Rewind: How To Make Your Own Luck

Hello, this is Stephen Crime from Startup Health. I'm here with my podcast partner Dan Sullivan from Strategic Coach. Hi, Dan. — How you doing, Steve? — I'm doing great. As we were just talking about, we're both back from some free days. — Yeah. And you're on the ocean and I'm on a beautiful lake. So, I had a great time. — Yeah. I actually went away with some college friends and we went down to a beautiful lake outside Atlanta. Really amazing to reconnect with old friends. But the conversation during one of the days, although it was fully on free days, turned to compelling offers versus convincing arguments, which has been a theme in the [clears throat] last couple sessions of our free zone workshops. And I think we did a little intro to it on our last episode, but been really intrigued by the idea of really almost reframing conversations into compelling offers versus convincing arguments. And it wasn't until you kind of outlined, I think so specifically, the difference between the two, did I realize how much time I spend making convincing arguments versus compelling offers. — Mhm. Have you seen first of all maybe reframe it for everybody before we dig too deeply but I'd be interested in the entrepreneurs that are in the workshops and their reception to this concept because I think it's a pretty transformative concept when you actually start to filter your conversations. — Yeah. Well, back to the source. It's Dean Jackson quote that I just snatched out of the air because he has a lot of really good oneliners. But it struck me that a lot of the turmoil our entrepreneurs go through is the length of time before they can get to a sale. And I think the reason is that they've been trained by their industry to actually have an argument visav what they're offering and they're arguing against the way things are done competitors. So, it's almost like they're going through a legal process where they're trying to convince a jury that they have a more convincing set of evidence. And I think actually the school system actually trains people that the more convincing you are with your arguments, the further up you're going to go in the academic world. And I think it spills over into a lot of people's occupations and especially when they're in a more or less established industry that you're trying to make a big deal out of fairly small points. The opposite of that is where somebody just has looked at all the talking that's going on in a particular area where value can be created. And what I mean by this is that whether it's a product that you're selling or a service that you're offering or anything is that probably it's explored territory. There's already people out there doing it and what you're using is a set of arguments to offset what they're doing that you're doing better. Okay? And my sense is that a compelling offer is not an argument. It's basically that you're inside the other person's head and they've already been exploring something and they don't have a solution and you come in with something that exactly matches their thinking and you say and here's a simple way of actually pulling this off. Okay, so you're not trying to argue anything. prove anything. You're just taking advantage of what they're already thinking. And you know, the great examples of that are comedians who are really good and they've got everybody going along with a story that everybody in the audience understands, but then the punchline just shocks people, okay? And it shocks them out of all their preconceptions of what they were doing before. And here's something brand new. You know, Steve Jobs was really good at that. Steve Jobs was not a convincing argument salesman. He was a compelling offer. He said, "You know, while I was out and about outside of Apple, I got interested in music. And I just noticed that if you go into a store to buy music, you're just going in because you heard a particular artist with a particular song and you want to buy that song, but in order to get the purchase, you have to buy 11 other songs, okay, that you weren't looking for. So, it's kind of a negative experience. is a sacrifice. You're asking people to sacrifice something to get what they want. And the other thing I noticed that the musicians, you know, if a dollar is paid, the musician maybe gets a nickel or maybe gets a dime. And that didn't seem to be right. And the other thing is unless they have 12 songs, they can't even get recorded. And he said, "It just seems really difficult

and complicated and hard and there's not a lot of reward for the people that you want to be rewarded. " So what we thought is since this already exists in the marketplace, it's a download machine from the internet. We just thought that maybe you could have a nice little machine and any song you want, you immediately access it. Cost you a dollar a song. And not only that, but we're going to give more than half of the money to the artist for doing the new song. And oh no, what do you think about that? And he said, and by the way, it's available tomorrow. So he didn't say, "Oh, we're working on this. In a year we'll have it. " He never said anything until you could buy it tomorrow. The packages are ready to be sent out right now and we can do that. So the big thing is that a compelling offer doesn't ask people to change their information or anything. It's just to recognize that the way it's being made available is very complicated. It's very hard. It's very costly. And here we just make it really simple. It's faster, it's easier, it's cheaper, and you just get what you want. And you're not really talking about what the competitors are doing. You're simply saying the difficulty that the person themsself is having to get something they really want. And probably if it was this easy, you would probably get all the music you want. — So faster, easier, cheaper. If you use that example and you shift it to health innovation, I live in the world of health innovation with startup health and backing entrepreneurs who were many times in the very early early days of an idea for a compelling offer to truly transform a disease, an illness, a problem that people are experiencing. I want to shift this compelling offer, convincing argument into health innovation, especially early stage health innovation. what you're going to see, what I live in every day. And I'd love to get your thoughts on that. — Yeah. And I would say that just from a customer standpoint, I'm not necessarily talking about the innovator here. I'm customer because at the end of the day, innovations only have value if the customer says so. I mean, there's different customers. There's people who want to invest in something. And so, a better offer, you're making a better offer for where they should invest their money over other possibilities. But I would say, and I'm going to keep this in mind, how is this faster? How is this easier? How is this cheaper? And how does this produce a much bigger, more satisfying result for myself? But if I'm an investor, then I'm wondering. I don't have to think this through. have this checked out by a lot of people because it's guesses and bets anyway. You're guessing that this is going to be better and you're betting on it. That's really what an investment is, but it's all guesses and bets. But I would say that the winners are the ones who have a cumulative 10 times breakthrough. So it's not necessarily 10 times faster. easier. It's not 10 times cheaper and it's not necessarily 10 times bigger each of the steps of it. But if you put the faster, easier, cheaper together, it's a 10 times breakthrough over anything else that exists. You know, — I think as an investor that you're looking for. You're not going to invest in something that's twice as good. — Yeah. It's interesting because you're seeing innovation in many cases. And I'm going to bring up another tool that I think is relevant, which is the profitability packager. You take things from plausible and possible and all the way up to, you know, producible, preferable, palpable. We should talk a little bit about that framework today because what you're seeing along that spectrum over the next couple of days. What I get to see every day are things oftentimes in their infancy and the possibilities are enormous for that 10x or 100x or thousandx but there's an element of getting to a place where you actually have all the data to prove it and you have all of the results that but you're not seeing things at the end. You're seeing things often times maybe even where the sausage is still being made. [clears throat] Yeah, there's a few things along the way and it's a big jump from last year. The number of handheld devices that you can take home where you're getting analysis and you're getting information that previously was only available at big medical centers, specialized medical centers. We just have arriving from the UK some watches which are 24-hour blood pressure monitors. And so you just wear it. There's nothing you have to do is you just wear it. But it measures minute by minute over a 24-hour period and just

shows you where your blood pressure is because blood pressure is a snapshot in a moment. And I get my blood pressure taken a lot. And I do it myself, but it only tells me what's true in that moment. And it's different in the morning than it is in the afternoon. If I'm under stress, it's higher. If I'm really relaxed, it's lower. But to get a readout that shows you day and night how your blood pressure is much more informative. — Yeah. — And that's available. — Yeah. So let's come back to compelling offer. If you think about the entrepreneurs that you're meeting and innovators that you're meeting, when you think about the ones that stuck out, maybe if you remember from last year, I know you said you're a big listener, you're not a notetaker. So if you kind of were to broad stroke, if you can recall the sessions from last year, the expectations for this year, how many of these entrepreneurs and innovators are making compelling offers versus convincing arguments and how differently do you respond to them? — Yeah. Well, some of them I mean when it gets into like they're at stage two, you know, of FDA and this [clears throat] we have to prove this, that. Not as an investor because that's not really what Babs and I really invest in. Okay, that's not part of our investment. We have an investment policy, but it's in different areas. But the thing about it is if it looks like there's a lot of uncertainty ahead and that's not just uncertainty whether it'll actually legally be approved but is there going to be a market for this and do they seem to have a plan for actually identifying enough check writers that it would justify people's investment and which means that it has to make more money that they're investing. So I think this is terrific. I mean I couldn't have prepared better for tomorrow than by talking to you today. — I push on this because I spend every day you know with entrepreneurs — evaluating and seeing the difference between those that attract the capital the customers the team that they need to succeed and those that don't. And the difference between the two often times has little to do with the actual technology or the actual idea and more to do with the entrepreneurs — who's leading it, innovating and guiding the company all the way through. And so I was I become very interested in this compelling offer versus convincing argument filter. I'm calling it a filter. You did it. — Yeah, it is a filter. you created a tool to help look at our compelling offers versus convincing arguments. But I've started to now look where it's that saying you have which is your eyes only see and your ears only hear what you're looking for. But — what your brain is looking for. — Yeah. And so that's kind of like the element here for me is I'm looking at this global army of entrepreneurs and I'm going look at the ones that are making compelling offers. trying to convince and argue. And I think I've discovered through that filter something in addition to mindset that plays a role in their success. And it is those entrepreneurs that are able to stay in compelling offer mode versus get into convincing argument. Not angry, but like almost on the edge of frustrated that starts to turn everything they do into convincing, convincing, but I'm not compelled to do anything. Yeah. And I think that's important to realize. I'll go back to because you've done your stretch of legal training and made the correct decision not to be a lawyer and because it's all about argument. I mean the law is so much about argument. My sense is that I find the breakthroughs they're a great simplification to even manage what the problem is right now is very complicated and it's fraught with red tape. But the one thing I found for example one of the breakthroughs that we saw last year that we signed up almost immediately was a company that does a very simple blood test. They come to your house, they do the blood test, three weeks later they give you a readout. — Is that inside tracker? — Inside tracker. Yeah. From Boston. I've had nothing but rave reviews from the strategic coach clients that we've recommend that they look into this. It's very reasonable. And in Canada, it has a special thing because it doesn't require a doctor's permission slip that you can even get the blood test. You don't need medical approval to actually have the blood test. But the big thing about it is it tells you what you can do to

improve if you're they have three colors. They have green light which means that you're doing great, yellow light, which means you're borderline, and red light is that this is having a negative impact on your health and on your fitness. [clears throat] But then they give you a little coaching program for the next interval. They're trying to get you on a regular quarterly. — Yeah. Cadence, — which I totally believe in. But then they've got a real punchline to it and that they said according to your readings right now, your chronological age, mine is 78, but my last test said that my biological age, what the markers are saying, I'm actually 67. And I said, "Oh boy, that's great. " And then they say, "If you just work on these yellows and get them into the green, we'll go after the yellows first of all and get you into the green and then let's take a couple of the reds and move them towards, you know, the crossover line and everything. Tremendously motivating. " You know, the other thing that's even simpler is the Apple Watch with its activity app. They give you three rings. One of them is total activity which is the number of calories from your activity [clears throat] during the day which you set how many calories. So I have 600 calories just to test it out that I'm going to have extra activity beyond resting heart rate. I'm going to do it and 600 and then how many minutes of actual exercise are you doing? That's your exercise one. 30 minutes of something during the day, not just walking around, but actually lifting weights or doing aerobics and do 30 minutes and then how many hours did you stand up during the hour, then sit through two or three hours, which was easy to do when I was on Zoom, you know, and it took me about 30 days after I bought the Apple Watch to kind of get a feel for it and the timing of the day. — Yeah. And then they give you a little encouragement and they always call me Dan, you know, they say, "Dan, you're off to a great start. Just keep it going now. " Yeah. Oh, Dan, you know, okay, you've done three rings yesterday. Let's go after three rings today. So, there's something very compelling about that because now my day is regulated increasingly by the activity that I have to do during the day to get my three res. Yeah. And then they say, "Now we'll show you your trends, but you have to do it for 180 days in a row. " So I said, "I want to get to my trend lines, and I want my trend lines to be really good. " So they build in a lot of psychology into it. And I would like to introduce that as a factor in the compelling offer is that you're depending on the psychology of the user. — Yeah. — To be a lot of the solution. those two examples you just gave and as wonderful as a solution like inside tracker is the massive leap is the mass consumer adoption the Apple Watch is just integrating things in to your daily life and giving you that feedback and doing that and then these other services and I'm just using inside tracker because you just said it are over and above and all data and I think the compelling offer comes in where you start to make it just part of people's lives right and you don't have to have 18 more devices on your wrist or in your finger or in your neck or in your head. And so there is an element here where we are living I think in the golden age of health innovation over the next decade or two. More solutions, possibilities and features or products will be developed. But the question is how many of them make it into — a stream of life the way you're describing it. — Well, they're profitable winners, you know. — Yeah. You know, Apple and Amazon and some of these big tech companies are integrating a lot into their products and their devices. Amazon bought a company or is buying a company called One Medical, which is a higherend concierge primary care company popping up all over cities. I don't know if they're in Canada, they're all over the US. You know, they bought a pill pack and they're integrating the pharmacy. But you start to see some of the integrations of these things and it really is an opportunity for us to accelerate I think the solutions that help turn your 67year-old age into maybe 62 and then 57 and then as you get older you're able to stay healthier longer and even reverse the aging process. But I think it's going to take that mainstream piece of it to get it into the flow — of a compelling offer versus a convincing argument to add one more device. — Yeah. And in your system in the startup health, you're giving a whole series of possible positive outcomes for the entrepreneurs are doing it. You know, first of all, they can get investment up front to help them. That's a part of the compelling offer to be part of. Plus, you're going

to give them all along the way, an organizational coaching development program. In other words, of how they organize themselves as companies. You had that to a certain extent 20 25 years ago from your own experience in the first use of, you know, the internet for advertising. You guessed properly and you bet properly and you beat the deadline, but you also recorded what your own experience was of thinking it through and that naturally lend itself to a coaching program. So you brought that from when you were in your 20s. It's a key part of the coaching. The problem is if you introduce a new technology, it's always missing one thing is that technology does not coach itself. Okay? And you understood that right from the beginning that there's going to be healthc care startups all over the world and they're going to have to be utilizing existing new technologies or creating their own new existing technologies. But if they've given no thought of how you actually coach people on how to use it and I don't want to change my life to learn something new. — Yeah. There's an element to in healthcare in particular and I think you'll see it over the next several days but we see this every day as well which is entrepreneurs connecting with each other on similar problems that they're trying to solve but have different solutions for attacking it. You've got this image in your collaboration model where the problem is in the middle or the hero target and you've got all these collaborators around the table. So when you talk about any part of health care or any disease for that matter, our latest moonshot is type 1 diabetes and bringing innovators and entrepreneurs and investors and philanthropists and stakeholders and patients around the table to talk about how to maybe prevent, manage, delay the onset or even cure type 1 diabetes. you start to really see how everybody can divide and conquer and do their own little part in it versus one person or one organization or one investor solving it all. And I think what you're just describing right now is really people working together and collaborating to solve the problem. And I think for health innovation to really reach its potential, the compelling offer of faster, easier, cheaper, more productive is to not do it alone. simply like to not work in a silo, to not have a solution something that people have to do that doesn't tie into what they're already doing or what's already at work. — Yeah. Well, the difference between the competitive model and the collaborative model is I mean, and there's competition at the end of the day. If you got something new that makes other things not useful anymore, you've just competed, you know, but I don't think that should be your goal. I never use the word disruptive because I think from the person who's innovating, I'd much rather transform things so that the value for everybody goes up in the world if they're adaptable and if they're willing to learn new ways of doing things. So I think one of the big things that you've done is that you've created a massive global collaboration where if I'm an outside investor into startup health, one of the problems of institutions, whether they're labs or whether they're hospitals or whether they're technology companies, they can't have I don't know multiply your 450 startup entrepreneurs by the number of innovations and it's in the thousands of innovations. No organization can keep track of that number of innovations. — No. — Okay. But you can on their behalf. You can say here's the top 10 and making real progress, you [snorts] know, in the last 30 days, you know, and you can get them out to them. So, you're coaching in a couple of different directions with the startup health organization because you're coaching investors. You're coaching technology companies. You're coaching big medical labs. You're looking for something right now and you're running into a door. And I've got this guy in the south of France who's come up with something really neat. — Yeah. It's access. It's access to early innovation no matter where it exists around the world. And oftentimes it's in an area or from a person or from an organization that nobody's either aware of or they're not aware of the progress that's been made. And so we're really trying to make sure that the stories get told about the progress that the entrepreneurs [clears throat] and innovators are having. — And often times they're not happening in public. And so as you look around for solutions, these are often things that typically would fly under the radar that

we're trying to make sure have a platform to tell their story so they can attract. — Yeah. — Well, the access goes both ways. I mean, — you know, the innovator in some unknown place, who's not known by anyone, has no access to the outside world in the way he would ordinarily or she would ordinarily proceed. They just won't get a hearing. They may be in a country whose health system, you know, the official system, the health system is not open to innovators period. So you're connecting innovators anywhere in the world with the sources of capital that are very eager to know about new things. Okay. And can all be done virtually. They don't have to travel to do this. — Yeah. So coming back full circle to the compelling offers of these health innovators. — There seems to be enormous progress being made just in testing — early detection which a lot of people are afraid to see or hear about. — Yeah. what they might find, which is kind of a crazy one of the interesting push backs now is that people don't necessarily want to know, which eventually they will either way, but — but that's true in every area of human activity, not just this one. — Unpack that a little bit. — Well, the fact is that we're very unequal in our ability to visualize a future that's better than today. We're very unequal in this. Okay. And then if you also have an attitude, I don't care who invents this. I just want to know how you get access to it, you know? So, we're all geared differently. I'm just talking about human beings here, not necessarily entrepreneurs. But the thing that really struck me, the 8020 has been flipped. You know, roughly it was 80% tangibles, 20% intangibles valuation 30 years ago and today it's flipped. It's 80% intangibles. The difference maker in between 1980 and today is the internet. That ideas just travel a lot faster than stuff, you know, tangible stuff. So I said this just shows you the impact of what people are willing to invest in at earlier and earlier stages just because there's a great story about a new idea. — Yeah. Well, it has to be credentialed. You know, in other words, you have to have the government say you created it. It's yours and now find out if somebody would pay you for the use of your idea. — Right? So basically the documentation and authentication of your compelling offering. — Mhm. Yeah. And it's the first question anyone's going to ask. I know you created this, but do you own it? I can't buy it if you don't own it. — Yeah. And what I'm going to be talking about next week or the week after is direct applicability in health innovation — because there in lies one level of intellectual property. you know, when you're building a life science company or medicine, it's very clear. I think when you're actually with ideas, because a lot of these are ideas and a combination of things coming together, do you own it and is it unique often times what I think and Keegan talked about this in the last episode is just going through and actually documenting it and making sure that it's not just in your head. — Yeah. I mentioned in my fast filter that I sent you this morning and I've noticed this since, you know, we're kind of digging into this that the vast majority of entrepreneurs are creative without having any appreciation of what they've created cuz they see it as a transactional activity. Somebody's got a problem, I work it out, I solve it onto the next problem. But they don't realize that the thing that they created to solve one person's issues could solve a hundred thousand people's issues if it was properly authenticated or you know you're given legal rights to the property. And then the other thing is would they pay you to use it? I mean an idea is worthless from the standpoint of a buyer if it's not useful. I mean there's a lot of people who have tremendous ideas but nobody would pay them to use their ideas. You have to have a mindset that goes way beyond your own situation to be really good at this game. — The game of — creating new things that really go big. You can't be a concern in the thinking here. Your concern has to be who's everybody that has to be involved and how do they benefit from having this new capability. — Yeah. from — this goes back to economic history and the person most credited with kind of laying out the basic philosophy of capitalism was Adam Smith who is a moral

philosopher because you know he wasn't in the business of creating economic systems but he just said there's a fundamental morality to what happens in the marketplace and whether something is really stagnant and fixed there's moral reasons for this. So he's got two great books. He's got the wealth of nations for which he's famous where he simply applies unique ability to countries that if you're really good at this then really maximize how good you are and create trading relationships with other people where you trade what you're really good at for what they're really good at. You know using money as the medium. And he says and therefore everybody in the marketplace who's successful is primarily motivated by their own self-interest for profit. Then he wrote another book is big. These are big thick books just by happen chance. I was in Glasgow. He was a Scott and he's buried in a cemetery in Glasgow and I saw it and it said Adam Smith this year to this year birth and death. and the author of the theory of moral sentiments. Okay, so he was already famous for the other book, but the one that they put on his gravestone was called the theory of moral sentiments. And he said that all human beings are naturally self-interested. But he said in order to actually work with the world, they have to be able to put themselves in other people's shoes and see the situation from the other person's. And he says, "Morality is the connection between your fundamental self-interest and how far you expand your self-interest to include other people's interests. " And he said, "And that's the basis for capitalism, which is what you're describing, that you have to do it together. Then you have to be tyrannical about the imposition of your innovation. " — Well, it's interesting. I mean, we could spend a whole episode talking about the juxosition of capitalism and impact and how you blend the two. And we're talking go back to health innovation. You know, clearly the theme of what I do, what you're about to go see. And it's how do you bridge the two worlds of making sure that you can both make money and make impact and see it through. Because — I do believe fundamentally that over the last 50 or 60 years a lot of innovation has been stunted in healthcare by the business models or the capitalistic nature of how certain things are set up to work against the best breakthroughs and the most accelerated ways to make sure that whether it be around cancer or Alzheimer's or diabetes, you're not seeing the best of the best. make it all the way through because of the way that people prioritize the money-m piece and don't blend the two together thinking that you can do both because I think farmers realize where you actually can make money and help people but you got to be able to do both. Well, I think that, you know, the world I was born into, which was the 1940s50s, you know, I was a teenager in the 50s, I think that was the correct model because the possibility to share and combine efforts, but simply wasn't possible. Everybody was inside of a silo. So, you had these great labs. I mean, one of the greatest labs in the United States was Bell Labs. Yeah. — You know, not too far from you, actually, in New Jersey. Bell Labs was one of the greatest research labs, but they were operating entirely within their own silo and the government. I mean, they were connected to the government. The government was the one consulting partner with all the innovators because the big capital really had to come from the government, — but the innovation was centralized, — very centralized and a real pecking order of your status of having your ideas considered. You know, everything was a hierarchical pecking order. And now it seems to me if you just and I pointed this out at our first Friezo summit in Chicago when you came and I said you know what you've created here is the first global entrepreneurial R& D lab. It seems to me that that's what you've created here is that built right into the structure is maximum sharing. — Yeah. Maximum sharing early innovation and all possibility. Yeah. And I think the index approach which is not a typical approach that firms take because most of them are just trying to pick a few of the winners. The idea of like let the best develop and get nurtured and coached and we subscribe wholeheartedly to the notion that over 100 quarters and 25 years you can iterate a lot and learn a lot and test a lot to get to the place you want to get to versus making one bet and hoping it works. [clears throat] — Mhm. — Yeah. Your nervous system has to be a real respector of the concept of luck [clears throat] and a respector of the

concept of timing which go together. I think timing and luck go together and you know when I look at my own life as an individual and also by my entrepreneurial career I have to grant 50% of my success to luck. I had great parents but I was the fifth child in a family and I got the special treatment as compared with my six sibling. There's no question that I got the special treatment cuz I had about a four or five year period where even though I was a member of a big family, I just had my parents to myself. Okay? Right? — They took me everywhere. They would talk to me about what they were doing. So I really understood what my father did. But not only that, who they were as individuals because I talked to them. I had a killer question when I was six years old. When you were my age, what was going on in the world? And you could get an adult to talk for two hours for that. And I just found out that I just got this opening to the world where I don't see it in my siblings. We're all with the exception of one who died early. We're all over 70, you know, and three of them are in their 80s. So, we had really good health. There's no question about it that all of us have compared to the general population, I would say we're healthy. We all have good brains. You know, we're all really smart in the way we need to be smart. And I was born right at there's a period of about 3 or four years. If you were born in this period, your life is nothing but abundance. And if you were born basically between 1940 and 1945, there's a slice there where there was always going to be enough of everything ahead of you because it was the smallest generation in American history. So you had the big populations and then you had the depression in World War II and immediately the people born in this period especially people near the end when you went to school there was any amount of attention teachers would give you any amount of resources when you got into the job market the jobs came looking for you didn't go looking for jobs so I've just lived in this 70-year slice of demographics where everything was a lot easier I consider That's luck, you know, wasn't my doing. The other thing is I never interacted with a playmate my own age until I was 6 years old. But I had already developed relationships with dozens of adults by that time. And when I got to first grade, I realized the playmates weren't worth talking to. They didn't have any experience and they didn't know anything. If you really wanted the real stuff, you went to the adults. So, I've always had that access. And then I was in a marriage that didn't work and I'm the one [clears throat] who called an end to it without there being a lot of damage as a result of that to myself or to the other person. And I said, I really have to have a great partner and you know, so it's a combination of luck and it's also a combination of your brain looking to be lucky, — right? — The two go together. I mean, you have to have a I know luck when I see it. — So, let's use that as a wrap-up. What's your biggest insight from today's session? I think we zigzag through compelling offer. We zigzag through I think both things that hold back but also the possibilities around accelerating health innovation and this last piece which I think we talked about the blending of capitalism and impact or the blending of impact investing and looking to bridge the two worlds. But I think this last topic you brought up make your own luck. — Yeah. Yeah. But there's two things. There's luck because so much of your life is accidental, you know? I mean, when you arrive, where you arrived, what the setting was, there's a lot of luck in it. I mean, none of this was designed for you in mind. I always tell people that. I said, you know, don't think that you're entitled to anything because none of this was designed for you. People were busy. They had other things on their mind when you were born. But I think that there's two things here. There's a recognition of that's the way the world works. there's just a lot of luck involved and the other thing is how do I make my brain something that takes advantage of luck cuz there's very definitely mindsets you know one thing you can't have any envy about other people I mean one thing you really have to get rid of envy that you think there's unfairness and everything I said you know you won't be lucky if you're looking for unfairness — you won't be that's the gap right where you kind of get in the gap between where you want to be or others are and where you are and how you measure yourself, which I've always appreciated. But I know we're out of time. — Yeah. But this was a good one. I mean, this is I feel prepared. — I don't know if this did you any good, but it did me a lot of good.

— Well, I did want to dig in and we'll do this on the next episode on the largest check because I do think you did an exercise. It goes back easily 20 years, but maybe 25 plus years called the largest check. And I think we're living in a moment where capital does enable and accelerate a number of things, but the largest check exercise is one I want to explore. For me, I thought your discussion on the last episode around compelling offers, convincing arguments. We dug deeper into it in the workshop continues to be for me a daily transformative thinking tool and a filter that has enabled me to actually look at my portfolio differently quite frankly and refiltering everything around which of these entrepreneurs are succeeding with compelling offers versus struggling with convincing arguments. — Yeah. And the problem is that if you're a good arguer, you can convince enough people that you can make a living and then you get hardwired that it's about convincing arguments. Okay. But if you really looked at what the breakthrough results were in your life, you'll notice that so much of it wasn't a convincing argument. You just had an offer that was very compelling. — Yeah. All right, Dan. Great spend of the time and love the free flowing discussion. have a great time on your trip and look forward to hearing about the breakthroughs and the experiences and your insights when you return. — Okay. Thank you, Steve. — All right.