>> Announcer: Live, from the Javits Center in New York City, it's The Cube! Covering Inforum 2017. Brought to you by Infor. >> Welcome back to The Cube's coverage of Inforum, I'm your host, Rebecca Knight. Along with my co-host, Dave Vilante. We are joined by Charles Phillips, the CEO of Infor. Thanks so much for joining us. >> Great to be here. Thank you guys for coming. >> So you're fresh off the keynote. A big deal. Thousands of people here at the Javits Center. What would you say is the most exciting to you about being here and what you really want us participants, attendees to come away with? >> Well, there's a lot of energy at the conference. And people can see the investments we've been making. All the innovation. And just the feedback we're getting is just keep doing what you're doing. You guys just really change the industry. The idea of a network commerce and a network ERP coming together is something new. They like the fact that we kind of find these new areas on our own. People are buzzing about Coleman, our new AI announcement, that platform as well. So it's been fun getting the feedback. >> So talk a little bit about Coleman. Talk about the naming of Coleman. >> Yeah, so it's named after Katherine Coleman Johnson, who is one of the early pioneers in NASA. She was a researcher mathematician there to calculate a lot of the orbital fractions that were needed for reentry. And John Glenn relied on her. And she's in the movie, Hidden Figures. And got to know that movie pretty well, because along with about 30 other African American executives, we raised enough money to send almost 30 thousand kids to see the movie for free. We screened it probably three months before it hit the theaters. And a lot of buzz. We didn't know a lot about it ourselves, so we learned a lot about them. So I was excited to say, if we're going to have an AI platform, why not name it after her? Such a pioneer. And it worked out. Her family was at the event and they were just blown away. And they're asking, can I get copies of everything? And taking pictures with us. So, I thought it was the highlight of the show. >> You know, I liked your first slide today and yesterday in the analysts meeting. It basically was your strategy in a nutshell. Micro verticals was sort of the starting point, the decision to go AWS cloud, The GT Nexus network component, burst analytics and then Coleman AI. Just fit together so nicely and it sounds great. And then you also said, look. Cloud and mobile and social, that's table stakes today. It's really sort of a new ball game. So my question is, you know, the slide's nice. It sounds great. How fully baked is it? >> Yeah, well, we're, I think we're, you know, we've had some time now. We're building the network. And so we've been working on figuring out the right integration points and where the value add was. And so, we're already able to kind of ship things like ASM directly to our ERP. And we showed in context where you can click on the order, an M3, for example, and see where it is on an ocean container. So we've already done a lot of that work. And there's only more to come. We want to, we didn't mention it today, but we want to attack the EDI market and commoditize that and have it be a free service. Because we already have a network. We can ship packets around it. Doesn't cost us anything. And we do that for some customers today. So we have more that we could have talked about that we didn't get to. So a lot of it's real today. >> We also heard at the analysts meeting, in great depth, and a little bit today, you had the CFO of Koch industries up there, made a large $2 billion plus investment. Koch is also a customer. And was a customer prior to the announcement of the investment. How did that all come about? Can you share that sort of story with us? >> Yeah, so we had a very successful project at Georgia Pacific. They brought us in because they were frustrated with SAP. It's too expensive, taking to long. We had the micro vertical reaches that could get going quickly. And we collaborated with them and added a few other things they wanted. So that went very well. And kind of, word travels when you come in under budget. (laughter) And one thing led to another. Made a trip to Wichita at their invite, and hit it off very well with Charles Koch. He understood what we did, he's an MIT grad, very technical. So, wasn't sure what I was kind of getting into. But once I started talking to him, he clearly understood everything else. And the more technical the conversation became, the more animated he got. So, clearly he's our kind of guy. We're product people. And so, we hit it off very well. >> And they're becoming a larger customer. You're getting deeper and deeper into that account. But there's an old saying, you know, God created the world in six days but he didn't have an install base. And so, you guys have emerged as this really viable alternative to SAP and Oracle. But how do you go from where they are to this cloud native platform that you guys have developed? >> Well, it'll be one of the largest global implementations ever. Of any financial project, of any HCM. 130,000 employees, which is great. So a project of that scale, that happens usually top down. When they're invested and ready to go. So they have four members on our board. And including the CFO, including the president of Georgia Pacific, and many other important executives. And so the guys who run the divisions, many of them are on our board and learning this stuff and excited. So they're actually pushing us right now. Which we think is great. We have a weekly cadence call with all these senior execs of all the projects to make sure here's where we are, are you getting what you need, are people responding. I mean, they are driving. These people know how to execute. And that's why they're $115 billion. It's great for us, great for them. They're pushing us. So I'm not too worried about that, given what I've seen so far. >> When you think about the long term strategy of Infor, you're now one of the most well-funded unicorns along with Uber and Air B&B. Where do you go? What do you sort of see as sort of the long term play here? >> Yeah, post world domination? (laughter) Then after that, we have other industries we want to get into. There's a few acquisitions we probably will consider. We want to expand our network. These networks grow up by vertical and by industry. There's a few other vertical we want to get into. But the list of things that we could build and what people are asking us to build is almost endless. You know? And they like the way we do these kind of digital transformation projects. There's lots of those out there. And so, we just want to make sure we have the ecosystem where we can implement. That's why it's so important to get a censure, Cap Jim and I, and Grant Thorton and Deloit, they're all taking training as we speak. Filling out their practices. Which we didn't have a year ago. So, that was our kind of constraint to scaling. We just couldn't take on so many projects. But now we can. >> I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the structure of the industry, the software industry specifically. I mean, you're fairly famous for having sort of predicted consolidation, and then orchestrating that consolidation. Mark Andreson's famous for saying software's eating the world. I think Bennioff said there's going to be more non tech companies that are SAS companies than tech companies. Do you expect we'll just see a sort of de-consolidation of software? Or maybe a bi frication? Where maybe some of the enterprise guys acquire, but there's all these burgeoning, blooming flowers of software companies emerging. What's your point of view on the software industry and its structure? >> I think you'll see more industrial companies wanting to own software. I think you'll see software executives running non software companies. Most companies think they have to get digital. And a lot of the board of directors recognize that and recognize they don't have the expertise to do that. And so a lot of software executives get asked to run non tech companies for that reason. Because you can learn retail faster than they can learn how to program. And if you've been building the applications for those verticals, you actually kind of know the vertical pretty well. So I think you'll see some of these domains over time where people have to become more technology fluent. And the way to do that is to bring in tech people. >> The other thing I wanted to ask you sort of as a follow up on that, you see Amazon buys Whole Foods and is getting into grocery, they're a content company. Apple's get the financial services. And you know it's because of digital. It allows you to sort of jump industry value chains. But for decades, people just stay within their own little value chain silo. Do you expect that to change as well? Where executives are able to traverse industries? >> I think so. Technology is causing that. There's enough disruption and fear where people are willing to consider something completely different than they were before. And that helps us, because usually we need someone to either take an action because they see an opportunity or because they're worried about getting disrupted. That's how these big projects get started. That's part of the reason why our growth is so good right now. >> Is that's what's driving it? Is it the fear of being left behind? >> It's probably equal amount of both. They see opportunity, I should be doing something, but I don't know what. So we have to tell them the what. Or, I'm worried about what everybody else is doing. I don't want to get Ubered out. And we tell them how not to be in that position. So we're getting an audience at senior levels that we couldn't before. Just because it's top of mind for everybody. >> How about, talk about MNA a little bit. And what you look for in an acquisition candidate. You have a platform, that's probably dogmatic about running on that platform. But talk a little but more about what you look for. >> We usually want next generation thinking in a technical platform that we don't have to completely rewrite. Because we don't to kind of pollute our architecture. If it's a modern architecture where we can graph it on to our information OS, as we call it, that's fine. So we don't buy things just for scale. And that was kind of early strategy for the company 10 or 15 years ago. We buy things because it's a specific value proposition for customers or fills a hole we think we need to fill. >> Okay. >> I would rather buy something that is small, maybe not much traction, not much revenue, but a great product. Because we have a huge distribution channel and we can grow it pretty quickly. We can fix all those other problems if the product is there. >> Well, the burst acquisition is very interesting because you saw the ascendancy we were talking about earlier, Rebecca. Saw the ascendancy of tableau, and Christian Chabeau, very articulate, would talk about the slow BI companies and really de positioning them. You're positioning is actually quite compelling. Not the old, takes forever to build a cube. And not the lightweight version of just a visualization. You're sort of the best of both worlds. Maybe unpack that a little bit. >> Yeah, that's the attractions we saw in Berson's. You need some of those enterprise features to understand fragmented and enterprise scale data. That's a hard problem. Having a nice desktop tool that can only handle a single table or gives you conflicting information so you can't have any semantic meaning across different data sources. It's nice to get answers quickly, but if they're wrong, that doesn't help you. So, we need somebody who could handle the back end. Our customers were asking us to do that. They want us to be the analytic layer, a system of record for analytics, because other companies don't want to do that. SAP or Oracle will say, just use all my stuff. I don't want to connect to anybody else. And we know that we have to coexist. And if we can build that analytic layer, we think that's strategic high ground. Let's own that. And if we can replace some of the underlying systems later, great. You know? >> I was just going to talk about, I was going to switch gears entirely and talk a little bit about politics. Before the cameras were rolling, you were on Obama's economic recovery board, which was led by Paul Volker. You've been to Washington, met with Trump, met with Pence. I'm curious about how you view the roll of business in advising government. In which directions to take, and the approach. >> I think it's increasingly important in a sense that, especially with the current administration, they should respect business opinion. Because he's a business guy. Secondly, so many of our institutions people don't trust any more. THey've kind of lost some of that credibility. I hope we can turn that around. But in the interim, we have to have other people who can fill in for some of that. And, especially tech companies. People want to know what tech companies think. And so, I think we almost have a duty to try to fill in some of that. And every part of the economy and the government has been effected by technology. They want to understand it. We can help them do that. >> And so many of your customers are in fact municipalities, and cities, and public school systems. >> That's a good point. We have 1500 state and local governments and federal customers. And that's a fast growing part of our business right now. And we're rooting a lot of federal agencies as we speak. Because they're going through an upgrade cycle as well. Something called Fed Round they have to get certified in. And they want to move to the cloud. And we're doing both of those with them. >> Now, you also talked about how you see technology executives perhaps moving into other industries. Do you see them also moving into public service? Do you see that as a possibility? >> That's going to take longer. That's probably later in their careers because of the economics of that. But every now and then, you'll see one do it, yeah. >> So, a question on cloud. It was almost by necessity, I would argue, that you gravitated toward AWS. Smart move. Others have said, you know, Oracle in particular, we're going to own the whole stack. We can make a lot of money owning the whole stack. If you had to do it again, would you pursue that same strategy, and why? >> Well, when we got there, the company was just trying to build a cloud business. We were doing it traditional. Trying to own data centers and, you know, doing data sharing. We could have done that and continued with that over time. But I just thought it wouldn't provide the elastic compute and the scale of data management that I thought was coming. We looked at all the platforms that we out there at the time. We met with Microsoft, IBM, you name it. And at the time, AWS was just so much further along in terms of services available, capabilities, entrepreneurial spirit, scale, it wasn't even close. In our minds, anyway. And so, they were great partners to work with. For us, it's been the right decision. They've helped us a lot. >> Yeah, and seeing your arc as maybe a question. But you're pretty technical. Maybe a better question for Duncan or Soma, but I'll ask you. Because you're more technical than I am. When you look at your architecture slides, there's a lot of Amazon in there. >> There is, yeah. >> There's like this dynamo dv, looks like some kineses, there's S3, there's all kinds of flywheel oriented tech. I wonder if you could sort of elaborate on that in terms of the impact that that has not only on you, but ultimately on your customers. >> Yeah, no. That was by design, by my direction. I wanted to take advantage of every single serviture we could on AWS. Because every time we do that, that's less work for my developers. I don't want them to worried about infrastructure. Just write the application and be an industry expert. So any time they come out with a new service, you name it. Whether it's Promethium, archiving, backup. We were one of the early customers of RedShip. We take advantage of it. Because it's cheaper for us to do it that way and we get the scale that we need. And we get it in multiple countries. So when any other strategy than that, we have to replicate things in multiple places and we have to figure out how to make it work on AWS. >> And I know we're limited on time, but if software's eating the world, software's going to eat the edge. So talk about your edge strategy. >> Well, it depends on what you mean by edge strategy. I think that software eating the world is true. Maybe it's helping the world, is a better way to put it. But almost every product that we see its inside of now. That's actually good for us, being the largest vendor for asset management. Every IOT company is coming to us because all that data is meaningless unless you can generate a work order or requisition and get something fixed, schedule someone to come. That's what we do. So all of that data needs to end up on a repository. That can effect the business process. And we own that business process. >> Well, something that we've said on the Cube since the early days of so-called big data is the practitioners of big data are the guys who are going to do well. It's not necessarily the guys selling big data infrastructure. And that's proven true. You guys never talked ever, I don't think, about big data. But you're a data company now, first. >> Yeah, and we've collected a lot more data than we ever thought we would. And so, now we've got to figure out how to use that. >> How to parse it, how to use it. >> Exactly. Which is why we added the next two layers of that stack. >> That will be next year's summit. >> Yeah, exactly. >> Next year's Inforum. Well, Charles Phillips, thanks so much for joining us. It was a pleasure. >> Great. Thanks you guys. >> See ya, thank you. >> I'm Rebecca Knight, for Dave Valante, we will have more from the Cube's coverage of Inforum after this. (upbeat music)

>>Fly from Houston, Texas. It's the cube covering Grace Hopper celebration of women in computing. >>Welcome back to the cubes coverage of the Grace Hopper conference here in Houston, Texas. I am your host, Rebecca Knight. We have a great panel today. Uh, three distinguished guests, Jeanette Epps, an aerospace astronaut. Uh, an engineer at NASA, Mimi Valdez, a executive producer on the film, hidden figures and Christina DOJ who is a, I want to call her a rocket scientist. She will not let me, she's an electrical engineer at, at, at NASA. Thank you so much for joining me. Hey Jeanette. I want to start with you. Um, recently president Obama has said we're gonna put men on Mars, men and women, men and women on Mars. How realistic is that? I mean, it's exciting for the, for the rest of us, non astronauts to hear this is, is it realistic? >>It is realistic. And one of the things I love that he, he did that was that it gives a national initiative to go back to Mars. And so that means that people will get more involved in STEM careers, especially girls will get more involved. And it's kinda like, you know what JFK did back in the 60s to give us that push a goal, an end goal to do something. Great. >>And do you think that, you know, he said by 2030, it's not very long from now. I mean, is it going to happen? I mean, what's, >>well right now a witness is working on is we have the NASA Orion program and it's a, uh, a power light capsule that will be launched off of one of the largest rockets bigger than the Saturn five or as big. And so that the mission of NASA, Orion is to take us beyond low earth orbit and go deeper into space. So we're looking at NASA, Orion, potentially maybe being the ship that will go to Mars and you know, maybe we have more work to do, but all of getting the nation onboard with going to Mars will inspire a new generation to do great things that will help us to get to Mars. Even >>Obama has said he loves science as a kid. That was his favorite subject in school. And do you think that it will have this galvanizing effect of, as you said, making sure more little boys and girls are studying STEM? >>Well, I've seen it already with some of the tweets and different things, questions that kids ask me nowadays. I think every kid has in their heart this goal to go to Mars now. And um, I can't go to a conference or anywhere without, uh, some young child asking about Mars and what, what are, how are we going to get there? When are we going to get there? And you know, I think one of my jobs is to inspire them to get involved in STEM and help us to get to Mars. There's a lot of technology that we need to develop and produce so that we can get astronauts to live longer away from the earth surface. We have the propulsion system that can get them there faster and bring them back home long. Will it take, well, it depends on the propulsion system that we developed. So there's a number of things that we're working on to make sure that what president Obama has said will get us to Mars in the 2030s if it's pushed out to a little later, that's fine. We're working on it and we're, we're going forward with them. >>Mimi, I want to talk to you now about the film hidden figures. Uh, we'll be out in some theaters and Christmas wide release in January. It is the story of black women mathematicians working in the 1960s at NASA. How did you find out about this story? Well, I give credits at Donna gelato, one of the producers on the film who optioned the book when it was a book proposal. So before the book was even written, she optioned this the story, and it's just this amazing story that the world doesn't even know about. We all know about John Glenn's mission. He came back a national hero. It was a moment in history that galvanized the world. You know, America winning the space race. But we don't know the story of all these brilliant mathematicians, all these women who actually will really responsible Katherine Johnson specifically who hand calculated those numbers for his cause. >>Everybody, I mean, I think this is such an amazing thing to do. And, and again, we just don't know her story. And as well as Dorothy Vaughn and Mary Jackson, I mean, so many women that worked at NASA that were just, um, they were hidden. You just don't know their stories. So, so the film tells their story, it tells their, um, it tells what they did, how they helped John Glenn. Did John Glenn appreciate that John Glenn actually would not go into space unless Katherine double checked the numbers. Like he wanted her to actually, you know, he, he, he trusted her because this is when the IBM computers were first coming into NASA. So they had started asserted use that and he was like, Hmm, I, I need Catherine to check the numbers before I go into say they were friends, professional colleagues. I mean he just knew who, you know, obviously she, she was really responsible and sort of that whole mission. >>And, and you know, for him it was just sort of like, eh, these computers thing, this was like a new thing at NASA. He's like, I need a human to make sure that these numbers are right. Right. Yeah. So we're excited about the film. Who's in it? Taraji P Henson plays captain Johnson. Octavia Spencer, please. I'm Dorothy Vaughan and Janell Monae. Um, she's a, uh, a musician. This is sort of her first really big role and she plays Mary Jackson. Kevin Costner is the head of the space station. Um, we have really great actors, but I think what was really important to everyone who participated in the film was everyone understood the importance of the story and wanting to make sure that we got it right. And also, you know, movies are supposed to be entertaining, but when they can be also inspirational and educate in some way, the fact that some young girls somewhere may see this movie and decide to pursue a career in math or science or any of the STEM careers is really gratifying to us because that's what we would love to accomplish. >>You know, Christina, you have been at NASA for nine years. Uh, tell me about your style, how you got, how you got to NASA in the first place. So I've always loved space since I was like a young child. I was in fifth grade when I told my parents that I wanted to work for NASA. So really since that point, like that was, you know, my dream. And so I, you know, pursued the math and science. Those were some of my favorite subjects. Um, luckily I had some supportive parents who really like saw that desire in me and kind of nurtured and encouraged me to, Hey, if that's what you want to do, then you go for it. We'll do whatever we can. Um, and then I came across some NASA opportunities in high school. Um, and one of the programs was the high school aerospace scholars program. >>And in that program I kinda got a glimpse into what it was like to be an engineer, to work at NASA. I got to speak with, you know, fight directors and um, flight controllers. And there's so many people who contribute to the space program. And that experience really solidified my desire to pursue STEM, STEM. Um, so I started to electrical engineering and then from there, um, you know, did the internship at NASA and I've enjoyed my career so far. It's been a, it's been a great experience. And so you work on the jet propulsion system of spaceships. Um, I work Lena. Um, I work on the power systems power systems. So you are, what do you do? So, um, as an electrical engineer on power systems, I work on the design of the power system testing. Um, basically everything on the spacecraft is going to need power. >>So I'm responsible for how I need to provide power, how much, um, when we talk about going to Mars, that's a, that's a long duration mission and power is something that, um, you have to budget for. So we need to advance that technology to support these missions that, um, our administration has said we want to go there. How are y'all going to accomplish this? So there's a lot of um, design hands on work and it's, you know, it's a challenge. But I mean, together as a team, we can, I believe that will, you know, meet that goal and be able to deliver a power system that will take us to Mars. So this is a question for rip for really all of you. You're an astronaut, you were working at NASA, you just made a movie to encourage young women to, to, to, to get into the STEM field. Why is it NASA recruiting here at, at, at Grace Hopper and, and should it be, do not, do you want to take this? >>Well, that's a good question. It's not that I'm mass and I don't, it's not that I don't think NASA has a desire to recruit here. I think there's recruiting times where people come out and do that. But I think I'm, one of the things that we do in the astronaut Corps, we try to go out and attend conferences like that and try to inspire students to be interested in NASA to understand what NASA is doing, to understand, you know, the shuttle retired. But we're still flying. In fact, when I fly to space and hopefully in 2018 I'll fly with the Russians. But in the meantime, NASA's building two shadows that would take astronauts to the international space station and NASA, Orion, that'll take us deeper into space. So we want to try to inspire with our stories and get people interested in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and now even the arts, the arts play a big part of this. The arts play a big part of the well, yeah, I think I'm as a scientist and looking at patterns and things like that, there's a lot of um, people who, um, begin to work in the arts, even if it's building things with their hands and making, sculpting things, painting things. And so there's a lot of artwork that comes into play in science that is >>really refreshing, exciting, count, counterintuitive. I mean, what would you say are the ways we've talked about getting them, getting them interested through, through film. Um, talking about, uh, Obama making this, this grand announcement and Treme, what are some other ways that we can get the next generation into this field? Well, representation is obviously important. I think when people get to see images in the media of these different fields and all the possibilities, I mean every kid on this planet is obsessed with their phone, maybe not realizing like the importance of these STEM careers that are making these phones even possible or even exist. And I think the more that we can expose these careers and all these possibilities, I think it will just be just more beneficial just for humanity in general. I mean, as we know, nothing in this world can exist without math. >>Nothing. So the more that we can sort of encourage young people to see what an incredible career this is in all the possibilities that go into it, I just think we'll be better off as a nation and as a, you know, just globally as a world. Jeanette, I mean, do you have any thoughts about how, what you would advise someone? I mean you started at NASA nine years ago. So I mean, as an engineer I feel like, I mean I am making some contribution, but really the way I feel like I have more impact is through mentoring and you know, participating in those outreach type of activities for, uh, younger students like K through 12. And then also, um, you know, undergraduate like where they're really like trying to figure out what are the career options and STEM. And so that's how I feel I can have an impact there. >>And these movies help because there's a surge of like, like it's inspirational for young students to see this and be like, Oh, I never knew that that was an option. And so we get outreached to NASA, um, our request to, you know, interact with, uh, local schools and communities and kind of, um, you know, do all my lessons or just teaching with them, just talking about kind of like what the career is like. So, um, I mean I hoping that I can contribute in that way for younger, younger people. Janette are, you are an impressive astronaut, but you are also known as a black woman astronaut. Yeah. D do you do, do you bristle at that or do you embrace it? What, what do you, how, what's the responsibility? >>Oh, I totally embrace it. You know, I'm young ladies always ask me, did you have a problem being a black woman and engineering? And I always tell them that, um, I don't have a problem with being a black woman. And if other people do, then that's their problem. I totally embrace it because I'm, one of the things that I didn't realize was that, um, there's still a need to have positive role models and images of yourself. You know, growing up, my mom never taught my twin sister and I that you couldn't do something because you are a female or Brown. But there are a lot of young ladies that actually do experience that. And so having a positive roam out of it, show them that, Hey look, if I can do this, you can do this too. There's no reason you shouldn't be doing this right now yourself. >>So you are a role model. And how do you then also make sure that it's active role modeling and not just sort of standing on a pedestal of. >>One of the things I like to do is like Catherine Johnson and these great ladies that, you know, without them I, you know, I wouldn't be here is you have to do well and you have to perform well. You have to do the same work that your colleagues are doing and don't do less and don't accept less either. And when it comes to the hard work, put in the time, do the work, complete the tasks and make sure you're, you're representing yourself and your group well and you don't want to be accounted as well. You know, she's the one that we've got to help and we've got to do this, but you want to be a contributing member to every group that you're a part of and completing the tasks, doing the same work if not better. I like to say do better work, but you know, you want to be a part of the. >>Yeah. But that puts so much pressure too because it is, it's, it's be a contributor, but also don't mess up because you are under a microscope to some degree because those are, >>you know, messing up isn't, isn't. Um, failure is never, um, should never be. If it's unintentional, that's okay because you always learn from your mistakes and you have to forgive yourself and keep moving forward. If you stop right there because of a failure, um, you wouldn't go anywhere. We all fell. And it's how you respond to it. That matters. >>Yeah. Every failure is an opportunity to learn. And I think, um, you know, yeah. You can't be scared. I mean, the first and foremost is just doing a good job that, cause once, if you're just dedicated and focused on that, then I think great things can happen. And then failure is really a, a buzzword in Silicon Valley too. Right now. It's a fail fast. Um, and this idea, as you were talking about that it's your response to failure that makes a difference. Yeah. And NASA, I became familiar with this famous phrase of failing forward, meaning that yes, you're going to encounter problems, but if you are learning from the, if you're making improvements, you can design something better. So we call it failing forward. And that concept has, I've embraced that comset and it's, you know, I've encountered many failures. I mean, designing new hardware. It's not gonna, you know, work right off the box. And I'm kind of embracing that idea that it's a learning experience. As long as you don't give up as if you're applying what you learned, then that is not a failure. Christina, this is great. Christina DOJ, Mimi Valdez, Jeanette Epps. Thank you so much for joining us today. This has been such a having to be here. I'm not worthy. Thank you. This has been Rebecca Knight live coverage of the Grace Hopper conference here in Houston, Texas. We'll be back after this break.