Financing Films & TV: A Masterclass with David Offenberg

Speaker 1  0:00  

Welcome to another episode of On Production brought to you by Wrapbook. Today we have the privilege of speaking with Dr. David Offenberg, an associate professor of finance at Loyola Marymount University, and a leading academic expert in entertainment finance. Dr. Offenberg, who won the prestigious Teaching Award for finance professors in 2018, is renowned for his innovative approach to teaching film finance. He's frequently quoted by major media outlets, and has just published a new book designed to teach film finance from the ground up. This book is a game changer for any aspiring producer or director looking to understand the financial intricacies of the film industry. Dr. Offenberg Welcome to the show. It's an honor to have you with us. No,

‍

Speaker 2  0:42  

I'm honored to be here with you, Cameron. Thanks for having me.

‍

Speaker 1  0:45  

Yeah, my pleasure. Okay, well, let's start. Can you tell me about your journey into becoming an academic expert in entertainment finance, that's really unique.

‍

Speaker 2  0:54  

But yeah, I got a PhD in corporate finance from Purdue University, Go Boilers. And I was a pretty normal finance professor. So I did research on things like mergers and acquisitions, and executive compensation and where those things meet. And then I got tenure. And then my department told me, I needed to teach a new elective. And this was coming out of the 2008 2009 financial crisis. And I've watched a ton of our students, great students go out and not get hired. And I felt like we had failed them. Because there's this great recession resistant industry right here in LA that we were not serving in entertainment. And so I started the process of learning everything I could about entertainment, finance, mostly through. Additionally, about 60 hours of executive interviews, asked the question, what do I need to teach, so my students will win the job interview. And then a ton of reading and more reading and more reading, and talking to more people till I built up the knowledge base where I could actually teach a course in it and not embarrass myself. Sure.

‍

Speaker 1  1:59  

That's amazing. So I'm curious, you know, in the years that you've been studying and teaching and being engaged with, you know, entertainment, finance, what prompted you to write the book? And how does it differ from other resources in film finance,

‍

Speaker 2  2:15  

the thing that I really wanted is data. Because there is, I mean, there are hidden pockets of data on how independent producers financed their films. But none of us can get to it, you know, it's locked up in freeware, it's locked up in vintage or in other, like, semi large, independent production companies, but you and I can't see it. And so I wanted the data so that I could actually see how producers finance their films over the course of their their careers. And writing the book allowed me the the excuse to talk to independent filmmakers, successful independent filmmakers, and ask how did you finance your films over the course of your your career. And because of that, I have great data. And because of that data, I have a really cool book that shows when people first use equity and when people first use debt, and when people first use tax incentives on average, that for the for the emerging filmmaker gives them like a whole new perspective on what their financial career arc is going to look like, or should look like.

‍

Speaker 1  3:17  

That's cool. So if I've, if I understand this correctly, you you got insights from like over 60 Different successful independent producers. I mean, any fun or interesting stories like along the way that maybe you highlighted in the book, or maybe you even don't highlight in the book, but you found interesting, and that informed kind of how you went about writing this

‍

Speaker 2  3:37  

way. So that's one of the struggles is that there were so many fun stories that I was not allowed to put in the book, where people said, you can't write this. But here's what happened. There's so many of those so many of those. But there's a great story in the book about the Charlize Theron movie monster. What happened with Monster is it was made on spec, the producers didn't have a distribution agreement in place when they made it. They finished the film, this would have been 2000 to 2003. So they actually brought in VHS copies of the film, to all the major studios. All the studios got to watch the film. In its full beauty. They got to see Charlize their owns Best Actress winning performance. And all of them said, no, there should have been a bidding war. It should have been a movie that sold for a good price. But they all said no, they didn't want to take the risk. And the only reason that that movie got released is because back in 2003, there was a movie rental chain, you might remember called blockbuster. And blockbuster wanted. I showed you

‍

Unknown Speaker  4:43  

I think there's one left in Portland, Oregon or something.

‍

Speaker 2  4:47  

That's right. That's right. Blockbuster wanted to have product for their shelves and so they decided to do a theatrical release as the distributor because they knew that if it released theatrically then more people would want to rent it at Blockbuster. And they didn't expect that it was going to do nearly as well as it did. And so they released it in just a few theaters and it boomed. And so they released it a few more and it boomed and blockbuster kept spending distribution money to expand the reach to where went into over 1500 theaters before it ended up on VHS and blockbuster stores around the country. That's

‍

Speaker 1  5:23  

incredible. So you spoke with some of the team members involved in that sort of process. That's

‍

Speaker 2  5:29  

right. That's right. And, you know, the, the producer that I spoke to there is Clark Peterson. And the really amazing thing that Clark said to me when, you know, he told the story is that I asked him so you got the movie in you got the great success story. You got Charlize Theron, her Oscar. And so how did you feel after that? And his, his first thought was? Well, shoot. I have to start all over from scratch. I have to do this again. We it's a hard industry, David. It is a hard industry. That's right. That's right. It's

‍

Speaker 1  6:04  

so wonderful. And it is so hard. You know, I love that story. Because I think that that provides insights for you know, filmmakers that have maybe even been through the process of bringing films to market fundraising, distributing and doing it over and over again, like that seems like this book actually has value for some even seasoned producers. I'd love to kind of get to that in a second. But before we do for like the aspiring filmmaker, just from from a first principles perspective, can you walk us through and break down just the basic fundamentals of film finance, and how you kind of structure this in your teaching,

‍

Speaker 2  6:41  

right. So everything for me comes from what's called an income statement. And a balance sheet. And income statements, shows how much revenue is coming in, and how much you're spending, and what's leftover revenue minus expenses is profit. And every movie has a balance sheet, every company has a balance sheet, you Cameron, even you as an individual have a balance sheet, because you have your income from your wages, and you have all the things that you spend money on like your house and your car and diapers. And what's leftover, hopefully, is your savings. That's your profit. So for a movie, the goal is to have a an income statement that generates a profit. And that profit then can be paid to the producers and to the investors. The investors then show up on the balance sheet, and the balance sheet has two sides, like any scale, like any balance on one side, or the assets, the assets for a movie are typically the movie. So initially, it might just be the script, and a whole bunch of cash. And that script in that cash get converted and production into a finished film. And that finished film is a valuable asset. And so the ownership of that asset is reflected on the other side of the balance sheet, where you have the debt and the equity. And the debt could be loans from banks, it could be loans from a tax incentive lender, and it could be loans from your grandma. And the equity side is you and any other equity investors who get paid after all the debts get paid. And so the the balance sheet, again, has the assets on one side and the debt and equity on the other. That's

‍

Speaker 1  8:23  

a pretty good articulation of what you need to know about the financial side if you are a producer or a director trying to get a film made for the first time

‍

Speaker 2  8:35  

and will and I will also say that's a semesters worth of accounting in 30 seconds. So I don't if you're new to this as a listener, if you're new to this, I would encourage you to either read my book or read another basic accounting or basic finance book because understanding an income statement and balance sheet is critical to your ability to raise capital from investors.

‍

Speaker 1  8:57  

Well, we'll see that's what I was going to ask David actually for, like, you know, folks, kind of really curious about film finances, how important is it for, you know, the producers, or someone interested in kind of kick starting their career in independent film? To really understand this like, that sounds like you're saying this is an essential set of insights and learning that you must do in order to be successful?

‍

Speaker 2  9:24  

I would think so. Because even in the beginning, if you want to have a meaningful budget for your film for your first film, you can't typically raise that money from your family and friends. It needs to come either from high net worth individuals or from institutions like independent production companies. And so being able to raise money from either high net worth individuals or independent production companies means that you need to be able to talk their language and their language is how am I going to get repaid in all these cases? These folks want to know how am I gonna get repaid they're at Don't get me wrong, they like the art, they're very happy with the art, but they're going to invest in the art because it's going to repay them. And so understanding how the income statement is structured and how the profits are going to be earned, and then how those profits are going to be distributed through the waterfall on the balance sheet is critical to convincing these people to invest in your film.

‍

Speaker 1  10:19  

That's awesome. And like I said, I think for those who are listening, that have more experience of being a filmmaker and getting funds distributed and generating equities, I think those folks are gonna be most interested to hear maybe some of the insights from you of what you've been seeing in terms of the market broadly. And I have some questions about that a little bit later. But for those filmmakers that are really just kind of curious, and maybe like that perfect candidate for reading your book, and kind of getting an insight on how to bring something to market. You know, can you just give an example of how filmmakers can really effectively communicate with potential investors? I mean, obviously, some amount of financial literacy is important. But how have you seen this be a successful process for producers when when looking to go raise capital and execute production? I

‍

Speaker 2  11:07  

love that question. The most important thing I've seen in my data is that the producers who are the best at this have worked on their own outside of producing their own films for at least eight years, that means maybe they were at a desk at an agency, maybe they were working at an independent production company, maybe they were running a production services company, maybe they were in construction, or investment banking, or some other completely different part of the economy. But the thing that is consistent in my data is that those who've worked at least eight years, before they go on to produce their first film, they raise money more successfully, they get to the more sophisticated parts of the independent film financing system faster, they get to work with bigger budgets, their movies have a bigger social impact, both in box office and in IMDb votes. And so working for at least eight years is absolutely critical. And I think I can't prove it. But I think the reason is, because that work experience provides a producer with credibility, it says, Look, I'm I know a little bit about what I'm doing. And I can do this, right? It provides them with connections. Because ultimately, they need to find high net worth individuals or institutions to pay for that first movie. And it provides them with skills, and you need a really diverse skill set to produce a movie, it's not like, you can just finish your film degree and then go off and do it, you need a much more diverse skill set than that. And so having that body of experience is so critical to being successful as an independent film producer, and a successful independent film producer who doesn't just make one movie, but makes several movies that make a difference in the world. And so that's really tough, then, because what that means is that when that person is eight years into their career, they have power, and they have a real paycheck. And then they have to decide, oh, my gosh, do I leave it all behind and go try this on my own, and a place where I have no power? And I have no paycheck? And I have no guarantees about my future. And so that's it's a really tough choice.

‍

Speaker 1  13:25  

It is a choice. I've spoken with many producers about who have varying feelings about those choices, depending on the year.

‍

Speaker 2  13:36  

Right. And that's definitely true there. There are better times to jump into the market than others. This right now, I'm not sure I would convince anybody to jump into the independent filmmaking market right now. But there will always be people who try. Let's speak

‍

Speaker 1  13:49  

to that. Let's speak to that, David, because why what what are you seeing is like the big risks right now, maybe this is like not the right market, or at least a challenging market. And by the way, I will say, you know, when when others are fearful, be greedy. And when others are greedy, be fearful. I mean, it really is hard to know when but I'm curious, like what's your data telling you? I

‍

Speaker 2  14:11  

will say that this, the caveat is that this is for the United States, I think that the markets better in Europe and a few other places. But in the United States, the streaming services have largely stopped buying independent films. They're they're no longer commissioning them, like they used to Netflix used to release I think about 170 180 films a year. And in 2023, it'll be under 60. And so that's a huge pullback in spending and Netflix was the big one, but everybody else has pulled back significantly as well. And not just because of the strikes, but because that was their plan all along. Once the streaming service gains a certain amount of scale, once they have enough subscribers. They don't need as much new content on there to keep people on because the especially In the case of Netflix, their competitors have not strengthened the way that we all hoped they would. Max's weakened to a place where it's now starting to sell some shows back to Netflix to generate cash. Disney is struggling and will continue to struggle with the integration of Hulu, Paramount plus, and peacock haven't come to be nearly as competitive with Netflix as maybe some of us would have wanted. And so because of this, Netflix has this really powerful position. And they don't need more shows. They proved this during the strike, where they didn't commission nearly as many Docu series and realities as we thought they would. And so, for independent film, streaming is not the place where you're guaranteed to make money. And the theatrical market is super challenged. Now, we don't see people going to theaters to watch independent films nearly as much as they did 10 or 15, or 20 years ago. I mean, we had one spectacular independent film in the theaters in 2022. And a couple in 2023. But it's been very few and far between, it's very unlikely for an independent film, to generate enough cash theatrically to repay investors. And so if you don't have the attribute, you don't have streaming than what's left. And and hopefully, hopefully, can we figure out something better? Because independent films are amazing, and we should have a a market for them, we should have a place where people can go to watch them. And absolutely,

‍

Speaker 1  16:25  

I mean, I was discussing this with a filmmaker just the other day, and just describing kind of the market cycle of bundling and unbundling of different industries. This seems like maybe in the cycle, an opportunity for consolidation and bundling. Once more, does that kind of map with your own understanding as well? And if so, can you kind of explain that concept to our listeners? Yeah.

‍

Speaker 2  16:49  

So we have been expecting for a few years now that streaming market would consolidate, we're seeing some of that already. We've lost Quibi, we've effectively lost Showtime, we've lost CNN plus we more or less lost discovery. And so there will be more consolidation in the years to come, I don't expect peacock to last much longer. With all due respect my friends at Peacock, I just don't see what they're bringing to the market that's going to make them competitive and make universal want to stomach these losses in the years to come. And so consolidation is generally bad for the people who supply products to the firms that are consolidating, because there are fewer firms. And so the suppliers in this case, independent filmmakers have fewer places to sell their movie to. And so on one hand, I think that's really dark for the future of independent film. But on the other hand, like you said, it creates a tremendous opportunity, because there are wonderful films out there that are being produced and are being finished and that nobody's getting to see them. And so there's a huge opportunity for somebody to innovate something that lets these independent films get into people's homes, where they can watch them and enjoy them. And I don't know what that looks like, I don't know how it's gonna appear. But I hope somebody figures it out. I hope somebody cracks the code. And we have a way to see these and enjoy these and allow the producers to monetize their films again.

‍

Speaker 1  18:19  

Absolutely. I mean, we've obviously just spoken a lot about streaming and the phenomena there have there been any other things worth mentioning, from your kind of Herge related to the landscape of film financing, and how it's evolved in recent years.

‍

Speaker 2  18:34  

I don't want to be so dark. Like everything is made worse by interest rates in the economy. And right now, we're in a place where interest rates are also really high. And for the independent filmmaker, that makes life even more challenging, because it's already hard to provide a return to your investors. And when your investors can get a 5% return just by investing in risk free US Treasury bonds. Boy, it's hard for them to pass that opportunity up and put their million dollars into your movie instead. And so hopefully, we'll see, you know, the economy reach the soft landing that all of us are hoping for, and the Fed will start lowering rates again. And that trade off for the high net worth individuals won't be so compelling anymore. An independent film will look like a better, better investment. But right now, in this high interest rate environment, it's really tricky to convince somebody with with that kind of money to invest in a project that's so risky and historically doesn't return very well. David,

‍

Speaker 1  19:41  

regardless of macro conditions, I'm curious, you know, for someone interested in learning about film finance, for their own career, for their own projects, regardless of kind of the cycle that the economy is then what are some common financial pitfalls that emerging filmmakers should avoid

‍

Speaker 2  20:01  

the number one pitfall is running out of money, which I think probably goes without saying, but it happens so often that films get started and they don't get finished. Because the producers run out of money, they're not diligent with their budget than with maintaining their budget, or they haven't raised all the money before they start shooting, they think they'll be able to get some good footage and then be able to woo investors in with that, and it doesn't play out. And so as a result, you know, a million dollars or $2 million has been spent, and there's no finished product to show for it. And it will never be able to be monetized, it ends up in the trash can. And that's something that no producer ever wants to that's a situation no producer ever wants to put themselves in. And so that's number one, don't run out of money. Number two, is make sure that the hurdles in the contracts are financial, and not time based. By which I mean, I see contracts all the time that say, we're going to pay on the first day of shooting or we're going to pay on this day. And that day is a bad hurdle, because there's no guarantee that the producer is actually going to have money in the bank account to pay on that day. So it's much better to have financial hurdles than time based hurdles, financial hurdle, meaning we're going to pay when we're profitable, or we're going to pay when we're generating revenue. And so by having a financial hurdle rather than a time based hurdle, it avoids a whole lot of lawsuits and a whole lot of contentious sort of behavior between investors and producers. That makes

‍

Speaker 1  21:39  

a tremendous amount of sense. What is your approach to teaching film finance at Loyola Marymount? And how do you keep it engaging and relevant for your students? And I'm actually curious, I mean, what's driving your students to kind of take the class as well.

‍

Speaker 2  21:54  

So I am a finance professor. I'm not a film professor. I am in the College of Business, not in film school. And my students are largely finance majors who love finance and want to learn more about how films are financed. And their ambition is always to be the person at the studio who's making the greenlight decision, because the greenlight decision is, on one hand a creative decision, but on the other hand, a financial decision. And all these studios have amazing financial models that try to project how much money the movie is going to make, to all the windows from release to for the next 10 years. And my students want that job. They want to be the person who is making the greenlight decisions, and maybe it's with a movie, maybe it's with a music artists, maybe it's with a video game, or a live event. But they they want to be the person making the greenlight decision in the entertainment field. And so, my dear, dear question of how do I teach it and make it engaging? I'm very lucky in that people have self selected into my course. They want to know it, they want to learn it. And I suppose Yes, I could make it really boring. But my favorite day of the semester, my favorite day of the semester, we go through a participation statement that the writer of Harry Potter and the Order for the Phoenix publicly released when he accused Warner Brothers of not paying him enough. And so a participation statement shows how much and above the line, talent member is getting paid on the back end or not getting paid on the back end. It shows basically the income statement, all the revenue coming in for the film, and then all the expenses. And what's left is the profit and the participant gets paid a share of that profit. And you can see in this participation statement, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix making well over $600 million in revenue. And yet, the writer gets paid $0 in profit participation, because Warner Brothers is contractually allowed to load so many expenses onto that income statement. So that the movie never ever, ever shows a profit. And the writer never got paid profit participation. And it's very unlikely that any of the actors or JK Rowling or the producer or director ever got paid participation on on that or any of the Harry Potter films.

‍

Speaker 1  24:20  

That's wild, I think it leads leads nicely to my next question, which is, you know, in your kind of academic setting, how do you bridge the gap between academic theory and the practical realities of the film industry in your teaching? Boy,

‍

Unknown Speaker  24:36  

what a what a deep philosophical question.

‍

Unknown Speaker  24:39  

I'm always guilty of going philosophical. So

‍

Speaker 2  24:44  

no, so for me, like the essence of finances, time travel, right. So finance is all about I need money today. Somebody doesn't need the money today. So how can I take their money today and give it back to them in the future? And so finance is really about move The money from the present into the future or from the future into the present. One of my favorite examples of this is ATT&T's spin off of Warner Brothers discovery, because ATT&T really liked Warner Brothers because Warner Brothers generated so much cash for ATT&T and ATT&T could use that cash to build out their 5G network. But ATT&T hated owning Warner Brothers, they didn't like it as an asset, it didn't help their business. And so the way ATT&T moved all of that cash from Warner Brothers from the future into the present and kept in ATT&T, is by loading Warner Brothers up with debt before the spin off. So ATT&T Put $30 billion of debt onto Warner Brothers, and then took all the cash and kept it for themselves. All that cash all those future years of cash flow from Warner Brothers, ATT&T kept for themselves. And then they floated Warner Brothers off on their own with this massive pile of debt, which is part of the reason why Warner Brothers is in the situation, they're in these days. And so that is finance as time travel. Right. So all those future cash flows from Warner Brothers are in ATT&T’s hands. And this is, from my perspective, this is everything about finance, finance, is all time travel. And so for my students, for my cell for anybody to talk to, I try to put finance in the context of time travel, if

‍

Speaker 1  26:22  

that's a really cool model, it really helps like to see the shape of how these financial decisions have very real impacts in the world. And on this industry. David, you know, we kind of talked about a little bit related to the macro and the market streamers. Are there future trends in film finance, that aspiring filmmakers should be aware of I mean, you You did mention that there are markets outside of the US that maybe are, are friendlier. Just curious on maybe incentive trends, anything in general and finance that just filmmakers should be aware of from your purview.

‍

Speaker 2  27:01  

The important thing to know about independent film finance in particular is that every few years, there's a new group of people, a new group of investors who enter the market and think, Aha, I figured it out. I'm gonna be the one who makes a ton of money off of independent federal finance. And it was the insurance companies and then it was the German bankers, then it was the Saudis. And then it was the Silicon Valley elites. And so every few years, there's a new pool of investors that moves into the market and provides a new opportunity for producers to finance their films and get their projects done, and hopefully be successful with those releases. And so I don't know who that's going to be next. But I just would say to anybody who's listening, boy, keep your ear to the ground, keep your ear to the ground, because there are going to be people coming into the market every few years. Rich people want to be in Hollywood. That's all there is to it. And so they are going to come to the market, and they're going to want to finance your projects, and they're going to want to rub elbows with a list stars. And it's it's your job to help them do that. And Live The Hollywood Life.

‍

Speaker 1  28:11  

David, are there any new projects or research areas that you're currently exploring that you can share with us? When's the next book coming out? Even though I know you just released this one. I

‍

Speaker 2  28:22  

will fully admit Cameron, my next book is going to be about the video game business. Because what the data shows us is that the people in the youngest generations Gen Z and younger are moving their consumption habits from filmed content to gaming. And last year, 2022 was the first year on record where the average Gen Z individual spent more time gaming than watching film content. And that trend is going to accelerate, which I mean, man, what an opportunity, what an opportunity there. There's a an analyst, they Matthew ball, who says there are 140 million people born each year, and every single one of them is going to be a gamer there. They're not all necessarily going to watch film content, but they are all going to play video games. And so I think it also creates an opportunity for those who are good storytellers, because there are so many stories to tell them videogames. And it may not be that independent film is the place to become filthy rich in the years to come. But it could very well be the case that telling the right story in a video game could create insane financial opportunities for the people who figure it out.

‍

Speaker 1  29:35  

Yeah, I mean, it's something I've been curious about is seeing new hardware technologies like Apple vision, which just seems like really truly astounding. Or, you know, interesting companies like Roblox, where you can build these types of stories in games and monetize them. I've always wondered like, if there will be a space for or frame based storytelling in a digital environment, like, if I'm in a 3D environment, in my, you know, in my VR goggles, do I still potentially want to engage with some craft in that digital environment because filmmaking is, in some ways very powerful because it's constrained to what is in or out of the screen versus like in a 3d environment, like I can go around. And the the narrative is slightly different. So I'm very curious to see how these things intersect.

‍

Speaker 2  30:38  

I'm way less bullish on VR. Than then you Cameron, we've had 30 years to figure it out. And still, nobody has come up with the killer app, that one thing that everybody wants to do in VR. And it's not like, we haven't tried, we've had, you know, billions of minds on this planet thinking about it. And nobody has come up with the aha moment of here's how we make VR something that people actually want to stomach. And, you know, maybe it has good institutional uses practical, like, within corporations within medical settings, but I don't see it as a form of entertainment that people are going to want to have on their faces in the years to come. But I could be wrong. Because you know, a

‍

Speaker 1  31:26  

David we're publishing this this one, they're gonna they're gonna quote plus one for you. Okay. What is it? It's like, the great economist from the New York Times, you know, the internet's never gonna go anywhere.

‍

Unknown Speaker  31:45  

I hope I'm not that guy, I hope no,

‍

Speaker 1  31:47  

definitely not. I mean, I do. He's obviously incredibly biased on this subject. But Palmer Luckey, the founder of Oculus, you know, he hit one of his famous quips is that it is the ultimate end state of any sort of computer interfaces, VR. I think I agree with it philosophically. But I think there's a lot of details in the practicality to get there. And I'm not even saying necessarily, like, I'm excited about that end state. I just think that may be an inevitability. But I am curious how gaming, and, you know, frame based storytelling, when I when I say that, I mean, like filmmaking, where there is a, a frame and something happening within the frame, like, that's a very powerful storytelling modality. But obviously, gaming is so exciting. And I think we're just really kind of strangely at the start. And I love all of this, because I think it ties in computer science, storytelling, film, information, sciences, all just kind of in this kind of amazing package. And the truth of the matter is like finance is what drives all of it. resource allocation, resource management. It's super interesting, you know, under percent, David, for our listeners who wish to dive deeper into film finance, besides your book, are there any other resources that you would recommend?

‍

Speaker 2  33:00  

I think that in addition to my book, The most important book for people to read is movie money, which is about how participation profit participation works in film. And I think my book and that book together really provide emerging filmmakers with a really nice perspective of how money moves through independent films, whose book is that there are about five authors on it now. And it's if you type movie money book into Amazon, you will absolutely find it there up to the third edition. It's it's a real classic, and so many people have it on the bookshelves. I also love how Bogles entertainment industry economics, it's dense, it's thick, and my students hate reading it and their finance majors. But it's also like understanding the underlying economics of the industry are so beneficial to people who are trying to figure out how to get a movie made. Because if you if you don't understand the underlying economics, you just can't talk to investors in the right way.

‍

Speaker 1  34:05  

Where can our listeners find you and follow some of your work? The

‍

Speaker 2  34:09  

most public place that I exist is on LinkedIn. And so please feel free to reach out and connect with me on LinkedIn. When you do make sure you add a little note saying I heard you on Cameron's podcast, and that way I will be able to differentiate you from the many many many other people who are spamming me from Nigeria.

‍

Unknown Speaker  34:28  

Amazing. David Offenberg. Thanks for being On Production. I really appreciate the time. It's

‍

Unknown Speaker  34:32  

been a pleasure, Cameron. Thank you