Well, thanks everybody for being here. This is very strange for us. The last two, I think two or three years, we've done in-person AGMs. And so, usually my goal, because I'm always nervous, is to make a joke and then hear some laughs. But here in the studio, we actually can't hear anything other than seeing a few people on Zoom's very straight faces. So, you'll have to uh bear with us. This is an experiment. know we have we have so many followers from all over the world and uh it's always really fun to get everyone together but we heard from some people that they wanted to be able to participate. So this year we're going to try virtual and we'll see how it goes. Um if you haven't been to one of our AGMs before, a public company AGM, uh we got to go through the kind of the the the dull part which is me reading a script uh for voting and corporate affairs. And then we're going to get into a um a Zoom component after this where we do an open Q&A where anyone can ask a question. Um so anyone that's doing voting and stuff, that's all going to happen via computer share. Uh you'll need to log in via that, not the Zoom. Um and we'll go from there. So I'm going to start reading this very boring stiff script and then uh after that we're going to uh have some opening remarks and then get into Q&A for as long as needed. Um so let's get started. Good morning everyone. Thanks for joining us. I'm Andrew Wilkinson, co-founder of Tiny and executive chairman, and I'm calling our 2026 annual general meeting to order. We're holding the meeting virtually again this year so that as many of you can join as possible. Right after the meeting, we're going to have a live Q&A on Zoom. If you need the link for that, you can go to our website, tiny.com, under the investors tab in latest news. Today, we'll work through formal business set out in the proxy materials we set out and filed on Cedar Plus. Before we start, let me introduce the directors and officers that are here with me today. Chris Sparling, my co-founder and executive vice chair. Austin Singera, our chief executive officer to my left. And Mike McKenna, our chief financial officer to my right here. Uh you can't see him. Um but they're slowly panning over so you can ah there he is. There's his winning smile. Okay. Um, I'll ask Mike McKenna to act as secretary for the meeting and Irene Lee of Computershare Trust Company to act as scrutiner. Here's what we're going to cover today. Receiving the company's audited financial statements for the year ended December 31st, 2025 together with the auditor's report, electing the company's directors for the coming year. Appointing the company's auditor for the coming year and authorizing the board to set the auditor's remuneration, considering and if thought advisable passing an ordinary resolution approving the company's amended and restated rolling omnibus equity incentive plan. and considering if thought advisable passing an ordinary resolution approving approving the unallocated options, deferred share units, restricted share units, performance share units, and other share-based awards under the omnibus plan. You'll find the full details in each of on each of these in our management information circular. Mike has confirmed to me that the notice and access materials and form of proxy were mailed to shareholders on April 30th, 2026 and that a revised form of proxy reflecting the virtual format was mailed on May 8th, 2026. I direct that the affidavit of mailing be attached to the minutes of the meeting and with everyone's agreement will take the notice of meetings as read. Before we dive in, a quick word on how voting and questions work today. Only registered shareholders and duly appointed proxy holders can vote or ask questions. Is that >> during the formal >> during the formal portion? That's right. And we'll we will have the casual Q&A for everyone after this. We've also opened attendance to other guests as well. And we're glad to have you here for the formal component. If you'd like to ask a question, use the Q&A tab in the web portal of Computershare. Send them in now or at any other point as we go. Mike will read them aloud. When you submit one, just let us know whether it relates to a specific motion or is more general. We'll take motion related questions during that item and save general ones for the Zoom Q&A right after the meeting. If the webcast runs into any technical troubles, please stay logged on and we'll resume as soon as we can. You'll also want to keep an eye out on our um on your own internet connection. I may pause now and now and then to check uh in with Mike on questions. So, thanks in advance for your patience. Voting today is by electronic ballot and the polls are now open. Only registered shareholders and proxy holders who have logged in with their control number or invite code will see the motions on screen and be able to vote. If you're a registered shareholder who already voted by proxy, there's nothing more you need to do unless you'd like to change your vote. Proxy holders, you'll need to vote here at the meeting. You can vote on each item as we go or wait until the discussion is done. Just be sure to click submit so that your vote is counted. And as a reminder, each common share carries one vote. Our bylaws set quorum at one or more voting persons present in person or by proxy holding at least 10% of the votes attach attaching to our voting shares. The scrutiners report shows 26 shareholders in attendance today in person or by proxy holding 20,689,892 common shares. That's 70% 70.6% of the company's common shares. I'll ask the secretary to file the scrutiners's report with today's minutes. On that basis, I declare that we have a quorum. With proper notice given and a quorum present, I declare the meeting duly constituted and ready to do business. To keep things moving, I've asked Mike McKenna and Chris Sparling to move and second today's motions. That's purely for efficiency and doesn't limit your right to take part. Our first item is to receive the company's audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31st, 2025 and the auditor's report on them both available on Cedar Plus and on our website. I declare those statements and the auditor's report received. Mike, are there any questions on the financial statements that we should take now? >> Mr. Chairman, there are no questions on this item of business. >> Next is the election of directors. Our nominees are Andrew Wilkinson, Chris Sparling, Alex Conconei, Tim Mlane, and Carla Mat. Each has agreed to stand and each would hold office until the close of next year's annual meeting or until a successor is duly elected or appointed. Could I have a motion to elect them? I move that Andrew Wilkinson, Chris Sparling, Alex Conconei, Tim Mlane, and Carla Mat be elected as directors of the company to hold office until the close of the next annual meeting or until their successors are duly elected or appointed. >> I second the motion. >> The motion is open for discussion. If you're a registered shareholder or dulyappointed proxy holder and would like to ask a question, please submit it using the ask a question field and click submit. I'll pause for a moment and ask Mike to read read out anything that comes in. We need some music to play now. >> Mr. Chairman, there are no comments or questions to be addressed on this section of the meeting. >> Excellent. Thank you, Mike. Our next item is appointing KPMG LLP chartered professional accountants as our auditors to hold office until the next annual meeting with their remuneration to be fixed by the board. Could I have a motion? I move that KPMG LLP chartered professional accountants be appointed as auditors of the company to hold office until the next annual meeting of shareholders at a renumeration to be fixed by the board of directors. >> I second the motion. >> The motion is open for discussion. As before, I'll pause and ask Mike to read any comments or questions. >> Uh Mr. Chairman, there are no comments or questions on this section of the meeting. >> Thank you, Mike. Um, next is an ordinary resolution to approve our amended and restated rolling omnibus equity incentive plan. You'll find the full plan in schedule B of the management information circular and a black line showing the changes from the prior version in schedule C. Could I have a motion? I move that the ordinary resolution set out in the management information circular approving the amended and restated rolling omnibus equity incentive plan of the company be approved. >> I second the motion. >> The motion is open for discussion. As before, I'll pause and ask Mike to read any comments or questions. >> Uh Mr. Chairman, there are no questions or comments on this section of the meeting. Thank you, Mike. Our last formal item is an ordinary resolution to approve the unallocated awards under the omnibus plan. That's the options, deferred share units, restricted share units, performance share units, and other sharebased awards. Could I have a motion? I move that the ordinary resolution set out in the management information circular approving unallocated options deferred share units, restricted share units, performance share units, and any other sharebased awards under the omnibus plan be approved. >> I second the motion. >> The motion is open for discussion. As before, I'll pause and ask Mike to read any comments or questions. >> Uh, Mr. Chairman, there are no comments or questions on this section of the meeting to be addressed. >> Thank you, Mike. Electronic voting will close in just a moment. If you voted in advance, then you're all set. Your vote is already recorded and there's nothing more to do unless you'd like to change it. Just note that if you do vote live today, that automatically revokes any earlier vote or proxy. And proxy holders, remember that you need to vote here at the meeting. Mr. Chairman, the live voting process has now ended. Now that everyone has had a chance to vote, I declare the polls for the meeting closed. >> Mr. Chairman, based on the scrutiners's preliminary report, sufficient votes have been received for all items of business to pass. Thank you. With all items duly passed, I declare that one, the nominees listed in the management information circular are elected as directors. KPMG LLP is reappointed as tiny's auditors for the coming year with the directors authorized to set their remuneration. Three, the amended and restated rolling omnibus equity incentive plan is approved. And four, the ordinary resolution on the unallocated awards under the omnibus plan is approved. The specific results for each director and for each of the each of the auditor and omnibus plan resolutions will be reported in our final voting results filed under applicable securities legislation. With no further business before us, could I have a motion to close this meeting? Mr. Chairman, I move that this meeting be adjourned. >> I second the motion. Before we close, I'll pause once more. Mike, any final questions or comments? >> Mr. Chairman, there are no final questions or comments to be addressed. >> I declare the annual general meeting adjourned. And now for the more relaxed part. Um me, Chris, Austin, Mike, uh the four of us are going to continue along on Zoom for an open Q&A about how the business is doing and any other questions you guys have for us. Um some of you may already be there. If not, the Zoom link is in the documents tab of this portal as in the computer shared portal or on our website tiny.com under the investors section in latest news. We'll take a moment uh if everyone wants to move over to the Zoom and then we'll get rolling. Thank you for bearing with us. This is always a a bit of a snoozefest this part. >> Yeah. >> This concludes the meeting. You may now disconnect. >> Just throw these onto the floors. >> Yeah. >> Actually, Karen, can I get a pen? Actually, >> we are no longer live. >> I'll keep here. Mike, you probably need a pen, too. Hey, >> thanks. Do we have any more? Sorry. >> All right. How many people do we have in the Zoom? >> Amazing. >> That's sweet. >> That's really cool. Well, >> that's great. >> We're very flattered. That's uh that's awesome. So, um thanks again uh to all of you for joining. And I just want to remind you Q&A questions can be added via the Zoom chat. So if you have a question, just throw it in there. Um we'll if it's a repeat or we feel like we might group them together or rephrase them a tiny bit. Um why don't we just start with a really high level overview of the last year. So over the last year we learned one incredibly important lesson which is communism does not work. Uh I remember talking to a friend of mine who runs a a far bigger holding company um than we are and I asked him you know look it must be tempting you have you know about a hundred businesses and they all have payroll bookkeeping uh you know cellular plans all these costs why don't you just bring all those costs into head office and then you can watch them like a hawk and centralize them and the idea always kind of fascinated fascinated me and others and there's a lot of holding companies that have done it successfully. And while Tiny has always been totally decentralized, this year we explored bringing some things into head office, primarily things like accounting, um, IT, payroll, and uh, what we learned was that it actually just added bloat. It added complexity at the holding company level. It was a distraction for management. It didn't lower expenses. And that's an that's something that we're currently undoing. It's not a terrible mistake. It was an experiment. But, uh, it's funny. Sometimes everyone in the world can tell you not to do something and you still have to stick the fork into the electrical socket yourself and learn the lesson. And so, uh, we learned that lesson this year. Um, on the good side, uh, Letterbox has continued its explosive growth. It's now at 29 million registered users. It's just astounding. Uh, I went to the Toronto International Film Festival and I think probably about 30% of the people were wearing letter boxed hats or pins like it's on all the screens. Just incredible what's going on in that business. Um, the other amazing thing that happened in our business um is recurring revenue growth. So, you know, 20 years ago when uh I started the original business, Metalab, one of the things that caused me a great deal of stress was knowing that at any given time I only had about 3 months of revenue and that I constantly had to be reselling and finding new customers to sell to. Now, in a services business, um you know, there are ways to solve that. you can get retainers, you work with larger companies. And we did that over time, but really Tiny um Tiny started out of Chris and I's fear uh and stress of not having recurring revenue, not having predictable revenue. And it took us almost 20 years. We're now in our I believe our 20th year. Um, but this year, uh, our annual recurring revenue ended at about $72 million, which if you'd gone back even 5 years and told me, I would be absolutely gobsmacked. Um, so in the last year, it grew over 80% and that was largely due to our acquisition of Sorado, which has been a phenomenal investment for us. Um, we also paid down a significant amount of debt. One of our big focuses, if you were at the AGM last year, one of our commitments was that we're going to focus on debt uh, debt payown. We're now below I think two uh 2.7 um times and uh so there's a lot there's a lot of really great stuff happening but you know it wasn't all roses um we commerce and creative market both struggled due to increased competition due to AI as well as some changes in the Shopify marketplace um you know our focus on debt repayment has reduced the cash available to head office so I wouldn't say that there's been an an M&A deal that we have wanted to do, but had we had one over the last 12 year or 12 months, I think it would have been uh a bit a bit stressful to put the cash together. Uh and then Mr. Market continues to completely misunderstand our business. Um specifically our siloed debt structure. Um so most of our debt sits at subsidiaries without cross guarantees um to tiny LTD which you wouldn't see if you just look at a global balance sheet. And then the other thing is uh our fund structure. So basically almost all of our M&A activity from 2021 to mid 2024 occurred in the fund and almost all of Tiny's free cash flow went into investments alongside um the LPs in the fund. And so we have a tremendous amount of value that is not reflected in our financial statements or really even on our balance sheet. Um over the last two years we've increased disclosure of the fund and we've tried to share some of the incredible things happening in the fund. Um but it's still a bit of a black box to investors and if there's one thing that public market investors don't like, it's complexity. So we continue to tell that story uh and hope that Mr. Market pays attention at some point. Um the other thing that's been going on is over the last month or so Chris and I have really leaned in. Um, you know, for the last year and a half, I would say we've been flying at 50,000 ft. We've been defining storytelling. We've been driving deal flow into the business. We have been um doing strategy, but we've been flying at a very high level. And there's this term that uh Brian Chesy from Airbnb shared, which I love, which is founder mode. Every couple years, you need to go into founder mode. And founder mode means you don't care about bureaucracy. you blow through walls, you dig into P&Ls. And so we've been focused on removing bottlenecks within the business, decentralizing, scrutinizing P&Ls, and driving down costs. Um, Chris and I have, you know, in the old in the old days, we were such maniacal operators that we would see every single P&L line item and we would obsessively negotiate it. So, for example, Chris, I remember uh at Metalab, we had all these fancy uh designers. They all loved really fancy coffee. >> And we're spending like $1,000 a month on on coffee beans. And so Chris, as an experiment, replaced all of the coffee in the office with uh super super cheap kicking horse coffee beans. And nobody noticed. >> Oh, folders. And and nobody noticed. And so we we would do cheeky stuff like that. We were just we were insane. Now, as we've grown, that's gotten harder and harder. Um but with AI, we've been finding we can actually scrutinize P&Ls and find opportunities. So, we're excited about that. The other thing, I mean, if any of you have followed me on my podcast interviews and stuff, um, I'm doing a lot with AI and we have been trying to figure out what is a modern holding company look like in a world of AI, not just in terms of the investing side and capital allocation, which I'll talk about in a moment, but in terms of how do we give our CEOs and operators complete freedom while also being aware of all the data. And I think for the first time, AI gives us the ability to dive deeply into businesses without bothering CEOs and doing what Chris and I like to call a swoop and poop. Uh where you dive down into a business and bother the operator. So that's been uh that's been phenomenal. We couldn't be more excited um to be re-engaged and uh we're so pleased that Austin has agreed to be CEO uh and to have someone that were so aligned uh in the CEO seat. Um this is Austin's sixth year with us. Austin came to us um in 2020 and uh he's been with us now uh for a very long time. And one of the most interesting things um so I I think of myself as having uh Chris is my first partner. So, I started the business alone. And the way that Chris became my partner was that he felt even though he was an employee, even though he had a salary, even though he didn't have stock options, he would be in the room with me and care as much or more than I did. He would wear the stress with me. And over time, Chris started putting up his hand and saying, "Hey, can I cut a check into the business? Can I buy shares? Can I participate in deals?" And so it wasn't that I selected Chris and said, "I need a co-founder." Um, it was actually that he just became my co-founder. And I think of Austin as our third co-founder and partner because he did the exact same thing. Even when Austin had a net worth of $50,000, he was cutting checks into deals with us while we were private. And then when we went public, he's been buying shares on the open market. And so I see that same thing. I see him leaning in and uh full alignment. And that is something that is incredibly rare in this world. Uh most executives come to you and say, you know, I want a crazy lottery ticket stock option and I want a big fat paycheck and I want a big fat bonus. And that is not Austin. Um so so excited to have him. Um and he's going to talk a little bit about um what he's working on. Um so to wrap up, in some ways Tiny is the strongest that it's ever been, but in a world of AI we really need to stay frosty. Um we are fortunate that so a lot of businesses um that were considered high quality over the last five years like SAS software companies for example um are no longer high quality and we're fortunate that many of the businesses that we have are not just traditional software and SAS businesses but our emotes are network effect uh or brands um and so we are grateful to have those businesses um versus just you know traditional software. Um, at the same time, our batting box, while we have businesses like Aeropress and Matina in the real world, has traditionally been technology and software, and I said it last year, but I feel like buying software businesses and technology businesses um has become so unpredictable. It's like building a sand castle and the tide is coming in and you just don't know where the tide's going to going to go. You know, historically, you used to be able to predict that the tide would come in 20 m. Now it'll randomly come in 40 meters and uh the sand castle will get wiped out. And so uh we are staying incredibly frosty. And to be honest, we're really focusing on um non uh non-software businesses and trying to find very unique moes uh both in technology and outside. Uh Austin, is there anything you want to add? >> Thanks. Yeah, appreciate it. Um also extremely excited to get going. I'll generally keep this short so we can get into the questions. Um, as you noted, we're we're less than a month in, so I won't necessarily get ahead of ourselves, but the real work is underway. Um, I'll list off a cute a few of the key priorities that we did share on the Q1, but just to reiterate, we're really focused on continuing to support the businesses that we feel have real long-term momentum and being honest and sharpening execution other areas of the portfolio. alongside we want to make sure that we have a really strong balance sheet and that's a coro focus for this year as well as allocating capital discipline. Andrew's been hyped up on AI and so we're extremely excited and think there is a lot of merit and so we're experimenting and putting that to work in real practical ways across the group. We're also focused on being more clear and communicating with you all. That includes being more transparent, sharing what's working and what isn't, and generally also increasing our overall disclosure. That's why we started by adding organic revenue growth by segment in Q1, and you can expect us to continue to build on that. We'll also keep looking for the next amazing business to own. Um, but we got to make sure that's not forced and the bar is going to remain really high. acquisitions do remain a really core growth pillar for Tiny when quality, value, and opportunity lines up like it did with Sorado in 2025. We're excited about what's ahead and we'll have more to share in the coming quarters. With that, we're happy to open it up to the Q&A. >> Awesome. Chris, do you have anything? >> No, just very excited to be here and honestly, I can't underscore enough uh how excited I am to have Austin uh in the CEO seat. Um, Andrew and mine, um, I'd say much more significant involvement in the business. Wouldn't be conducive without Austin being here. Uh, we work really collaboratively together and just very excited. >> All right, let's open it up to questions >> that were submitted in advance meeting via email. So maybe >> Sure. >> this first question at you. Could you just talk about how much of the portfolio is exposed to AI risk? >> Sure. Obviously extremely topical. um all started and Chris and Mike you guys can add in but there's no surprise that AI touches most of our portfolio but it's not equally as we shared in Q1 the closest business to the blast radius is creative market which does which does have structural changes that we need to navigate and we're well on that way but there still is and we do believe the value in curation and helping customers find what they need in a much noisier market More broadly though, we find that AI is becoming a place where the value of taste, judgment, and brand is becoming extremely important and we're seeing that in places like Metalab servicing some of the leading edge businesses and we're benefiting in a big way there. One of one of the surprising things has been you know metalab is working with companies like sunno and wind surf um and many others that are the most cutting edge AI companies and it's interesting um how engaged they have been uh with metalab so generally it's both a risk but an opportunity u we do see some pressure in some of the businesses it's helping gain a lot of leverage across the portfolio and making strong judgment the most important thing over time >> thank you Paula, I'll direct this next one to you as well, Austin. Um, could you talk about if Tiny is going to be changing its strategy under your leadership? >> Sure. So, the general core strategy of Tiny is not changing. I think maybe just to reiterate who we are, we're still the long-term owner of simple, amazing, durable, and predictable free cash flow generating businesses. What we have drifted on in the past couple years is our operating structure. and we do want to go back to what we have found works really well and that's being a decentralized organization and we're back on that journey. Um we're a short way in but we're making a lot of strides. So it's a lot about being sharper where we spend our time, how we use AI, maintain leverage, and more importantly over the long term how we allocate our capital as well. >> Anything else that you guys want to add on that? No, really that I I think one of the core things is at head office all we want to be focused on is strategy and capital allocation and storytelling. We do not want to be getting into the day-to-day operating of the businesses. And I think we we drifted on that over the last couple years. Um and like I said, it was a it was an experiment. It was worth a shot, but it didn't work. So, here we are. >> Great. And then just sticking on the AI topic, what are the real use cases for AI and how does AI implementation impact costs and the model going forward? >> Can I take this one? >> Yeah, go for it. >> Um, well, here here's an example. So, one of the challenges that we've had historically is that we want to know what's going on in the operating companies, but we want to leave the CEOs alone. And our commitment to CEOs and one of the reasons why we're able to hire such incredible people is because we basically throw them in the pool. We say this is your business. You run it. Uh we're going to, you know, call us if you need us and uh we just want to see a small scorecard of what's going on. But occasionally, you know, we're curious. We want to see uh what's the payroll look like? What do the expenses look like? All those sorts of things. So, what would happen is Chris and I would email the CEO and we'd say, "Hey, do you mind sending us this, that, and the other report, an Excel spreadsheet?" And we sidetrack and we freak the CEO out. And so now what we can do is basically we can basically give all of the companies an approve approved um set of tools that they can use. So pretty broad but basically saying you can use any payroll or um payroll or accounting service um etc that has a rest API and then we can pipe that into head office. We can have all that data by default and so we just don't have to distract them. So it allows us to keep an eagle eye in all the businesses without bothering the people below and doing the dreaded swoop and poop. Um and then what we're really experimenting right with right now is can we automate things like support and that doesn't mean complete automation. It's likely augmentation but we have a lot of um support admin FPNA um you know even even like basic diligence and and screening of businesses like very early on. So for example, we get hundreds of emails a month from people wanting to sell their businesses and we can very quickly assess is this something that's in our batting box that we would want to take a look at um and just save a lot of time. So I think that AI has just hit a point over the last call it six months where it's useful for those things and I see that progressing and we are being very aggressive about implementing those things across some of the businesses. The other thing I'd say is that we're really dividing the portfolio into businesses that are not affected by AI competition and those that are. And the ones that are, we're being much more aggressive on harvesting cash and driving optimization. Whereas the other businesses that are succeeding and have strong moes, we're just kind of leaving them alone as we always have. >> Great. Thanks, Andrew. Um, we'll move over to some of the audience submitted questions now. Uh, maybe sticking first on the topic of AI. Could you speak on why Sorado is not vulnerable to AI disruption or what threats exist around Sorado and AI? >> Austin, you want to take that one? >> Yeah, I can start. So, I mean, similar topic of every business in some shape or form um, will have benefits and risks with AI. I think specifically when we looked at Sorado, it is a hardware enabled product and that's an extremely key and special piece of that business and we're really close with many of the largest hardware providers in DJ. Um, and they have a extreme moat in that way and so I think that's one of the key characteristics of that business and how we're quite excited about that in the future and how it best navigates the AI topic. Maybe one more piece and I'll put you after but we we also are seeing a huge benefit in being able to do the more ambitious things on our product roadmap. So historically you'd spend months if not years on codebase refactoring for example and those are becoming much easier lifts and so we can get to the much more ambitious and interesting stuff that customers really want and we're seeing that at play with with Sorado right now. Thanks. The next question comes from Palash. Um, wondering what hurdle rate you aim for when you think about acquisitions and how you ensure there's a consistent pipeline for potential targets. >> I have a really stupid answer for that. Um, so I'm I'm not a traditional finance person and when we started buying businesses, my model was incredibly simple. Chris and I would actually go on a napkin and we would write out, okay, we buy this business for X and it will produce this much in profit every year and this percentage of the profit can come back as dividends. And what we would be asking ourselves is can we get paid back in 5 years or less. So 20% hurdle rate. And we have a model we call bird in the hand and two in the bush. So an example of that would be let's say that we buy a business for um five times. We want to have a bird in the hand. A bird in the hand would be something very simple. Um the company has not raised prices in 5 years or 10 years. So that is a sure thing effectively that if we raise prices slightly uh we will not have a disruption and we can model increased cash flows. Two in the bush would be um like when we bought Aeropress uh okay Aeropress is a good example. So they hadn't increased pricing in a long time. They also um did not do e-commerce uh in a significant way. I think it was 3% of their online sales and they didn't really do any marketing or best practices. It was a brilliant founder entrepreneur who loved engineering and all he wanted to do was product and because of that it became an iconic beloved brand globally um despite not doing those best practices. And so our bird in the hand was okay, we can um slightly increase prices and uh we can maybe optimize cost a little bit. But on the flip side and what's played out um because we've significantly grown the revenue of that business is that we could uh implement marketing best practices. So the two in the bush is the question mark. We don't know for sure and the bird in the hand is what we're relying on. And so generally the answer to that is we're looking for about a 20% hurdle rate. Um that's the minimum and we have we've screwed that up before uh once or twice but for the most part that's the operating discipline we use. >> Thanks Andrew. Um the second part of this question also from Palash. Is there a plan to stabilize the stock price if you believe it is undervalued? >> Well we don't really play that game. Um ultimately we think the best way for us to stabilize the stock price is for the market to understand what we're doing. And I think the way that they will understand that is a excuse my French a shitload of free cash flow coming into the business um you know as we uh as we deploy it into exceptional investments and as our various investments play out. And so I think it's really just a numbers game. Um obviously we also consider share buybacks. We've done some um but we are not playing with Mr. Market. We're not trying to play that game. We are in this for decades not days uh or weeks. Uh Chris and I own 60% roughly of the outstanding shares and we're quite happy for the share price to be low if that's what Mr. Market decides. Um because we're not selling, we're just sitting here waiting. >> I also think there's an aspect of just stepping up transparency in what we report and uh you can see that we've started to do a bit more of that and I think over the course of the year we'll try and increase transparency in how the different operating groups are are functioning. One of one of our biggest challenges is that the so much of our capital allocation occurred over the last couple years within the fund and the fund is invisible. Yeah. And part of the challenge with the fund is all the businesses within are unodudited. And so even if we audit them and we incorporate them into the financial statements, it gets incredibly messy. You end up with these financial statements that have all these non-controlling interests and issues and it makes it actually more confusing. So, uh, we're kind of, as Charlie Munger puts it, we're like a one-legged man in an ass kickaking competition. We have our hand tied behind our back right now. And internally, we feel very good about where everything is at. Uh, but externally, I think people don't quite understand what we understand. >> Great. Uh, the next question I'll I'll direct to Mike. Can you define free cash flow for us because you seem to define it one way at year end 2025 and another way in Q1 2026. Yeah, thank you. And we did um change the definition slightly, but it's really to more so enhance the information flow. We've talked about that a lot today in terms of increased disclosure. There is a lot that goes into our free cash flow from the earnings line as well as um distributions and dividends from the fund. Uh and as well, we do have uh non-controlling interest. So we had reported Sorado as a main entity in the business over a couple of quarters on a consolidated basis and given the impact of it on the overall cash flow right we um we move to define that now with the NCI uh included and I think again that just gives more clarity to the shareholders we talk a lot about increasing these free cash flow metrics and enhancing free cash flow overall and we're just trying to get to a clearer picture so the key thing was really more uh inclusion and more insight into the contribution of Sorado and I think that that's you know really important as we go forward and you know it'll it'll it'll change again slightly in the context of what's included in that number coming around to Q2 because we'll now have had a year-over-year comparison uh for Sorado as well. So the definition won't change but the the the inclusion of of Sorado will >> Austin do you mind speaking for a moment about what metrics you are measuring the business on and what you would like shareholders to pay attention to. Mhm. I mean, we've reiterated a couple times, but I think the core resulting metric is free cash flow per share. What drives that and the value of that free cash flow per share over time. We do look at durability of revenue, durability of earnings, and we've touched on those things and how we want to improve that over time. And that does include owning a more diversified mix of businesses too. Um, and that's an area of focus for us, but it all does culminate down to uh free cash flow per share. >> Great. Thank you. Um, the next question related to shares, why did you stop repurchases and not renew your NCIB? >> Can I take that one? >> Why don't I start? Mike, you can you can touch on it, but just the general philosophy, we have many different tools in our tool belt when it comes to allocating capital. Um, we have net new businesses we can acquire. We have reinvesting in existing businesses. We have repurchasing our public shares as well as purchasing LP units within our fund. All of which we've been active on as well as repaying debt. And so we have been active on a repurchase of shares perspective, but it's always looking across those various tools which serves the highest rate of return. Uh Mike, do you want to say anything about renewal of >> Yeah, from a technical perspective that the NCIB remains open and we still do have access to it as a means of allocating capital. So we'll be keeping an eye on that through the balance of the year as well as an opportunity. >> Great. >> Great. Thanks. The next question, if the tiny investment fund is one of the biggest unknowns holding the stock back, are you considering unwinding it or selling off the stakes to address this issue? >> So, we've explored um a variety of different ways to do that. Um ultimately the fund has a 10-year life cycle and we're trying to evaluate, you know, are these businesses that we want to own forever? Uh what do the founders want to do? That's a big piece as well. Um so there's some businesses in the fund where the founders may want um liquidity because we have um shareholders as well. Um there's others we may want to hold forever. Um and so we need to determine what the best thing to do is. And we do have a ticking clock. I believe we have what four three or four years left with an extension on it. So, we've got a lot of time to resolve that. And like I said, I do not want to rush um doing something to increase short-term share price that is suboptimal in terms of one of those businesses. You know, we could have sold businesses uh we've had opportunities to sell businesses within the fund which would have impressed shareholders um but they would have been suboptimal. So for me owning such a large stake um I would rather wait and see the business play out before we explore anything like that um including you know merging the fund in uh acquiring businesses out of it selling businesses within it etc. And because we're so founder focused um we have to be very thoughtful about how we do those things. Um we have had a few businesses over the course of the last decade where we've decided to sell them and typically there's been two factors in that. One is somebody willing to pay more than we believe is the discounted future cash flows of that business as we can see them. Um so often those are you know a strategic acquirer in the case of MI lime for example. But also it comes down to what the founder wants to do. And if the founder is aligned with um with the idea of a sale, we'll consider it. >> Great. The next question, uh could you talk about why executive turnover has been so high since you've been public? >> Yeah, it's really interesting. Um executive turnover is always high, I'd say. Uh there's a few rare businesses that seem to have very calm and consistent um founders who never fire anyone and have someone in for 20 years. But what I've found is that every 3 to four years um we have to turn over a new leaf, right? We have to it's a a different business requires different people. And so often what ends up happening is we outgrow certain people and we end up um changing the executive lineup. Um, and there's certain people that are always there. Um, but in the case of the last couple years, it's actually been the same level of executive turnover as there's always been. It's just because we're public, it has to go out in a press release and it draws attention to it. But if you look at even the portfolio below, there's constant churn and change and new CEOs and all sorts of stuff. So to me, that's just normal business. >> Yeah. I also think I talk to some founders and they get paralyzed by fear, especially if they're in in a public space like we are in handicapping themselves, not making change out of perception of how the market will react. Um, I actually admire that we will make changes that we think necessary uh for the better of the business, better of tiny, and not necessarily be worried about the perception. I think it's more of a superpower than it, while it might look bad, I think it's more of a good. >> Yeah, Chris calls it shadow boxing. We don't want to shadow box and go, well, you know, we've got the wrong person in the wrong seat, but we're not going to make a change because what will the market think? I think that's the wrong way to approach things. And I think that as we've been public now for many years, what two two and a half, three years now, um we've learned that ultimately we just need to run the business as if it's private. You know, we need to make decisions that are right for the business and worry about the market. Um second, Thanks. This next question from James. Um, wondering why Tiny has not leaned further into storytelling and investor communication around its portfolio companies. Tiny owns a unique collection. Sorry, longer question. Tiny owns a unique collection of businesses, yet many retail investors have very limited visibility into what these companies actually do. Given the quality and diversity of the assets, it feels like there's a significant opportunity to better educate the market through more frequent portfolio spotlights, founder interviews, updates, capital allocation commentary, or long- form shareholder content. Institutional investors may already have access to deeper context through direct conversations, but retail shareholders largely rely on public disclosures, which currently only provide a partial picture. Can you comment on whether increasing transparency and storytelling to retail investors is something Tiny plans to prioritize going forward? >> Yeah, I I would what I would say to this is that um for us, we can't forget who our customer is. And I think most private equity firms and acquirers of businesses forget who their customer is. Our customer is founders. And so all of our storytelling is focused on founders. If you listen to my interviews and podcasts and stuff, we're talking about what we are selling. And what we are selling is a is fair and friendly capital for entrepreneurs who want a third door. Uh you know, I I've got this line. We're about to release a new website and uh Austin came up with the we we're doing like a strategy session and we're kind of saying what are what are we about? And Austin said something really insightful. They said life is too short to sell your life's work to some private equity executive, right, named Sterling who's never made payroll. Uh, and so I think what we are selling is, hey, we are nice and normal and we're not going to screw up your business. And so that's what we focus our energy on and that's what drives our deal flow and opportunity set. Um, and because we are not actively out in the market raising capital, um, that's not our customer. And I think most private equity firms, if you go to their website, it's all about, you know, we are former tiger cubs. We have $13 billion AUM. We have a, you know, a big black and white skyscraper on our website. And if you go to the tiny website, it's all about what is it like to be a founder? What is it like to sell your business? What are the pains of that? Um, now that said, I have been incredibly frustrated with our investor communications and website. And so we are in the process of a massive redesign not only of our founder storytelling publicly but also explaining what's in the business and telling the story from a investor standpoint. Um so what I would say is really just that we've been focused on our customer. Um but we haven't forgotten about you guys. We will we will get there but it's not going to be by doing big keynote presentations and uh videos and that sort of thing. It's going to be by just writing uh and communicating more clearly. >> Yeah. Just to reiterate, I I do think that with Austin at the helm, it is more conducive for Andrew and I to step up some forms of communication. But I always think back if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. And there is an opportunity cost on our time and where we allocate it. And so I think things will improve a bit. But to Andrew's point, our message is often for founders and just trying to find the best opportunities. >> By the way, if any of you are wondering why we're looking down, there's a screen that we can see of us. And so we're looking at it even though the camera's there and it's really weird. It's like being on a Zoom where you like you kind of want to look there but you want to look there. So apologies. >> We're obsessed with how we look. Yes. >> Um thanks. I'm going to combine a few questions submitted by Lewis here. Um first when you look at the portfolio which businesses in Tiny do you expect to be worth multiples of their current value? related. Are there any businesses within Tiny where you could reinvest capital and see great returns? >> We're very fortunate in that most of the businesses we own are incredibly asset light um and do not require a lot of reinvestment for growth. Um that's one of the miracles of technology businesses. Uh you know, one of the problems as well. Uh I remember, you know, Chris always talks about metalab as owning a law firm. You know, if you own an amazing law firm and it produces $10 million at the end of the year, you're better served distributing those to all the partners than you are to go and buy a fancier office or buy paintings for the office or buy bus ads unless you're in the, you know, um the personal injury space or something like that. And so, um for us, we're we're really lucky. We don't need uh capital for most of the businesses to grow. Uh there's a few exceptions like Matina uh which uh you know we're uh actively exploring growth opportunities there um and Aeropress to some degree or another in terms of R&D. Um but overall I'd say uh almost none of the businesses need additional capital to grow. Uh Austin, do you have any comments? Yeah, I mean we don't generally give too much direction on stock price or value or any of those types of things, but I think one of the underappreciated areas uh Andrew touched on it briefly is Letterbox. It's become the go-to film social network, has grown immensely since we've acquired it. Um it's growing at great rates and a hyperp profofitable business. um we do and maybe we can share more overtime though it sits in the fund right now so we have some constraints around it but I think that's that's an area that's been largely underappreciated. >> Yeah, it's kind of crazy when you think about our market cap. We're trading at roughly $96 million USD right now uh for 100% of the equity which is crazy to me. Yeah. >> Uh if you do if you do the math. >> Thanks. The next question, um, what would you say to shareholders who have lost confidence in tiny being run like Berkshire Hathaway? How can you reassure us that there is actually a path to growing intrinsic value by 10 times over the next 12 years, which would equate to the 20% hurdle you mentioned? >> Well, I think the hard part is everyone remembers Warren and Charlie as these 90-year-old guys doing the victory lap. And what I've learned is everyone has their chaotic uh teen years and you unfortunately are all witnessing our chaotic teen years. Berkshire Hathaway in the 1960s was an underfollowed small cap business with that wasn't getting a lot of attention and there wasn't the internet. So a lot of people weren't even aware of them. In fact, most people weren't even aware of Buffett until Roger Loenstein wrote his biography of him I believe in 1988 or 1989. um where he became kind of a capitalist celebrity. Um and so when we got to know Charlie Mer, we asked him uh you know what was it like in the early days and you know he was telling us about all sorts of chaotic nightmares where they had bought retailers and you know they thought they were smart and they were trading for liquidation value and they barely got out uh by the skin of their pants and you know they had the the big conflict where they got sued in the 80s and all sorts of stuff. and and what everyone remembers is the two charming old men where everything's fine because they, you know, are at the end of the story. I think um everyone just needs to remember that business is hard and what they're witnessing is that business is hard and things change and Moes uh evolve over time. Uh what I will say is that I feel very comfortable as a you know the single largest tiny shareholder and having the majority of my net worth in the business. Uh from the inside it's a lot more comfortable than it is from the outside. Thank you. Um the next question, can you expand on the line from the shareholder letter on why 2026 will be a harder year than 2025 to explain and operate through. Cutting is painful inherently and there are realities in some of the businesses that will require restructuring and cuts and saying goodbye to great people. Um and that is the hardest part of business. Business unfortunately while you can put it in a spreadsheet, it is not a spreadsheet. It is a group collection of people. And uh and so we have some very difficult decisions to make in some of our businesses. And so that human element, it sucks. It's horrible. Um and so that's going to be really hard. >> Yeah. I think we've created a lot of bottlenecks over the last two years. And the goal throughout this year is to kind of unwind those bottlenecks. And that really is that pursuit of decentralizing the business again. >> Great. I'm just uh just reviewing here, but it looks like we've gotten through all the questions. Um maybe we can just give it a couple more seconds here. >> Feel free to chime in or add something to the Zoom chat if you got something. By the way, if you see us looking at you now, it's because they moved the the monitor up. That's much better. >> Yeah, we're still >> We're not all staring down. >> Maybe we'll give it another 30 seconds. >> This matina is really good. >> Very good. Wow. Delicious. Um, sorry, one one further question that just came in from Lewis. Could you >> fund and tiny? >> Well, we've explored it in the past and I think ultimately it comes down to valuation and dilution and the problem I think is that we're negotiating against ourselves. We're the single largest LP in the fund. um and we have investors that want maximum value for the fund and inherently if we merge in into tiny we're going to be negotiating for the best possible price for shareholders and so there's this um paradox there and it makes it incredibly difficult yeah at today's value I don't know if that makes sense and it's also worth just remembering the value of the carry and you know keeping it as a fund we do have this tremendous value of the carry as we potentially divest different assets within the fund and I think that would be very accreative to tiny shareholders regard regardless if we were to merge >> when we when we raised. So for those that don't know the history of Tiny, we basically bootstrapped the business uh with, you know, very we used a small amount of debt here and there, but for the most part, we just bootstrapped and compounded cash flows from 2006 to 20 2019. We had one deal where we brought in a partner, but we, you know, were putting all of our own cash into um into deals. And in 2021, we went out and we raised uh 150 million USD fund. And we wanted it to be incredibly fair. We didn't want any um LP to come to us and say, "I'm upset with how this has gone." Uh where we couldn't put our money where our mouth was. And so what I wanted was to be able to say, "Well, we're the biggest investor and we lost a lot more money than you did if anything went wrong." And so um what we what we did is we basically we were the largest LP so we're 20% of the fund and we also did not charge a management fee. So we only charged direct costs to the businesses and that is very non-traditional. Um and we also added an 8% hurdle. So we have to outperform the stock market before we get anything. Um but we have a 30% carry over that 8%. And so if you think about it, if the businesses within the fund uh perform, if we 3x the fund, for example, the carry check is is massive um and very aligned with with the LPs uh and very good for tiny shareholders. So if we did a merger, uh that also probably would have to get negotiated um and would not be ideal for shareholders. >> Great. Uh another question that's coming from Andrew at Holland Advisors. Can you talk about how acquisitions can be made in time without using only for cash flow or equity? >> Well, we have we have quite a few um pools of cash that we have not tapped into in some of the subsidiaries. Um we also wouldn't be allergic necessarily to using debt if it was structured properly. I think our biggest focus in terms of debt is um ensuring that we do not have cross defaults. We really like having everything uh siloed within the businesses. And so for example, would we be comfortable putting two or three turns of debt on a business that was highly predictable uh where we have that kind of bird in the hand opportunity? Uh yes, but incredibly cautiously. Um I don't know Austin, how do you think about it? >> Yeah, I think I largely agree. I think one of the points on several of these questions is just getting back to the tiny flywheel really working and the way that has worked best historically is being extremely equity efficient and so we want to be really really careful if we are issuing equity. Um, I think we've been doing the opposite right now because we feel the value is there in terms of repurchasing the shares, but we're okay with also waiting for the right opportunity and we want to make sure the business is resilient in the way of having leverage come back to the zone that we've shared and we'll step back up and look for the great opportunity as they come along. But we're going to be extremely patient. Um a question on if there are any thoughts on industrial automation companies like robotics etc. >> Uh one of the most important things is investing in things that you understand and I don't understand that so we would probably not invest in that. >> I also think they're too capital intensive. >> It's very competitive right? I I think um the way to win in capitalism is to go to the most unattractive and boring types of businesses that no one else is paying attention to. Um or to have some sort of proprietary relationship. So, um generally when we buy businesses, we're actually looking where everyone is not looking right now. And I'd say everyone is looking at industrial automation, um you know, frontier models, uh robotics, all those things. I I don't want to be playing where everyone else is. Great. Thanks. Um, what are you guys most excited for about the year ahead? >> Well, to be honest, I'm really excited about getting back to our core DNA. Um, I think we had a bit of an adolescence and we tried out a goth phase and we realized that it didn't work. Uh, the makeup doesn't look so cool. Uh, we saw some photos of ourselves. Um, and so I don't know, I just am so happy to be back and feel like our hands are on the wheel and we're all aligned on the vision. Um, and uh, and really I'm excited to unlock value. I'm excited to increase margins. um and get back to as Austin said getting that flywheel of cash flow going because I think you know if you think about it over the last two or three years we were really the first year was learning how the public market worked and digesting um going through all the added cost and complexity of being public and learning that uh what mattered who to listen to all that sort of stuff. Um and then last year we were you know trying to get capital together for Sorado and doing that deal and and getting there. this year I think is really about dialing in the operations, increasing margins, driving efficiency, removing bottlenecks. Um, and my my number one we we have a kind of a value at tiny which is yes before no. Um, and I think we want to get back to that. Uh, I think we've been in kind of a no before yes phase for a long time uh, for the last couple years. Oh, that's too complicated. That's, you know, we can't do that for XYZ reasons. Now I feel a real sense of opportunity um and excitement about what we can do. >> I really I really do echo that. I feel like there's a smorggas board of opportunity within the portfolio and it goes back to unlocking these bottlenecks and I feel like with Austin at the table I'm more excited than ever before. Andrew and I are very involved and it's just more conducive an environment for us to be involved and enact these changes and um honestly just we're running around having it's that's the thing I'm most excited about right now. >> There's a wonderful book I for I can't pronounce the guy's name because it's very difficult but it's called the goal. I'd highly recommend all of you read it but it's an allegorical story about a factory and the employees within a factory and the core idea of it is reducing bottlenecks. And I think where we got to over the last year or two was that there was a lot of bottlenecks. We became a um we stopped parallel processing. We started sequentially processing. And historically tiny has always been so decentralized that when people would ask Chris and I what we achieved over the last year. We would have a list of 30 things because we did everything via delegation. When we started bringing everything back up to head office, it became this thing where things were not being delegated and everything was being bottlenecked at head office because head office had to approve and oversee various um you know various changes within the business. And so um we're reducing a massive bottleneck um with the changes we're making. >> Great. The next question um how long can we expect Andrew and Chris to have an increased presence in the business? Well, I think um founder mode, there's seasons, right? So, there's going to be moments where Chris and I are leaning in and we're getting super involved. Um and we're still trying to find the perfect operating cadence. Right now, we're daytoday. Sometimes we're um you know doing a couple meetings a week. Other times we're just out storytelling. Uh it depends on the season. And I think founders love wartime and it feels like we're in wartime right now. Um, so you know, the two generals are are in the tent every single day. >> Yeah, I'm heavily concentrated my personal balance sheet and tiny and uh I really believe have few eggs and watch them closely and I'm I foresee myself watching Tiny closely indefinitely. >> Great. Thanks. Um, this next question for Austin. How will your leadership differ from previous CEOs moving forward? >> Sure. So I think generally we've we've touched on these comments briefly but it's the concept of going back to simplicity a decentralized organization putting a lot of trust in the leaders we have in the general managers of each business that's again where we've really succeeded well in the past and putting a lot of trust in those relationships and so that overall actually also has a effect of transparency across the whole orc everyone knows what's happening and running more synchronized in the direction of tiny but allowing each of those GMs to really be making the day-to-day decisions. And so I'm really excited to get back to kind of the basics and and the simplicity of what worked in the past. >> Great. Thanks. Um Mike, can you touch on the bond offering? >> Yeah, it was something that we did look into opportunistically. There was a great market uh there sort of through the end of 2025. Uh unfortunately as we got into 2026 and around our timing wasn't great. The market did change um you know investor sentiment in that market has changed in terms of you know technology uh related businesses. Um but again it was opportunistic on our part right so we were trying to look to effectively get a better cost of capital across the business. Um I think we can still do that with the structure that we have. Andrew talked about the importance of trying to maintain the structure uh that we have currently in terms of of of where the the debt sits and I think we can maintain a very strong cost of capital with the current lenders and and the structure that we have in place. So that was an opportunity we looked at it uh and you know at this point in time you know we'll keep continuing to look at other options uh as we need to but the reality is right now you know we don't need to do anything. That was again just an opportunity to look at a at a new market. Thanks. Um, this question for Andrew. To avoid any potential conflicts, what criteria do you apply in determining whether an investment should be made by you personally versus Tiny? >> Yeah. So, um, Chris and I have a family office uh, called Folly, the Folly Partners that we started in, um, what, 2019, I guess, to manage our personal investments and stuff. Um, and really, I don't know if people know the term, there's this very douchy term family office. Uh, so it's a family office that just means rich person, uh, personal holding company. Um, and so Chris and I have one of those and it basically just manages our stocks, our venture investments, our hobby projects. So, you know, I often start silly businesses off the side of my desk, um, and incubate stuff and most of it loses massive amounts of money. And so I do that in my personal holding company. Um, and that structure has always been the way that we've operated because frankly Chris uh hates it when I light money on fire uh and doesn't want that complexity within tiny. So, uh that said uh occasionally we will uh make minority investments in private businesses. So, if a friend is doing a deal or we have an opportunity that's too small for tiny or not something that would fit, but we always go to tiny first and just say, "Hey, is this something that uh we want to do within tiny?" But all the investment is basically stuff that just doesn't fit into Tiny. >> Great. Thank you. Um, are you open to incubating businesses at Tiny that just need time to grow into something more meaningful? Uh, I know Andrew does a lot of this personally, but I don't believe the economics acrew to Tiny. I think the biggest learning for us. So, you know, the story is started the uh web design originally web design agency in 2006 and had a lot of cash flow out of that. And Chris and I uh first said, "Oh, you know, we started Metalab. That went really well. So, why don't we just start more businesses?" And so, we started everything from a pizzeria to a cat furniture business to uh skin skincare, all sorts of stuff. And if we started 10 businesses, one of them would do well. Uh, and that pain, while it was exciting, that pain was really frustrating. And when we read about Warren Buffett in 2011 or so, we realized, hey, there's a much easier way, which is buy exceptional businesses, put good people in charge, and just let them run. And so, we stopped doing that. But I found I still had an itch. So, I still like starting little side projects and stuff, but almost every single one of them loses money. Uh, and I I really, you know, none of them have done very well at all. I think I've had one one of them got sold. Um, but but it's been, you know, almost all lit on fire. And so, uh, I just think it's a distraction for Tiny to be starting businesses and doing small stuff like that. >> Yeah, I really look at, you know, our strategy. It's skipping the line and incubating. we just end up taking on so much more risk than you'd otherwise think. And I do think our approach for shareholders is just much clearer and much less risk >> to just be a growth by acquisition. >> We have done it a few times within Tiny and I'd say it's always been an epic disaster and money bonfire. >> Yeah. >> Thanks. Uh this is just a follow-up to Andrew from Holland Advisors question. Um he's asking about M&A capital sources. So gives the example of of Berkshire using insurance as a float. Um so what's uh what's the secret sauce for Tiny and how do we think about sourcing capital for M&A going forward? >> Well, I'd say it's opportunistic. I mean at the end of the day when Sorado came along, we had to get creative and figure out how to get it done. And I think that Chris and I, we really want to limit dilution. We don't want to raise a lot of equity. And so we have to ask ourselves, do we want to lever assets that are currently unlevered? Um, do we want to have, you know, do uh converts? Do, you know, there's there's a million different things we can do as a public company. >> SPVS, >> SPVS. Uh, we could raise another fund. There's a lot of different things we can do. And I'd say that we don't want to do anything until that no-brainer opportunity is there, at which point we get creative. But I will say we just do not want we don't want more dilution. Thanks. Uh maybe we'll use this opportunity for for the last question which is for you Chris from Gerard at Aeropress and he's wondering if you really drink Fulggers coffee. So I do not drink Fulgers coffee. That was honestly it was a it was a really fun social experiment. Just everyone was so it almost felt pretentious in how um uppidity they were on their coffee and I felt like we just couldn't win. And so quite literally after hours I would get these fancy bags and fill it up in secret with folders and sometimes great value and I'd walk around the office whistling the best part of waking up. And back when plus was a thing I don't know if you remember plus they came to our office um for some project and I served everyone the folders coffee and they all drank it and said this is great coffee you have in Victoria and I just smirked away. Yeah. I actually got so worried at the end of that that we'd have a mutiny on our hands. I waited a month before I went back to the fancy coffee. I waited a month and then I did the big reveal and everyone said, "Oh, we knew that the coffee was off." They didn't know. >> To be to be clear, we all drink Aeropress and I think most of us drink AeroPress black. Um because it's, as Gerard knows, the only coffee that tastes the way the beans smell. >> Yeah, I drink Aeropress now with good beans. >> All right, do we have any more questions or >> uh No more questions have come in. So, >> great. Awesome. Well, why don't we wrap there? Uh, I will say it's a lot less fun not having a live audience and getting a laugh and just having dead silence in here. But it is cool that um so many people tuned in and great that people didn't have to travel uh and go through all that. But um thanks everyone for joining us and uh I hope you'll continue to follow us on our uh our journey here and uh we got a lot of exciting stuff coming out. So uh yeah, keep watching the website. >> Yeah, thanks everyone.
SootharaSO ERKENNST DU DIE FÜHRUNG DEINES SCHUTZENGELS | Rudolf Steiner Originalworte
Настя МажиринаРадуйся Тайно и Наблюдай, как Вселенная Открывает Любые Двери
Настя МажиринаДелайте это ТАЙНО и наблюдайте, как ВСЕЛЕННАЯ открывает Двери без Усилий
Muhammad ZulaliClaude reverse engineered my 32-year-old Jeep. Then it started controlling it.
Gerald CelenteTrumpty Dumpty Had a Great Fall... The Crash Heard Around the World