>>from >>Around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of IBM think 2021 brought to you by IBM. >>Welcome back to the cubes ongoing coverage of IBM Think 2021 virtual cube, you know, the pandemic has caused us to really rethink this this whole concept of operational resilience and we're gonna dig into that and talk about the importance of constructing a holistic resilience plan and get the perspective of some really great domain experts. Alan Downs is the vice president, global Cloud security and resiliency services at IBM and he's joined by MS Michelle what? Weston who is the director of cloud security and resiliency offerings at IBM folks. Welcome to the cube. Thanks for coming on. >>Thank you. >>Now before we get into it, I said IBM but I want to ask you, alan about an announcement you made last month about Kendrell new spin out from IBM. What can you tell us? >>Very excited about the name? I think there's a lot of meaning in the name centered around new growth and censored around partnership and relationship. So if you look at the name that was announced I think it really does typify what we set out to be as a trusted partner in the industry. All born around new growth centered around strong partnership and relationship. So very pleased and excited and look forward to the opportunity we have going forward. >>Yeah congratulations on that. Had some clarity martin schroder. New ceo Cubillan. Great executive love it. So good luck. Um Alan let me stay with you for a second. I mean operational resilience it means different things to different people and we know from speaking with C. IOS in our community during the pandemic. It doesn't just mean disaster recovery. In fact a lot of C. I. O. Said that their business continuing strategy were too focused on on D. R. Ellen. What does operational resilience mean from your perspective? >>So I'll answer it this way. Operational resiliency risk is defined as the quantifiable steps that any client needs to take in order to respond, recover from an unplanned outage. It sits squarely within operational risk. And if you think about it, operational risk is the kind of non financial element of risk. And defined within that category, operational resiliency risk is trying to identify those steps both pre active and reactive that a client needs to consider that they would have to take in the event of an unplanned disruption or an unplanned outage that would impact their ability to serve their clients or to serve their organization. That's how I define operational resiliency risk. >>Great and I wonder Michelle if you can add to that but I think you know I sometimes say that the pandemic was like a forced march to digital and part of that was business resilience. But You know, where do we go from here? You know, we had 14 months shoved into our face and now we have some time to think about. So how should clients think about evolving their strategies in this regard? >>Yeah, Well, certainly with respect to what was called Newco now, Kendrell, um our approach has been advisory led. Uh we will help clients along this journey. Uh, one thing that I'd like to point out in one of the journeys that we've been taking over the last couple of years is it really is about security and resiliency together. If you think of that planning and how to mitigate your operational risk, the security and resiliency go hand in hand through the same people within the organization that are planning for that and worried about it. And so we had already started about three years ago to pull the two together and to have a unified value proposition for clients around security and resiliency, both being advisory lead, doing everything for a client from project based to the digital consumption world which we know clients live in today to a fully managed service all around security and resiliency together. >>Yeah, so I mean it's really important topic. I mean you heard Chair Powell last month. He was he was on 60 minutes saying well yeah worried about inflation, were way more worried about security. So so alan you know, were let's say you're in the virtual, you know, conference room with the board of directors. What's that conversation like? Uh where does it start? >>I think there is a huge concern right now with regard to security and obviously resiliency as well. But if you just think about what we've all been through and what's transpired in the last 12 months, the what we call the threat landscape has broadened significantly and therefore clients have had to go through a rapid transformation not just by moving employees to home base, but also their clients having a much higher expectation in terms of access to systems, access to transactions which are all digital. So you referred to it earlier. But the transformation, our clients have had to go on driving a higher dependence on those systems that enable them to serve their clients digitally and enable them to allow the employees to work remotely in this period has increased the dependencies that they have across the environment that are running many of the critical business processes. So the discussion in the boardroom is very much are we secure? Are we safe? How do we know how safe and secure and resilient should we be? And based on that fact about how safe and secure should we be? Where are we today as an organization? And I think these are the questions that are at the boardroom is basically from a resiliency security perspective, where should we be that supports our strategy vision and our client expectation? And then the second question is very much where are we today? How do we know that we are secure? How do we know that we can recover from any unplanned or unforeseen disruption to our environments? >>So Michelle, I mean I just mentioned the threat surface is expanding and we're just getting started, everybody's like crazy about five G leaning in the edge Iot and that's just uh this could be orders of magnitude by the end of the decade compared to where it is today. So how do you think about the key steps that organizations should should take to ensure operational resilience, you know, not only today, but also putting in a road map. >>Yeah, yeah. And and one thing that we do know from our clients is those that have actually planned for resiliency and security at the forefront. They tend to do that more effectively and more efficiently. Um It's much better to do that than to try to do that after an outage. You certainly learn a lot. Um but that's not the experience that you want to go through. You want to have that planning and strategy in the forefront. As Alan said in terms of the threat vector, the pandemic brought that on as well. We saw surgeons Of cyberattacks, opportunistic attacks. Um you know, we saw the best of people in the pandemic as well as the worst in people. Some of those attacks were on agencies that we're trying to recover. We're trying to treat the public with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic. So none of us can let our guard down here. I think we can anticipate that that's only going to increase. And with the emergence of these new technologies like cloud, we know that there's been such a massive benefit to clients. In fact those that were cloud enabled to sustain their businesses during the pandemic full stop. But with that comes a lot more complexity. Those threat vectors increase five G. I expect to be the same. So again, resilience and security have never been more relevant. More important, we see a lot of our clients putting budget there and those that plan for it with a strategic mindset and understand that whatever they have today may be good enough, but in the future they're going to have to invest and continue to evolve that strategy. Are those that have done the best. >>Yeah, the bolt on strategy doesn't doesn't really work that well, but and I wonder if you think about when we talk to CSOS for example, and you ask them what's your biggest challenge? They'll say things like lack of talent. We got too many tools. It's just as we're on the hamsters on wheels. So I would think that's, you know, unfortunately for some, but it's good for your, your business. That's that's a dynamic that you can help with. I mean you're a services organization, you got deep expertise in this. So I wonder if you could, could talk a little bit about that, that lack of talent, that skills gap and how you guys address that. >>I think this is really the fit for managed services providers like Kendrell, um, certainly with some of our largest clients, if we look at Peta as an example, that notion of phone a friend is really important when it starts to go down and you're not sure what you're gonna do next. You want the expertise, you want to be able to phone someone and you want to be able to rely on them to help you recover your most critical data. One of the things clients have also been asking us for is a vaulted capability, almost like the safe deposit box for your data and your critical applications. Being able to put them somewhere and then in the event of needing to recover, um, you certainly could call someone to help you do exactly that >>Ellen. I wonder if you can address this. I mean, I like IBM I was I'm a customer. I trust IBM. What's your relationship? Are you still gonna, you know, be able to allow me to tap the pieces that that I like and maybe you guys can be more agile in some respects, maybe you can talk about that a little bit. >>She has Sure, Dave and many of our clients, we have a long history with a very positive experience of delivering, you know, market leading and high high quality of services and product the relationship continue. So we will remain very close to IBM and we will continue to work with many of IBM's customers as will IBM work with our customers going forward. So the relationship, I believe whilst a different dynamic will continue and I believe engenders an opportunity for growth and you know, we mentioned earlier the very name signifies the fact that it's new growth and I do think that that partnership will continue and we'll continue together to deliver the type of service, the quality of products and services that our clients have, you know, enjoyed from IBM over the last number of years, >>Michelle my, one of my takeaway from your earlier comments as you guys are hands on consultative in nature. Um, and I think about the comment I made about a lot of Ceo said we were way too d our focus. But when I think about d are a lot of times it was a checkbox to the board. Hey, we got it. But it was last time you tested it. Well, we don't test it because it's too risky to test. You know, we, we do fail over, but we don't fail back because it's just too risky. Can I stress test, you know, my environment, we, at the point now where technology and expertise will allow us to do that is that part of what you bring to the table? >>It is exactly exactly what we bring to the table. So from a first of all, from a compliance and regulatory perspective, you no longer have that option. A lot of the auditors are asking you to demonstrate your d our plan. We have technology and I think we've talked about this before about the automation that we have in our portfolio with resiliency orchestration that allows you to see the risk in your environment on a day to day basis. Proactively manage it. I tried to recover this, there's a there's a failure and then you're able to proactively address it. I also give the example from a resiliency orchestration perspective in this very powerful software automation that we have for D. R. We've had clients that have come in scheduled A. D. R. Test, it was to be all day they've ordered in lunch And the D. R. test fail over failed back took 22 minutes and lunch was canceled. >>I love >>it. Very powerful and very powerful with an auditor. >>That's awesome. Okay guys, we've got to leave it there. Really great to get the update. Best of luck to you and congratulations. Thanks for coming on. >>Thank you so much >>and thank you for watching. This is Dave Volonte for the cubes continuous coverage of IBM think 2021 right back. >>Mhm.

from the silicon angle media office in Boston Massachusetts it's the queue now here's your host David on tape hi everybody Dave Volante here with Stu minumum we have some breaking analysis we're gonna break down the acquisition of IBM Red Hat by IBM was announced today that it closed Stu was originally announced in October a 34 billion dollar acquisition so not a surprise surprise that it closed a little bit earlier than people thought people would thinkin you know well into the second half closed in July they got through all the all the issues in Europe what does this mean in your view to the industry yeah so Dave we did a lot of analysis when the deal was announced absolutely the the cloud and the ripples of change that are happening because of cloud are the impetus for this and you know the the question we've been having for years Dave is you know how many companies can stay kind of independent in you know their swimlane to what they're doing or are we going to see more massive consolidations we're not that far off of the 67 billion dollar acquisition of Dell buying EMC to go heavily into the enterprise market and of course there are cloud implications what happened there and you know we're watching the growth of cloud what's happening in the developer world you know we've watched Red Hat for a long time and you know Red Hat has a nice position in the world and it carved themselves out a nice role into what has been emerging as hybrid and multi cloud and in my opinion that's you know the number one reason why arvind and the IBM team you know when to take that 20-year partnership and turn it into you know now just part of the IBM portfolio Arvind Krishna executive at IBM a longtime player there so the the the deal is so you talked about Dells acquisition we've talked a lot about the VMware model keeping the company separate and of course Red Hat is not going to be a separately traded public company it is going to be a distinct unit inside of IBM's cloud and cognitive software group as I understand it is that right so the question is will it be reported separately or is it going to be oh we're gonna throw everything into our cloud number yeah so Dave this is where all of us that have watched and known IBM you know for our entire careers because they've been around over a hundred years on ask what's going to happen so from a reporting structure Jim Whitehurst reports to Ginny from a Wall Street standpoint it sounds like it's gonna be just thrown into the cloud piece you know Dave isn't it that the the the standard practice today that you throw lots of stuff in there so we can't figure out what your cloud business really is I mean let's look at Oracle or even Microsoft and what they had you know Amazon's probably the only one that clearly differentiates you know this is revenue that we all understand is cloud and can you know touch and feel it so sure I IBM you know you've got all of the the piece that used to be soft layer it's now the IBM cloud piece there are lots of software pieces in that mix the cloud and cognitive is a big umbrella and you know Red Hat adds a few billion dollars worth of revenue into that stream so IBM's assumptions here juni talks a lot about chapter two chapter one was a lot of front-end systems that sort of the growth was everybody thought everything was going into the cloud that's really not the way it is 80% of the workloads are still on Prem and in Chapter two was all about you know connecting those to any cloud multi-cloud heard her words the IBM cloud or the Amazon Google or Microsoft cloud etc etc she made the statement that that we are the only hybrid multi-cloud open source company okay I guess that's true does it matter that they're the only hybrid multi-cloud open source company and are they yeah so I mean Dave anytime a vendor tries to paint themselves as the number one or you know leader in the space it's you know that's how they're defining it that's not how customers think of it customers you know don't think is much about whether it's multi cloud or hybrid cloud they're doing cloud and they're working with you know more than one supplier it is very rare that you find somebody I'm all-in and then you dig in oh yeah wait I'm using office 365 and Salesforce and oh wait there was that cool new thing that Google announced that somebody off on the sides doing so we understand that today it's a multi cloud world tomorrow to be a multi cloud we're absolutely open source is growing you know at great leaps and bounds Red Hat is you know the you know best example we've had of that that trend something I've been watching for the last 20 years and you know it is impressive to see it but you know even when you talk to customers of you know most customers are not you know flag-waving I must do everything open-source you know that they have a little bit more nuanced view of it sure lots of companies are participating in contributing to open source but you know I've yet to talk to too many companies that were like well when I'm making this decision you know this is absolutely what it is am i concerned about my overall costs and I'm concerned about transparency am i concerned about you know security and how fast I can get things resolved and by the way open-source can help with a lot of those things that's what they need to think about but look IBM you know had a longtime partnership with Red Hat Red Hat has a strong position in the marketplace but they're not the only ones there you know you mentioned VMware Dave VMware cross has a strong play across multi cloud environments you know we see Red Hat at all of the cloud shows you see yeah IBM at many of the cloud shows but you've got Cisco out there with their play it is still you know this this chapter - if you agree with Ginny's terminology we are relatively early in that but you know IBM I believe is strengthened in their positioning I don't think it radically changes the landscape just because you know Red Hat is still going to stay you know working with the Amazons and Microsoft and Google's and and and other players out there so it doesn't dramatically change the landscape it just consolidates two players that already worked closely let me ask a question so I mean was clearly positioning this as a cloud play you know generally and you know in a multi cloud specifically is this a cloud play okay um so I'll say yes but Dave so absolutely the future and where the growth for Red Hat and where IBM and for this thirty four billion dollars to be successful the tip of the spear is open shift and therefore you know how does that new cloud native multi cloud environment you know where do they play but at its core you know red heads still Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux you know is it stills you know that is the primary driver of revenue and Linux isn't going away as a matter of fact Linux is growing Microsoft you know just revealed that there are more Linux workloads sitting in Azure than there are windows we already knew that there were you know strong Linux out there and Microsoft is embrace Linux we saw Satya Nadella at Red Hat summit and you know we've seen that proliferation of linux out there so linux is still you know growing in it where it's being used out there and in the cloud you know linux is what most people are using so the reason why I think this acquisition is interesting Jim Whitehurst today said publicly that it was a great deal that IBM was getting but then he couched he said of course it's a great deal for our shareholders too so and Ginni chimed in and said yes it was a fair deal okay fine 34 billion you know we'll see the reason why I think IBM likes this deal and IBM you know generally has been been good over in history with acquisitions you know clearly some mega acquisitions like PwC which was transformative me we have time to talk about that Cognos and some of the other software acquisitions done quite well not a hundred percent but the reason why I think IBM likes this deal is because it's a good cash flow deal so I think in many ways and they don't talk about this because it's not sexy marketing but iBM is a services company over 60% of the company's revenue comes from professional services IBM loves complexity because they can bring in services throw the big blue blanket around you and do a lot of integration work and the reason is that I think this is an interesting acquisition from from a financial standpoint and Ginny says this all the time this is not about cost synergies this is about revenue opportunities when you try to put everything in the cloud you always run into the back-end systems and her point is that those back-end systems need to be modernized how do you modernize those back-end systems openshift it's not trivial to do that you need services and so iBM has a large install base probably by my estimate you know certainly tens of billions of dollars of opportunity there to modernize back-end systems using Red Hat technology and that means that it's a front-loaded deal from a cash flow standpoint that they will find automatically revenue Cyn to plug in to IBM's captive install base what are your thoughts yeah Dave III think that your analysis is spot-on so RedHat has been one of these most consistent you know revenue companies out there you steadily when they went from a billion dollars to now they're right around three billion dollars they had the March to five billion dollars they had a couple of minor blips in their quarterly earnings but if you plug in that IBM services organization you really have the opportunity to supercharge this is not the opportunity is to have that that huge IBM services organization really helped you know grow those engagements do more openshift you know get more Linux help ansible you know really become the standard for you know automation in the modern workplace the challenge is that too many IBM people get involved because the the thing that everybody's a little worried about is IBM's done well with a lot of those acquisitions but they don't leave them stand alone even you know VMware for many years was a standalone company today VMware in Dell they're one company they're in lockstep from a management standpoint and they're working closely together what differentiates RedHat is you know iBM has groups that are much larger than RedHat that do some of the same things but RedHat with their open-source mission and and where they're driving things and the innovation they drive they move a little bit faster than IBM traditionally does so can will the Red Hat brand the Red Hat people and Red Hat still stay independent enough so that they can till you know hop on that next wave you know they they jumped early into kubernetes and that was the wave that really helped them drive for what they're doing the open shift you know even Dave you know Red Hat ahead bought core OS which was a smaller company moving even faster than Red Hat and while they've done a really good job of integrating those people absolutely from what I've heard it is slowed things down a little bit just because Red Hat compared to core OS was a much bigger company and of course IBM is a be a myth compared to Red Hat so will they throw these groups together and you know who will be making the decisions and can they you know maintain that that culture and that growth mindset well the point is structure we bring up VMware a lot as the model and of course when EMC bought VMware for paltry six hundred million six thirty five million dollars it folded it in and then spun it back out which was the right move certainly allowed the ecosystem to blossom I don't think IBM is gonna take that same approach blue wash is the term they'll probably blue wash that now cuz no Dave they said iBM has said they will not blue eyes there's no purple red stay separate absolutely there's concerns you know so to get those revenue synergies there's there's you're gonna have to plug into IBM systems and that requires some some work and IBM generally good at that so we'll see we'll keep our eyes on that it's but but I would predict that IBM is not going to do a VMware like well it's going to be some kind of hybrid Dave one of the other things is you talked about so Jim Whitehurst you know executive respective had him on the cube a lot he's reporting to Ginny you know the question is is this Ginny's last big move and who replaces her yeah let's talk about succession planning so a lot of a lot of rumors that Whitehurst is is next he's 52 years old I've said I don't I don't think they would do that but but let's talk about it first of all just you know Jim white her side sort of interviewed him the number of times but but you know I'm quite well you think even watch the job so you know I talked with Jim a little bit at red hat summit you know he kind of makes light of it he said you know knowing IBM the way we all know IBM IBM has always taken somebody from inside to do that he feels that he has a strong mission still to drive Red Hat he is super passionate about Red Hat he wrote a book book about the open source culture and is still driving that so I think from everything I see from him that's still the job that he loves and wants to do and you know it's a very different challenge to run IBM I'm not saying he would turn it down if that was the direction that it went if it went down to it but I did not see him angling and positioning like that would be where he wants to go well and of course you know Jim is from North Carolina he's got that kind of southern folksy demeanor you know comes across as the so the nicest guy in the room he's also the smartest guy in the room but oh we'll see we'll see what happens there I've said that I think Martin Schroder is going to be the next CEO of IBM Martin Schroder did three years of combat duty as the CFO in in what was a tough time for IBM to be a CFO they were going through those big transitions talking about you know they had to had to do the the SoftLayer acquisition they had to put together those strategic initiatives and so he's has he has CFO chops so he understands finance deeply he ran you know when IBM's big services business he's now responsible for IBM's revenue generation he's a spokesperson you know in many ways for the company he's like the prototypical choice he would not be surprising at all to see IBM plug him right in a little bit of history as you know still him a bit of a history historian of the industry have been around for a while John Akers back in the early 1990s when IBM's mainframe business was was tanking and the whole company was was tanking and it was at the risk of actually believe it or not running out of money they were gonna split up the company because the industry was breaking apart Intel and microprocessors Microsoft and software C gated disk drives you know Oracle and databases and to be more competitive from a product standpoint they were gonna split the company up into pieces Gerstner came in and said no way Gerson it was you know CEO of American Express said no that's not how customers want to buy he bought PwC for a song compared to what Carly Fiorina at HP a Carly Fiorina at HP wanted to pay I think 15 billion for it I want to say IBM paid five billion or maybe even less for PwC it completely transformed the company it transformed IBM into a services company and that's where what IBM is today they don't like when you say that but that's where the revenue was coming from what that did now and they also started to buy software companies IBM was restricted from getting into applications for years and years and years because of the DOJ because they owned the mainframe they had a monopoly while Microsoft and Intel changed all that IBM started to buy software companies and bought lots of them so they became a services company with a collection of software assets and the main mainframe and you know the power they have a storage business and you know Finance I'd be a global finance business etc etc so my my point is I'm not sure Jim Whitehurst would want to run that you know it's it's kind of messy now what you need run that is somebody who really understands finance knows how to turn the knobs and that's why I think you know Martin Schroeder is actually an excellent pick for that to keep the cash flow going to keep the dividend going to keep the stock buybacks going it's still in my view not a growth play I think there's certainly near-term growth that can be had by modernizing applications but I don't look at IBM as a growth company I look at IBM as a portfolio company that throws off a lot of cash and if and when the market stops rewarding growth and profit list growth a company like IBM will become more favorable to investors yeah and the question at the end of the day is after spending thirty four billion dollars for red hat does IBM help weather the storm of what is happening with the phenomenal growth of AWS the changes happening in Microsoft build more of a relationship than they've already had with Google and help position themselves for this next wave of IT there's IBM helped create a lot of the waves that you know happen in IT well the pure play cloud players are in it for the long game you know you know Amazon's philosophy is give tools to builders and allow them to disrupt the you know traditional old guard whether it's old guard technology companies or old guard industry players and you've seen the stat of how many Fortune 1000 companies or you know have gone out of business in the last 20 or 30 years or whatever it is that's going to continue and Amazon and and certainly Google and Microsoft want to support that disruption by providing cloud tooling and put the data in the hands of people that allows them to create new business models now that doesn't mean everybody's gonna throw up there mainframes it's it's not gonna happen it's certainly not gonna happen overnight and probably will never happen but I just don't see how IBM becomes a growth company in that scenario the growth is going to be continue to be with the cloud well but Dave we had seen IBM I'd say struggle a little bit when it comes to the the developers these days and the Red Hat acquisition is definitely going to be a boon to them in this space because Red Hat all about the developers that that's what you know that their customers are so you know that that's such a huge community that they've already tapped into so Ginny has said this hybrid multi-cloud is a chapter two with a trillion dollar opportunity so who else is going after that trillion dollar opportunity let's let's lay it out there who are the multi cloud players VMware obviously IBM Red Hat with open shift is in there Google with anthos Cisco is coming at it from a network perspective so they have coming at it from their position of strength even though you know you know they're relatively new entrants well ever everybody wants to be the new management layer in this multi cloud environment what VMware had done is had you know vCenter became you know the console for everyone as they were consolidating all of their silos and when I go to a multi cloud environment right where do I live you know Microsoft has a strong play there that's the other you know VMware IBM Red Hat anthos Google Mentos Cisco and Microsoft yeah and of course the one that while they won't say that they are multi cloud you can't talk about multi cloud without talking about Amazon because Amazon is a piece of everyone's cloud environment we were seeing what they're doing with outpost there so they are the kind of Spectre looming over this entire multi-cloud discuss yeah right on I think you got to put Amazon into that mix they will be an entrance into this multi cloud play and it's not gonna be a winner-take-all deal I could say cisco is coming at it from a position of networking strength Microsoft has its software estate and it's gonna do very well there IBM Red Hat coming at it from a standpoint of modernizing applications and there's a services could play and services component there and VMware of course coming at it from the the infrastructure operating system I don't see Oracle as interested in that market there may be some smaller players like turbo anomic you know who probably get gobbled up by one of these guys that we just mentioned but that really is the landscape and this is you know five six companies a trillion dollars there's plenty to go around all right Stu final thoughts on on the the Red Hat news the IBM news that they've finalized the Red Hat acquisition yes so you know what you want to look for is you know first of all you know what's happening organizationally you know if open shift is the primary you know the the tip of the sphere what we're talking about here for this you know cloud native multi-cloud world you know what does you know the IBM Cloud messaging looked like they're gonna have an analyst event here in a couple of weeks that you know that they've invited all the analysts to going into what does that cloud portfolio looks like how do they sort through all of the kubernetes options that they've had today do they try to elevate IBM cloud to be a stronger player or will they let Red Hat continue to play across all of the cloud environments that they have so you know organization and product positioning of the two things that I'm looking at the most Tom Siebel said publicly yesterday that IBM is a great company national international treasure but they miss cloud and they missed a I I wouldn't agree totally they didn't miss cloud they were late to cloud they had to buy software they're in cloud just like Oracle's in cloud not as competitive as the AWS cloud but they're they've got a cloud yeah HP doesn't have a cloud Dell doesn't have a cloud these these two companies that I just mentioned do AI yeah they're not sound of generalized AI like what Google and Amazon and Facebook and Microsoft are doing IBM's trying to solve you know big chewy problems iBM is a services company as they said so you know Watson you see a lot of negative stories about Watson but Watson requires a lot of services to make it work and it's as they say solving different problems so they're a player in AI multi cloud is new and this move the acquisition of red hat yes thirty four billion dollars expensive it's not gonna be pretty on the balance sheet but they get good cash flow so they'll deal with that over time it puts them right in the mix as a leader in multi cloud so thanks to for breaking down the the acquisition and thank you for watching this is Dave Volante what's do min and then we'll see you next time