in order to drive more capital to the space. But at the same time, we get to get up every day and create stories like I've seen in my career where you walk into a business that didn't sell to a strategic third party and didn't lay people off. And not only that, put wealth into the hands of employees such that you get to hear stories where people get to buy their first home or they get to retire with dignity or they get to help their family, help their grandkids go through college. And so on the one hand, we're generating, I think, competitive, you know, we're focused on returns, but there's also a really important social impact to the people and to the jobs, to the communities that they serve and getting to look at that on a level playing field, which I think is unique and needs to be more of. Andy Farquharson: Yeah, I'm sure, I'm sure incredibly fulfilling for you guys as well to be able to have both of those. That's awesome. Yeah. Which I think is something that you're also giving to the companies that you invest in too, is to be able to solve that. But that is fantastic. Guys, thank you so much for your time today. Now, before I leave. Michael McGinley: It's exciting to get up every day. Andy Farquharson: What I typically ask these guests, ask my guests is a quick three questions and you offer a quick response. So Katie, I'll come to you first on this first question and Michael, you're second. So who is the leader that you most admire in employee ownership? Katie Kimble: my gosh, there's so many. Michael McGinley: Yeah. Andy Farquharson: Sorry, Katie. Katie Kimble: Wow. I don't know that I can pick one. And it's interesting for me coming at it from a different perspective. Like I'm five years into the employee ownership journey. Michael's much, much longer. So. Michael McGinley: So. Katie Kimble: This is going to sound interesting, but Michael was one of the first people I met in the space and I found him to be the most open-minded and most forward thinking in terms of how to expand employee ownership. So I might just have to say Michael. Andy Farquharson: Hey, that's a great, that makes a lot of sense considering you're partners in this business. Michael, over to you. Michael McGinley: That's a tough one to follow. But. Andy Farquharson: I don't think I've ever had anyone self nominate. Michael McGinley: I will say there was the business owners that I referenced earlier that I wrote the book for and I'm sure they wouldn't want to be publicized. But there is a company in central United States that had a very similar setup to us. Male, female co-CEOs living in different cities and they started their business because they wanted to run it differently. than how traditional firms in their industry had ever worked. And they had a better idea for how business could work and how it could work with their employees and then ultimately sold to their employees. And in every way, they embody the servant leadership approach. And it's a mindset of, it's a win-win approach to life. That if we do well and you do well and the business does well, the community does well, And so with everything that they do from the moment that they started their business was a focus on creating that win-win-win approach to everything and putting purpose and profit on a level playing field. They become the marquee business for people to work. so I would say that that's probably who we've modeled ourself after humbly as best as we can. Andy Farquharson: Okay, so yeah, at some stage, we'd love to learn a little bit more about that business. But if you get their permission, we definitely update the pod later. Okay, moving on to the second question is an end. We'll let this to either one of you. What is your favorite resource on employee ownership? Michael McGinley: Thank you. to get the best you can. Okay. Katie Kimble: Yeah, I'm happy to jump in there. There's a lot of good data that's now coming out from a lot of industry groups, particularly here in the US. So we find a lot of data within that. And CEO, we find a lot of data within the ESOP Association. We've gotten fairly involved in the policy side of employee ownership. There's a lot of really positive legislative environment right now. And so ESCA, here's another group that gets involved in that. And then we're very, I'm very excited to see there's a lot more conversation going on at the university level of employee ownership. And I think that's really critical to helping grow and bring in the next level of professionals and just educate, whether it's company folks, professionals. So, you know, all the, all the universities here that are starting those programs and, or continuing those, there's a lot of good research coming out of those groups too. Andy Farquharson: Michael, is there anything else you'd like to add to that? My favorite resource for you. Michael McGinley: No, that's really it. She mailed it. Katie Kimble: Ha Andy Farquharson: Okay. All right. Then lastly, what would you say to a business owner who's sitting on the fence regarding a transition to an employee ownership model? Michael McGinley: Yeah. Katie knows my answer to this because I ask it all the time. And my experience coming from an investment bank where a business owner would typically show up and they say, I want to sell my business. And usually the first response is how much is it worth and who's going to pay the most for my business? And what the data says is most of those outcomes either don't work. And for those that do work, the seller's typically unhappy. And so I tried to change that in my practice. And the first question I would ask is, who do you want to own your business? And when you approach that from a standpoint of where do you want that legacy to go? Where do you want those, who do you want the employees to work for? Who do you want to benefit from the business going forward? Where do you want it to be? When you start thinking about those questions, I think you really start to get to more of the heart of the culture and the legacy of that business. And an ESOP can make more sense for a lot of people in that when you ask that question. And so I would encourage more investment bankers and more business owners to think about who's the rightful next owner of your business. Because it may very well not be a private equity firm. Andy Farquharson: Well, I love that framing. think it's a great question. So thank you both so much for your time, for joining us for that first ever double episode. Where can people go if they want to follow your stories and learn more about Honour? Katie Kimble: Yeah, well, please feel free to check out our website or www.monarchinvestmentpartners.com. Just a quick note, the monarch name is a nod to the butterfly effect. So with small change, we can hopefully create transformational impact. And lastly, I just wanted to thank you, Andy, for the work that you're doing in this space to create awareness, for having us here to get to talk about all of this today. It's a really important conversation and you're leading that. So thank you for having us. Thank you for the work that you do. And thank you to your listeners as well. Andy Farquharson: Thank you very much. Well, Katie, thank you for your time. Michael, again, thanks again for your time and really appreciate you all joining us on The Alternative Exit. Michael McGinley: Thank you. Katie Kimble: Thank you.