The David vs. Goliath Playbook for Competing Against Big, Well-Funded Competitors

SPEAKER_00 1:01

This is an Undiscovered Legacy Production and prod member of Punt Nation Media Network. Welcome to Business Conversations with Pi and Piet 2.0, where the advice is real, but the voices are AI. I'm Scoob, and we're harnessing cutting-edge artificial intelligence to tackle real-world business challenges and deliver actionable strategies you can implement right now. Joining us is our newest AI voice, Piet. Sharp, insightful, and ready to challenge conventional wisdom. The questions are real, the data is vast, and the insights game-changing. So buckle up, school believers. It's time to get across the start line. Let's dive in.

SPEAKER_02 1:46

So in the late 1980s, um there was this tiny telecom startup, right? And they had this genuinely revolutionary product in their hands.

SPEAKER_01 1:55

Yeah, a mobile satellite communication system.

SPEAKER_02 1:57

Exactly. Something that was going to completely transform the trucking industry. But the crazy thing is, every single time they pitched a major client, they lost.

SPEAKER_01 2:06

Right. And they weren't losing to better technology.

SPEAKER_02 2:09

No. And they weren't losing to a cheaper alternative either. They were losing to a product that um that literally did not exist.

SPEAKER_01 2:16

Aaron Powell, which is just wild to think about.

SPEAKER_02 2:18

It really is. Anyway, welcome to the deep dive. I am, I mean, I am incredibly energized for this one because today's entire mission is driven by you, the listener.

SPEAKER_01 2:28

Absolutely.

SPEAKER_02 2:29

We are making a massive, and I mean massive deal out of this because the strategy we're unpacking today comes directly from a question that was submitted to tuepodcast.net slash ask pie.

SPEAKER_01 2:40

Yeah, I love this because it just, you know, it it fundamentally changes the dynamic when we get to dissect a real high-stakes puzzle that you're actively wrestling with in your own career.

SPEAKER_02 2:48

Aaron Powell Totally. And the listener who went to tuepodcast.net slash ask pie sent in like the ultimate anxiety-inducing question, the one that basically haunts every single ambitious founder.

SPEAKER_01 3:00

So for sure, the big one.

SPEAKER_02 3:02

Right. They asked, how do I compete in a saturated market against big, well-funded competitors? Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_01 3:07

It's the classic Goliath problem.

SPEAKER_02 3:09

Exactly. So to answer this, we've pulled together this incredible stack of sources. We're looking at internal insights from Y Combinator partners, some deep dive strategy pieces from Forbes, and like actual battle scars from startup veterans.

SPEAKER_01 3:23

Aaron Powell Because the goal today is to examine why fighting a corporate Goliath head on is, well, it's a trap. And how you can actually weaponize your small size to completely outmaneuver them.

SPEAKER_02 3:33

Right. Because if we look at the default human instinct, it's to fixate on the biggest threat in the room. Right? You see a massive competitor, they have all this funding, and your first thought is I need to track their every move.

SPEAKER_01 3:44

Yeah, I need to watch everything they do. But our sources reveal that staring on that competitor is actually the single biggest strategic error a founder can make.

SPEAKER_02 3:51

Okay, let's start right there: the mindset. Because there's this concept in our sources from Reese Pacheco, he's the co-founder of Shelby.tv, which was this small curation company going up against um YouTube. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_01 4:04

Yeah, a true David and Goliath situation.

SPEAKER_02 4:06

Trevor Burrus, Jr.: Literally. And he uses this race car driver analogy to explain the fixation problem. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_01 4:12

Right. So Pacheco points out that race car drivers are taught one fundamental non-negotiable rule when they're spinning out of control. And that rule is keep your eyes on the track.

SPEAKER_02 4:23

Keep your eyes on the track.

SPEAKER_01 4:24

Because human motor skills follow human vision. If you look at the wall, you are going to steer your car directly into the wall and crash.

SPEAKER_02 4:31

Wow.

SPEAKER_01 4:32

Right. In the business world, when founders get obsessed with a competitor's, you know, every feature release or every little press mention, they lose sight of their own customers.

SPEAKER_02 4:41

They stop looking at the track.

SPEAKER_01 4:42

Exactly. They stop solving the actual problem and they just steer their company right into the wall.

SPEAKER_02 4:47

Okay. I understand the theory behind that, but let's look at the operational reality for a second. Let's unpack this. If I'm a founder, right?

SPEAKER_01 4:55

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 4:55

And my primary competitor just launched this massive, heavily publicized AI integration.

SPEAKER_01 5:01

Right.

SPEAKER_02 5:01

My board of directors and my investors are going to be calling me. They're going to demand a response by Monday morning. If I just ignore the landscape, isn't it irresponsible not to watch them? Doesn't that make me a sitting duck?

SPEAKER_01 5:13

Well, it isn't about remaining ignorant of the landscape, it's about refusing to let a competitor's panic dictate your own product roadmap.

SPEAKER_02 5:21

Okay, fair.

SPEAKER_01 5:22

There's this perfect illustration of this from the Y Combinator archives. It's about a startup called Justin.tv.

SPEAKER_02 5:28

Aaron Powell, which eventually became Twitch.

SPEAKER_01 5:30

Right, exactly. It evolved into Twitch. But early on, they were locked in this fierce battle with other streaming startups, companies like Ustream, and the founders later admitted that they were spending like half their time obsessively refreshing each other's websites.

SPEAKER_02 5:44

Oh man, just hitting F5 over and over.

SPEAKER_01 5:46

Aaron Ross Powell Right, because they were terrified that the competitors had some secret market insight that they lacked.

SPEAKER_02 5:51

Aaron Ross Powell, which is essentially just corporate imposter syndrome. You just assume the other guy has a master plan simply because their logo is slightly larger.

SPEAKER_01 5:58

Aaron Powell Precisely. And that imposter syndrome led Justin.tv to make a major, just unforced error. They spent precious engineering hours building this highly specific, super complicated feature for copyright owners to issue takedowns.

SPEAKER_02 6:14

I'm sure the users love that.

SPEAKER_01 6:16

Well, that's the thing. It added zero value for the actual viewers or the everyday broadcasters. It was purely a defensive administrative tool, but they released it anyway. And then get this two weeks later, one of their main competitors rolled out the exact same feature.

SPEAKER_02 6:31

Let me guess. The competitors saw it, assumed Justin.tv had discovered some secret revenue lever, and totally panicked.

SPEAKER_01 6:39

They completely panicked. The Justin.tv team realized they were just watching the blind lead the blind. The competitor was burning their own runway to copy a feature that Justin.tv actively regretted building in the first place.

SPEAKER_02 6:51

That is wild. Yeah. And it really reframes the entire concept of competition. We tend to view our competitors like a theater set, you know. From the front, their PR announcements, their feature launches. It all looks like this solid brick house. Right. But we forget that if you look behind the facade, it's usually just held up by duct tape and panic middle managers.

SPEAKER_01 7:14

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 7:14

As a startup, you're constantly psyching yourself out, comparing your own messy internal reality to their highly curated external PR illusion.

SPEAKER_01 7:24

Aaron Powell, which is just a massive mathematical fallacy, anyway, because the Y Combinator sources emphasize that outside of extreme winner-take-all network effects, markets can easily support multiple massive winners.

SPEAKER_02 7:36

Okay, give me an example.

SPEAKER_01 7:38

Think about retail banking. A regional bank doesn't see a chase branch open across the street and decide to just liquidate all their assets because, you know, someone already invented banking.

SPEAKER_02 7:47

Right, right. There's room for both.

SPEAKER_01 7:48

There is. You have to stop fearing the boogeyman in the closet. Stop letting the illusion of the competitor dictate your reality.

SPEAKER_02 7:55

Okay, so if we stop staring at the theater set and we stop letting direct competitors dictate our roadmap, who should we be looking at?

SPEAKER_01 8:04

Well, the answer isn't competitors, it's alternatives. You should be analyzing the alternatives. Because the market, ultimately, they do not care about your cool proprietary technology. And they certainly don't care about your competitors' new funding round.

SPEAKER_02 8:18

They just want their problem fixed.

SPEAKER_01 8:20

Exactly. They only care about closing the gap between the problem they have and the solution they want. And sometimes the alternative holding them back is a direct competitor. But sometimes it's just the inertia of doing things the old manual way. Yeah. Or worse, sometimes the alternative is just a ghost.

SPEAKER_02 8:38

Which brings us back to that telecom startup in the 1980s, fighting a ghost. In the tech industry, this is known as vaporware, right?

SPEAKER_01 8:45

Exactly. So this is a story from Stephen Morley. He's a startup veteran who was at Qualcomm during their absolute infancy. They were trying to sell this revolutionary system called Omnitrax to major trucking logistics companies. But they kept repeatedly losing these massive contracts to a joint venture backed by heavy-hitting Japanese and American corporations.

SPEAKER_02 9:06

And like we said at the start, they weren't losing because the corporate giants had a superior product. They were losing because the giants were just selling a promise.

SPEAKER_01 9:26

If you just wait 18 months, we're going to release a system that is infinitely better and significantly cheaper.

SPEAKER_02 9:33

Even though it didn't exist.

SPEAKER_01 9:34

The product did not exist. The engineering wasn't even done. It was pure vaporware used as a psychological weapon just to freeze the market.

SPEAKER_02 9:43

Here's where it gets really interesting, though. Because if you're a founder and you're bleeding out because a corporate giant is promising a cheaper price for a ghost product in the future, the operational temptation is to slash your own prices right now just to win them back and force the contract through.

SPEAKER_01 9:59

Which leads directly to the single fastest way to destroy your own company.

SPEAKER_02 10:03

Competing on price.

SPEAKER_01 10:04

Yes. Competing on price is a fatal error. Morley actually illustrates this with this classic economic joke. He says, A man walks into a butcher shop and asks the price of pork chops. Okay. The butcher says, three dollars a pound. The man is outraged and he says, The butcher down the street sells them for two dollars a pound. Right. The butcher calmly replies, So go buy them from him. The man says, Well, he's out of them right now. And the butcher just smiles and says, Well, if I was out of him, mine would be two dollars a pound, too.

SPEAKER_02 10:35

Oh my god, that's exactly it. It is remarkably easy to quote a cheap price for inventory, you don't actually have to deliver. Exactly. But even if the competitor's product does exist, engaging in a price war with a well-funded Goliath just seems mathematically impossible to win.

SPEAKER_01 10:51

Aaron Powell Oh, it's a brutal war of attrition. Morley points to the historical airline battle when Southwest Airlines entered the Maui market. They were trying to challenge the entrenched monopoly of Hawaiian Airlines.

SPEAKER_00 11:02

Okay, what happened?

SPEAKER_01 11:03

Hawaiian Airlines immediately dropped their prices to completely unsustainable levels.

SPEAKER_02 11:07

Aaron Powell Because Hawaiian Airlines could afford to cross-subsidize their losses. I mean, they can bleed money on the Maui route for two years by propping it up with all their profits from like the Los Angeles or Tokyo routes.

SPEAKER_01 11:19

Right. And a startup only has the one route. If you bleed there, you die. You simply cannot beat a well-funded incumbent at their own game of capital deployment. They just have a deeper war chest.

SPEAKER_02 11:29

So if dropping prices is a death sentence and fighting them head on is a trap, the only remaining variable a startup can control is the battleground itself. Which brings us to the Willie Keeler strategy.

SPEAKER_01 11:42

Yes, Willie Keeler. He was a baseball hall of famer, famously undersized. And when reporters asked how he maintains such an incredible batting average against these vastly more powerful pitchers.

SPEAKER_02 11:52

What'd he say?

SPEAKER_01 11:53

He said, I keep my eye on the ball and I hit him where they ain't.

SPEAKER_02 11:56

Hit him where they ain't.

SPEAKER_01 11:57

In modern business strategy, this is known as the blue ocean approach. You basically refuse to stand in the congested blood red waters where the giants are just fighting over the exact same prime real estate. You have to find a sub-niche, find the structural gaps they leave behind.

SPEAKER_02 12:14

And our sources provide some fascinating mechanics on how to actually execute this. Take Maxim integrated. They grew to over a billion dollars in revenue in the highly saturated semiconductor market. Right. Every massive conglomerate in that space was fighting tooth and nail to secure contracts with whales like Apple or Samsung. But Maxim looked at that bloodbath and basically just walked the other way. They deployed a long tail strategy.

SPEAKER_01 12:39

Yeah. And to understand why that strategy worked, you really have to understand the vulnerability of massive conglomerates, giant semiconductor fabrication plants, they have astronomical overhead. Right. So to justify turning on the machines, they need massive high-volume contracts. They are structurally incapable of serving, say, a small medical device company that only needs 5,000 chips. Wow. So Maxim realized that the giants' need for scale created this massive, completely undefended territory at the bottom of the market. They just scooped up thousands of small, specialized companies that the big guys were ignoring, and they build an empire on the long tail.

SPEAKER_02 13:16

It's just brilliant. It's about finding those hidden clusters of demand. And there's this great story in the sources about market researcher Howard Moscowitz and Prego spaghetti sauce that perfectly illustrates this.

SPEAKER_01 13:29

Oh, this one is fascinating. Moscowitz completely revolutionized how food companies find their niches. Because previously, companies would use focus groups, right? They'd ask a room full of people what kind of sauce they wanted.

SPEAKER_02 13:41

Standard market research.

SPEAKER_01 13:43

Right. But the problem is when you average out the opinions of a focus group, you just end up with a perfectly generic middle-of-the-road product that everyone tolerates but absolutely no one loves.

SPEAKER_02 13:53

Right. It's just average.

SPEAKER_01 13:54

So Moskowitz threw out the focus groups. He ran these blind taste tests all across the country with dozens of wildly different sauce formulations.

SPEAKER_02 14:03

And when he plotted the data, he didn't find one giant peak of average preference. He found distinct clusters. And one of those clusters revealed that a full one-third of the American population desperately wanted extra chunky spaghetti sauce.

SPEAKER_01 14:19

Yes. And absolutely no one in the saturated grocery market was making it. The giants were all just fighting over the same traditional smooth sauce demographic. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_02 14:27

So Prego launches an extra chunky line. Trevor Burrus, Jr.

SPEAKER_01 14:30

They hit them where they weren't, and they generated hundreds of millions of dollars in untapped revenue.

SPEAKER_02 14:35

Aaron Powell It's amazing. And you see this same strategy play out even when the product itself is literally legally indistinguishable from the competition.

SPEAKER_01 14:42

Aaron Powell Like Absolute Vodka.

SPEAKER_02 14:44

Exactly. Absolute vodka entered a market that was utterly dominated by the giant Smirnoff. But by legal definition, in the United States, vodka has to be a flavorless, odorless liquid. You physically cannot compete on the underlying technology of the liquid. It's the same.

SPEAKER_01 15:00

So Absolute didn't even try to compete on the liquid. They competed on the packaging. They made the physical shope of their bottle, the star, running this 25-year continuous advertising campaign with over 1,500 visual variations of that bottle. They carved out a premium artistic niche in a market that seemed completely impenetrable.

SPEAKER_02 15:22

So what does this all mean for you, the listener? I mean, are they supposed to just make one highly specific product?

SPEAKER_01 15:28

Pretty much, yeah. Look at the meatball shop in New York City. Yeah. They didn't open this sprawling Italian restaurant with a 70-page menu to fight against every legacy tritoria in Manhattan. Right. They sold meatballs, do one thing. Or bonobos, entering the notoriously brutal apparel space. They didn't launch a full menswear line. They focused entirely on engineering a pair of men's pants that actually fit correctly.

SPEAKER_02 15:51

Do one thing, perfect it, and own it.

SPEAKER_01 15:53

Exactly. But identifying the niche is only the first phase. The crucial next step is defending it. When you are tiny and under-resourced, you have to use the big company size against them. You have to weaponize their inertia.

SPEAKER_02 16:05

Because big companies are slow. They're weighed down by layers of legal review, compliance, you know, middle management.

SPEAKER_01 16:13

Yes. And startups have two major asymmetrical weapons to combat this: speed and customer service.

SPEAKER_02 16:20

Aaron Powell This makes me think of the DigiKey example in our sources. It completely upends traditional sales logic. I mean, they distribute electronic components and scaled to $2 billion in revenue. Right. And they did it with a sales force of exactly zero people.

SPEAKER_01 16:35

Aaron Powell Because they understood their specific customers' actual value proposition. If you're an electrical engineer trying to build a prototype on a tight deadline, a traditional corporate sales cycle is infuriating. Oh, for sure. You don't want a sales rep taking you to a steak dinner to discuss a contract over three weeks. No. You want a highly specific 50 cent resistor delivered to your desk by 9.0 AM tomorrow so you can prototype instantly.

SPEAKER_02 16:58

So DigiKey just stripped away the entire bureaucratic sales apparatus. They utilized catalogs and online sales and offered guaranteed overnight shipping of small parts.

SPEAKER_01 17:07

And their speed was a feature the lumbering giants couldn't replicate without cannibalizing their own massive sales teams.

SPEAKER_02 17:14

Wow. It's really a David versus Goliath situation. But David realizes Goliath takes three weeks to answer an email, whereas David can respond in five minutes.

SPEAKER_01 17:24

That's a great way to put it. And Zappos deployed a very similar asymmetry in the shoe market. E-commerce was incredibly saturated, but Zappos recognized that if a customer emailed a massive retail giant with a problem, that email went into a ticketing system.

SPEAKER_02 17:40

Right, routed to some outsourced call center.

SPEAKER_01 17:42

Exactly, and maybe generated a scripted generic response three weeks later. Zappos simply empowered their frontline customer service reps to solve problems immediately, without scripts, regardless of how long the phone call took.

SPEAKER_02 17:55

That speed and personal accountability generate a level of brand loyalty that millions of dollars in corporate advertising just cannot buy.

SPEAKER_01 18:02

And this taps into a deeper psychological framework mentioned in our sources regarding the psychology of the sale. Every transaction is fundamentally about resolving structural tension.

SPEAKER_02 18:12

Meaning the gap between where the customer currently is and where they desperately want to be.

SPEAKER_01 18:17

Right. The customer is standing at point A, their current flawed reality. They want to reach point B, which is their idealized vision. Your product is merely the bridge between the two. But to convince them to step onto that bridge, you have to address their underlying needs, hopes, and fears.

SPEAKER_02 18:34

Like beer commercials.

SPEAKER_01 18:36

Yes. Massive corporate beer commercials rarely spend airtime discussing the complex enzymatic breakdown of hops, right? Or the specific temperature of their fermentation tanks.

SPEAKER_02 18:46

Right. They just show a group of incredibly attractive people laughing around a bonfire on a beach at sunset.

SPEAKER_01 18:51

Because they're not selling a beverage to hydrate a consumer. They're selling the hope of a vibrant, socially connected lifestyle. For a startup, understanding that hope is vital, but alleviating the fear is what actually closes the sale.

SPEAKER_02 19:04

Fear is just sales resistance.

SPEAKER_01 19:06

Exactly. Why won't this enterprise client sign with you? Are they afraid the software is going to crash? Are they afraid they'll look foolish to their boss for picking an unknown startup? If your speed of execution and your dedicated customer service can systematically dismantle those specific fears, the corporate giant loses their inherent advantage.

SPEAKER_02 19:25

Okay, that structural framework makes perfect sense for carving out and defending a niche. But I have to ask the ultimate anxiety-inducing question. The one that's likely giving our listener cold sweats right now.

SPEAKER_01 19:36

Uh-oh.

SPEAKER_02 19:36

What happens when the massive trillion dollar ogre finally wakes up? What happens when a massive incumbent like Amazon or Google decides that your highly profitable little sub-niche is actually something they want to own? I mean, what if they just copy you? Don't they have a massive structural advantage?

SPEAKER_01 19:54

It is the most terrifying variable in business. But the Y Combinator partners highlight a profound structural limitation within those tech giants. Big companies are driven by the efficient allocation of resources. Okay. So if Microsoft can bundle a product that is merely good enough and force it onto 80 million enterprise users through their existing office contracts, the internal product teams are heavily disincentivized from spending the agonizing years required to make that product perfect.

SPEAKER_02 20:20

So big companies rarely build great products when they don't have to.

SPEAKER_01 20:23

Exactly. So the startup's offense against massive distribution is exponential quality. Being 30% better isn't enough to make a customer switch. You have to be 100x better.

SPEAKER_02 20:33

Building something 100x better sounds like an impossible mandate. But let's look at the mechanics of how Instacart actually pulled this off against Amazon.

SPEAKER_01 20:41

Yeah, the avocado problem.

SPEAKER_02 20:42

Right. When Instacart launched, everyone was like, well, they're dead. Amazon is arguably the greatest logistics and supply chain company in human history. Startups feared Amazon would just crush them.

SPEAKER_01 20:53

But Amazon's logistics empire is built on uniformity. They are brilliant at moving perfectly identical cardboard boxes with standardized barcodes through highly mechanized warehouses.

SPEAKER_02 21:04

Yeah, but Instacart's business model required sending a gig worker into a chaotic, poorly mapped local grocery store.

SPEAKER_01 21:11

Right, to make a subjective human judgment about the ripeness of a specific avocado.

SPEAKER_02 21:16

Exactly. And then replacing that avocado on the fly if the inventory was wrong. It is a hyper-local, fundamentally messy logistical nightmare.

SPEAKER_01 21:24

And for a middle manager at a trillion-dollar behemoth like Amazon, tackling a high-risk, low-margin, chaotic problem like that, it's a great way to ruin your promotion track.

SPEAKER_02 21:34

So Amazon couldn't solve the avocado problem because their internal structure basically rejected the chaos. A trillion-dollar company couldn't figure out the logistics of picking the right avocado.

SPEAKER_01 21:44

Exactly. Instacart leaned entirely into that specific friction and built a product that is 100x better at solving that exact logistical nightmare.

SPEAKER_02 21:52

And you see the exact same dynamic with Kyle Volt at Cruz, the self-driving car startup.

SPEAKER_01 21:57

Oh yeah. When Cruz entered the market, Google had already been developing self-driving cars for 10 years, a decade-long head start with billions in funding.

SPEAKER_02 22:07

Investors literally told Volk he was out of his mind.

SPEAKER_01 22:09

But Vogue survived by intentionally seeking out the pain. He directed his engineering team to tackle the absolute hardest, most complex edge cases of urban driving, the ridiculously difficult technical hurdles that comfortable engineers at Google were avoiding because they didn't want to risk their careers on unsolvable problems. Cruz beat Google's decade-long head start by building a 100x better system because their corporate survival absolutely depended on solving those hard problems. Google's corporate survival did not.

SPEAKER_02 22:42

This has just been a masterclass in asymmetrical warfare. So let's summarize the core lesson for you, the listener, who asked how to compete against these well-funded giants. First, don't look at the wall. Stop obsessing over your competitors' polished PR, and keep your eyes on your own track.

SPEAKER_01 22:59

Second, don't play their game. Do not bleed your runway dry fighting vaporware or engaging in a price war. Find the structural gap they're ignoring. Hit them where they ain't and serve the extra chunky crowd.

SPEAKER_02 23:11

Third, weaponize your small size. Move faster than they can, and use deeply human customer service to alleviate your customers' fears. And finally, when the ogre inevitably comes for your niche, secure your survival by building a product that is 100x better.

SPEAKER_01 23:25

And if we synthesize all of this, I really want to leave you with a final provocative thought to mull over. As founders, we spend an inordinate amount of time agonizing over our lack of funding or our lack of staff, you know, our weaknesses. But what if your biggest competitive advantage isn't actually your own brilliance? One of your most lethal advantages is simply the reality that your giant competitor is too arrogant, too bureaucratically paralyzed, and too deeply comfortable to execute the agonizingly hard work that you are willing to do.

SPEAKER_02 23:53

That reframing changes everything. Their comfort is the vulnerability that you can exploit. Listen, this entire deep dive happened because of a listener question. You must write in, send your specific questions about business to tuepodcast.netaskie. That is tuepodcast.net ask pie. And be sure to subscribe so you can stay informed by hearing the answers to questions from other ambitious entrepreneurs just like you. Until next time, stop staring at the wall, find the gap, and go build something 100x better.

SPEAKER_00 24:22

And that's a wrap, school believers. You just experienced the power of AI-driven business insights with Pi and Piet 2.0. Real advice, artificial voices, unlimited potential. If today's episode sparked an idea, challenged your thinking, or gave you that breakthrough moment, don't keep it to yourself. Share it with a fellow entrepreneur who needs to hear this. Got a burning business question? Want Pi and Piet to tackle your specific challenge? Head over to tuepodcast.net slash ask pie and submit your question right now. We'll dive deep into your issue and deliver the actionable strategies you need to get across the start line. Remember two believers, the hurdles aren't in the way. The hurdles are the way. Until next time, keep moving forward, keep taking action, and we'll see you in the next episode.