THE STATE OF THE LIVE EVENTS WORLD ENSURING AUDIENCE ENGAGEMENT

Hello, this is Les Goldberg and welcome to The Road Ahead. The Road Ahead podcast is dedicated to the future of the live events business, bringing together industry experts. Hello, production world. This is Les Goldberg and The Road Ahead. I have three amazing guests. I have Richard Owers, who's a technical production manager. I have Conor Twohill, who's a managing director for event and Envy Create. I have Matt Culverhouse, CEO of Made Human. Guys, welcome to the show. Thank you very much. So guys, this show today is dedicated to the state of the AV world and the future of audience engagement. So we all put together and do shows all the time. But if the audience is not engaged, we don't win. So I'm going to throw the first question to you, Matt. What is one technology in the last five years that's changed how we do live events? Obviously, AI. But I would say probably for a future perspective, not just being in the room, I would say transcribing, translating as well. I think having something instantly, which has been indexed and be quoted, we're creating communities at the end of the day. So rather than obviously having people in the room, translation, fantastic, but with apps and things as well. So I think the future of us actually having a job and people going back to the next event is how do we keep them coming, audience acquisition, engagement, etc. So forward thinking for me. You know, I really appreciate the fact that someone could be giving a live speech, and then you can categorize it and take the highlights out and immediately go to post and put it somewhere else or post it on social media, and media analysts, etc. They're all picking up and hyping. It's right there for you. It's instant gratification. Absolutely. And it's one of those things that is something, you know, if you think about we'd have to do it, someone would manually have to translate it, and someone would have to categorize it. And this is all done with AI. Yeah. I know one product called Grammarly that does something like that. But anyway, the question to you now, what is one technology in the last five years, Conor, that has changed the way we do live events? And you can't take the answer. No, no, no, no. So I guess for me, the biggest one that I felt or that we've had to dealing with is we went from having live events for the live audience in the audience was the number one and it was such a big deal to make sure the live audience had an amazing show. But now it's always the live audience and the online audience. And even though that was a part of shows for lots, but once we went through COVID, the online audience became everything. And lots of virtual events came in. And then the online part of the event, any event became a much bigger deal. So that for me, that was a much bigger part of what's changed how we talk about and how we think about creative experiences for our audiences and who our audiences are. You know, what's really interesting is that during COVID and that time period where people weren't traveling, they, the remote audience became many times the size of the live audience. And once we all got back to business and going to live events, again, people said, we don't want to lose that remote audience, we want to monetize that. So, so I think making curated content for the remote audience to keep them engaged, because it's a lot easier to be engaged when you have a live audience and people are interactive and participating. But that remote audience and dealing with it and trying to monetize and make content, I totally agree. I think that is a fundamental change that we were dealing with. Richard, your turn. One technology in the last five years that's changed the way we do live events. I can only agree with what the guys have said, the broadcast element of a show has become quite important. Whereas before COVID, it was just a, you know, a bolt on. Whereas now it's as important as your live audience. And like I say, trying to get them engaged with the changes in AI, the technology, you can do translation instantly, you can capture what they're saying instantly, and make them more involved. So, you know, the broadcast element of it is as important as the face to face. But I think since COVID, we've realized that we are pack animals, we do like meeting face to face. So it's important for the people that can't come, more for busy schedules than, you know, actual face to face. You know, I have had some recent events where it wasn't about the live audience, it was about the broadcast audience. I went to a sporting event in Las Vegas about two weeks ago. And the audience was 300 people, but there were a million people online watching that audience. So it was a very different experience. So that's really a different concept, focusing on the remote audience, and not the live audience. Yeah, you got to try and make sure you balance both, right? Because if you invite people there, and if you want the audience to be a part of it, you want to use the audience to create the atmosphere, because when you're at home, there is none. You're sitting kind of listening to it, and it doesn't feel like an event. But if you have an audience there, and you get them going, you get them to be part of it, and you get the cameras on them, it makes it feel like an event. And the people who actually come to the event deserve and should have something done for them that kind of thanks them for being there as well. There's nothing worse than being at an event where you've almost got like a hype man, and you feel like you're in a studio audience. Oh, absolutely. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And like, that's their second rate, and the audience in the room. Yeah, that doesn't quite work for me. You know, it's interesting that, you know, sometimes people focus on one or the other, the remote or the live. But I think it's making content that really stimulates both groups. Because if you're going to have people come together, you want that that material to have meaning, and to have people make sure they feel valued. You know, the worst thing is to be the afterthought. And we're really, you know, it's kind of like maybe a sporting event where, you know, the shows for the people on TV and not necessarily for the people in the audience. Yeah. Okay, we're moving on to you, Matt. When creating content messaging for an audience, how do you know if it will resonate with the attendees? What's your formula that you use to know that people are going to be listening? Well, there's a reason the company's called Made Human, because I want to make things back with a more human face and centred. You probably have noticed, I can't sit still, I'm probably the most neurodiverse man in the room, sponsored by ADHD, actually a phrase coined by one of my clients. And I think neurodiversity for a start, if one in five people is neurodiverse, you've lost 20% of the room before you've even started. So I'd say from a messaging perspective, multisensory things, and it's not just about the keynote anymore. I think when clients spend so much money on the breakout room, where you spend 75% of your day, and you've got a really crappy screen and projector, and it's just being talked at, talked at, talked at. We're also working with a company in the Czech Republic at the moment to look at how we change registration and asking questions at the point of registration without elongating the process and making it feel like a really long, rich process. We're asking questions, things like Myers-Briggs, for example, so we can start learning about people's personality types to build that into our content building. That's a really interesting thing, creating a profile. So either you can connect with other people's or you can have them go to certain sessions that match the profile. Very interesting. What are your thoughts? So I guess slightly different view from my, for me is like, I would be really worried if I thought I had an absolute smash, like it's definitely gonna work. Clearly we've seen it before, done before, it's gonna work. Because I always think you want to be at a point where when you're doing something creatively, especially, you don't know if it's gonna work because you're doing it for the first time ever. So when the question is like, how do you know it's definitely going to work? If you think you've got a dead set, it's going to work because someone's telling you all that and they've shown you it's happened to work before. By it having been done before, it's not going to work as well. It's been seen before. You want unique thoughts. So you want to be scared, ultimately. You want to, apologies, but you want to be engaged and be scared by creative. If your clients or whoever you're talking to is like, oh, yeah, it's going to work and then they feel safe and you think you've got it smashed. That terrifies me because you know at that point you're not doing something that's actually going to work and change something. So, you know, there's a certain risk component with every kind of presentation. And if you want to make it meaningful, you know, it sometimes has to have a risk. Yeah. And but hopefully that converts to an engaged audience. It's better to try and do something new and have an engaged audience than spend tons of money doing something safe and bore everyone to death anyway. We do not want to be safe and boring. Those are attributes that don't do much for me. Okay. Your thoughts, Richard? Yeah, the same. My job is to get hold of creatives and turn it into something that we can actually do that isn't going to wreck the show without sort of stifling their idea. So, you know, creatives come up with some really crazy stuff. And my job is to go out and find the technology that we can do it with and try and take away a little bit of the risk. But, you know, new ideas means doing new things you've never done before. And like, you want to make it engaging for the people so they don't want to go to the same old conferencing, the same old thing. And that's a bit tricky, you know. But that's exactly how it should be. Yeah. Having creative leaders and then figuring out how to do it. And if you can't do it, then cool, you figured out then but at least you know straight away if that's where you're coming from. Yeah, you're on to something amazing. Yeah. Okay, next question back to Matt. What will a creative production team look like in the next few years? Will it look different than it is today with all of the technological change that we're experiencing? I think we need to balance technology with what we're actually putting on the screen. I always say to clients like innovation is not the screen anymore. It's actually what people are reading on that screen. So I think we do need to be a bit of a behavioral expert. We need to we also worry our response to an RFP is only going to be as good as the detail in that RFP. And I think clients need to tell us what they've before, if they've been safe, if we can take risks. Yeah, I think the number of if anyone's ever seen a shared list of questions or an RFP, most of them come from me, I will ask back so so many questions that almost pisses people off. But if I don't have the information, I won't be able to answer. So so will the production team Conor look different, or will look the same. So if you have the creative director and TD and you have the producer and the associate, will their jobs change with innovation? I mean, yes, how I don't know, my biggest fear is the is the chance for people to fool people with AI at the moment leading to the point where you're being convinced to do stuff in certain times, when there's no team in the background that have a clue what they're doing after like any clown can just type in some stuff and get out an image and then say, Look, we can do this, but without knowing how to do it, and the understanding and expertise behind that. So I think, after you get past the concept part, there's always a level of technical expertise that's needed. And I don't believe it's going to change massively, there might be some elements of support, because AI what AI tends to do is make things faster, make things quicker and easier to do. That's cool. But it still needs to be controlled by people that are in a creative area trying to do something amazing. That's to a goal that needs people that needs to be delivered. So I don't think it will change hugely. Richard, do you agree? Yeah, 100%. Because AI can assist all of us in what we're doing. But I don't think it can really replace any of us at the moment. And no AI is that grumpy for production managers. I'm sure we could we could get the learning program and AI to become grumpy based on the tone that you can upload a bit of material. So this question is a follow up to that. Where does AI fit into live production, live event production? Like what do you see it doing for you? Do you see it making content, writing scripts, sending out registration emails, like automating things? What do you see? And so we're still quite a small business. So I still do a lot of site visits and things. So I'm the clown using Chatterjee VT to knock up some nice real time renders for me. Again, based on the proms that I've done. I appreciate that. Very quickly. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. quicker than any traditional graphics person. Yes. But again, to your point, only based on the prompts that you put in. So I would need someone technical to actually list everything out for me. I'll come to another clowns. Some information. And then probably for me, I use it a lot for story arcing, theming messaging, I can run some thoughts through it. So it's really for something in the content production. So for you two guys, Richard and Conor, do you see it and other aspects of it outside of content? Do you see it doing production schedules? Do you see it doing, you know, background checks on your technicians? Do you see it? You know, rooming lists? Again, I mean, maybe you could do it's it's it's it's it's a supporting tool. But I just I think the whole basis of AI at the moment, especially a lot of them is it's collecting what's already existed is giving it to you in a really nice way that makes it feel human and personal, but it's still what's been done before somebody else's opinion. It doesn't even give any acceptance or any. It doesn't take any responsibility for the information that's giving you in regards to it being somebody else's. It's not always right. It's not always right. It's a lot of them will give you the answer that you want to hear. But it could be something else's idea, something else that's happened. And so I find it entirely dangerous in my mind for certain points, for sure. Again, just to be fair, we do use some points that I get from a conceptual one, a very, very high level, but I mean, barely ever. But But it is that kind of point where it, it's not ever going to be a promise that you're going to be able to deliver upon. It's a concept in regards to like, you know, it can it'll give you a picture, like the same as if you want to try and give it put something across, you would use the Google search images, that's cool. And you can create an image to do that. But once you get into the point where I promise you, if you come with me, I will give you this, I find it very hard to believe that AI can do that to the point where then we can go and deliver that. So when you're making a promise, it's very hard to make that promise. It comes across very foolproof, doesn't it? When you read the information, it sounds like it's bulletproof. But then actually, you've got to do something with it. The thing about it is, is that they keep saying it's going to get better. Every time I see Jensen Wang on TV, or, or the one from AMD, the I don't remember her name, what I'm saying, it's going to get better. It's going to get better. And it's going to displace people's jobs. I must have heard that so much in the last two weeks, everyone's worried. But I know from the physical AV side of the world, we have to unload trucks full of equipment. Yeah, the wall is not going to be set up with AI. Yeah, it's just not going to happen that way. That's something that lacks thought, emotion, empathy will never be able to take away those jobs. They say it's trying to teach it. It is very entertaining when it gets things wrong when it gets things wrong. If I asked Elon Musk this question, he would say all of our jobs are going to get replaced with robots and, and AI. Yeah, I know. But again, this is the whole thing. They've created a product that takes away any accountability for what it says by a bunch of people who never take any accountability for what they say. And the reality, but what the reality is, is that they even cross saying the same people who have made ChatGPT are saying everyone should be afraid of AI, which is a great marketing tool to say this thing's really powerful. Don't be afraid of my product, be afraid of the future, but that means their product is really powerful. So it's all marketing nonsense. Okay, next question. This is to Richard. Richard, do you ever see a world where real-time data can influence live content on a show? So something is measuring data, and all of a sudden the audience feels a certain way. Today we're gonna demonstrate audience measurement. And do you ever see a time where you have a client and you said, look, we have, depending upon the audience, we're either gonna play the A clip, the B clip, or the C clip based on how they're feeling? Yeah, I think it's something that we will see. I think people are a bit frightened of it at the minute because human beings are unpredictable. So, you know, they could mess with the answers and stuff, but it's definitely something that moving forward, people could do, especially with the help of AI that can filter it, which is more important. Do you guys agree? Yeah, yeah, for sure. I mean, I think there's a really good chance to manage your content in a really nice way in a show, especially if you've got good speakers. It all comes back to human beings, but if you start off your show with a certain speaker and then whilst they're working, they're figuring things out in the background for the main speaker to come and then absolutely smash it. Like if there's things that they can get to from a point of data really quickly as the show grows, then you can try and change performance, change the humor you use, change things that you do. So it definitely has a place, but again, it's about, because AI, again, is about getting information to you as quickly as possible. So it definitely will be useful for sure. It would definitely be a wild card to see a show that you didn't know the outcome when you started it and based on how the audience was feeling, then the look of the show could be impacted. I think something that seems like a thing that you'd see at one of the big attractions where the audience feels a certain way and they play the certain clip that goes with it. We all talk about personalization, but how many of us actually get that right? So actually to be able to respond real time is really cool. Well, we're going to show you something shortly here. Okay, this is the next question. Back to Richard. Richard, how has your experience working in the USA differ from UK and EU? What are some of the biggest challenges when working a show in the US? So all of us work around the world, and so obviously the US is different than EU and UK. And so what are your thoughts? So I've literally just finished a show and got back Saturday from San Francisco. Oh, yeah, we worked on that show. Yeah, so... Constant plugs on this day. Yeah, they were great, by the way. Yeah, culturally, we're very different in the way we work. The labor and the union rules are very different to anything this side of the pond. And it's quite hard to get your head round when you talk to the steward, because every time you talk to him, something doesn't quite line up. So that's a bit tricky. We also speak a common language, which is completely different. You know, you guys call a scaff clamp a cheese burr, and there's little things like that all the way through our language that's completely and utterly different. So you're like, oh, we just need to sort this out, and everyone's sitting there scratching their head. But the biggest thing is the labor and how that all works. It's very different in Europe, and it's quite hard to get your head round. So I remember doing my first shows with people that came over from the UK to the US, and the word was vision mixer. That was the switcher. And they had some different terminology, but essentially, other than a word, it was still the same program. But so your comment really is about the way the labor machine runs and maybe some of the rules when you're working within a union environment. Yeah. Yeah. It's very, very different. And trying to plan your schedule to work within their schedule of how things work. You know, they have to have their tea break. They have to have their lunch break. Over in Europe, we're like, oh, we're going to run over five minutes. That's a real problem because that's a big cost if you run over into meal penalties, things like that. Oh, yes. You know, it's very simple. If you follow the rules, you don't have a problem. And if you deviate from them, it has a very big price tag. So back to Matt, your thoughts on working in the US, and then I'll go to Conor. I'm actually working with LMG in two weeks as well, so no plug. Keep the plug. Keep them coming, OK? I've only actually worked in the UK a few times. I spent the last probably 12, 13 years of my career working in the US. I'll firstly never feel comfortable hearing the term biobreak used for a toilet trip. That should never, ever be used. Oh, biobreak? Biobreak is just... We have a biobreak. It's a common term on my headset. That's not a term that should be used. Size, scale and encore, I'd say are the three things. Size, scale and that other word you just said. Anyone that has the exclusivity to hang things from a ceiling and charge 200 grand for the privilege is not a thing. That's horrific. You would not be the first person who have ever said that rigging rates might be a little overpriced. That would definitely not be a comment I've never heard before. Your thoughts, Conor? Yeah, every time we do a show in the States, it's always bigger and louder than what we do anywhere else. So it's always really good fun, but the costs in comparative terms makes it really hard for clients. And the work isn't as much because you can get so much more done. And we're talking about an online audience in the end. So the reach doesn't become as big if you do it in Europe or anywhere else as you do it in America. So with the online offline kind of balance of audience and the level of costs that comes into some of the stuff in the US versus doing it in different locations, people start to think it's not worth doing it. But again, from my point of view, I've never had a bad show in the US. The US always turn up. It's always a great show. But the cost right now with some tariffs and whatnot can become difficult. And travel as well. And not to mention travel, obviously with new governments and travel restrictions and visas. Actually, there was a show not too long ago in Miami that we worked on where a number of the people from the production crew couldn't make it because they couldn't get their visas. Just two weeks ago, I understand, there was a group of people who, five of the UK production team that were flying in with their undressers and were turned around and sent back. And that has been a UK-based model for some decades. That would not be fun flying across the pond just to go get your bag and go to the other bag. Yeah, and the fine and being banned from the country. I think besides nomenclature and labor rules, I think there's style. And my own comments would be that the style, the UK production teams like working with UK teams that understand the nomenclature and the style. So fortunately, our team here writes a lot of business that we deliver in the US, which is an advantage than just dealing with US companies directly. I am moving on. So Matt, this is to you. How do you approach producing live events when you have multiple languages in the audience and presenters? So the presenter could be speaking in one language and then the audience could be listening in multiple languages. Is that something that has become a hindrance or is it something you do a lot of or you don't do at all? I don't know, a few times. I'd say recently, I think the AI piece, the live transcribing using the app, but I think it all comes back to that sort of holistic approach for me from day one. If you get the communications right, and we showcase that we're using the same language, we're sending out communications before the event, during the event. Again, with AI, with different apps now that are out, we can do push notifications in their own language based on what they're using. So again, it's some real-time info. So you don't see people with translator booths in the back of the room and listening in one language and recanting it in another language to a wireless device. You see using AI as a translating tool and that's the efficiency and people bring their own phones and their own devices or earbuds. Absolutely, I think from sort of an inclusivity perspective, there's nothing worse than seeing random people dotted around the room wearing a headset. It's nice to feel like you're not standing out for the wrong reasons, depending on the perception. Richard, do you agree? Yeah, I think people are still a bit reluctant to 100% rely on the technology, which is probably perfectly good, but they just have the fear factor. So you still see translation booths until people are 100% sort of sure of the technology, but it's definitely getting loads better and more inclusive for everybody, which is what you want. I have a pair of Apple headphones that can translate from any language into English. The only problem is I can't speak to respond, but if I wanna listen, it definitely works in the listening department and they don't cost, they're just standard headphones now. Okay, Conor, this one's to you. This is a tough one. Where does the in-house AV model make sense today considering cost, qualifications and capability of the providers? Some of those in-house companies may not always charge effective rates that are reasonable. And you mean like companies that have their own in-house AV? No, no, no, like if you go to a venue and they have an in-house provider. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And sometimes they may not give you the best deal. Sometimes they might not. It's always good to work with people that know the venue, know the best way to use it, know how to use the sound. Yes, sometimes you'll have people who take it as a chance to charge way more than they should and kind of hold you to ransom. But it all depends on what the ambition of the event is. Sometimes you can manage with what they have and it works. Sometimes you have to bring your own equipment in because you're trying to do something that's different and that needs that level of sound that they can achieve. You're always gonna trust your own expertise and your own experts. But I wouldn't ever discount it immediately. It's always go and check it and test it and then if it doesn't work. So let me ask a follow-up question before I ask the other guys. Do you feel like in-house has the general, if you went to 10 properties, they have any technical sophistication? Meaning that if you had a high profile client that had some technical sophistication requirements, would you feel comfortable using them at any price? I'd say from a comfortability perspective, knowing they are in the venue, they will only ever get up to a certain level from me and then I will absolutely go to an external. I think I've worked with numerous people in this room all around the world, even when there is an in-house company and chosen to bring from outside. It's also a comfortability factor on me. I don't know these people. I don't work with them all the time. The trust. We don't use the same terms. I don't want to hear the words buy or break. So, yeah, it all comes down to trust. Richard, your thoughts? Yeah, I mean, I've got a classic example of last week. I was sold by the house a 65-inch plasma for the week and they wanted $9,600, which I could go to Amazon and buy all of the bits 10 times over. You can buy one every day. Yeah, pretty much. And then, yeah, the guys at house, lovely people, but you know their companies had to jump through a load of hoops and have to give kickback to the hotel. I see them at a certain level, but after that, you have relationships with your suppliers and you know you can trust them. You don't have that with the house supplier most of the time. You find that people, some people just let you down and they ruin it for everybody else. We had a show at one point where we did a technical rehearsal with a crew that were for the venue's crew. And the next day of the morning for the show, they had replaced the entire crew with a whole new crew. So the entire technical rehearsal might as well not have happened. So when you have people like that that just don't have any respect, that they ruin it for everybody else. But there are some really genuinely awesome venues out there with really good people in there. It's just that some people just mess it up for everyone else. In certain regions, I'd say back to the US, UK thing, it's sometimes not as expensive in the UK, but in the US things are normally three to four times the price they should be. Yeah, I think if you're gonna use any in-house, it starts with whether they have the ability to execute at a fair price. And that's the formula. And if they can't get there, then you definitely- And if it's the same people that are charging me $10,000 to put a plug in, I'm probably gonna be a bit risk-averse there. Do you know, just like he just said, a flat panel for $9,600. Yeah, I hope you guys take it home. All right, this one is Conor. What change do you see coming that everyone needs to be prepared for in the live events world? Change that we see coming. I don't know of a specific change. My only concern right now really is, as I mentioned before, is the overuse of AI that is making us believe that things can be done by people that can't do it. So the danger is that we're gonna have people entering into the events industry who don't need to know what they should know and trying to do things they shouldn't be doing because we're making it so that easy for them to do it. Competency is the most thing. That's the thing that worries me. Sometimes when I see some things, even though we get sent saying, oh, somebody else said we can do this, it's like, but there's gravity though. I don't understand how do they think they can do that? But it's people just chancing their arm. And that's the kind of part that worries me. At the moment, that's the thing that we're struggling at the most with regards to people coming from left field with nonsense and having to bat it away and saying, but that they haven't thought of all these things because they haven't, because they haven't even thought of it at all. Wouldn't even know how. So for me, that's the kind of thing that we're dealing with the most. Well, the workforce has changed over many years, especially with people leaving during COVID and the newer generation and they don't have the experience. So then there's a risk component bringing people in that lack experience. So Matt, what are your thoughts on what change do you need to be prepared for that's coming in live events or anything? I think we've all changed a little bit since COVID. I think we were at home for so long, the way we take on information now has changed. I think when we're designing sessions, none of us can watch a series like we used to anymore. We're on our phones. I said to a client the other day, we're no longer competing with your competitors. We're competing with everything. But if we have things going on phones, polls, that kind of stuff, I'm now getting my phone out and now I'm on my phone and I'm checking emails, et cetera. So one and a half hour general sessions, things like that, they need to go. We need to change how we're giving people information, how we talk to them on a human level. The distractions that people have. They learned all these distractions when they were at home, working from home on Zoom and Teams and how you're in a ballroom, but people typically are looking at email or have an Apple watch or something. Richard, your thoughts on this? Yeah, well, you say about the workforce, I worry that AI is actually scaring off some people that would come into the workforce. I don't feel there's many young people coming in, design is a thing. You can go on an AI program and it can design your whole stage, but actually it still needs someone with a creative brain to input it and also a bit of a technical brain to say, oh, that's not gonna work there, this won't work like that and sort of have a bit of a theatrical background to it. When you look at what AI is doing, you're like, oh, well, it's dead easy, anyone can do that. And I think it's a bit more specialist than that. And I don't think we're really sort of inviting those people to come and learn how to be a specialist. You know, there's hard work in learning the fundamentals of what we do. And it starts with loading a truck. Nothing sexy about it. Absolutely no show's gonna happen without the equipment making it to show site and all complete. So this is my last question. I'm throwing it to you, Conor, to start with. What makes creative and technical teams truly work well together to achieve a flawless show for the audience? Time and planning. I mean, when you see things that are done properly and done with the same, but you can feel like from the very beginning, it's how this process has been progressive and they've had the time to do it. If you look at things like, say, for example, has anyone been to ABBA, like the ABBA production? Like that entire production, the fact they built a building for their production. They didn't go try and design into a building. They built it for it. When you see that kind of thing coming together, you can really see from the beginning to the end. There's been no compromise. They haven't had to. They've had to be able to make it exactly the way they wanted to. It's something beautiful to see. When that can come together, your creativity and production coming together with the right time and respect of how long it takes to do that with the right IP. Like everything is where it should be. You can do something amazing that is being sold out every single goddamn day. It's still going. It's amazing. For me, when you see those things come together in such a beautiful way, that's just perfection. Any thoughts? I think understanding and interpreting the brief together. People that sort of tear out logistics here, creative here, production. An RFP needs to be interpreted like IKEA instructions. You have to do it in order and you have to do it together. Richard, your thoughts? I agree with the guys. Traditionally, technical are meant to bounce off creative and bring them back to earth with the budget. But as you said with the ABBA thing, they didn't really think about that. They just thought, what do we need and let's make a brilliant show. That's quite a rare thing, but it'd be lovely to see more of that, like the sphere and that kind of thing. It's interesting. The creative ones come up with the juice and the design. And then you have the technical ones that say, this is what it's going to cost. And sometimes the cost and the design may not match the budget. And so the reality therapy from the technical side to the creative people. And if you can find chi, sometimes you can achieve some amazing things in a cohesive working environment. And there's nothing more demotivating for that creative that spent hours and hours designing something that no one's ever going to say. But like you say, it's working in tandem. All it is is time and money. Yeah. Time, money, and respect. Yes. Well, listen, I want to thank my three amazing guests, Richard Owens, Conor Twohill, and Matt Culverhouse. You guys are amazing. I look forward to seeing you in a ballroom, in a convention center, on a show site somewhere. And this is obviously, thank you all for the live audience in England. This is Les Goldberg and The Road Ahead. Everybody, great job. Thank you.