Even performance marketing has to prove it delivers incremental results.
Hello, I'm Neil Perkin, the host of Think with Google Firestarters.And Firestarters is a series of insightful conversations with the interested and interesting, as we like to say, of the advertising, marketing, and innovation communities.
And today on the podcast, we're going to be looking into the future of performance marketing.And I'm delighted to say that we're doing that with Chris Tate.So Chris is the managing director at Crowd in New York.
Crowd are an innovative full-service agency, media agency, that specialise in what they term as incremental marketing.So Chris has been at Crowd for about 12 years, really helping to grow the business.So Chris, welcome to Firestarters.
Perhaps if you just give us a little bit more on your role and then of course what your provocation is for the Firestarters audience.
Sounds good.Great to be here.It's been about 10 years since I joined Firestarters in a live version in London with Google, which was great, and one of the highlights of some of the speaking slots that I've done.
So great full circle moment to be back here. I lead the crowd agency in America, been over here for nine years, as we just discussed yesterday, which is which is a nice moment, one more year, and I'll be a true New Yorker.
And yeah, it's generally looking after the growth of the agency, delivering what we promise for clients, and then making sure that we're in constantly innovating in our product and what we think about in terms of marketing, as we'll discuss today.
And so my opening provocation is even performance marketing has to prove it delivers incremental results.And what do I mean by that?So it's both a simple and maybe quite obvious statement, but I think it stops people a little bit.
And mostly people raise their eyebrows as in like, okay, what do you mean by that?And I think it's because most people think. It's incremental.But I think in reality, you probably are like 50, 60% of it is, and 40, 50% of it isn't.
A lot of it is still based on surface metrics like leads and clicks and CPA.And we think in 2024 that just isn't enough.And we need to understand on a deeper level what it is doing for businesses, not just in the bubble that it's in.
So if we're not providing incremental lift for brands, we're wasting money, potentially cannibalizing organic sales and attributing success to channels that aren't providing real growth.
Brilliant, that's amazing.There's lots to dive into there, but I'm just going to begin, actually, if we may, just by thinking a bit about what this idea of incremental marketing means for the future of performance marketing.
Where do you think it's going to go?
Yeah, um, so I actually think it was a good thought exercise to just take a step back and and and remember where this term came from performance marketing and it actually emerged in the 2000s quite popularly when um
Google Analytics launched in 2005.It was huge from a kind of going from traditional marketing metrics to something you could measure.And people were spending a lot of money on marketing, and they wanted more of a data-driven way to measure it.
And it actually firstly came in the mid-1990s, shortly after internet marketing sort of became a term.But performance marketing essentially focuses on achieving measurable results. And it's been a huge success, right?Like we can't forget about that.
Google and Meta, they deliver hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue from this.And brands have had huge success and agencies have grown and created value and wealth for a lot of people and helped economies grow.
So you might be like, well, what's the problem?Sounds great.And I think the future, as we think about this, we've kind of backed ourselves into this corner. both as agencies, as brands, and as CMOs, and this kind of comfort in the word performance.
And anything outside of that seems alien and crazy and not worth it, right?And in reality, this performance element, this performance marketing element, is optimizing for demand, like hand raisers and people that are in market or
just about to get in market.Our VP of strategy here calls this kind of like a 95-5 rule where only actually 5% of your customers are in market at any one time.And that is performance marketing.
And yes, we do a lot of different things within it, and we pick customers up outside of that 5%.
But really, the problem is we've sort of created jobs and brands and media plans and everything to capture that performance marketing and not cultivate new customers. because of this kind of instant gratification of ROAS and ROI and CAC and CPA.
And we're kind of in that, like people don't want to be brave outside of that.
But I do think the future is for agencies like Crowd and there's a lot of great agencies to like be responsible for guiding people past that and into new realms of, you know, we've just talked about brand marketing, incrementality,
and bringing a kind of new wave of marketing with this integration between all of these things.
And I think agencies like us, we can do a good job of that because we come from a very performance-focused background, and I think brands and CMOs want the comfort that, okay, we're gonna maybe spend a million dollars on this brand campaign, but it has to be accountable.
And so I think that is the future of kind of incrementality and performance marketing in brand marketing, getting new customers.Yeah.
So the idea of incrementality is quite a challenge, isn't it?Because what you seem to be saying there is that actually, increasingly, that kind of activity, marketing activity, needs to be brought back into business outcomes.
Not necessarily just marketing outcomes or media outcomes, but actually, what does it mean for the business? So how do you do that in quite a complex business?How can you link it all the way back through to real kind of benefits?
Yeah. So yeah, that's a good question.I think it's a good place to start in terms of just measurement in general.And this kind of rising importance of incrementality and experimentation that generally the industry is with.
Everyone has agreed, you've got Walk and Meta and Google and IAB all advocating for this.And kind of this, the best in class measurement right now is kind of this trifecta of digital attribution or MTA or DDA.
MMM, so this larger kind of MMM media mix modeling, then in between that, incrementality and experiments to understand the impact of a campaign, like over what would have happened anyway. So that's the first place to start.
You can't, you shouldn't just, you know, be totally dogmatic and go with one of those things and say, forget about attribution.That doesn't matter anymore.It's nonsense.Let's just do experiments.So let's just do MMMs.
You need all of them because they all help you, um, deliver at different shoots for different people within the business.For example, attribution is very useful from a. In the weeds, how do we attribute spend and how do we change spend?
Whereas MMM is like a six month thing for a CFO potentially to decide where they spend the money.So from an incrementality perspective, to measure the true impact of incrementality,
We would advocate for doing uplift and geo split experiments so they're essentially a Test and control experiment where we would do on a geo basis to pick three places that are very similar run media in two and hold out in one and You can do this today
Free in all of the channels that we've just talked about in google in meta in ctv in loads of different channels And I would encourage people to to start doing that today for free to understand the impact of that incremental impact of search and incremental impact of their meta campaigns um, but the real real hard thing neil is that
people are struggling to implement incrementality across channel and across all of the stacks that they're on.Because it's quite hard to do, and it can become quite expensive.So there are ways and partners that you can do cross-stack incrementality.
And it's essentially a large-scale geo-experiment working with a partner, tagging everything up correctly, and having that exposure across all of the channels that you're on.
And then feeding that back in to say, OK, these are the channels that are actually providing incrementality.And then you would recalibrate your attribution or recalibrate your media spend based on that.
Yeah, I think the challenge that people are having with it is it's kind of like a snapshot in time.Really good for a campaign incrementality read. But the real value from us and from people that understand it is, what do you do next?
And how do you feed that back into your media campaigns?
So I mean, that's a really interesting approach.And it just strikes me that there is quite a few implications for process and the way in which you would sort of tackle campaign planning, I suppose, and optimization.
So what do you think is the sort of mindset or process shifts that you need to get into in order to do that kind of idea of geoexperimenting and incrementality well?
That's a really good question. I think it's such a good question because the way that traditionally performance agencies are set up are not to think like that.
They're to think like, how do I deliver the best return on ad spend with the money I have to prove the value?And generally, what happens is that it just keeps going down.You keep chasing the audiences that are more likely to convert.
And essentially, it's a dead end eventually.So I think a huge part of incrementality
generally, where we're going from a marketing perspective is introducing more marketing that is accountable for delivering new customers and inspiring people into the brands.
And I think setting up the processes and frameworks and the ways that people can think about that is very important.So to give an example, I think the way that we think about this, and by the way, it's quite easy to say,
You should be doing brand marketing.Brand marketing is so important to inspire new customers and get them into the brand.
It's super easy to say that, but it's actually quite hard to really hard to deliver it because there's so much gray in the ways that you track it.There's so much gray in the creative and the way that you kind of, um,
create emotions for people to inspire them to come and buy from your brand.So the way that we think about some of this is that it's kind of bringing this performance mindset to a creative discipline.
And our entry point into brand is that, how can we create these kind of more awareness campaigns that inspire people, but they're held accountable, like performance marketing, just to different metrics?
So there's a few different systems and ways that we're trying to teach people to think within crowd.Two really important ones, right, when you think about marketing outside of straight up performance.
And the first one is generally within this brand marketing, we're thinking about either brand awareness, consideration for the brand or purchase intent. Really, we want to understand which one of those things that we're trying to accomplish.
Brand awareness takes a lot longer.It can take two years to create lifts in brand awareness for brands.So you have to be willing to invest in that.Purchase intent can take three months.So it's a metric that we can move much faster.
And if a CMO comes to us and says, we are willing to invest in this, but I've only got three months' worth of rope.We are not going to pick brand awareness.We're going to pick purchase intent and moving people to purchase.
The next time they go to buy a razor, they are going to purchase my razor.That's what happens, right?We can't make them purchase it today, but they're going to purchase it next time.
And the second really, really important thing that we try to teach people here is how much headroom is available in those three things. So you could look at brands.
We work with quite a famous coffee brand in New York that has in-home machines and pods.And they have an amazing, amazing awareness.If you say the brand, unprompted and prompted, you would know the brand.
But the challenge is no one's considering buying it right now.Like they've either already considered it or they've got it.Like how do we get more people to consider it?
And there's huge headroom in getting more people to consider it and barely any headroom. in the awareness phase, like they already have amazing awareness.
So then we set up campaigns to understand how to increase that consideration and eventually get people to purchase.But those are the two kind of mechanisms, how much headroom is there in those three things?
And how long do I have to prove that this works?
That's really interesting.I mean, as you're talking about, this sort of feels like a way of approaching bringing together brand and, you know, what we've been calling performance marketing in a sort of consistent sort of approach.
Is that fair to say that it sort of runs across both of those kind of elements? Definitely.
And because you can use traditional performance marketing channels for all of your brand campaigns to raise awareness, the trap that you don't want to fall back into is, OK, I'm running this thing on meta, and what's the ROI on it?
Because that wasn't the objective of the campaign.Another one of the cool things that the team have worked really hard on is something called outcomes-based planning, which Again, those three words sound pretty straightforward.
But it's bringing that kind of outcome, starting with the outcome we want to achieve, and then working back all of the kind of inputs and data that is required to say, if we do this, we are going to get that outcome.
And for example, within that, it's a very performance mindset.So within it, we're looking at all of the different audiences that we could grow within the category. Some of those audiences are just complete... Denied like a rejecters of the brand.
There's no point in targeting them.
They've been a customer before they're never gonna come back Some of them are just not within the household income some of them are in the wrong part of the country and you eventually get down to like a few segments which are Spot-on to grow the brands then we work out where they are and how we can how we can hit them with our message How much money that's gonna take how many impressions and I think the other big point around this kind of buying is that
A lot of this brand type buying is done on reach and how many people can we reach.Whereas we take a different method in terms of like, how many times do I have to reach that person, which is frequency.
And we, you know, because you could spend $15 million, get loads of reach. But you only reach the people you wanted to twice, and they're just never going to become familiar with your brand.So the key thing is frequency.
How many times do we have to reach them on those channels for them to now consider our brand?And I think there's just a lot of different things with an outcomes-based planning that is very performance driven.
And I think CMOs that we work with and we speak to just really love that, bringing that to a brand kind of more creative discipline, basically.
Yeah.I mean, one challenge I have for you on this is about the risk, I suppose, of undervaluing, you know, good traditional kind of brand advertising.I mean, there's so much work, you know, like barring shops, mental and physical availability,
Liz Bennett and Peter Fields kind of long and the short of it, which show the value really of having that sort of longer term brand advertising, which might not have that initial payback, but is nonetheless essential in order to then lead into activation.
Do you think that the risk is that because it becomes more accountable, that it all becomes a bit more short term and a bit more kind of performance focused and we're not focusing enough on the brand perhaps?Is that a risk?
Yeah, and I think, I think that's, that's where we are today.I think that's most successful brands that have grown really.Um, I mean, there aren't that many brands that have grown only on performance marketing.
I would actually challenge us to find them.Um, and you know, even when you look at kind of like Airbnb or, um, there was another one the other day that I saw. And they're just saying like, performance marketing is not the reason why this brand grew.
It's really, really important.But there are two, like, I still meet brands that spend 90% of their money on things that are accountable straight away. And a lot of brands have done quite well over the last five, six years.
Economies have been absolutely flying.There's been loads of money to spend.And ultimately, these platforms, Google and Meta, put the ads in front of them when they want it really, really perfectly.
But eventually those new customers run out and the brands that don't actually get this and haven't got a brave CMO or an agency that can guide them through it aren't going to be here in five years.
They're just not because they don't understand the fundamental elements of how to grow a brand.And I take some responsibility for that because
As an agency that have focused so heavily on being really good at those technical channels and delivering instant revenue impact and growth for brands, now I want to take responsibility in trying to push the next.
If I can do it for 10 brands over the next three or four years, I'll be really happy with that.Just get them out of this mindset of instant impact and more into how do I grow over the next two years.And one of the key elements of that, Neil,
Showing them Not it doesn't have to wait 24 months to be like, oh, yeah, it worked It's like doing those incrementality studies as we go to say that had a huge impact on all of these other channels on search interest on downstream traffic and all of that stuff so
Yeah, it's definitely, I've talked about this before in terms of it being a trap and one that we have to just be careful on.Some people have called it the cack valley of death or different things, but it's hard to get out of.
Yeah, I can see the temptation with it.But what it seems to be you saying there is that, like most things, and I think everybody says the same thing ultimately, which is it's about balance.
But what you seem to be saying is that you're bringing more data into achieving the right kind of balance in the right way to achieve those outcomes.Is that a fair summation of what you're saying?
Yeah, exactly.And just to kind of, yeah, nail that point,
When we recently did a brand media plan for a company who sells truck parts, essentially, we told them exactly how much money they had to spend, where, with which partners, and how much money it was going to cost to lift one individual person to consider their brand, and the impact of that in six months' time.
It was incredibly accurate in the end when we ran the campaign and delivered all of the lift and had a really great downstream impact on the brand.
And then the key thing is performance marketing has to then deliver what it promises because there's so much more interest in the brand.So that's where it works really well together.
I think, you know, within the performance realm, we talk about like funnels and upper funnel and that isn't brand marketing, that's just using Google and meta to do some kind of like upper funnel awareness campaigns, but you're still using the same ads.
So yeah, that's that's the difference.I think we will hang our hat a lot of the time on on these kind of forecasts of how much money we think we can deliver via these campaigns, how much lift we think we can deliver.And it's all backed by data.
And that's that kind of performance mindset coming in.
Yeah, and back to the incrementality point, I suppose.
I mean, one question I do have is about data, actually, because it seems to be quite a, you know, there's a significant shift underway within marketing team's client side to amplify the focus on first party data, the importance of having your own
data that you can then use in multiple different ways, your own customer data.So are there implications here for the work that you do and for performance marketing as well, the amount of data that clients have access to and how they can use that?
Yeah, definitely.And that's been a key trend for as long as I can remember, at least four or five years, right, in terms of investment in first party data.And we've had all of the storm of cookies and app tracking and Safari and everything.
So first party data is incredibly important.I think it can answer a lot of the the known unknowns about our customers.And we can use machine learning algorithms that are super smart today to answer some of these questions for us.
But I do think that sometimes, I listened to one of your recent Firestarters in the sense of data and ideas and strategy, which I thought was amazing.And I totally agree with him in some sense that
You can learn a lot about your current customers, but sometimes that isn't your future customers.
It's like this continuous loop of marketing to the people that are already in market or already interested in your brand, but activating new segments and new demand is hard to do from your current customers.
And I think first party data is incredibly important in marketing, but we shouldn't think it's the only answer because we still need to have really good brand marketing that inspires new segments and new customers to come to the brand.
And I think that's the unlock that not a lot of brands that have grown up in performance marketing are doing.
And I think they can learn a lot from brands that have been around for a hundred years on how they do kind of the marketing without any first-party data.Think of CPG brands.
Yes, right.Absolutely.No, you're right.
And I must ask you, of course, about AI and the implications of the development that we're seeing, the rapid development of AI to both performance marketing and also what you're doing there with incremental marketing.
So what role is AI playing and how is it changing the game?
Yeah, and I'm so excited by this topic.I love using GPT.It makes me faster at so many different tasks that would take ages to write up notes, for example, or structures and things like that.So I'm really excited about it.
I think that it's been part of performance marketing agency's DNA for a decade.We've talked about data-driven.We've talked about machine learning.We've talked about bidding algorithms. People in performance marketing love this stuff.
And I think that it's made campaign management easier.It's made automating bids easier.It's even made, you know, I think targeting, for example, way easier on on meta and things like that.And even creative, right, where it struggles.
I guess the downsides of that, it can't really determine strategic goals.It wouldn't, unless it's guided by humans, it's not gonna be able to do kind of incrementality and things like that.
And I think those are the things that need to be framed by people, by marketers on top of it.So I think it's gonna be an amazing tool and it's gonna upend the industry hugely.
But here's an anecdote from within my agency over the last few weeks around how is AI impacting jobs and what they're doing and how their sort of day-to-day runs.
And I asked one of the smartest people that we respect hugely in our agency, and he said that AI is amazing at taking the kind of
lower level work that we all used to do, kind of manual bidding and trafficking, all of these things that were super valuable for an agency because we could do it at scale.We don't need to do it anymore.
And they said that his job is actually harder today because he has to really, really work hard to deliver value for brands and value for our clients. versus the things that we used to do which were seen as valuable.
So I just thought it was a really interesting anecdote in the sense of like a real world application that AI is actually making people's jobs harder, not worse, just harder in the sense that they have to try harder to deliver value.
But yeah, I think generally it democratizes information.
People are going to be able to just ask AI things and it will be able to create a model, a machine learning framework on the back of it without knowing anything about Python or the way that these things work.
It will be able to do the analysis for you.
I mean, just go back to the point you said about that make job harder.I mean, that's a really interesting sort of provocation.
But I guess for me, what you're saying, it seems you're saying there is it's almost like harder in a good way, because, you know, if it's kind of all being able to automate a lot of the tasks, which might want to be manual tasks, the idea that maybe it's actually freeing up a bit more time to focus on how you can really
add value from a human perspective, you know, strategic thinking, creative thinking, the kinds of really understanding, as you say, how you can deliver value beyond the kind of automation bit that AI is, is that really a good way of thinking about it as well?
Yeah, definitely, definitely spot on.And And it's a good signal to me to how do people think about their careers and growth within marketing and how do they learn the right skills to be successful in a marketing agency of the future.
And I think that's it, right?Like critical thinking, understanding historical frameworks for different things that have been true for centuries.How do you bring that to your day?
Not just, I'm going to be really good at Google Ads, or I'm going to be really good at this. Yes, those skills are still so important today.And I think probably for the next three or four years will be okay.
AI will do bits and bits and bits and bits and bits.But one day, it will, it will just do those things.And you will be like, I, none of the things I do are needed anymore.So I think that kind of critical thinking, like how do we set up
For example, with an incrementality, we should all have more time to think and do that now and then think about how it applies to the future of our marketing spend versus just being in these platforms kind of optimizing.
And I think I do see that in a lot of people within our agency that they're off learning new skills, they're testing themselves on things that are outside of the platform.
They take the data outside of the platform and try to work out what's going on, then reapply it back in the platform.So yeah, I think you're spot on there.And that should be a good thing for us to do more enjoyable work.
Because actually, trafficking is not that enjoyable.Yeah, it makes a lot of sense what you're saying.I mean, it's all about balance, like we said before, isn't it?
And speaking of balance, one thing I also wanted to ask about in the context of AI was personalization.
Because I think it's a really exciting area, and lots of marketers getting really excited about the idea of personalization at scale and being able to deliver the perfect message to the perfect customer at the perfect time kind of thing.
But is there a risk with this that actually we go too far with it, perhaps, that we forget the value of that kind of the upper funnel, the brand bit?And actually, we don't always know what we want.
So serendipity and these kind of things that actually add a different dimension to product discovery and how we find stuff and how we answer questions and whatever.So how can we strike the right balance?
Yeah, it's a good question.I was speaking to my wife about this recently in terms of I actually think I told her about this podcast.And she was like, oh, that's not that controversial.I told her the provocation.
And I was like, wait, wait, wait, what do you mean?And she's like, well, she thinks it is all incremental.But then we got onto AI, and I talked about this subject.
And I said to her, I think the real interesting part of it is it probably could get to a stage where it is incredibly personalized to each person on a one-to-one basis. more so than we all thought we were doing over the last decade.
But yeah, I think there's a lot of implications there around how much data do you want to give a personal AI on your phone and the privacy element of it?
And what's the end goal there that you said that you liked a shirt on Instagram, and then for the next three months, you get advertised by that shirt? It doesn't know that actually you're bored of looking at that shirt tomorrow.
So there's a long way to go, I think, in that personalization.And another conversation that was happening within the agency the other day was, Oh no, it was on LinkedIn actually, I'm sorry.It was like Google and DuckDuckGo.
And DuckDuckGo still has advertising, but not based on any click data or searches that you've done before.And I actually think there's some beauty in that.Like, if someone is looking for something, great, put it in front of them.
But I also think that there's a lot of traps that have been set within marketing around like all of these signals, like a click or an impression and a click sometimes, we all know it, like we click things all the time that we're not bothered about.
And then for the next week, you're like the thing, you know, the AI thought I was really wanted this like, I don't know, lamp.So yeah, I think there's a balance.
I honestly think if a brand knows their customer, understands their product inherently, and understands where they should be showing up in media, then there's a really bright way to do this without worrying too much about personalization, one-to-one, and getting everything perfectly from a messaging perspective.
So I think, yeah, my signal would be to go back to like, traditional ways of doing marketing, and then start applying your performance knowledge to that, versus the other way around.
Yeah, I like that approach.
I'm going to ask you a really out there kind of question now, actually, which is about the future relevant to AI, because obviously what we're seeing a lot more of is this idea of AI agents, and lots of companies and businesses and service providers are creating these sort of chatbots and agents or whatever.
And so the idea of if we're going to actually have lots of recommendation agents or lots of AI agents that are recommending products and services to us, are we going to get to the point where we are going to be like machines marketing to machines?
And if so, what's that going to look like?
Yeah, I mean, the logical conclusion would be that in the sense of, The machine knows me better than myself because of all of the things that I'm doing or showing it.
If it could understand emotion as well, that would be even more powerful through face signals or your whoop on your wrist or whatever it might be.I'm just not, I'm so not excited by that.I'm so not excited by that future.
I am excited in a lot of ways for agents and AI to be able to speed a lot of things up in my life. But I'm not excited about like a just completely automated future where you don't have to touch anything from a human perspective.
That just feels to me like we'll all be plugged into some system and not actually speak to each other and have human interactions, which I think actually those skills are going to be incredibly important in the next, you know, for my kids who are like two.
actually being able to have like a human connection and speak to people I think is going to be so important.And we're fighting against that.
We're going to be fighting against that from the way that people use their phones and social media and obviously agents coming in.You might be able to think something and it will happen on your phone. But some, I just don't know, I'm not excited.
I'm not excited from a marketing perspective about that either.
Yeah, I know what you mean.I know what you mean.I mean, in some ways it's a logical path, but yeah, it kind of misses out on that sort of nuance and the whole kind of human element of it in some way, doesn't it?
It'd be interesting to see what happens.But yeah, thank you for that answer.I'm going to ask you one final question because we are running short on time.
But one thing that has sort of struck me about this and the way in which you're talking about performance marketing and incremental marketing,
is that in many ways what you're saying here seems to be suggesting that actually the word performance within performance marketing will start to lose a bit of meaning.
It just becomes marketing, and it just becomes the way in which you do advertising and marketing.So is that already happening, do you think?Is this really just the way in which we'll do all advertising in the future?
I think it's happening, yeah.I think, yeah, you raise a very good point.It's happening, and I think that
And agencies that provide these services I think are starting to feel a little bit uncomfortable with the word because they know it's limiting eventually.
That's not to say you can't be a great performance marketing agency and grow to be quite big, but I think it's in a little awkward moment in the sense of like performance agencies who are really good at this stuff are trying to break out of it into full funnel and brand marketing.
They're also trying to pull in different measurement instruments like we talk about by MMM companies or by attribution companies.It's really good.I think that's really good for the ecosystem because agencies like us and all of our competitors
Keep pushing on that.It's going to be better for everyone and better for brands.And yeah, I agree with you.It will, it'll, it'll go like this, Neil, right?Like we're on the way back to kind of, okay, we have to think about all marketing here.
It's not just performance to your AI point about agents.It might go all the way back down into performance in like 25 years and like, You know, it might go again.
So yeah, I think we're on a little uptick back into more traditional and brand marketing and doing things to grow brands versus just focusing on ROAS.And that to me is like very exciting.
And I think why we got into marketing is we love like inspiring people with great marketing.Yeah, and data-driven will still be there, just in a different guise.
Brilliant.I think that's a really excellent way to close out the discussion there.But Chris, that's been absolutely fascinating.So if you've enjoyed this discussion, don't forget to subscribe and also to share the episode, of course.
But my thanks go to Chris Tate for joining us on Firestarters.Thanks so much, Chris.
Sign in
