Contact Us menu-bars menu-close

Why design function is a MUST for every business

Fail Faster

Episode 414


35 minutes

Paul Ghio, VP Product, Shutterstock Marketplace product leader joins us for a super insightful episode of Fail Faster.

Paul shares a very interesting story of a risky bet a company made that touches on the common root problem of why products fail. He shares how sometimes products are built on approximations for personas who don’t exist and what could be the expense for such decisions, how businesses might be missing crucial learnings by keeping their focus only on the profits and the responsibility of good designers who check their biases at the door and carry their customers on their shoulders in the conference room.

Podcast transcript

Vandana: Hey, Paul, welcome to the Fail Faster podcast. How are you today?

Paul: I’m doing well. How are you doing?

Vandana: I’m doing very well. Thank you so much. I am super excited to dive deep into your world, Paul, and your company. Super exciting. I am one of the users of Shutterstock. I feel like a lot of us who are with the social media, and more need that kind of service, and what a great idea. And I would love to learn more with our listeners about you a little bit if you can get us some of your background and how you kind of came about to this role. That would be great. 

Paul: Yeah. Well, thank you for having me. So I’ve been in tech for upwards of about 15 years. I didn’t know I wanted to get into tech initially, nor did I know I wanted to get into product, but I actually had a family friend and a mentor who had a lot of very early success in tech and kind of showed me what was possible. So, without getting into all the details, we sold the very first company to Myspace when Myspace was hyper-relevant and at its top three sites on earth and has since had kind of a lot of successes. And so dating back to about 2009, you starting a company and then the online real-time conversation space. Think of it as Quora. If your audience is familiar with Quora. But it had a little bit more of a real-time component. 

The headline is the company didn’t work out, but he did achieve a fair amount of success. So I ended up joining as a community manager while I was still in college. I worked there for about two years and did everything from helping facilitate conversations to moderating and defining community ethos. And ultimately, it was incredibly rewarding because I got to have a lot of really great conversations with technologists in the space, artists in the space, VCs in the space.

That really kind of furthered my aperture and exposed me to kind of all the interesting people and thinking and divergent thinking and the interesting projects that were happening at the time. And I knew at that point, I needed to further get into tech. At that point, I didn’t even know what that really meant. I didn’t, again, product was still a very nascent role. And so I tried to start a few things that raised some venture money and ultimately ended up joining a company called Creative Market.

So for people who aren’t familiar, Creative Market is a design asset marketplace, the place where designers go to purchase things like fonts, icons, all sorts of templates. I joined that team relatively early. So I was employed and the beautiful thing about being so early is that I got to wear so many different hats and I got to play the role of GM, even though we didn’t have a formalized product function there. I got to play the role of an analyst. I got to just help out in so many different ways.

By sampling all sorts of different kind of roles within technology at that company, I really started to hone in on, A, what I was good at, and B, importantly, where that intersected with where I wanted to go and the things that really, really excited me. And so I ended up getting into product from a growth perspective, meaning I was working on funnel optimization, sharing all sorts of things to bring new users into the fold and help keep our existing users around. I stayed with that company for about five and a half years. And it was a really wild journey because the company was acquired in 2014.

We were with this larger public company called Autodesk for about three years. I ended up becoming an executive as part of this company. And then we actually spun the company out and went fully independent again, raced around, kind of had full control over our future once again, which was incredibly exciting. We continued to build the team from there, continued to grow from there. And then eventually the company sold to Dribbble, which is, of course, a design portfolio company and pretty well known in that space. So all in all, incredibly formative experience. Got to spin up research, got to build the design team, the product management team, and really just learned a lot throughout all of that.

After that, I ended up going to some larger companies. So I was a little bit burnt out, admittedly, working for smaller companies and went to a company called HomeAdvisor, which is a marketplace connecting homeowners and property owners to local service providers, things like plumbers and architects, developers. So went there and building some new zero-to-one product. Then went over to Yelp doing a very similar thing.

Most recently been over at Shutterstock where I oversee the content marketplace. So, a lot of people know Shutterstock and stock photos. So I oversee kind of that part of the business and product as well as stock video, 3D models, using things like animation, gaming, music, and then some of the third-party brands that we’ve purchased. So TurboSquid and Premium Beat. So that has been in very expedited terms. That’s been kind of my journey in technology. It’s far, far from over, but have learned a lot, of course, have a lot more to learn.

Vandana: Awesome. Thank you so much. And a lot of those brands remind me of my previous career as an architect. Like I was an avid user of Autodesk, loved all the versions that it kept throwing. So there’s lots of componentization and everything that architects needed at the time. Yeah. Awesome. Well, thank you so much. And it seems like, yeah, sometimes we just pick up lots of skills and then kind of culminate into the next role is what I feel like you’ve been doing a lot. 

Paul: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, I wish I could say that there was like intelligent design behind this big master plan. And there was some of that. And, you know, I knew things that drove my curiosity and things that didn’t. But a lot of it was just kind of figuring things out along the way. And I think that’s true of product as well, where oftentimes we as product people can fool ourselves into thinking that we’re smarter than our user, trying to think four or five steps ahead. And oftentimes our users prove us otherwise. Learn to kind of take it one step at a time and then reorient yourself and then figure out what is that next step for yourself or for the product. 

Vandana: Absolutely. Let’s, that brings us into maybe a story that you might be able to share where it was like a setback of sorts or a small failure of sorts where you got a lot of learnings out of where you probably thought you knew the users and proven otherwise. 

Paul: Yeah, yeah. There’s plenty there. And I learned the hard way that you need to have a tremendous amount of humility in this business. But one, I think, decent story here is when I first joined HomeAdvisor. So again, HomeAdvisor kind of being this marketplace that connects homeowners with various types of local service professionals to help maintain, repair, and improve their homes. And so I joined at a really interesting time.

The company was established. It was at scale, multi-billion dollar business. And it had kind of built this product and built this business that had been working quite well for a while. But there was a desire to try to figure out what is that next horizon. How do we continue to evolve the business? And so they were making several different bets. And I was kind of brought on to help usher in one of these bets and make it successful. And so this was something called Minjobs.

When I joined, the team had been working on this for about six months. So they were three weeks away from launching V1. And I mentally wasn’t fully aware of that. As you might imagine, getting brought in as the architect of this new business and then realizing, OK, the spaceship is already on the launch pad. The countdown has effectively already begun. And this thing’s ready to take off.

So very quickly, you know, figure out how you can kind of control this thing and then go from there. And I level what this product did was instead of charging, let’s use the example of Plumber in this case, instead of charging a Plumber for a lead from a homeowner that may or may not actually manifest into work and become a job, the team had built a product where the homeowner only paid if the job had actually been won. Hence the name, Winjobs.

They would pay a 5% fee if work had actually started to try to better align incentives. But overall, the company was trying to solve a business problem and then back into a user problem as opposed to solving, excuse me, a user problem. Our users weren’t necessarily raising their hands, saying, hey, this is a problem for me. How can you help me solve this?

So I came to learn that there was unfortunately zero research done for this, which is nobody had talked to a user, which is not a not a good sign, not necessarily a death sentence, but can be close to that. And they were kind of building for this approximation of someone that they thought existed out in the universe. It wasn’t them. And it turned out to really not, this person turned out not to exist to kind of give away the end they do to some degree.

But all said, we rolled this thing out, the thing launched. And like all projects, when you’re in that first like 100 feet, 1000 feet from the launch pad, it’s incredibly fragile. And so we started generating thousands of dollars. And you have to put this in the context of a, again, a massive multibillion-dollar company where thousands of dollars a week isn’t interesting.

And very quickly, the task became, how do we get to escape velocity? How do we very quickly figure out if this thing can work and we can kind of break through the atmosphere or this is going to be a bet that doesn’t work? And so I worked with an outsourced team. We went through kind of a lot of iterations to try to address the core problems that we saw.

And namely, chiefly, the core problem was home service providers didn’t want to pay us. They already had their own way of collecting money. They would collect cash. They would collect checks. They would use Venmo and Cash App, wire transfers. And they already had an established behavior here. There was no problems that they saw with that established behavior. And so when we tried to kind of force ourselves and wedge ourselves in the middle of that transaction, there was no update.

And so the problem that we were facing, which a lot of people in the marketplace world will be quite familiar with, is disintermediation, where users are kind of taking the transaction outside of the product, off the platform. Think of this as like going to Airbnb, but instead of paying Airbnb and paying a host Airbnb, you call the host up or email them and say, hey, I really want to reserve your place. And he says I didn’t know you. And so that was the riskiest part of this, what I would call the riskiest hypothesis, the riskiest thing that we had to prove out to work. And we did a lot. I won’t go through all the details, but we did a lot to try to get that to work.

And over a six-month period of time, we had either weekly launches or multiple launches a week. Mostly, I would say 80% trying to address that core problem. And I also, in parallel, along with my team, would have weekly calls with both customers as well as with business owners. And we just wanted to understand, hey, generally speaking, what are the problems that you’re facing? What are the top three problems that you have, regardless of its relevance to HomeAdvisor or even to this project specifically?

And then we would take it a step further and ask them about if they had experience using this product, their thoughts on it, what worked, what didn’t work. Sometimes we would show them prototypes. And very quickly, we discovered that they had a massive, massive distaste in their mouth for HomeAdvisor.

And unfortunately, HomeAdvisor, again, great business, but had made kind of a lot of decisions over the course of a decade that made short-term sense for the business, maybe weren’t in the best interest of the customers’ long-term. And so 9, 9.5 out of 10 of these home service professionals would say something to the effect of, I would never trust HomeAdvisor with my money. And then they would give a reason. And sometimes the reasons were, they were outlandish. They were almost kind of silly. They were conspiratorial. But that is how they felt.

So not only were we trying to introduce a new behavior and solve a problem that didn’t exist, we were dealing with a customer base that fundamentally didn’t trust us. To own this part of their workflow. And I think had the team kind of discovered some of this stuff or really taken some of this stuff into further account earlier on, they would have designed a different solution or maybe said, Hey, this is not the core problem to solve. The problem is actually deeper. And therefore we need to solve this a different way.

So ultimately, you know, again, over about six months after all of those launches, after having a lot of different and very smart people involved in this project, we got it to a point where the product was kind of working for certain people and it was doing somewhere in the neighborhood of like one to $2 million a year. But again, when we’re talking about a multi-billion dollar business, one to $2 million isn’t that interesting. And so we had to put a fork in it and say, this is, you know, this is not going to be kind of the bet that works.

So a lot more I could extrapolate on a lot more learnings there. And there is kind of a part two to this story, taking some of these learnings, bringing them over to Yelp, where we actually were able to do something somewhat similar, but a lot more successful. But I’ll quickly pause there in case you have any questions or want to highlight anything.

Vandana: Yeah, I, I feel that that’s a huge problem to solve. Like if the users do not have the trust in a brand, I mean, that goes a long way and it, I mean, how do you solve for that? That’s my, I’m like, what happened after that? I’d like to know what were some of the measures that you took to kind of bring up the brand and the trust in the brand.

Paul: Yeah, I mean that, so those are very deep problems. And I think those are problems that take, it is a, both a product problem and by-product, I mean, both like product management and design, it’s co-owned by a lot of different teams. There’s also this, a brand component to it, of course, like your brand is more or less like what people think when they think of the name HomeAdvisor or Tesla or, you know, Twitter, now X.com, whatever it might be.

And so I think some of those problems are almost impossible to fully solve, especially when they’ve been kind of deeply woven over the course of a decade, as I mentioned. You know, I don’t want to come off as saying, oh my gosh, you know, this team made all these mistakes and they’d only know. And like, there were some mistakes that were made and there was very real consequences that came up in the metrics of the business that came in, you know, in the story that I just gave and like the perception of the business. The team did a lot of things right. And they grew the business and they had kind of a lot of massive milestones.

So you have to kind of give them success for success as do. But I think that’s a challenge that that company and kind of anybody else will continue to face unless there is a 180-degree pivot. And I haven’t. I mean, I’m sure there’s examples out there that I could think of, but on the spot, I can’t think of one example where a company has really done that 180 around.

Vandana: And it’s a hard thing to do. Right. Yeah. And I mean, all of that, it starts from user research, right? All of that, like being in touch with how you are being perceived.

Paul: Yeah.

Vandana: How are you? How are you users looking at you? And unless you talk to them, you will never know. So

Paul: yes.

Vandana: Yeah.

Paul: Yes, exactly. And then you have to, you know, there’s both kind of how do you build that awareness for yourself? How do you build that awareness as a team and an internal culture? And then it takes a certain level of courage as a general statement to kind of swim in the opposite direction, because based on a lot of these decisions, again, the company made a lot of money. And in the short term, that can be really addicting.

When you’re a public company and you have to report out to the street every single quarter, and given where the incentives kind of fall, it can be really easy to kind of prioritize short-term wins for the business at the expense. And sometimes, again, that makes sense. But ultimately, I think the companies that have longevity, put their users first and truly understand like, what is this problem that our users are having? How can we build trust with our users where they see us as a trusted partner, as opposed to kind of a necessary evil?

I’m using language that several professionals that use with me at HomeAdvisor say, hey, this is a necessary evil. I’m just using it to kind of fill up my calendar. So yeah, there’s a lot there. And it’s especially true for marketplaces, because whether it’s Airbnb or components of Amazon or HomeAdvisor, kind of the key and a through line across all of these is you have to have trust. You have to have trust that you’re going to get the right experience, the experience that you have been promised upfront. 

Vandana: Yeah, so true. And I believe some of this is like trickling down on with different brands in our lives, like Uber sometimes and Uber Eats or anything else. So how do you what are some of the things that you need to do or you have done in your career to keep that integrity of the marketplace? 

Paul:  Yeah, I mean, so I think part of it comes from an understanding of where value comes from in the marketplace long term. And it’s having kind of that long-term orientation. And a lot of that is within the control of kind of the leadership team because it’s a value. And I think some teams, again, I’ll use Airbnb as an example because I think Brian Chesney and team very much embody the value of long-term trust. That doesn’t mean that they haven’t made mistakes or haven’t done things that are maybe in the best interest of Airbnb. But as a general statement, I think that’s where they tend to lean. And so I think values are really important here. Of course, having that connectivity with your users.

One of the things that I try to both preach as well as practice going back to this example at HomeAdvisor is literally picking up the phone, getting on Zoom call, getting on Google Meet calls with users, and really learning user to a depth where it feels like they’re almost part of your extended family, where you can almost anticipate how they’re going to feel, how they’re going to think. And I think a lot of mistakes that I’ve seen product and side teams make is oftentimes there’s a dedicated research function, which is incredibly important. And I’m very much an advocate of that.

But they rely on that secondary information coming back from the research kind of team through decks and presentations. And they don’t build that kind of like firsthand tactile feel of the users. And I think you need to have both. And again, I just I can’t stress the importance of just picking up the phone. I literally will cold call users when that makes sense. Sometimes we’ll reach out, we’ll do more formal study, but just cold call users and like just get to know them and get to know them on such a deeper level. I think, you know, kind of above and beyond that, it’s understanding the second-order consequences of product decisions.

Like there’s a few questions I always love to ask when we’re building product. Who is this for? And try to get really, really narrow, not for that kind of abstracted person. Like, can we get really narrow? Who do we think we’re building for? Like really describe them. What problem does it solve? It’s a pretty obvious one, but oftentimes I’ve seen a lot of product teams launch solutions to problems that are kind of made up, you know, behind the scenes. How do we measure success? And another question more to the point is, what do we think the downstream consequences of this are going to be?

I think we going through that exercise at least helps build awareness of how this might impact someone’s overall product experience, both good and bad. And sometimes we say, Hey, we think that this actually is going to create a little bit of an issue over here, but we can solve for that later. Or we think it’s enough of an issue to solve for now, but just having that awareness and kind of being able to see kind of that whole holistic experience.

Vandana: Right. Awesome. I love it. And this is such like basic things, but you know, we miss it. And I love the part where you said, you know, the short-term successes and especially monetary successes showing that the business is profitable and then kind of at what expense. So that’s a huge thing that we have not talked about. And we generally don’t think we say, Oh yeah, we are positive. Business is bringing a lot of money. Everything is great. What are we talking about? Right. A lot of that happens in conference rooms.

Paul: Yeah, I agree. And I think, you know, some of that is just, it’s trying to bring the user to the conference room. The thing that my teams will often kind of hear me say is the customer on my shoulder. I try to like reserve a seat for them, whether it’s in a virtual meeting or a real meeting, like how would this person react? Because ultimately, you know, two things I’ll add here is that I think most product experiences need to make a user kind of feel something.

Of course, they should feel lightweight and easy, but they shouldn’t make users feel kind of happy to open an app or go to a website. They shouldn’t, of course, you know, increase your pulse or your blood pressure. Ultimately, technology exists to make us feel more human. I think that is so important to ask the question, which like I rarely see this asked in product teams. How do we think this is going to make users feel? Because we like to think of users as really rational operators. And of course, they can be at times, but what we all know about people is we’re emotional creatures. And oftentimes we think with our emotions first and then kind of logic second.

And the other thing, and this is more or less a reiteration, but I think it’s so important is I think you really have to kind of care about your user and respect your users. And I’ve seen, I’ve seen teams that do very much this. And I’ve seen other teams that they kind of discount or look down upon their users. Even people in very, very high positions kind of look down upon the users. And I think when you think your users are, you know, incapable or unintelligent or whatever it might be, it kind of leads you to thinking that you can outsmart your users.

And going back to the earlier point, I think it’s really, really important to have a level of humility saying, we don’t have all the answers because I have, you know, even the greats, the Steve Jobs have launched an awful lot of duds over their careers and of course, successes as well. And so you have to admit to yourself, we don’t have all the answers. We’re trying to get to the answers. Of course, we need to ship things to try to kind of shine the flashlight in a certain area and see, Hey, are the answers over here or over here? But if you don’t care and respect your users, I think you more easily arrive at the wrong conclusions.

Vandana: I’m so glad that we are doing this, Paul, because you’re bringing the exact reasons of why a designer and a human-centric mindset is needed today to run almost all the businesses. You know, this is a perfect conversation, which validates that. And I’m very sad to know that we are, we’re all like people who are close to this community. We all know that this is also the first role in the team that gets laid off because people feel, Oh yeah, yeah, we are good. The business is good. We don’t need the design folks anymore because we’re not going to be doing any more design. I mean, I just don’t see that. I mean, this is the first role to be appointed in starting any initiative in my opinion. And this conversation is like really surfacing the why that’s needed. Thank you for sharing all that. Very in-depth reasons, which have not been this clear in some of the podcasts, but yeah.

Paul: Yeah. I mean, you know, I think everybody on this point, like everybody in product has kind of their own approach and bias to some degree, even their own religion around how they approach product and religion is maybe too strong of a word, but you know, the thing that is maybe somewhat apparent about kind of mine is I’m very user-centric. I bet on teams that are very user-centric, design-centric. I love, you know, when I mentor startups on a fairly regular basis and I love seeing teams that have design co-founders or at least co-founders that have a high level of like design thinking and it’s contextual. Like if you’re building a massive kind of data product, maybe that’s less relevant. That’s definitely not where I’m at my best. If you’re building a product where your end users are consumers or what we call it at Shutterstock and Creative Market, like prosumers, people who are consumers who really act like pros, like you really have to have that bent. So point made. I’ll get off my soapbox now, but thank you for allowing me to get up there and preach a little bit.

Vandana: Absolutely. This is needed. Let’s get to Shutterstock a little bit. I know we are almost at time, but I wanted to get a little bit of the insights that you’re seeing in the trends that people are using that product and what’s coming up for you next.

Paul: Yeah, yeah. So Shutterstock is of course a company that a lot of people know and a lot of people know it in the context of stock photos. Over the course of the last couple of years, we’ve tried to do a lot to kind of expand the footprint of what Shutterstock is. So that encompasses everything kind of going back to an earlier point from offering more content types and trying to be kind of that one-stop shop. So whether it’s a stock photo or a video or a 3D model or anything in between, we have all those raw ingredients right there.

In addition to that, the company has made some bets into kind of extending into the workflow a little bit more and giving people the tools to be able to kind of manipulate kind of their designs and get closer and closer to that end outcome. Because taking that user-centric point of view, at the end of the day, the user just wants to get to a place where they have a design that they feel good about, that they feel like is going to perform and that actually performs, that they can be proud of. And so Shutterstock wants to help people get kind of closer and closer to that. 

So we’ve made a lot of bets, some of which have worked, some of which have not worked, some of which are very much underway. One of the kind of the newer areas that we’ve been exploring over the last year, as one might imagine, is in the AI generative space. Of course, with the launch of Dolly 2 last year, and then Sensen, Stability, and Mid Journey, all of these companies are doing incredibly interesting things, transforming text into real imagery, in some cases, video.

This is both a moment where the industry is a little bit in question. What is the role of a stock photo going forward? And there’s also kind of a massive amount of opportunity here because we see the deck, excuse me, getting kind of reshuffled. And so all to say, we’ve made some bets. We actually launched our own AI generative image generator in partnership with OpenAI.

That is something that launched to the public in, let’s see, January of this year, and overnight just drove a tremendous amount of interest, where we were getting millions and millions of queries over kind of weekly and monthly periods. And so there’s clear, it’s clear that there’s something here. There’s a lot of excitement. And the technology is evolving so quickly that in a lot of cases, people can get to these images and get to these outcomes. 

We can’t tell if it was a photographer taking that photo or if it was just technology kind of building it from scratch. We have internally tests, we’ll call them a test, but like tests, we’ll run where we’ll show kind of the internal audience, here’s four images. Can you pick out the one that’s real? And it’s kind of a toss of the coin. It’s very, very hard to pick in a lot of these scenarios.

We’re continuing to explore that space again in partnership with OpenAI, which we’re really lucky to have. And in addition to that, Shutterstock is also kind of exploring other applications for generative art. And some of which I can’t talk about because I don’t think we’ve talked about them publicly yet, but some of which I can. We’ve partnered with a lot of kind of large companies.

OpenAI being kind of one of them, NVIDIA being yet another big one, Meta being another one. We’re actually providing these companies, our entire library, or most of our library to help train these models. And so it’s a very different business. It obviously doesn’t have that kind of consumer bent, but it is kind of an interesting part of the future. So there’s all of that. Of course, we’re excited about kind of 3D and what that holds, especially with some big upcoming launches like the Vision Pro. So obviously, very early markets still. But yeah, there’s a lot of exciting stuff happening. 

Vandana: Awesome. Well, thank you so much for sharing all that. And I am definitely going to get on some of the stuff that you just talked about, especially the image. 

Paul: Yeah. Check it out. Check it out. Play around with it. Let me know what you think. 

Vandana: I will. Absolutely. Thank you, Paul. Is there anything else that you have as a last golden nugget that before for the leaders who might be in yours in your shoes today or who are trying to get there and struggling with stuff that you have? 

Paul: Yeah, a golden nugget. I mean, I don’t know if it’s truly a golden nugget, but I’ll share one more thing that has been kind of top of mind for me lately. And I think it’s helpful or might be helpful for other people that have arrived at those conclusions. You know, I think a thing that’s really challenging to do in any field, especially in product and design, is to enter into a beginner’s mindset.

What I mean from that is to really approach either a problem or a solution from almost the perspective of a child of like a five or six or seven-year-old. I think it’s easy for us to kind of get wrapped up in our own stories and our own beliefs and dogmas and all of that and almost convince ourselves that something is going to work or a problem is worthy of our time and it’s actually the right problem to solve or a solution is the best possible solution.

Oftentimes when we put ourselves in the shoes of our user, our users are coming at some of this stuff without all the context we have. They haven’t been thinking about these problems for weeks and months. And as we know, attention spans over time are shortening and people don’t necessarily read much on the internet. 

So you have this kind of flash-in-the-pan moment to really capture someone’s intention, communicate value in a way that’s kind of interesting and in a way where they kind of elect to say, hey, I think this is going to solve my problem better than anybody else. I think good product teams, like the best product teams that I’ve seen, find ways to try to check their biases at the door and try to kind of become completely objective and really, really thoughtful.

I think that it’s kind of a mindset that you have to kind of intentionally put the hat on and adopt and then take the hat off because of course you have to then kind of build a product and make some moves. But I think that’s a really, really kind of important skill and it’s a learned behavior. Like we’re not born with that ability to say, hey, let me just, all this knowledge that I have and all these learnings that I have, just like truly look at this again from the perspective of a child. So you have to kind of like force that behavior, but I do think it’s a very, very powerful tool.

Vandana: That’s such a great, great tool and a tip. Thank you so much. Yeah. We feel that we are, with all the experience that we are getting, we bring a lot to the table, but in this case, you have to take all that stuff out. And then, yeah, that is so true. And really great for people and teams who can, who can really get to that stage. Thank you so much, Paul. This was so good.

Paul: Yeah. Thanks for having me. This has been fun.

Vandana: Thank you. I think we’re definitely doing another one. I have. All right. All right. Thank you so much. Have a great day.

Paul:  All right. You as well. Take care.

Get updates. Sign up for our newsletter.


Let's explore how we can create WOW for you!